ScubaSam
-
Posts
84 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by ScubaSam
-
-
Yeah, that was the other part (aside from the wounding theory), you can carry more rounds. But what difference does it make if you have to keep shooting the enemy to take him out, especially if you are in close quarters and you can't afford to have delays in getting results? With the 7.62x51 they go down fast and with less rounds.
I think in CQB its a balancing act, really. With 7.62 you have greater spotting power and the ability to penetrate obstacles, but the recoil makes automatic fire difficult and you carry a lot less ammo. 5.56 gives you the opposite - less weight, a lighter recoil, but reduced power.
I mentioned the switch from SLR to SA80, and on balance I think this was actually one of those unusual good calls for procurement, in the sense that they foresaw a lot of wars in the future would be fought in build up areas. Going from a single-shot, 20 round mag, 7.62 full-size rifle to a fully automatic, 30 round mag, 5.56 bullpup rifle was probably a good call.
Having said that, things like the LSW may not be around much longer. A friend of mine in an Infantry unit says they dont even use that weapon after training - its far too large and cumbersome for CQB, and its mag size is too small for a support role (despite the name...). Using it as a DMR is an idea that has caught on in some regiments more than others. Glad to see it make an appearance in game though.
-
Believe it or not, one of the reasons standard riflemen found their rifles switched from 7.62 to 5.56 (like when the British SLR was dropped in favour of the SA80) is actually because of the fact 5.56 is "less" effective.
If you put a 5.56 round in someone and they are wounded, any conventional force will have casevac procedures to be followed. So you've neutralised one enemy, plus another one or two giving him first aid, plus others helping to extract him, plus that enemy squad's mission is going to be interrupted until they get the casualty evacuated.
With a 7.62 round, theres a greater chance the enemy will be killed outright. That results in one less enemy, but by making the enemy evacuate a casualty you have a greater effect on their operations.
Of course, today, when the main enemy are insurgent forces (who really aren't so worried about casevac procedures, lets face it) you're probably better off just dropping them, especially if they are doped up and willing to die for their cause.
-
BTR is a bit of an armoured truck, when you think about it.
12.7mm (.50 cal) MG, same as an LMTV, and its armour is pretty paper thin. Holds a Syrian Squad and a bunch of ammo.
Anything lighter than that (like a GAZ) would just be a target, tbh.
EDIT - I lie. After actually looking in game...i see its a 14.5mm MG, and it has a 7.62 co-ax as well. Its armour is listed as large red Xs for almost everything, except for frontal 5.56 fire which gets...an orange dot. woo-hoo.
By contrast, the armoured MVTR has those dots for all directions on small calibre fire. The BTR could serve as an 8 wheeled "truck" for Red forces if so desired, basically.
-
The good news is we have already fixed that issue and it will be out in a new patch soon
Steve
This may be a wild guess...but is the reason the standalone 1.20 has been delayed because 1.21 is in rapid development and the plan is just to release that and take everyone straight to 1.21?
-
So you think we should have realistic LMG and HMG tracer loadouts/colours, as well as rifle tracers for squad/team commanders?
Sounds like a fair bit of work putting all that in, but if BFC were willing to do it, well... its realistic, it adds to the immersion...so sounds good to me
-
Riflemen (specifically squad/team commanders) tend to put the odd tracer round into their weapon, if available, as it allows them to give fire control orders based on "Watch my tracer". The majority of rifle rounds, however, are not tracer.
MGs usually work on a system of every 3rd round or every 5th round, depending on the weapon/the ammo available. So while its true to say the game probably has an unrealistic surplus of tracer, I'd prefer having it to not having it. Makes it much easier to see what your guys are aiming at, especially as you can't afford to babysit one unit the whole time and monitor what it decides to target.
-
The wars in Afghanistan/Iraq had been a bit of a boon for British kit issue. Every single unit, from Regular army to Territorial (part-time reservists) even down to Cadet forces (a youth organisation for 12-18 year olds, sponsored by MoD) gets issued mostly new kit and equipment these days.
Six years ago, when I was a cadet, we were still running around in OG shirts, wooly pullovers and 1980s combat jackets. And that was our best drill kit, normal barracks kit and dirty field kit all rolled into one.
Nowadays they all get combat jackets, shirts, trousers, all of which are the proper IRR (Infra-red reflective) stuff the regs get. Most units have new PLCE webbing and bergans too (when I started we still had 1958 pattern webbing...). The kids today even get issued combat socks!
So if thats the scale of issue to cadets, you can imagine the kit available to frontline regular forces. Media stories of "poor equipment" are much exaggerated, IMHO.
-
I can't really speak for the US forces, but I think a good job was done for the voices on the British module, considering the campaign focuses around a Scottish battlegroup - I seem to hear a prevalance of Northern and Scottish accents, mixed in with a few others. Makes sense to focus your voice efforts to match the unit you're portraying.
-
The problem with 'official' doctrine is its been warped in the weird wars we've had going for the past eight+ years. Is Syria a 'classic' full-scale invasion? Is it a 'police action'? A retaliatory strike with limited aims? Are the citizens hostile? Pinning down what precisely is to be done under which circumstances might be tough.
Even the basic TO&E doctrine has been fiddled around with to an extent. Its not unusual to see Sergeants or Colour Sergeants as Platoon Commanders, GPMGs issued left right and centre, Platoons organised as two "Multiples" of 12 rather than 3 sections of 8, Cavalry acting as Infantry, the list goes on and on.
But of course, its usually only when a war breaks out that doctrine gets experimented with and thus updated. Mounted cavalry was still a part of most armies in 1914, remember? How quickly that changed
There hasn't been a major war to put the conventional tactics and doctrine developed since 1945 into practice. The warriors never did roll out across the north german plain against that big Soviet tank rush, so it was never discovered if the structure would work for real. I'd like to imagine the US and UK would go into Syria with their "textbook" doctrines but I'd say its very likely some "lessons learned" from the conflict would result in a change to the doctrine to counter some previously unforseen threat/problem.
-
Apparantly the research BFC did suggested that 40 or 50 HE rounds and 150-200 AP rounds is about what gets carried in a Warrior, so it appears to be accurate with regards to doctrine.
I was worried for a while that the WMIKs and Jackals didn't carry enough ammo - the 7.62 count was only 200! Then I discovered that somebody had been very clever and let the vehicles draw ammo from the boxes stored onboard - the same ones that can be acquired by troops. A nice feature, that.
-
A few Geordie, Welsh and Irish voices wouldn't go amiss, but they seem to have got most of the major dialects in.
What is missing however is distinctive Sandhurst accents for officers in HQ units
Reference the Major at 1:06 in that video for further info
-
+1 to that. Also would help when you realise one waypoint in a chain is out of place - at the minute you have to delete it plus all the waypoints after it, then replot it and replot every single waypoint after that...Even explaining it is long and time-consuming lol so draggable waypoints would be a great timesaver.
-
Liberal use of the "double click on the HQ" tactic seems to work well for me in real time
The platoon basically becomes a big blunt force instrument, with everyone getting ordered about as one large block. Its only when they come under heavy and constant contact you then begin micromanaging the individual squads, with the help of lots of pausing.
Company level missions are manageable, but they're not exactly a cakewalk, mind. However, I've never ever played a Battalion level mission sucessfully...are there even any Battalion level scenarios out there?
-
The Operations team was there with their XO Major, and he became the battalion HQ after the CO became a casualty. The game then made the E-9 the commander once the Operations team became casualties (I did continue the test after the screenshot) in other words a unit can have multiple XOs
-
I like the sound of that lomir
As Sequoia said, feel free to tweak with those forces a bit. I'd love to see another British unit enter the fray, maybe a Mechanised or Light formation as those were barely touched upon by the main module campaign (Warriors are great, but they get ooold).
-
The XO took over command of the battalion, but the Sgt Maj just became the senior rank in that squad. He's moving because I basically had the HQ unit run towards a Syrian position until the CO became a casualty...cruel, I know, but its in the interests of science
-
Sure, look at the book "Thunder Run". Names escape me and I'm a bit busy (or lazy?) to run down and find my copy. However, the armored unit's top E, an E-8 or E-9, is pictured in the act of performing the epitome of his role. He's standing at the rear of a tank firing his M-16/M-4 across the engine deck of a stopped Abrams at close-in enemy. While he's doing this, a junior E is kneeling behind him wrapping a field dressing around the E-9's bullet-holed leg. Pure testosterone fueled warrior example to his men in the midst of combat. The picture is worth a thousand words...
Sounds awesome, and I've heard stories of British RSMs doing the same sort of thing (every now and again) in Afghanistan. Heard one where an RSM was visiting a platoon position when it came under heavy enemy fire. Eventually the enemy began to get real close to the compound and a withdrawal was ordered. The RSM was the last man out, sitting on a tripod mounted .50 cal with only his loader for company, mowing down scores of Taleban, until at the last minute the two bugged out of there.
However, I'm not sure if thats the official role
which is more what I was looking for. -
I think it might well be. I definitely heard the "pop" sound of a rifle grenade being fired, then moments later several WIA casualties on both BLUFOR and OPFOR are taken. So either the grenadier isn't recognising which weapon he's currently using, and that needs to be fixed, or like you said a 30m arming distance needs to be added for rifle grenades.
How do you go about reporting a bug officially, then?
-
I've got the boxed paradox version, It came with a printed manual (scaled down, no editor section in it) and the Map
With the Blue Units, starting at the top and working clockwise, you have:
A Mechanised Brigade, designated "FI" on the right hand side. (Finland, perhaps?)
An Infantry Battalion, designated "GR" on right hand side (Possibly Germany?)
The flagged unit above the GR battalion is a Division HQ designated "EURO"
then there is an Infantry Battalion designated "SP" (Spain?)
the last unit to the South East is 3rd Brigade, 2nd US Infantry Division. They look like a Stryker Brigade to me.
As for red units, some of the designations are unclear because of the blue arrows overlapping them, but:
- A brigade sized infantry force lies in the FI Brigades path, right in the middle of the blue
arrow. Can't see their designation. (but at a guess I'd say its a 5)
- to the NE, what looks like 7th Infantry Brigade lies in the path of the SP bn.
- E of that, 6th Infantry Brigade is covered by the arrow with no NATO icon at its base.
- the two units in Al Hasakah are 8th Infantry Brigade (the northernmost unit) and 14th Special Forces Regiment.
- the Southmost unit is 9th Infantry Brigade, in 3/2 Infs path.
Hope all that helps. Main US unit seems to be 3/2 SBCT. Can't see any British forces there, but you could always add small detached units to the Euro forces or something similar.
-
It sounds like its only British-heads posting so far - any Americans (or BFC) care to shed light on what the role of an E-8 or E-9 is in the US Army/USMC, in a combat situation?
Obviously the roles of a an American First Sergeant and Sergeant Major must be different to their CSM and RSM counterparts over here, seeing as one set is in the game and the other isn't.
-
If the ammunition fits, steal it? I'm sure it could be implemented that each soldier is only allowed to use a certain bunch of weapons (for Red this would be Soviet bloc) and therefore if an enemy squad is lying there with stacks of AK ammunition, the soldier would be allowed to steal it.
I think the buddy aid function is basically a "grab and go" where brown (KIA) soldiers are concerned. It takes a minute or so to do, but they do have to get down, take their weapon off or sling it, take the weapon off the dead guy (which may have become wrapped up in its sling), fish through his pockets for magazines...you get the picture. As for grab and go on red (WIA) soldiers...I'd rather see my pixeltruppen saving their buddies than nicking their ammo and leaving them, so I think the features is spot on the way it is now, though I can see how it would be handy for conscripts that don't know eachother (and maybe don't know any first aid for that matter!).
-
I did a Sniper test yesterday with veteran Army, Marine and British Snipers, engaging a steadily advancing Syrian squad from a start line of 1200m
The British sniper did that too - fired a bunch of shots, caused a few casualties, but then switched to his L85 eventually. I thought "fair enough, he's probably out of ammo" but lo and behold, a few minutes later hes back on the L115, caused two more casualties with it.
The stats for the British were:
Enemy Spotted - 1180m
First Shot - 1134m
First Casualty - 1083m
Casualties:
- 578m
- 563m (with next shot)
- 558m (with next shot)
- 421m (enemy brown)
- 436m (brown, enemy were prone and crawling about at this point)
- 380m
***at 395m, both men decide to fire L85s at prone enemy for several minutes***
- 394m (with L115)
- 394m
***brew is put on at this point***
So basically, they got a lucky shot at over 1000m, but the most damage was done at <600m. His spotter only fired his L85 at the 395m mark, when for some reason they both decided it was a good idea.
Oh, and for the record, in this test the British eliminated the enemy squad about 5 minutes before the Army managed it, and about 10 before the Marines
-
I dont' believe friendly-fire from small cal weapons / including grenades is modeled....?? Has it been in a patch since?
I've not noticed friendly fire from small cal weapons or hand grenades (thankfully), but rifle grenades do cause friendly casualties, which can be annoying when the grenadier decides to fire it instead of his rifle.
I've also seen heavy weapons (.50 cal and 7.62) cause yellow friendly wounded in a night battle, they were targeting light a trench which the inf were charging, the the round were going right above/through the friendly inf. I was aware this could happen at night under iron rules, but I was playing on veteran so maybe it was changed.
-
I agree that some parts of the campaign were unrealistic, but in other respects I actually found it more engaging than the Army or Marines campaigns, probably because I know more about British tactics and organisation. It was obviously designed by somebody that has a working knowledge of these tactics as well, but perhaps not to the same standard that RecceDG has. However, I still enjoyed every mission of the campaign, which has to count for something as well.
I would echo the other advice about trying to do it yourself. I've got ideas for a mini-brits campaign of my own, and I've already got the research done and a rough campaign plan. Making the maps, however, is turning into a chore (I'm trying to be faithful to the real world locations as much as possible), so I do have a lot of respect for the scenario makers of the campaign that comes with the game. It's very easy for me or RecceDG or anyone to come up with a grand design for a campaign, but it takes an awful lot of man-hours to turn it into a reality.
On the bright side, this could be an opportunity for the "hardcore-realists" to band together and create a campaign between them, based on as much real-world military knowledge as possible. I'd certainly be intrested in such a collaboration.
Could we have more radio chatter please!
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
They'll talk to eachother about enemy units they've spotted etc but you can only hear it if the camera is almost on top of the troops.
There's been a few suggestions for some sort of notification system that could tell you when, say, your troops spot a tank or come under fire. Radio chatter was mooted around as a suggestion, I believe.
As it stands at the minute, I also love the arty and CAS radio chat too. Wish the Syrians had some as well!