Vanir Ausf B

Lie.

So the gist of this thread is that BFC needs to junk their current engine and spend the next several years developing a new one with the graphics of Arma 3 and the AI of Deep Blue. And here I am thinking of 20 things I would rather see before either of those things.

ARMA. Seriously. It's a shooter.

Huh, the kind of AI you guys want would take years to program.

Real time or WEGO over TCP/IP? Not my cup of tea but a valid complaint. Better AI? The addition of triggers has helped a lot. If branching triggers ever make it in people will be begging for mercy. But even now the AI is a far stronger opponent than in the CMX1 games. I've actually LOST games to the AI. That never used to happen. Better graphics? Fine, but keep in mind that the better the graphics the more expensive/time consuming they are to produce. I question if BFC has the resources to produce artwork and animations on par with AAA titles. They would definitely have to hire more artists or scale back their release schedule. Sales might increase enough to compensate. Or they might not and then it's THE END. Personally I'd rather see efforts put into things like TacAI, UI, more detailed vehicle systems modeling, a revamped spotting model, mostly under the hood stuff.

Yeah, it's been reported.

At medium ECM level PGMs can't be called in at all, although AFAIK this really should only apply to US PGMs.

The lower hull, yes, although I don't remember at what ranges. The upper hull is impervious to anything except the 128mm gun on the Jagdtiger, which didn't even fight in the East. Of course it is, although the IS-2 "mid" and "late" with the D-25 cannon are a little less slow than the "early" IS-2 armed with a A-19 cannon.

Because the front hull cannot be penetrated by an 88. When engaging IS-2s distance is your friend. Their weakness is their slow rate of fire. For that to be a factor the IS-2 has to miss at least its first shot.

It does for the 2nd halftrack in the section. Look again. The section HQ does have a radio icon, and its the halftrack's radio he is using (the HQ doesn't have a portable radio).

The 251/2s? I just checked and they do have radios if you purchase them in the editor. If the halftracks in the campaign don't have radios it's an issue with the campaign.

Options. Main menu, 3rd from the bottom.

IIRC, they throw normal smoke. Also, last time I looked the launchers were a little gimped so they only throw one side at a time. But since it's only normal smoke its not worth much anyways.

They actually can't penetrate the Bren carriers at all. At least not from the front or the side at 300 meters. Despite that, the MG42s blaze away at them whenever I give the command. I really don't know why they aren't working in your game.

Interesting. When you switch the setup zones do you also switch the attacker/defender in the Battle Type or leave it?

In any case, I wish them luck. We could use some "real world" weapon performance data

I would be more impressed if that were backed up by serious increases in defense spending. Most NATO counties barely have an army anymore.

Panzerfausts do occasionally show up in the halftracks, but most don't have any. It was the same way as far back as v2.12 so if it was changed it was done prior to then. Fausts in the Opel trucks is a more recent change. They used to have none. We are looking into that.

I just tested this. At 300 meters HMG42s and LMG42s will fire at buttoned Bren carriers and M1 halftracks IF you give them a Target order. They do not fire on their own.

From what I have read the withdrawal had been planned for several days in advance and was orderly at the start but was anything but orderly by the end. Poroshenko says 80% of the troops have left. What about the other 20%? We don't know how many UA troops were in Debaltseve, but most estimates were of several thousand.

Exactly. The US has an entire branch of its armed forces dedicated to making sure US ground forces don't get bombed. The annual USAF budget is around 170 billion US dollars. That is over twice the size of Russia's entire defense budget. That doesn't even include US Marine and Naval aviation. This fixation with Army SHORAD is nuts. Nobody outside of this forum views it as a major problem.

Limited resources require tough choices. Even the US Army doesn't get to always have its cake and eat it too. To illustrate, the Army is upgrading it's Stryker brigades to double V-hull variants to better protect against IEDs. The problem? They don't have enough money to complete the program. http://archive.defensenews.com/article/20140112/DEFREG02/301120013/US-Plans-Radical-Upgrade-Stryker-Brigades So yet another layer of AD or double V-hull Strykers? You decide.

That would be cool but no, that's not in the game. Even if it was you wouldn't use it more than once since nearly all US units could see through it.

Is it? When was the last time a few US companies got bombed? The reason the US Army skimps on AD is because when the US Army actually goes to war those assets end up sitting around doing nothing or get retasked to do something useful. It's an inefficient allocation of resources. Frankly this whole discussion is navel gazing. It matters in Combat Mission but not in reality.

Theoretically, it's possible. But given the overwhelming US advantage in other areas the likelihood is extremely remote.