stikkypixie
-
Posts
4,134 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by stikkypixie
-
-
I refer you to page 26 of your own link.
Backblast dampening measures to modern heavy projectors are quite useful if you don't want to damage your position too much. Collateral damage has become much more of an issue since WWII. It also means that you have less to worry about if there are friendly troops moving about. So there is an advantage to backblast amelioration, but that does not indicate that the use of the weapons without this is impossible indoors.
What you mean with page 26? All I see is that the RPG-7 can be fired from buildings.
-
The Dragon was not designed for work from the interior, but if you are sceptical about the Dragon, that is no problem. The Panzerfaust was a recoilless projector, using 190 grammes of black powder [for the PzF 100] for propulsion. The 90mm RCLR was also purely recoilless, and it used 500 grammes of M5 nitrocellulose/nitroglycerin propellant. It's listed as less of a shot report than the Dragon. And it's also listed in the report excerpt I quoted above.
The dual stage RPG motors are mostly for added range. You can take a purely recoilless design that does mostly the same, but the firing pressures would be higher, making for a more cumbersome weapon, and with the double propulsion you get more range for the same amount of propellant.
The part of the dual stage motor makes no sense to me, but I'm no expert.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/rpg-7.pdf, this link would say that the RPG dual launch was designed for other reasons than added range.
All I'm saying I know that modern AT (if not the Dragon) have specially designed soft launches to allow them to be fired from inside buildings, and I assume there is a good reason for that. Even with the same amount of powder, doesn't mean that their usefulness in practice cannot vary.
Edit: Forgot to add, that hopefully BFC can find some sort of middle ground for infantry AT in buildings.
-
That's why I asked about the primary sources. These booklets just ape each other, and I don't believe the story.
The Panzerfaust was a recoilless weapon, much like the initial stage of the M47 Dragon missile (which adds a sustainer motor). The dangerous zone of the Panzerfaust was 10 m, that of the Dragon 30 m. If we assume the risk the Nazi's were willing to take was three times more than the US Army of the eighties, then let's call them equivalent in backblast. (I'm being very rough on the Panzerfaust, I am sure you'll agree.)
Let us turn to pages 8-12 thru 8-14 of US Army Field Manual FM 90-10-1, and we read:
(Highlights in bold are mine.)
Furthermore, the rule for firing a Panzerfaust from within a bunker was that one meter of free space should be behind the tube at firing. Not that impressive.
I'm no expert but, isn't the Dragon specially designed for firing from interiors? "Common sense" would say that if backblast/overpressure wasn't a problem Russian RPGs would not bother with that dual stage propulsion of theirs.
-
Do you have any primary sources for this? The only things I found were exhortations to make sure nobody was behind you within three (later five) meters during firing, making sure the back of the tube was unobstructed when firing from a foxhole, and reminding the soldier that loose debris behind the tube might turn projectile. I've not found much else. Notably lacking from anything I found is any field instruction leaflet forbidding its use from enclosed spaces.
To be clear: I'm really interested, not just making a point.
There was long discussion about this a couple months ago. The most convincing argument I remembered from this thread was this link:
arguments pro firing from buildings were always very vague in details and anecdotal.
-
Speaking for myself personally, I think the CMBN UI fails at both:
Ok, let me first start with the information thing. I too agree that information could be conveyed more effectively. But having played the CMx1 games for so long, it doesn't bother me as much. No game I play has a way of both presenting all unit information and still keeping it manageable. Me personally, I like my games with stuff exploding, and not looking like spreadsheets. Mind you I like my numbers, but not in a tactical setting.
As for the ammo sharing, for me this is intuitive. Two squads close together pool ammo together, but they DO NOT share ammo, as in no ammo is transferred. If you put a squad close to a halftrack, that squad will also pool ammo with the halftrack. The acquire and move orders could be better though.
As for the camera controls, I must have gotten pretty used to it as well. What I do is, select a unit (or units), ctrl+click to jump to a spot near where I want to place my waypoints, and give orders from there. I only use the edges for the move locally. It is actually funny, because I tried playing the Total War Shogun demo and I was very frustrated with the camera controls
-
Just a question, when people talk about a poor UI, do they mean it is hard to get information or giving orders? Or do they feel there is a lack of information?
-
Agreed. I don't even like the enemy casualty crosses showing up (and those can be removed via mod).
There's a FOW mod out there (by Mord, I think) that transforms all infantry icons (MG, etc.) to a generic infantry symbol, so at least you won't be able to differentiate unless you actually click on the spotted enemy unit. Of course, you won't be able to differentiate among your own either.
You only see crosses if your guys can actually confirm the kill no?
-
I played it against a human, and he had set up his defensive line in Bocage rows on the right, which could easily be flanked.
-
Thanks, we'll work it into a revised version.
-
3) Barbed wire should be crossable by infantry, but VERY SLOWLY. Currently it has a similar effect to an un-climbable wall or bocage, less of course the offering of cover. Historically, wire was (and still is) not much more than an inconvenience unless covered by fire. Driving a tank over and flattening it was one solution. Another might be the adding of bangalore torpedoes to the game. Perhaps demo charges could double for them though.
SLR
You can blow up barbed wire with demo charges in the game.
-
We'll take a look
-
Hi!
hcrof and me have compiled a list a with frequently asked questions (and answers) to help along those who are not very familiar with the game.
As this is a two man project, it can probably use some input from people here.
So if you have new questions, better answers, or anything else, please feel free to post in this thread
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?p=1313301#post1313301
-
Yes I'm sure we do agree.
The LOS "pre-check" is actually the only check that matters. If you have it you can spot the enemy, if you don't you can't.
Everything else is LOF, for example your MG setup wrong against the bocage can "see" the enemy because he is part of an indivisible unit that can see the enemy. He can't shoot at it though cause he is set up too low. He will TRY to shoot them, cycling the gun etc, but he cannot.
The pre-check just is just a coarse filter if you like. If the LOS check is a go, finer detailed LOS checks are made.
-
Does anyone have any tips about the second mission in the 1985 campaign?
In my opinion the Soviets have too little men to attack a town that size. Not enough artillery either and air support seems to be very unreliable. And the mujahadeen seem very resilient. I have lost lots of men (relatively) just to enter the town. Oh and there is not enough MG ammo. How's that for whining
-
The main thing I use waypoint-LOS for is "will I be able to spot the target from this location" so I know where to put an FO with LOS yet minimal danger to them.
IMHO this is very gamey: how do I know what I can see from there until I go there?
I don't understand the rationale for enabling this, but since it's enabled, that's the obvious use for it.
GaJ
Because if you play WEGO, and if you misplaced a waypoint you would have to wait a full minute before you can (hopefully) give a correct waypoint. In real life no unit would sit around doing nothing but they would just advance until they have LOS.
And guess from a technical point of view, it is simply a consequence having the ability to stack orders.
It is much less "gamey" than in CMx1 because of relative spotting.
-
They were khaddafi sheep.
-
This is another thing that I don't understand - the structure of armies. When you say platoons and sections i am confused. Sorry for my noobishness. I could go the net and find out but I like hearing it from the source - you guys seem to know a lot about this stuff and it would be great to heAr from the horses mouth if you know what I mean.
Thanks again all for any help.
Skimbo
Just search on wikipedia or open the editor and have a look. There 101 variations but for the units in CM it goes something like this:
squads/sections (depending on which country) - platoons - company - battalion
Usually there are 3-5 squads in a platoon, 3-5 platoons in company and so on. Sometimes other stuff is added as well.
-
Is there a demo?
-
But Steve just posted that units enjoy a spotting bonus *within* the Cover Arc. IOW, the FO could open fire on enemy troops exposing his position.
Steve posted that the size of the arc matters and the bonus you get diminishes with the size of the arc. So it is better to use a small arc as this will prevent the FOs from firing and you'll get the same spotting "ability" anyway since a really cover arc doesn't add anything.
-
"All men are enemies. All animals are comrades."
Comrade Steve
P.S. Maybe we should open a Poll to see how many can correctly identify the source of that quote?
Animal Farm?
-
I have a quick question about command delays. Did anyone ever take them into account? I understand that for a an operational game they are crucial. In my experience with CMx1, they were just an annoyance and never really affected my plans.
-
Hello:
Trying to put all this together now. Is Womble correct below (other than he has switched Rattled and Shaken - here is the list as in the errata: "OK, Cautious, Nervous, Shaken, Rattled")?
I mean with Suppressed and Pinned being separate? These are effects and the list is a spectrum of mental states (morale?).
Thanks,
Gerry
Yes, morale and suppression are separate (of course they influence each other).
-
I think it's the ORDER OF ORDERS that makes a difference.
If your first order is a dismount, then MAYBE one needs to pause the vehicle before it's movement begins, but the passengers should dismount b4 the vehicle moves.
Not 100% sure, but I think I have done this successfully a few times.
You'll just need to try it.
I'll give it a try, thanks!
-
Why do squads not exit the halftrack when you give them a move order from the halftrack?, in the situation where you have also given the halftrack a 15sec pause and a move order such as reverse?Going on memory, you could do that in CMX1.
As long as the halftrack has a movement order, the squads won't dismount.
Infantry AT in buildings
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
So the strip charge that first ejects the projectile to reduce the backblast is stronger than that of the PzF? I did not know that.