Euri
-
Posts
510 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Euri
-
-
-
An unexpected result in a Abrams vs T90AM stand off. The T90AM has set up a reverse slope ambush in a conceled position and is buttoned up for faster spotting. Still the Abrams spots and fires first. But the gods of war had other wishes.
-
1 minute ago, kraze said:
This should be up to TacAI improvements
It would be great if this would be the case. We can only hope
-
3 minutes ago, Muzzleflash1990 said:
what you would categorize as major changes?
Some major changes would be for example:
- meaningful consequences of breaking Comand & Control (eg restriction of ability to give certain orders, as area fire - see discussion under Engine 4.0)
- abitliy to determine stance for teams (now small teams lie prone into vegetation and see nothing)
- abiility to determine towards which direction to pay attention to when hunting
- choosing formations (column, wedge, line etc)
-
From what I can recall:
Spotters and Air controllers were much more efficient in CMSF, if I remember correctly (it has been some years since I last played it). They can plan sequential missions with different artillery and air assets, while in CMBS this is not possible. Also I have the impression that the rate of fire of MGs and assault riffles is slower in CMSF -
39 minutes ago, Erwin said:
Thanks. That was good to know. A new cool name to describe folks... that most will have to look up.
Would the adjective/description be "herostratic"?
Sounds correct. For example: "It seems that CMBS players have strong herostratic tendencies"
-
I think the community will appreciate this guy (he paved the way):
-
The trigger for the question was the spotting I witnessed in the recent video I uploaded
-
Great spotting from a T90 AM!
And from the point of new of the enemy
-
From the second mission (a truly memorable one)
-
The colder the temperature the better the IR spotting?
-
What is all this obsession with big fires? Is this is a forum for pyromaniacs?
-
My mistake. they are eight of them! They are so powerless that give the impression that they are less :-)
-
I just finished a mirror PBEM on Brutal. No surprises. Total victory for Russians in both. But what came as a suprise is that the After Action Report declares 8 UKR vehicles killed when UKR has only 4 vehicles during the game!
Is this a bug with 1.04 maybe?
-
If this is correct, the logical conclusion is that if one gives a move order (even some meters away) it will avoid the precision strike in all cases whatsoever. This should be tested further because if this is the case, tunguskas are practially immune from precission fire.
-
Of the current turn(!) or the preceeding turn?
-
3 hours ago, John Kettler said:
Euri,
Seems to me that when facing Excalibur, the key is frequent movement.
True. But taking into account that Excalibur needs 2 minutes to come down, the key question is do I have to move out of the observation area of the drone used for spotting, or just move a few metres aside? I think the former
-
I am writting this from PBEM experience. The player has god like control over all troops (as if they are schyzophrenic and he is talking in their heads) irrespective of whether they are in CC or not. And if one can bring fire indiscriminately on suspected positions, spotting efficiency becomes less relevant than it should be)
-
Another very easy feature to introduce (for Iron mode) is the following: any squad or vehicle that is out of command and control of its platoon leader should be unable to initiate area fire anywhere (maybe except to last know contacts of this unit)
A more hard feature to intoduce (for Iron mode): any squad or vehicle that is out of command and control of its platoon leader should be out of control of the human player. Only TACAI decisions. There can be one possible excpetiont to this (probablyevent more hard to implement) : Movement orders will be valid if only towards the last known direction of the company Platoon HQ
-
I believe the game strongly misrepresents the time reactions (if there should be any) of tanks to ATGM attacks.
-
It vaguely reminds me of something....
-
I have the impression that this game has rendered air controllers and air strikes very inefficient compared to CMSF. I dont understand why an air controller cannot instruct at the same time multiple strikes espessially from fixed wing assets. Although I have no military experience at all, during the past I have been playing Falcon 4.0 BMS simulation a lot. It would suffice to enter the GPS coordinates on the plance computer and then the formation (it is never one single plane) would plan the approach and take care of the bombs realease. Same was with Anti tank CAS missions. The external input was the area where the tanks where and then it was up to the pilots to identify the vehicles through the weapon systems and launch the mavericks.
I dont see why an air controller is not able to order and plan multiple air missions at various time intervals. The way the game is now, it is a lot of waste of time and inefficient deployment of resources.
Can someone with military experience explain me what am I thinking wrong?
-
Not sure if this is relevant, but 2/3 Russian platoon leaders mounted in BMP, when dismounted have no radios! The third one does have. Any explanations?
-
Jesus Christ. This game makes you believe that M1s are practically undestructible even from AT-14 and then you see this:
Bogged & Immobilised
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
I need to understand better how getting bogged and Immobilisation works. I am in a game with hot conditions and VERY DRY ground and I order an Abrams to move FAST on a dirt ROAD. And after a while it gets bogged down and then immobilised. Why does this happen?