Ryujin

Not really, while tanks are more powerful, there's a big jump in infantry AT capability. In ww2 you either have pretty much static AT guns or very limited infantry AT capability, which left you with situations where infantry really couldn't hit back against tanks. With unguided rockets in pretty much all squads supported by ATGMs teams and MANPADS you have a lot more options to keep your infantry relevant in ways they wouldn't be in WW2. Almost all of your infantry is going to be mechanized in some way as well, giving you a lot more mobility as standard. You're going to be using them differently as with all the lethality of the cold war setting you're probably going to want to be moving them around a lot more and using them with their vehicles (especially IFVs). Basic fire and maneuver tactics should be the same for the most part, less has fundamentally changed here. Squads are more flexible and powerful with the soviets and US having a lower recoil full auto rifle standard. MGs aren't quite as decisive as they aren't the only ones with full auto rifle caliber fire now, they're more useful at range where a larger round and a bipod/tripod makes a difference.

Thickest armor is still the turret front by far. You don't want to be taking hits to the hull (which for many tanks is were most of the ammo is as well). Ideally you don't want to sit hull down and trade shots, but scope for targets turret down if you can, pop up to hull down to engage, then move. This limits the amount of tank and time exposed while only showing the best armor, which is even more important with accurate and powerful ammo flying around. At this time frame there isn't the same line up of super ammo and thermals are just coming in. The original M1 is good, but it really is a "beta" version of the M1, without the many armor upgrades and the same 105 and ammo as your M60s. Things should be more lethal than ww2, but not at shock force/black sea levels of M1s punching through anything they come across. Having used the original M1/M60A3 a bunch in steel beasts, it'll be interesting to see how they perform in CM, but I expect the tank fights could easily go to either side. I think the big thing you'll need to get used to is DPICM (and ICM to a degree). Tanks getting wiped out by artillery is going to be a big shift and you can't just park somewhere and cover an angle safely like in WW2.

I'd argue it makes it more interesting and different than just not touching on it at all in cold war turned ww3. Both sides expected that any conventional warfare would realistically be happening often in nuclear and chemical contamination. A hypothetical soviet invasion would be crossing nuked terrain, a lot doctrine and equipment from the time is based around that. While yes obviously a tactical nuke is outside the scope of CM, battles happening in the aftermath aren't. It isn't critical but would add a different dimension from the other settings. Of course if you want to be accurate to how MAD turned out you can play the NTC campaign, then close the game and say to yourself 'And then nothing happened'.

I noticed we get the M901A1. Does that mean TOW2 falls in the timeframe if I understand correctly? I thought that was later.

While obviously challenging to implement, no cold war WW3 scenario is truly complete without it. Contamination making any casualties KIAs, forcing vehicles with NBC overpressure systems to stay buttoned up, reducing non-radio communication, and quickly tiring troops in NBC gear. Seems like it would be more impactful for scenarios than EW (as you always have perfect command and control anyway). I don't think it'd need to be more detailed than a battlefield being "contaminated" or not. Isn't critical but seems like something that could be an interesting aspect to the setting for possible expansions, but seems like it'd need some thought as to how it's implemented.

Wow they actually did it, glad they changed their minds. Haven't touched CM in a while but this setting should bring me back. Hope cluster/ICM gets added to black sea as well, maybe with some of the smarter anti-armor rounds like CBU-97. Really felt like it was missing from modern armor fights.

I think it's pretty much impossible to do well playing full real time above a platoon size simply because you don't just play as the company commander. You also have to do the jobs of every platoon and squad leader simultaneously. You don't have any subordinates to handle the details, you need to micromanage your units as the AI will not do anything useful on it's own (outside of self preservation sometimes). I usually play wego because it's nice to review turns and I like not quite being able to intervene instantly (but I also tend to avoid borg area fire and such). When playing RT I pause every so often to just do a review of my units and their status. An auto pause on casualties or something could be nice though.

Yeah, 84mm single HEAT. Not a ton of punch, so really most effective against light BMP/BTR targets.

HEAT. Manual says 420mm.

Yeah, sorry I missed that in the first post.

Weather probably effects it, suppression and skill certainly do. For the AT-13s... are they deployed on a tripod or being shoulder fired? That makes a pretty big difference.

It seems to me like it's an issue of everyone standing up in the hatches like they're on parade. With 1:1 hit detection, this will of course make a big difference. If the HMMWV gunner actually crouched down behind the gun shield, his life expectancy would probably triple as very little of him would be exposed. I can't imagine anyone would stay in the "up and looking around" pose the do now under fire.

I don't think the AI running out of ammo is that big of a concern, I'm sure you can just have the AI fire briefly and cut them off if they run low. Honestly, if an AI unit lives long enough in contact to run out of ammo it's already an improvement over the usual turkey shoot. It'd also be nice to have this option for player units, with something like a "cover fire arc" or some ROE options. There's certainly cases where I'd like my units to fire if they so much as think they see enemy infantry and ammo isn't an issue.

The snipers seem to still aim center mass-ish in my experience, so it's not worth it against specific stuff like sensors. Against something overall thinly armored like a BMP, BTR, or maybe a rear shot, it can work as a center shot will likely punch through and hit something but it probably won't disable the vehicle in just a couple shots. I've used snipers vs BMP-3s before to get them to retreat and harass them, the rounds will penetrate and if you don't stick around to keep shooting them you can get away with it. But it didn't seem to do any serious damage in most cases.

This guy's hiding spot was a little too good. some time after driving onto these foxholes by accident I noticed this poor guy still alive and squeezed under one of my abrams. That said... it might be the safest place to be given the circumstances...

I haven't seen it consistently, but the UAVs seem to be nearly blind outside their observation area, so if the spotting rounds land even a little bit out of it's area, the spotter has a hard time adjusting. I can understand the assigned area being it's focus, but it seems odd that it's so binary.

I'm pretty sure thermals work much better in the fog than night vision, which of course the US has plenty of, even for infantry. I think they scan with the NV sights, they're just not great.

Until the AI is smart enough to find a good position themselves, it's necessary to some degree. You can't tell your ATGM team to go up on the ridge and find a spot overlooking the road. They'll just go exactly where you say and happily stare at the backside of the ridge, even if moving two meters forward would give them a good view. I'd rather deal with a few exploits of the target line instead of having my troops stand around in a useless spot just out of LOS when moving them. Aside from that, in general CM simulates the combat very well, but not being in the commander's boots. You almost always have far, far more information and command power than an actual commander. Just comes with the perspective and the fact you play as every leader on your side.

I was able to beat it as the Russians, but I wasn't terribly impressed with the BTRs. They got the job done, but they just feel like they don't have enough ammo for the coax and you have to keep the 30mm on a tight leash, but the smoke screens were invaluable. The ATGM teams on the other hand were great, as were the RPGs for blasting buildings. I liked that the AI script wasn't entirely passive, in my play through they tried a counterattack accross the bridge with some armor. While conducted in the usual suicidal AI fashion, it was a bit of a supprise and could have gone much worse if one of my BTRs hadn't put a burst of 30mm through the turret ring of the bulat (it was quite an impressive point blank flank shot resulting in an instant fireball). Overall one of my favorite quick scenarios so far. Lots of room for trying other approaches, I never used the left road and focused on an overwhelming attack across the bridge right to the objectives. Lots of CM urban combat has made me wary of clearing more blocks than I need to, but a flanking approach would be interesting in this case.

The squad itself doesn't come with a javelin. It's a piece of equipment they have to pick up from someone else and that should be factored into the vehicle carrying it. So it makes no sense for this to be part of cost of the squad. As mentioned above, the organic AT to a squad is just a pair of AT4s. I disagree with some of the points above like the effectiveness of NVGs and PDAs, both I've found very useful as the US. I'm not sure how effective optics really are in CM, but I think they do help a bit to both spotting and shooting. But I do agree the cost difference between US and Russian soldiers at same skill settings feels like it should be closer to 50% or so. Right now it feels a bit too high.

The problem is if you don't manage the individual squads, no one will. They won't take any action other than shoot and react to extreme threats. There's no squad or platoon leaders under you. Combat Mission is much more battle chess than being in the boots of the commander, and as such you'll be very ineffective if you don't play squad leader for every squad. Losing focus of the big is of course a problem with this, so I usually don't like large battles (and I wish CM would focus more on a smaller scale). On topic, that does mean that carefully managing the fire orders is important as in a lot of cases you should be suggesting what sort of weapons to use for them. Generally for a javelin team, my opinion is keep them on tight leash and not issue any target orders until you have a javelin worthy target. Don't expose a team with that valuable of a weapon to return fire until you need them. (of course when you do actually want them to fire a javelin at a building or infantry, it's like pulling teeth to get them to use it).

I noticed this BTR-4 driver doesn't seem too impressed with my plan... he had a bit of close call with a BMP-3. Surprisingly not even injured. They went over his shoulder, past the gunners leg, and out the back of the vehicle without injuring anyone with spall or damaging anything important.

Pretty cool, didn't know there was an injector for opengl out there. Does have all the pieces for some atmospheric night vision battles. There seems to be a better shader pack out there called MasterEffect, which does bloom the right way (useful for nvg) and does already have support for depth buffer so it comes with DOF and such. If you don't want the bottom bar effected, you can hijack the split screen and have it not effect the bottom instead. http://reshade.me/forum/shaderpack-mastereffect/161-mastereffect-reborn-official-thread

Yes, you can blast through any wall. It'll suppress the occupants. Windowless walls are a great spot for this. You can also blow out the adjoining walls of buildings right next to each other. In cities this can be very useful to create a covered "tunnel" down the block without having to go out in the street to get to the next building.

This came up in another thread, but I think it deserves its own thread as it seems to not be widely known (at least I had no clue it was different from a normal fast move). The point being after some quick tests it seems it's the "Don't Stop!" move I had been missing for a long time. Unlike a normal fast move the troops will try much harder to complete an evade move under fire. So if your units get pinned in the open, an evade may get them on their feet and running to cover rather than laying there to be picked off. But the really interesting thing is it can be used preemptively. You can use it to say run across a street with much less risk of them stopping in the middle and all being killed. You can even use it to charge an enemy if you're feeling a bit desperate/suicidal. Obviously because they won't hit the deck, they'll be very exposed standing and running. So use it wisely. They also seem to stop to fire while carrying it out. I need to test it more, but it might work in some cases for an assault or room clearing move when you want them to keep going. Ironically, evade may be the closest thing to a proper 'assault' order... The evade button is the 4 arrows '+' looking button next the to the 'M' button. When you press it it'll create a waypoint you can drag around. Try putting it on an enemy and watch your guys keep running under fire to see it in action. Should save a ton of pixeltroopers, especially in urban combat. EDIT: Also seems like you can change the waypoint type and it'll keep the effect. Not so sure about following waypoints after the first.