FAI
-
Posts
320 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by FAI
-
-
Whoa... Planetary insertion by counter-grav HALO technique... I never thought Honorverse tech is incorporated into CMSFOriginally posted by RuhrRiver:Really nice screenshots, guys.
-
You're putting too much faith in ex-military man-cum-politician. They'd be first and foremost politicians.Originally posted by Clavicula_Nox:Well, we all hope that good leaders and officers will stay in the Army and eventually replace the politcians...but I doubt that will happen to any real extent. Anyways, the emphasis on smaller and self-contained units (Brigade Combat Teams) has helped a lot, and hopefully with the future expanse of the Army, this doctrine will continue to serve in a meaningful capacity.
-
4K in a couple of days...
-
My regular unit armory had them in the 90s.Originally posted by vincere:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Yeah, the army converted them from .303 to fire 7.62mm NATO, think the designation was L5A4 or something. They definately saw service in the Falklands. I know some support TA units still had them in the early 90's!
FAI I don't know about Bren fetish but I'm sure I'm not the only one who had a SLR and Lee Enfield fetish. </font>
-
The Brits got some kind of a Bren fetish or what?Originally posted by flamingknives:The Bren, in the 7.62mm version* was still in service during the '91 Gulf war.
...
*Can be distinguished by it having a straight magazine.
-
Even the BAR, with its weight and low ammo capacity, still saw widespread service in Korean War, even found its way to Vietnam War.Originally posted by Battlefront.com:... After the war the MG42 became the benchmark. The Commonwealth countries stubbornly clung to their Bren more out of emotion than logic IMHO. The other nations moved away from it. Many of those other nations used MG42 derived weapons and, not surprisingly, nobody used Bren, M1919, or other clearly outdated weapon designs.
...
Steve
-
I think the credit should have gone to the MG34. The MG42 was just an incremental improvement of the MG34, and the concept itself was developed with MG34 in mind first.Originally posted by Taki:Best Machinegun Concept is the MG42 build bye the Germans in WWII.
-
I wish that not only they put cherry-picking back, they'd also allow unrestricted formation of units ("Rambo" squads, anyone?
) -
Sure, like a snowball in hellOriginally posted by Garm:Just one little question: Is there a chance for a release of the WWII game in this year?
-
How do you model something that hadn't been tested in combat?Originally posted by bodkin:Will the CMSF T-90 have active defence systems modelled like Shtora?
When's the T-95 due?
-
I second that. Enough tactical/strategic goodies to make a really entertaining game, if done correctly.Originally posted by dan/california:If they were going to do a Sci- Fi game I would like to see them do ship to ship combat in the Honor Harrington Universe.
That has needed a good computer game treatment for a long time. And there is built in fan base. It would require a whole new engine obviously. That odd cracking sound is Charles's jar exploding.
And I need my Honor fix too :mad: :mad:
-
How close is he to the most likely combat area? Has he seen any combat yet?
-
I was hoping for something worthy of the venerable X-COM's successor.
-
Everybody knows the US LOST in Vietnam. Millions of commies were killed, sure, but in the end they kept the country. Packing up and went home, leaving the battlefield to the enemy, is just an euphemism for a retreat, and defeat.Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander:I am sorry if I got the Vietnam history wrong, when I was growing up the Soviet-Afghan was was in the news, so when my country packed up and left Afghanistan (lost), I always thought similar thing happen to Americans in Vietnam.
I guess I need to read more history instead of listening to liberal democrats
BTW, Vietnam was not a declared war(as far as I know) but an armed conflict? So you might be right, US didnt lose a war, just a conflict
Victory is not about staying or leaving Iraq, but about accomplishing the mission. Can the mission (war on terror) be accomplished in Iraq?
-
I don't ever remember losing this war.Originally posted by Sgt.Rock of Easy Company:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander:
Vietnam War module? Who would feel nostalgic about that conflict that America lost?
....
So basically, we just quit fighting and left. </font>
-
Make sure it's a pony. And a BBQ party...Originally posted by RTFM:Top quality arguments given for and against these vehicles. I do hope MRAPs save a few lives as the coalition wraps up its obligation as the occupying power in Iraq. If it was up to me the troops over there could have a lifetime tax exemption.
Early next year the US will finally take delivery of the one smart weapon that’s been missing from the inventory…A smarter commander in chief. I’ll eat my horse if history judges the old one kindly.
-
So, in a low-light condition firefight, soldiers using active IR would at a great disadvantage over opponents using passive?
-
Lack of armor action in Vietnam, as I recall, was a major rationale for the "No CM:Vietnam" policy.
-
Not really as, the insurgents have set off EFPs on busy roadways to hit Coalition convoys as they pass through traffic. An ordinary car won't even phase an EFP, it can cut through armor like a hot knife through butter, whats rusty sheet metal going to do? </font>Originally posted by Splinty:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by FAI:
The irony is reducing collateral damage is a PR boost for the insurgents as well... By using EFP they negate the MRAP's protection while at the same time score some PR points.
-
The irony is reducing collateral damage is a PR boost for the insurgents as well... By using EFP they negate the MRAP's protection while at the same time score some PR points.
-
Mr. Picky would like to point out that the Hetzer was not, a tank.
-
-
Regarding IED vs MRAP, my opinion is that from the insurgents' POV, it's another victory for them. They have succesfully forced the US to spend extra gazillion dollars to upgrade their vehicles and protect their supply lines. And for a freakingly tiny portion of that money, they can adapt to keep their leverage, either by building even larger IEDs, manufacturing/importing EFPs, and/or devising new tactics. The (crude) cost/expenditure analysis is in favor of the insurgents.
-
Why would they wanna inspect military equipments on their way to the front?Originally posted by LT Mike:1. It's not a tank
2. Customs are a pain in my ass. Imagine trying to perfectly clean a Stryker thats been in combat for 15 months.
New screenshot caption contest!!
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
Sarge, I'm beginning to suspect that we're not just short on a transport, but also a few lines of extra programming.
Did I mention that I also have a nagging feeling that we're living inside a rather buggy computer game?