Secondbrooks

Javelin-team took out 2 T-62s but sadly wasn't able to get last one. Which alone already was real trouble. It sucked over 15 rockets from AT-4s and M72s + some SMAW rounds from front and sides, basically everything was broken but 115mm cannon and 7.62mm MG and it didnt' give up (was still fighting back when mission ended) Bit panic arose as both my APCs + several teams refilling ammo-stock (AT-weapons mainly) were in valley while T-62 was speeding full speed at that valley Yup it got another of APCs. I lost about 10-20 men against that T-62, many of them dead. Rest of fight costed me about 5 wounded. EDIT: I cheated a bit, and reloaded game. I hate it when something just spawns on map within effective range of my men and right away starts to engage (wiped out almost whole platoon).

Color me convinced. Infantry behaviour is cool. Radio chatter is neat. Javelins are spare. Overall things are very well and game feels quite new again. Dejavu with CMBO -> CMBB

Thanks for replys. I quess i shut up

Marines seemed to be quite okay. Then i saw TOWs on foot. First: -2-3 men teams? Is this correct in US viewpoint? In Finnish viewpoint this is fecking wrong, how those men are going to handle that bu*ger? We had full squad (7 men) dedicated to one of those. This leads into second issue: -Deploy 6 mins, pack up 10 mins... This piece of... er... tool is going to get blasted. We had less than 3 minutes to deploy and less than 2 minutes to pack-up and leave firepositions, this includes kevlar-mats and alumium-cage. I alone could deploy and pack up that thing faster than CMSF's marines. Sure once again i dont' know how US does these things and what it's drills are, but to me it seems complitely wrong way, team is too small and it performs too slow. Third is related to second: -They pack up TOW slower than deploy... It should be other way around. I understand that CMSF can't handle TOW drills 100% like in reality, but still... Oh and same goes for Syrian ATGM's (why in the earth i havent' whined about them earlier? Because TOW didn't exist? I don't know) So there. Sure i overreact, it's just that i feel myself important right now. However if this is the way US Marines (or Army) does it then okay i will cease my complaints here.

I've used LMG firing 1000-1100 round minute and with that thing it was 2-3 rounds back in -99... But we currently are thought (or atleast i was half a year ago) to "douple-tap" with two short 2 round burts. Fire remains controlled and rate of fire as high as possible. But i'm not trained machinegunner. It can be that they get more training on how to handle and fire LMG. What i fired wasn't suppressive fire or anything, just pop-up targets in livefirerange or lasersimulator in quite heavily wooded and brushed terrain. no reason (or even possibility) to fire suppressive fire. And usually i had to conserve my ammo, as it's was something like one 100 round belt full + few boxes of spare rounds.

If computer is given ability to micromanage it's firepower then i quess it would gain edge over human players, because of calculative powers? It can calculate how to get most firepower on player's troops, and then it can issue like 100 orders in one tenth of second. i usually ignore use of area fire as i'm so damn lazy (i micromanage only things which says big BOOM, like javs and > 100mm HE). You could say that i'm just poor player. Which i probably am. Is it then real spirit of CMx2 to win battles by micromanaging fire? As that is the way i see current CMSF... right now it's favoring player, if AI gets area-fire-micromanaging-possibility then i can see that game starts to favor computer (or players who pauses game for every second and go thru all their troops, issue new area fire orders etc) I would like to area fire to be automated, or maybe semi-automated (how easily to open fire and should they use heavy fire etc.). That would cut half of micromanaging off, basically i would now only need to keep attention on how and where squads should move. That would improve CMx2 greatly in my eyes, make difference between player and computer smaller. Yup, it is probably just wish-thinking and daydreaming.

I'm in middle of arguement in other forum about samekind subject... And found this. http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc? AD=ADA225438&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf Might explain a bit about USMC's point of view... It's Army study which is against viewpoint which is saying that squad can't fight as well if another it's M249 is taken away. Is short: I dont' know how much Army studied this, but it seems that alteast 2 major tests (after Korea and Vietnam) and 1 summit of officers after ww2 are backing writers thoughts: Firepower has got too great, closecombat ability of squad has got weaker (expacely after casualities, then there are less and less pure riflemen left). SAW isn't traditional LMG. I know that our LMG is far too big and bulky to be handled properly in close combat (i've lost couple fo times because i just can't move and aim LMG i carried as fast as opponent with rifle, luckly this was in exercises)... but... Well... I don't know. Intresting thing to read and happened to back my opinion (partially) on this kind matter.

Same figures in my monitor, seems quite saddening infact. However i will show my support to BFC now and will go and view them all for one time, but one time only. Salut. EDIT: My internet connection is so freaking slow right now that it will have to wait.

Sounds bit of a screw up! Optical brighteners, yes that was the word. Few reservists have looked their own home washed uniforms (with somekinds of detergents and maybe even rinses) with somesort night vision devices are saying that their uniforms aint' any different to 'army'-washed (Finnish army tells that home washing is no-no atleast for reservists having army-issued outfits, this optical brightness-thing is said to be reason for it). But fabric seems to react differently into active and passive IR both. I'd think that it would be worse with active IR if clothes are having optical brighteners, while with passive there might not be issue. However i'm just quessing.

I've heard that some rinses (well most of them infact) got these glowing things and it's the one which makes outfit shine.

ArmA2 will be released atleast for Xbox 360

One can't train hard if one can't take the physical stress. Train hard with body in poor shape and body starts to break down, that is the problem expacely with current youngsters. Soon special forces might have trainees or already trained soldiers who's body can't function, they physical fittness doesnt' improve but descends. They are on sick leaves, or body needs months of rest from hard over-stress. Stories i've heard from parajaegertraining are chilling, it indeed needs guys with exellent physical fittness to be able to take that, without problems. And basic-condition (ability to ake long term stress and recover from it) doesn't grow fast.

Then again OFP presents you great campaign. OFP is quite much about singleplayer, while ArmA is multiplayer. I dont' think there are many who actually like the story and missions in ArmA's campaign. OFP still has one of best campaigns i've played and it definedly has best mods. Hard to say which will be everyones bucket of rice, as OFP/ArmA community has been torned quite bad to haters and lovers of ArmA. I've switched sides to haters.

I've heard that nightvision devices and such individual "high tech" equipment have been in low numbers as well for long time. But that improvement in this area has been remarkable after start of OIF.

I served almost 10 years ago and back then average physical condition had dropped some amount during 20 years. Now it has dropped the same amount in less than 10 years! Still from what i've seen our nation is in relatively good condition when it comes to some of the worst western nations. But still physical condition is dropping like cow's tail, it ain't healthy and something should be done. So i'd say this is more problem to regular forces, who get the fresh rookies and they have to build those into men who can take the pain (or then rookies can't and they drop out). Special forces atleast here have luxury to be picky (enough volunteers in good physical fittness) and as far as i can tell physical requirements are same as they have been earlier. Or like some special force units, they can choose from serving soldiers, who already had got used to physical hardship... Or atleast should have

Call me pathetic, but that is great song!

Why do you think geigercounter was used to indentify blue-on-blue incidents related destporyed/damaged M3 Bradley and M1 Abrams? Because Geigercounter tells good stories... or becase it tells you that there is radiation around penetration (which indicates that it was DU penetrator shot from M1). So there is some amount of radiation but not much, like there is not much radiation in non-depleted uranium either. Toxical problems are far more problematic. Are they how problematic... i quess time will tell. EDIT: Oh yeah. Before you start to reply just check what i did write. I didnt' say that tank which got hit is qoing to glow in the dark. But i was just making note that it is radioactive.

And from same site and same document: Somehow i feel quite pissed off about this. It's not logical as there are greater threath to kids from dud ordinance etc (i find landmine ban to be idiotic!), but radioation is somekind ugly&hideous troll in the dark. Btw. How did North America or Western Europe react into Tsernobyl's accident?

How did US find out which vehicle was shot by it's own M1s during Gulf war? By using geigercounter (from what i've read)... What does that tell? That it ain't atleast 100% radioactive free, however i doupt that area around penetration would start glowing at dark. From wiki i would read chapter: "Gulf War syndrome and soldier complaints" It's not the first time i heard from this.

That is pretty much what i'm after.

:confused:

Well i read it differently. The parts i bolded in my quote in previous post should support my case... Atleast i think so... However: i'm idiot.

I'm not organisational freak, but i'll try. If it's 100% like 1960 Soviet motoriced regiment, then it doesn't have much. 1 tank batallion and 3 infantry batallions, that is all. Regiments are dependant of divisions. Division has all the good stuff. -36 122mm guns + about same amount of rocketlaunchers. Plus possible other assets from higher levels which might douple the amount or even triple. -Tank regiment -3 Mechaniced regiments -Engineers batallion -Recon batallion Brigades in other hand are much more independant. I'm not sure how close this gets at soviet brigade. Should be guite modern example. You'd had in Brigade -3 infantry batallions -Maybe tank batallion as well -company of recon -36-54 tubes of arty (guns or rocketlaunchers). But how ever they would have firesupport from higher, so amount could be doupled maybe even more. -Engineers possible for higher chain of command.

When thinking that CMSF happens in extreme conditions and there are quite many very extreme situations in battles, does your reply mean that specialty does have effect on AT4 and RPG-16 in CMSF? :confused: How about other weapons found in regular squads? Are there any other than RPG-7 and RPG-29 ?

Umm... I'm not smartest bloke on planet, but wasn't it so that player was unable to issue orders when game was paused.