Vanir Ausf B

Thanks for the revelation, John. http://community.battlefront.com/topic/118648-russian-optics-and-spotting-in-general/?p=1592349

This would be more like necessary unrest

Vehicles with 2-man crews that have a passenger sitting in the commander's seat are presently suffering from poor communication between commander and crew. The next patch should fix this.

Something to keep in mind is that one of the changes from CMSF to Black Sea in how vehicle optics work is that thermal imaging systems -- FLIR -- are much better at spotting than day/night sights. In CMSF TI sights just let you see through normal smoke but were otherwise treated the same as any other day/night sight. Also note that, to the best of my knowledge, the Black Sea code draws a distinction between thermal intensifiers that see in the near infrared spectrum -- smaller, cheaper, not cooled -- and thermal imagers , i.e. FLIR, that see into the mid to far infrared spectrum and are larger, more expensive and are cooled. The former are considered to be day/night sights and not in the same category as FLIR. To the best of my knowledge the BPK-3-42 gunner's sight on the BMP-2M is a thermal intensifier. The fact that it has a passive range of only 800 meters is strongly suggestive. That means that in the Black Sea code it is not on-par with the Stryker gunner's thermal channel nor with the Vesna-K gunner's sight on the BMP-3M which by way of comparison is a FLIR with a passive range of over 4000 meters.

All Russian tanks in-game can penetrate the Abrams frontally to at least 2000 meters. It all depends on hit location. Specifically, the lower hull, the gun mantlet and the small recessed area below the mantlet are vulnerable.

Now that I think about it, we really need to wait for the next patch (or patch beta, our case) to properly test spotting times with passengers in the vehicles.

This is true, as I noted. However, in my experience the actual difference in spotting times with different vehicle targets is small. I may do another test tomorrow with different parameters. As thewood pointed out, testing with only the crew is a worse case scenario for the BMP.

Nope. 2-man crew only. Same with the Strykers. I may add some passengers to see what difference it makes.

For what it's worth... Spotting times for BMP-2M vs Stryker, 1200 meters Mean = 72.4 seconds 95% confidence interval for Mean: 57.41 thru 87.42 Standard Deviation = 55.4 Hi = 214. Low = 15 Median = 47.0 Average Absolute Deviation from Median = 45.1 Spotting times for Stryker M1126 vs BMP-2M, 1200 meters Mean = 29.1 seconds 95% confidence interval for Mean: 14.38 thru 43.88 Standard Deviation = 15.5 Hi = 73 Low = 1 Median = 25.5 Average Absolute Deviation from Median = 11.6 Number of times the Stryker spotted first: 22 Number of times the BMP-2M spotted first: 7 1 tie ... Spotting times for BMP-2M vs Stryker, 500 meters Mean = 21.9 seconds 95% confidence interval for Mean: 17.97 thru 25.83 Standard Deviation = 12.5 Hi = 53 Low = 4 Median = 20.0 Average Absolute Deviation from Median = 9.17 Spotting times for Stryker M1126 vs BMP-2M, 500 meters Mean = 16.0 seconds 95% confidence interval for Mean: 12.11 thru 19.96 Standard Deviation = 8.58 Hi = 35 Low = 2 Median = 14.0 Average Absolute Deviation from Median = 6.43 Number of times the Stryker spotted first: 20 Number of times the BMP-2M spotted first: 9 1 tie Note that each test has a sample size of 30 which is pretty low for this type of test, and the testing was not entirely scientific since the Strykers and BMPs were spotting each other instead of a common target, so the results should be viewed as suggestive rather than definitive. That having been said, it appears the Stryker has a significant edge at all ranges but it is more pronounced at longer range. However, the Stryker does not spot first every time.

Another possible solution -- a final solution, if you will -- would be to explain the situation to your opponent and ask him to put the rogue out of his misery, if he can get LOS to him.

I haven't watched any of the videos, but the description matches a bug that has been around since at least CMBN v1.0 and even CMSF from what I've been told. The incidence has been reduced over the years -- I personally haven't seen it happen in about a year -- but it has never been completely squashed because it is not reproducible in some cases. The usually way of dealing with it is to cancel all current orders then issue a new movement order, but if the unit is unresponsive for some reason then you may have to write it off as an act of Charles god.

I used a program called Combat Mission Black Sea It's just a save game file. On a Windows machine you place it under My Documents --> Battlefront --> Combat Mission --> Black Sea --> Game Files --> Saved Games

That is probably related to the building being a barn-type structure, which are more porous to LOS/LOF than the graphics suggest. Nevertheless, LOS through two walls seems improbable so I will report it. I also found another unrelated bug while watching the replay.

I won't even play a QB smaller than Large.

CMBO holds that distinction.

I asked Steve the same question the other day. His response was "Red what? Oh, that. Let me think about it." Of course there will be at least one module. But BFC has strongly hinted that a Western front title is up next after Black Sea.

I just tested this with a v2.12 installation and got the same results, so if it has been changed it was done prior to that version.

They're missing from the trucks but the squads themselves had them when I tested.

Oh it was predicted. BFC basically said "we'll take the ribbing".

I never played Shock Force so the more NATO the better.

Trophy has two launchers, one on each side of the vehicle.

I think the discrepancy in our results is from the orientation of the tanks. You are testing with the tank facing towards the shooters. I am testing with the tank facing away at a 90° angle. Turn it to the side and see what happens. My knowledge of APS systems is limited, but it's my understanding that they have overlapping coverage to the front of the vehicle, so missiles approaching from the side are facing fewer interceptors. It's still possible to get through from the front, although it does appear that some types of missile are much better at it than others. The Khrizantema in particular is very dangerous from any aspect, perhaps because of its high speed. And yes I am using 1.01.

But thanks anyways for providing our Armata Thread of the Day.

I ran the test again reducing the shooters to 4 per tank. I discarded hits that occurred after the tank had already been destroyed. In 2 test runs there were 11 intercepts and 5 hits, 5 out of 6 tanks destroyed.

Was it really stuck, or did the driver just get arrested?