Secondbrooks

Well, problem more is that they don't share information as they are basically from completely different formations in the first place, another being seperate SF company while anoter is from seperate Airborne company. Also handling them is like rusty knife, without handle, if they don't become in same platoon. that because they are not highlighted when i click on one unit of platoon... which is major reliever for my brain, when i'm organizing my manuvers. I like to keep things organized and shiny (not including my house... Or car... Or myself). Sure it's not big problem, but... Well... Uh... Maybe i'm bit spoiled brat.

Wasn't it by patch 1.11 that they do fire at tile even when there is no more visible enemy as it has hit the dirt and gone to hiding, earlier this ment that shooter didnt' shoot anymore at tile, but now they fire at that place for short time... And by WIA which gets hit turns to KIA. Or am i dreaming? Last battle i played was Marines against Army, me as MArines. And even when my battle was very succesful i had 2 times more dead than wounded! I guess Strykers with their 40mm AGLs was responsible for that, as they seemed to keep firing at tile even if my men went to hide (ofcourse i dont' know did they manage to hide). Strykers were easily using tens of 40mm grenades at single tile. At least that was conlusion i made while wondering how KIA numbers were so high.

Yup. I use them as very competent vehicle borne IEDs. Fast at enemy positions (preferably in cover of smoke) and let enemy do the rest. :cool: Ps. Well i've not really used it yet like that. As i just figured it out.

My personal favorite was to lead attack past knocked out BMP-3. And while my men got next to it. *KABOOM*, they got pinned (and handful lost their lives) and by that remained close to this particular BMP-3... which then kept blowing up on regular basis for few minutes. I believe my feelings were pretty much as "happy" as yours.

I will get someone there to take care of woundeds as fast as possible... That is the reason why HQ teams are presented in game. Right? I'd say that overall i manage to keep KIA numbers pretty low, if my battle overall goes well. Not even close to 1:3. Ratio 1:3 comes true, if something goes stlightly wrong, like my platoon doesnt' manage to hold their positions but needs to start withdraw from attacking enemy and leave fallen troops behind. This is my un-educated guess conserning Blue. About Red i'm not so certain, been playing Blue quite much lately.

It would seem to be rather simple thing to include condition that Blue in position X needs to be spotted. No? Overall i support triggers. AI in defense sucks a lot as it don't have any kind reactivity to situation.

And French reservists really were bottom quality, lacking training (they had time while in fortification line but it wasn't used), they didn't have morale and that little was suffering from long time of hanging around in fortification line, they didnt' have weapons (AT and AA severly lacking). Communists supported Nazi-Germany (by wish of Soviets) and ruined whole lot of AT-guns and AA-gun during process in factories, i believe 25-30% of year's production. Communism as a whole was increasing society's friction. German air-superiority and Stukas were used skilfully, refugees blocking roads etc. Could say that Germans just were far too superious in all aspects. Regular troops are said to be able to fight well with what they had. In fact DeGaulle's tank-unit was raging just 2 kilometers away from Guderian's commandpost during their short counterattack at some point of time. EDIT: Oh! sorry for not throwing some dry joke. Well i will try: Foreign Arsehole: You French can't fight! French: Oh yes we can! Foreign Arsehole: Name even one unit! ... French: French Foreign Legion

hmm Maybe this is wrong thread, but would it be possible to add few fictional ad hoc formations to Syrians. SF with BMPs and T-90, Airborne with NVGs etc. Sort of all-stars dream formations capable to perfom well 24/7 (menaing that they have maximum night operation capacity and also organic vehicle support). I can do it now aswell, but they don't share same chain of command, which seriously hamppers their capability to share infomation. And they are harder to control, when vehicles and squads are from seperate batallions. I really miss that there is no really competent opponent from RED, escpacely in quick battles. Ofcourse it's bit gamey, but that shouldn't require much effort to include in game as all men and vehicles are already in, basically just new kind formations. Like Dream ATGM-platoon, Dream mech company, Dream armored batallion etc. BIG Pleeeease

And it ain't first time. They have shelled other posts back in 90s, one base was rather large and i believe it drove them several times per day to shelters. Each time they informed to IDF that they were UN peacekeepers and IDF is firing at them. Also tanks firing and sniper fire at UN compounds around 70s and 80s, told by General Gustav Hägglund who served around that area quite much during 70s-90s. I don't know ho many actually died or got wounded because of IDF's fire, but harashment seemed rather regular, from Israel side mostly.

No one hasnt' mentioned Muzzle flashes, or is it just me? In dark those are very visible. Once Syrians sees one he probably sends wild bursts at it's direction. Very unaccurate fire, but still now he has idea where his enemy is and he has change to suppress them (if fire is intense enough). Right now Syrians don't have even idea what is on them and from where it comes from. We had funny firefight in pitch black night, where little path surrounded with dense young forest seperated us and opponents, both sides just fired short bursts or rapid fire at opponents. No NVGs or flares, just few flash&bang alarms but those were not much use for illuminating porpuse. Basically idea in that sitauation was to fire at visible muzzle flashes and after firing fastly move away (as you just highlighted your vicinity with your muzzle flahses). I guess we kept changing position after each shot more than opponents, none of us did get hit while opponents Miles-vests seemed to signal many times as sign of near misses and wounds (They probably had 7-10 guys aginst our 5 guys). Wound didn't matter as after 3 minutes of lying on back guy was able to shoot again, we were on training mode and not in simualtion. One of our guys had circled behind opponents and calmly "executing" them one by one. As he said every time he saw muzzle flash, movement or sound he started to greep at it, when he saw back of opponent it he just calmly aimed and took a shot. Pretty damn effective, lots of KIA signals confirmed that. I personally didn't like NVGs at all, i believe they were 2nd generation. Maybe reason was that at same time with i was in Army i also practiced alot of Airsoft with my frends during weekend leaves, we usually played at night (risk of getting caught while playing in areas where we shouldn't was minimal ) and i got used to use all my senses pretty well. In brigade NVGs were nice as there usually was enough ambient light. In the wilds i don't remeber single time i would have been very pleased to them. Usually it was because it offered so narrow zone of vision and bad guality picture. And we usually operated in forests, basically they were enough to spot movement but not much for anything else. Well.. our squad had thermal optic attached to ATGM-launcher so maybe that was main reason why NVGs seemed so much waste of money as they seemed

Without knowing this particular case more specific i'd say following. Guys out from vehicles, if distance is 300 meters to most expected location of fire i'd say make that 400. Not for small arms fire so much but because of RPGs. If there is absolutely nothing from which you would get bit of cover while appraching village (is it village?) then you probably need to send one squad (i'd say squad not team, because they dont' pin down as easily) approaching it by hunt, while others providing overwatch, sadly your troops are rather small in numbers. Farther away you get enemy to open their fire better for you. So maybe recon by fire is wise thing (i don't use it but i'm not wise). Prepare to fetch your squad from there by LAV and smokescreens. Overall sounds pesky situation. You lack dismounts, flanking in my opinion is no-go without very clear picture of enemy's where abouts and/or force to respond to surpprises. You seem to lack force, 2 (scout?) squads isnt' much, 2 LAVs ain't either. And you seem to lack intel abotu enemy. [whispers]send HMMWV to take enemy fire[/whispers]

Steve: You had long post. I started to quote and answer it but after hour i've desided that it's useless and it started to look like a mess. We basically agree with most points, only splitting hairs remains with them. Only thing i'm interested to hear more is that 'German army without single private'-thing (i did forgot that part of history). What happened when size of army bloated? Did long term NCOs became also so numbereous that one could be positioned to most platoons? Or did NCOs with much less experience take place of long term NCOs in platoons?

Well... Aren't those only possibilities? There is either numbers or quality. If both are superiour then we most likely have a winner right there! As has been cited to be overlooked refreshment training of reserves. Which one is more important, career NCOs or traning of reserves... I'd take training of reserves Finns were not optimal themselves , lacking refresment training, weapons, numbers, ammo for artillery, planes, vehicles etc. It has been stated that Soviet troops infact had more training that Finns had (they atleast had it in fresh memory)... But i really can't say what this has to do with career NCOs? I can see this NCO question to touch more about how small units performed in combat, how well they were facing demands and hardship. So basically platoons without long term carreer NCOs were fighting with molotovs, shotguns and logs against tanks. Being hammered daily by heavy artillery and fighting against much more numberious enemy. Fighting with querilla tactics. I really can't say how career NCO could have made them perform drastically better. -44 is same. Finns were atleast capable to halt Soviet offence after brief almost panic-like situation and cause Soviets bloody nose after getting strategical and operational level up-to-date. Units could suffer 75% causalities in counter attacks under rocket and artillery fire, but still after resupply with fresh meat they were both fit and motivated to fight. Would Career NCO have made it better? I can't see it. Can't say much about war against Germans. I fear i have to draw same conclusion. And both sides seemed to value each of other. But those two last ones are rather irrelevant as NCOs had years of experience in previous wars. Yes experience is good, but Germans didnt' have carreer NCOs in platoons stationed? If they had that would be first time for me to hear that. German idea was to trust to subordinates, that was the main idea and power behind Germans which i've heard. As far as i can tell they were drafted/voluntary guys, given year or so NCO training and sent to units to gain experience in war. If you take NCO and train him into responsibilities of doing what platoon leader wants (or should not be doing), you have then NCO who does just the same thing. He has just served shorter time than carreer NCO, that is basically the only difference how system works. How many Career NCOs would IDF require to have one per each platoon? How big would costs of personel increase, how much should wartime strenght in men dropped to meet that demand? We are are facing guality or numbers discussion and i'd say IDF gets along better by keeping numbers high. Optimal case would be to have high numbers and career NCOs, but that would cost a LOT. That could be reached to economical scale and how good quality seeks to places where they get better salary and bad guality to career NCOs with worse salary... But that is not probably a good idea Long post.

Not a grog, i just have to work with them. And i'm one of those few and "selected" (too uneducated to do anything else ). So i'd say it's just Danes. Well i'm not very wise with pure Holsteins (if there are any pure blooded left) as we have mostly just mix between Holsteins and Friesians and some might hold Ayrshire blood also. It's said that regionally there is alot variety in how Holsteins are bred.

I dont' get this career NCO thing. There are armies which has performed rather well with out one, IDF generally is held as one of best armies in world, 2006 could be bit darker, but main reason i've seen is that reservist refreshment training was overlooked. Finnish Army back in ww2 where career NCO's might be positioned just in company's supply (if even there), junior resevist officers and reservist NCO's leading combat formations, some bit more capable or experienced NCO raised to rank of sergeant might be positioned as vice-leader of platoon (as a "partner" for Junior officer). And those troops went thru hell back in -39-40. I believe Germans had similar system and they were pretty capable combat force. Maybe US and maybe British militaries are built so that lack of career NCOs in platoon scale is problematic (low standarts of junior officers?). But i can't see why this is the only way of doing things. And what i've read reservist NCO training in IDF, it's been considered to be one of most hard and demanding NCO training in western world, and those who get it are indeed best of the man material. Lack of long time experience facing lack of quality of personel? Same said about Russia, career NCO's are seen bit of shady characters as they do it for money, not for love of Mother Russia. True career NCO in their 30s 40s stationed near younger troops might be good thing but i can't see it being main key to unit cohesion.

That is actually heifer, as it's doesn't have milk battery (=cow) or pistol's holster under it's belly (=steer/bull). I don't know is that Holstein... Typical indeed not. But it could be rare red white Holstein.

That particular unit doesn't have visible milk battery at all, it's that young still. Might take month or year for milk battery to deploy, bit like Syrian AT-3.

Time for first bug report. 30 liters of milk.. From what? I don't see it's milk battery between back legs. Meh. I though BFC could do better than that. :mad:

mmmm... Mud and Swedish girls in bikinis. On sprunce covered tanks going 50 km/h Damn (Swedish) tankers! And they get to pick all those needels from them and wash away mud, im sure of that too.

If nothing else if at hand (like Syrians probably don't have) , trees with lots of leaf and branches from something like spruce (if not taking whole tree and lob it on or in front of tank :eek:) works rather well. More there is camolayers the better. Even when Syria is rather arid enviroment i think there is enough trees in various locations to cover tank platoon or company. Our tankers, who are using sprunces throwed on tank, says that it cover somewhat from thermals even when used in as simple way as that is (basically giving little more edge to get the first shot at opponent). I've seen alot of pictures from older T-72 which basically are covered totally with sprunces (whole trees and branches). Seeing bush with long 125mm barrel going full speed on road is rather sexy sight they say. Newer Leopards seems to do the same. Same in Germany, altough they seem to use leaf-trees and not sprunces. It's basically like modern sniper camo-suit for snipers, probably not just as effective.

Well not dirt. But nets, trees, branche... Quessing that if one doesn't want to become too picky there are options without end. Would be one addition to loooong feature reguest list... Hmm how actually thermals in game works? Do they sense heat (=have alternative way to see something) or are they basically just offereing better spotting bonus by same 'ruleset of spotting' as normal eye would. Would be interesting to know as to day i'm not sure which is best way to use thermals. My feeling is that it's just regular extention to eye and no alternative way of seeing. Modelling heat radiation and it's visibility into CMSF like this feels very complicated and resource consuming.

Hmm What about NLAW's or MBT-LAW? We should be getting them this year and with luck i get my hands on them in few years. I find it quite amusing ... If they arrive in CMSF.

It's said that East-Germany T-72's had such IR-spotlights that their NVGs were capable to see to 2 kilometers, without spotlights light they are said to be pretty much useless... Well that might be bit optimistic range for spotlight, but it's said to be very powerful. Ofcourse that would mean that it's very-very visible to opponent with IR-equipment. So personally i don't know are Syrian tanks getting along better if their crew smashes those IR-spotlights so that they don't turn them on even by accident. this smashing part should be taken as minor sarcasm. I dont' knwo what kind hassle it would be if player would be given possibility to turn on/off those spotlights. Basically keeping tanks as stelathy as possibly until opening fire and when there is order to open fire they turn their spotlights on to increase their change to see things (as they probably will expose themselves anyway because of muzzleflashes). But it probably would complicate things much.

Sergei. Here it is.

I don't remember what is going to be BUK's destiny, has it even been defined yet? It should be pretty potent system and as said by some: best of it's time. (well it could bes guy who actually was selecting it ) And i remember talk that during next decade it would/could/should be modernized... Now soon i have feeling that it will be replaced, by French made long range AA-missiles SAMP/T (correct name?). Sounds odd to waste relatively fresh AA-system to buy a new one, while modernization would be much cheaper solution. That, if BUK gets removed form service, would make point stronger that there indeed is something shady in it... Or then we are talking just about eek!!!-it's-Russian/Soviet-equipment-quickly-destory-it reaction.