Jump to content

akd

Members
  • Content Count

    9,628
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Everything posted by akd

  1. Target arcs only affect spotting in so much as they affect facing. They are fire control orders. A face command has the same effect on spotting.
  2. https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a522286.pdf I doubt this is modeled in CM given its complexity. Thermal optics are likely just a flat bonus to vision.
  3. I thought this was funny: The surfaces of the helmet are reflective...
  4. The scenario we've been discussing actually starts cool, but thermals are generally less efficient in daytime desert conditions. That doesn't necessarily mean worse than day optics / NVGs and it depends on multiple factors. I'll repeat that individual anecdotes are almost entirely worthless for discussion of spotting in CM. There are abstractions and spotting cycles for individual units that can lead to oddities like above, but they are unlikely to persist for long or be consistently repeatable.
  5. Here are the thermal optics discussed: http://www.nitevis.com/ANPAS-13E.htm
  6. Not sure what you are expecting to get patched here? I am looking into the equipment of the Fire Support Team to determine if they should have a thermal optic in addition to their laser target designator, but that's not a bug per se. Everything else seems to be working as expected.
  7. This is from a relatively new site. They also post some interesting videos on YouTube. https://www.battleorder.org/military-organization
  8. You can also just set the scenario time forward 30 minutes - 1 hr and the LOS for units without thermals will change.
  9. Friends, Grognards, Forummen, lend me your eyes... If I have thermals and you do not, then there will be conditions under which I can actually see a target and you can only know that it is roughly where I tell you it is, possibly no more than this bearing, this distance since you also may not be able to see relevant reference points. No amount of time is going to cause you to develop innate thermal vision and see the target yourself under those conditions, well unless we are speaking on evolutionary scale time.
  10. Again, it would appear based on behavior in game to be a simple optical laser designator, probably something like AN/PEQ-1. The icon is probably arbitrary. Same is used for Russian and Ukrainian forces. Now possibly it should be something like the AN/PED-1 (I think it should be for Black Sea, but not sure in CMSF2).
  11. Well, you can use the Infantry Battalion rifle squad. Scout team split there gives you two riflemen with M4/M203 and M4. Here is a demonstration using same conditions as GeorgeMC's scenario: https://www.dropbox.com/s/v4fw6pds43txod6/spotting demonstration.bts?dl=0
  12. None of those other units have thermal weapon sights. They all have NVGs. Read my post above again regarding information sharing. It has a thermal weapon sight for the M249. Yes, it has a much more powerful thermal imager than the weapon sights carried in the rifle squad. The squad as a whole will be better because it is observing with 3x thermal sights instead of just one. I think your conceptual problem here is that the thermal weapon sights are tied to the individual weapons and are not shown in the special equipment panel, whereas NVGs (light in
  13. Drone warfare in Ukraine: https://coffeeordie.com/drone-war-ukraine/?fbclid=IwAR2-GAbVklqO-MDJUwpZyFrEHRRqghhZtvVgvtwdg6dbBXUeCwoql7amJVk
  14. First, the misunderstandings about how spotting works: When a unit shares a positive contact, it generates a possible contact marker for units in C2 or proximity (including tanks) following a variable amount of time, regardless of whether or not the receiving unit has any chance of spotting the target itself (i.e. a unit in comms / proximity but with LoS completely blocked will still gain the possible contact marker). If the unit has LoS to the location and has the means to see the given contact under the current conditions, this possible contact marker will increase the chances of the
  15. 99% sure I know what's going on: part obscure aspect of sim, part poor understanding of how spotting works. Will double check this one to make sure.
  16. Trees won't block them. Only terrain (unlikely with mortars) and structures, I believe.
  17. Seems impossible for some to manage simple file sharing, even with handholding. Can Erwin or anyone else confirm that the original scenario described is actually "NATO TV 98-5 Steelers" not " NATO TV 95-5 Steelers"? Search for the latter yields nothing across the vast internet.
  18. Indian divisions in Italy seem to have used Brens.
  19. 1. Yes, your mortars are likely having their LoF block by nearby obstacles. 2. re: pack howitzers, BFC has not implemented variable charges for these weapons, so they are always firing using a full charge (which is best for direct fire).
  20. I did some quick comparative tests and what I am seeing is the usually variability in spotting outcomes, no unexpected superpowers for any one particular unit. FOs (multiple binos) and Javelin teams (gen II thermal imager) seem noticeably better on average at picking up distant contacts compared to a split off scout team, but that doesn't mean it is impossible for the scout team to ever pick up any particular target first. Lateral sharing of ? possible contact locations seems to be working as expected, even for units not under same HQ. One thing I did note, if you are assuming that FOs with
  21. CMSF2 somehow enabled the platoon HQ 51mm assault mortar as an on-map indirect support asset. This seems to be causing the Platoon HQ to be treated as a mortar team, rather than an HQ. I guess this change did not make its way into existing scenarios, only newly made ones.
  22. Going to link these updates on Steam forums.
  23. IR (thermal) is simply not working on LAV-AT-A2. Reported.
  24. There are no anti-armor precision rounds in CMSF2. There is only 155mm near-precision Excalibur with unitary HE warhead.
×
×
  • Create New...