Lethaface
-
Posts
4,026 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
10
Posts posted by Lethaface
-
-
2 hours ago, pintere said:
That will be an interesting read. It would be pretty unimpressive if that’s true…
The question is whether the Russians have the time to only commit the reserves after a frontline penetration has occurred, or that they have to commit them before the actual event in order to be there in time to prevent breakthrough.
-
12 minutes ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:
Bradleys yes, but production of Leos is so low, it will take ages. In particular the specialist engineer variants.
True they will be difficult to replace, but still material as opposed to the soldiers operating them.
And of course while not same as the Leo2R, ersatz breaching vehicles based of whatever heavy AFV or (up)armoured bulldozer around can perform the task more or less and won't be as difficult to produce.
Edit: not sure if all those vehicles are already destroyed in the meantime, or if some of them are still salvageable. -
2 minutes ago, Haiduk said:
This is a guy of 47th brigade, who filmed it.
Thanks (direct source always better
).
At least it seems they didn't take too much casualties, apart from vehicle losses. Bradleys/Leos are replaceable. Hopefully they can get re-geared soon. -
22 hours ago, Haiduk said:
This UKR serviceman probably is CM player % )
Combat Mission in reality
F...k, f...k, of course
I hope people are intact, the "hard" is a s...t
By the way, a participant of this episode claims losses were 2 KIA and several WIA, other troops successfully withdrew.
Maybe it was alraedy posted, but this video look like might be from this incident:
-
On the defense in complex terrain they can be very effective as well, as long as you can keep them hidden / unsuppressed until enemy infantry comes very close. Woosh them and bugger off for the next victim.
-
Just now, keas66 said:
I mean one wonders how the Allies would have fared with modern style social media pundits screaming that the Normandy Invasion had failed - "we are stuck on the beaches ... we are doomed !" . I am tempted myself to restrict myself to weekly updates only .
RL helped me a bit restricting my following of proceedings lately, which is imo a good thing especially the stuff like twitter. People feel the need to post stuff and keep it going not really being bothered whether there is actually something worthy to post but rather how to get likes/'followers', etc.Although I probably will follow a bit more closely the coming weeks now that things seem to be 'in motion' and have some more time.
-
50 minutes ago, pintere said:
Bear in mind that the Tiger I’s combat debut was pretty unspectacular, and yet it also went on to wreck the Russians on quite a few occasions throughout 1943.
It‘s still far too early to draw any conclusions about how effective the Leo 2 is.
As effective as Ukraine can utilize it and prevent them from getting hit with arty or ATGM/mines etc.
-
1 hour ago, danfrodo said:
And really disgusting to see all the pants-wetting over UKR losing some vehicles, incl some nice new NATO ones. WTF do these people expect? And one mistake by one group in one field suddenly means all UKR army is incompetent? Geeeeeeez, some folks out there need to get a grip. The 'game' is just starting and we've got the much much better team.
I like seeing those actually
. Feeling the need to call the outcome of an operation with supposedly multiple brigades in strength which, when there is some video of what could be like a company/battalion on the move having difficult time, perfectly shows their petty thoughts of trivial value. Kids in the chocolatepropaganda factory who enjoy being fooled
.
-
4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Yesterday's ISW report shows more strife within Russian power circles over what to do about Priggy:
This is an excellent way to control Prig's ability to speak... fire or arrest anybody that interviews him.
The relief-in-place op to swap Wagner for MoD forces is underway with, apparently, some amount of DPR forces in the mix. It will be interesting to see what happens in the coming days as it does seem to be a good time for Ukraine to hit the newly deployed forces.
Indeed would seem like a good strike option, or an ambush plan by Wagner/Russia; if they are capable of such.
-
3 hours ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:
I cannot offer a native speakers' perspective, but to me it looks more like a philosophical than language point. For example, in legal usage if event X increases the probability of event Y, and in a particular case event Y occurred after event X had occurred, then the event X is considered to have caused the event Y. At least for some legal situations. So both the example you described using the word "lead to" and the one you described with the word "cause" could be understood as causation - in principle, and not because of the words used.
correlation vs causation.
-
9 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
OK, time to move on from two topics that have exceeded their relevance to this thread:
1. Ukraine has a fascist problem that needs to be addressed, but so does every nation and so citizens of those nations need to be careful about throwing stones. Especially if they are fascists trying to support Putin by parroting Russian fascist propaganda.
2. What the merits of A-10s are/aren't on the battlefields of today. I think the issues have been presented well enough, but should be saved until the Ukrainians actually ask for A-10s (if they ever do).
Steve
Noticed this now
-
3 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:
Sure, but let's at least be honest about it instead of some people saying "Oh, they are not national socialists - they are socialist nationalists, completely different thing" or "Oh, boys will be boys, they are just having fun in the good old Ukrainian style".
When we look at something like AZOV, I don't know how many of their fighters are actually far-right or nazis. But it does seem like there are some. They have been fighting really hard, and that can be exchanged for political power after the war.
I agree that there is no merit in trying to add a rosey tint to anything from Ukraine, like they are fairies. At the same time they are fighting/defending in a war of aggression against their country and so far they, incl. AZOV, seem to be behaving rather disciplined all things concerned.
Anyway Ukraine will certainly have enough to deal with after the war. This might be one of those issues.
But other countries in Europe also have such type of people and they are (unfortunately
) also allowed to vote. They can't just lock them all up. Plus like you say we/I don't know really what are the political goals, if any, of such groups and how strong their backing is.
Personally I think the subject is moot and mostly a way to whatabout diverge from the real issue. Ukraine will have to deal with it, but in no way shape or form is there any justification from it for the war against Ukraine (ps not saying that you say it is).
3 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:We could compare to Afghanistan, also invaded by the Russians (Soviets) back in the eighties. Surely it doesn't matter that the local freedom fighters that we support with weapons and money are a bit too much into an extremist religion? After the Soviets are kicked out, probably they will cut their beards and Afghanistan will turn into a free, democratic, and prosperous country...
I don't think Afghanistan compares well to Ukraine. But yes if Russia would in fact be occupying Ukraine and we would arm and train some extremist insurgency group fighting against Russia, that might bite back in the future.
But we are supporting the democratically elected nation state of Ukraine, not Azov. How Ukraine deals with Azov is their problem as long as they don't go ethnical cleansing and stuff like that. But you and I know how fast the support would stop in that case, as well as the prospect of joining NATO / EU.
-
8 hours ago, MeatEtr said:
We are honored to be on his list; we will see to it his earthly remains will be handled with the respect they deserve after the battle finishes
.
-
Just now, BFCElvis said:
That may to how it's done. I'll ask.
Inquiring minds appreciate
-
Ok thanks
, in the CMCW tourney I seemed to get coupled with opponents next to me on the scoring ladder.
-
3 hours ago, Tux said:
I’m not sure we are. People on this thread are probably more comfortable than most in accepting the kind of nuanced reality that you’re pointing out. However that hasn’t been the narrative so far: the story has been that Wehrmacht markings on AFVs are ‘ironic jokes’ intended to mock the Russians’ labelling them as Nazis.
If you’re right and this is just Ukraine’s due complement of fascists that we’re seeing (every nation has them) then that’s fine but needs to be managed to make sure their influence isn’t blown out of proportion in the minds of more ‘casual’ western viewers (so far it doesn’t seem to be moving the dial so that’s encouraging). It’s the ‘ironic joke’ option I think people are warning against and pointing out is potentially and needlessly counterproductive.
I didn't read the last 7 days because occupied with other stuff but perhaps a fresh thought: why are people even considering stuff? I mean ideally Ukrainians shouldn't use any 'questionable' markings. Ideally there wouldn't be any people with extremist thoughts there. But the reality is different; these people also exist in Ukraine and they also fight in the war.
But they fight in their own country, against a force invading their country.
If I my country would be invaded I'd have zero qualms about working together with neighborhood thugs against the invader. That doesn't mean I condone criminality.
What do we want to achieve? Play into Russia's cards?
-
-
On 5/16/2023 at 11:13 PM, Butschi said:
Buttoned up.
Why do you think this is odd? It's really more like a too small sample size. I'm not claiming that what I say is exactly true - in fact, back at university I'd have been flogged for making such bold statements with so little data.
I did a "simulation", meaning, "made a dice roll", i.e. I generated a random number, repeatedly, until it was < 0.01 or 0.02, respectively. That is about the order of magnitude (very roughly! I don't know the exact values!) for the spotting probability in the scenario I described (0.02, or 2% for the "simulated" M60). I repeated this 50 times for each "tank". The result looked like this:
Different histogram but same phenomenon. Long tail for orange and seemingly no tail for blue. Now, exactly same parameters and setup but 5000 "experiments" for each tank.
Here you see that both have long tails, and if I were to repeat the experiment a million times each, you would probably see that both get events out to 700. Only that orange gets way, way, way more of them. Just by having 1% instead of 2% probability for each dice roll.
Wish I was the statistics expert, I'm a particle physicist and some statistical data analysis was part of my PhD and later in my job. But in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king, I guess.
What you describe may be unlikely (though that depends on what the actual parameters governing this situation are) but remember this: There are thousands of players out there making thousand upon thousands of dice rolls each day. The probability that someone observes such a situation (and then makes a frustrated post on the forums) is actually not that small.
Well sometimes universities or other organizations are too strict with protocol ;-). I remember during one training I was enrolled in years ago there was a guy from Switzerland following the training as well (he worked for the WIPO) and he told us that in his work/organization people were only allowed to say/propose something in a meeting if they have a degree in the subject. I guess I was rather 'flabbergasted' about that bureaucratic reality. We/I live in a different world fortunately.
Anyway I don't think that you need to run your tests for 1.000.000 of times, as you already did you can with a large degree of certainty predict what will happen when you enlarge n. There is a very slight chance of these probabilities not being subject to a 'normal distribution' and will show wild different behavior if enlarging the sample size beyond certainty of 2 standard deviations.
After all, the (underlying) data is produced by an algorithm (CM), it's not the quantum universe you are trying to predict here. I neither made statistics my profession but the subject was certainly touched upon during my time in school/university and apart from not enjoying to memorize formula's or using SPSS to make pointless (uni stuff lol) ANOVA / T analysis to prove you got the point, I was/am quite interested in the subject of chance/probabilities and statistics.
Seems to me you have 'enough' understanding of the subject (not surprising given your profession ;-)) to present your findings with a bit more certainty.
-
On 5/16/2023 at 11:13 PM, Butschi said:
Buttoned up.
Why do you think this is odd? It's really more like a too small sample size. I'm not claiming that what I say is exactly true - in fact, back at university I'd have been flogged for making such bold statements with so little data.
I did a "simulation", meaning, "made a dice roll", i.e. I generated a random number, repeatedly, until it was < 0.01 or 0.02, respectively. That is about the order of magnitude (very roughly! I don't know the exact values!) for the spotting probability in the scenario I described (0.02, or 2% for the "simulated" M60). I repeated this 50 times for each "tank". The result looked like this:
Different histogram but same phenomenon. Long tail for orange and seemingly no tail for blue. Now, exactly same parameters and setup but 5000 "experiments" for each tank.
Here you see that both have long tails, and if I were to repeat the experiment a million times each, you would probably see that both get events out to 700. Only that orange gets way, way, way more of them. Just by having 1% instead of 2% probability for each dice roll.
Wish I was the statistics expert, I'm a particle physicist and some statistical data analysis was part of my PhD and later in my job. But in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king, I guess.
What you describe may be unlikely (though that depends on what the actual parameters governing this situation are) but remember this: There are thousands of players out there making thousand upon thousands of dice rolls each day. The probability that someone observes such a situation (and then makes a frustrated post on the forums) is actually not that small.
Well sometimes universities or other organizations are too strict with protocol ;-). I remember during one training I was enrolled in years ago there was a guy from Switzerland following the training as well (he worked for the WIPO) and he told us that in his work/organization people were only allowed to say/propose something in a meeting if they have a degree in the subject. I guess I was rather 'flabbergasted' about that bureaucratic reality. We/I live in a different world fortunately.
Anyway I don't think that you need to run your tests for 1.000.000 of times, as you already did you can with a large degree of certainty predict what will happen when you enlarge n. There is a very slight chance of these probabilities not being subject to a 'normal distribution' and will show wild different behavior if enlarging the sample size beyond certainty of 2 standard deviations.
After all, the data is produced by an algorithm. I neither made statistics my profession but the subject was certainly touched upon during my time in school/university and apart from not enjoying to memorize formula's or using SPSS to make pointless (uni stuff lol) ANOVA / T analysis to prove you got the point, I was/am quite interested in the subject of chance/probabilities and statistics.
Seems to me you have 'enough' understanding of the subject (not surprising given your profession ;-)) to present your findings with a bit more certainty.
-
On 5/17/2023 at 10:11 PM, MrSpkr said:
Finished one battle as Syrians. I largely relied on a reverse slope defense, though the guys on the Syrian left made multiple cross-map shots to help out the other side of the battle.
Discovered the joys of calling artillery down on my own positions (partially, anyway) during the last four turns in order to prevent the flag rush I know he was preparing. Won a tactical victory (poor placement of certain assets on my part kept my score down).
A very fun little battle.
Good result. I also made use of the reverse slopes, crossfires by AFVs/heavy weapons and the airburst mortars switching between the approaches. These were particularly effective pinning and attriting the US infantry trying to crest the slopes.
-
6 hours ago, Butschi said:
That's what I meant, I think.
Btw. This is all about gnerating the partial contact. The "ID step" seems to work a bit different. I'd guess that it is a random process abstracting performing some task, something like zooming to the partial contact, switching on thermals, etc. Really only blindly speculating here, but maybe something like where you get an additional die for your dice roll which you perform every 7 seconds. You have chance to roll the required result right away but the longer it takes the likelier it gets.
Interesting discussion by the way
-
On 5/15/2023 at 6:57 AM, IdontknowhowtodoX said:
No dude don't do that. We already have Wargame Red dragon. Don't need another one. RNG spotting is what makes CM different. Even though it does frustrate players at times.
Exactly. Even though it isn't always perfect, sometimes very far from perfect, it's exactly what keeps me/us playing this simulation which was originally released in 2007 (although significantly developed on since).
-
On 5/14/2023 at 5:46 PM, The_Capt said:
The other area of improvement is the effect of artillery on armoured vehicles. The current CM engine is not reflecting realities we are seeing in the war in Ukraine, I do believe a revisit is in order on just how vulnerable tanks are to heavy indirect fires. This will have a big impact on CW as the Soviets were an artillery heavy force.
That's good news I didn't read before and IMO well warranted.
To be fair we did have plenty of discussion about that one, but no changes to the simulation even though quite some work was done on the subject pointing towards the simulation being too generous on tanks. I did a bit of testing / work for that myself, especially CMBS M1A2 and Oplot-M dealing with 152/203mm direct and indirect hits.
I might have missed it but until now I didn't read about plans to change this behavior. Better late than never ;-), and thanks for the update! I feel such significant decisions should/could be posted/collected in a sticky adminonly post on the General Forum.
If anything they will help motivate people to do work when they anecdotally start to develop an intuition that there is something off in the simulation (they care about).
On the spotting subject: I don't have much issues with spotting with RED after who knows how many hours of CMx2 since 2007. And while atm I can't put many hours, almost all of my playtime is in PBEM in some organized format; there's certainly players who can make the RED spotting 'work for them'.
Perhaps the outliers or assessed capabilities of vehicles like a T-90AM in CMBS, or the Khrizantema, feel glass half-empty while they appear half-full for the M1A2SEPv2/3.
IMO a lot of the spotting is often impacted by C2 sharing, that's more difficult for RED in CM (which I'd say is fair) but is manageable as a player and to large affect. There are some c2 issues for at least Syrians in CMSF2, but that's another subject. -
On 5/10/2023 at 11:13 PM, Sarjen said:
Just some info regarding the IR capabilities of the T-80s: the early T-80s uses the TPN-3 which is equipped with a much more sensitive infrared image converter assembly than its predecessor. The passive range of the early versions is between 500 and 800m. With the support of the modernized infrared headlight L4A, which had received a more luminous lamp, the visibility in active operation increased to about 1200 m. Still worse than the western technology but still more than 20m as in my video example.
IIRC in CM the IR searchlights aren't ever turned on for any side, because they would stand out too much. So the IR headlight isn't in operation AFAIK.
).
Request for advice on real life Ukranian recruit training.
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted · Edited by Lethaface
The best advise imo is to look for qualified / experienced people to directly fill in on the subject, or even do actual lecture on the spot. Ideally combat veteran/reserve psychologists/psychiatrists , with actual deployment experience. These people do exist, perhaps more among SF formations.
If not available through army channels, they might be hire-able.