Dietrich
-
Posts
1,267 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Dietrich
-
-
My two bits (two cents adjusted for inflation):
How did the US win? By outproducing its enemies and its allies alike.
-
In recent playing of a mission from Paper Tiger's "USMC Gung Ho!" campaign, I noticed several instances where fire team leaders were overzealous with their M32 MGLs inside buildings and fragged members of their own squads, even of their own fire teams.
Conversely, in the same mission I made sure to keep my M1A1s positioned so that they wouldn't end up fragging Marines in the process of opening fire on just-spotted Syrians in the town.
Given the minimum arming distance of launched grenades, wouldn't it make sense to make pixeltruppen use launched grenades (i.e. rifle grenades; but the MGL isn't a rifle, innit? =P) only on targets beyond, say, hand grenade range? Something they'll keep in mind for CMSF2, hopefully.
-
And awesome photos...
Indeed — thanks much for the photos, akd.
-
Almost two minutes earlier, the USMC squad on the left suffered two WIA from the Syrian squad on the right while advancing across a bush-covered field. A minute earlier, the RPG man in said squad scored a turret hit on an Abrams from about 350 meters. Some of the ten or so Marines overwatching from rooftop half a klick away spotted where the RPG came from and fired a Javelin at the building, wrecking the wall. Just seconds after the Marine squad had hustled into the two-story building, the squad leader, Sergeant Roca, took it upon himself to bust into the one-story building and shoot the Syrians still alive therein.
Or at least it seemed that the squad leader took it upon himself to rush into the building and clear it solo. I suppose it actually was a glitch that one pixelsoldat from a squad ended up in a building adjacent to the one the squad was ordered to enter. But it's more fun to "dramatize" the on-screen action.
-
I don't mind the close-range urban use of a FlaK 38, which may not or may seem within the boundaries of plausibility/realistic-ness (depending on how many combat accounts one has read). I do mind the comprehensive and unrealistic non-usage of the multiple MG-34s/MG-42s which the German infantry in that scene were carrying.
Of course, in WW2 movies oftentimes the GIs have an unrealistically high proportion of Tommy guns (cf. Miracle at St. Anna, in which most of the main GI protagonists have Tommy guns, rather than, say, one Tommy gun and the rest M1 Garands), whereas the Krauts have an unrealistically high proportion of MP40s yet make relatively little use of their MGs.
And in BoB, many of the Easy Company guys' grenades had <1-second fuses. (Or were they just that bad-ass that they often let a grenade cook-off before tossing it in? =P) Whereas in SPR, none of the potato-mashers got cooked off, so they could be thrown back the way they came.
"Quick, lets retreat across a marsh"And then there's:
"So? They're just charging into the open, and even if they have any MGs they aren't using 'em..."
-
Yeah, the "Semper Fi, Syria!" campaign has the MEU's HQ riding in an AAVC (which appears in the "Objective Pooh" scenario, at least), but as it's a campagin, we can't open it in the editor to look at all the units.
I've started preliminary work on a campaign involving a Marine TF (battalion of infantry, company of AAVs, company of tanks, platoon of combat engineers, full howitzer battery)—basically the muscle of the 2nd MEB—and I figured the TF/battalion HQ would ride in the AAV company's HQ (AAVC) vehicle.
-
-
A couple days ago there was a clip of a good-old T55 in hull-down position. We take that old tank so for granted in the game.
Against an M1A1 or a Challenger 2 or a Leopard 2A6 or even an M2/3A3 (so long as it isn't in the middle of reloading its TOWs), a T-55 is a death trap. Against technicals (except perhaps one with an SPG-9 that's in a position to get off a flank shot) or dismounted insurgents, a T-55 is kick-ass (so long as it isn't crewed by incompetents).
Such has been my experience in CMSF, anyway.
-
Not saying it's among the "best" H2H scenarios, but two words:
Lead Express
-
I've seen pixeltruppen shooting at (or at least in the direction of) friendlies since at least the release of the "Task Force Panther" campaign (which was at least pre-v1.20, since it used SBCT infantry to stand in for paratroopers, rather than the IBCT infantry introduced with the British module).
Yet another reason to assign infantry units relatively close cover arcs.
-
Thanks very much for this, Mord ol' pal. =) I'll probably use this in place of the "all non-hooded" Combatants mod I made and have been using for quite a while.
-
I wonder how successful that M-113 with the turret actually was in combat.
<good-natured sarcasm> Certainly orders of magnitude more lethal, survivable, maneuverable, and air-mobile than a not-put-together-in-a-junkyard M1126. </good-natured sarcasm>
-
I am trying to find the reference, but so far no luck about the US division specifically trained for night fighting tacics and committed around Aachen. I believe it was the 104th, but don't quote me on that.
As it happens, winkelried recently uploaded to the Repository a campaign for CMBN focused on just such a unit (which was part of the 104th ID): 415th Infantry Regiment assaults Lucherberg, Germany.
-
German forces in game have very few radios. per p. 99 of manual:
Except that in the game (according to a quick check in the editor) the German infantry formations — not just the motorized/mechanized, "more important" Panzergrenadier/Panzerpionier formations — have radios down to platoon level, including all the rifle platoons. Or at least pretty much all the platoon HQs in the German infantry formations have a radio icon in the equipment panel.
At first I questioned this (despite not being a WW2 battlefield communications grog), but then I deduced it must be some sort of concession to the engine and/or gameplay because (apparently) the other sorts of WW2 battlefield communications (flares, smoke signals, field telephones, et al.) aren't simulated (at least not explicitly).
Perhaps Steve, Phil, or a beta tester could elucidate why the German forces in game are more on-par with the Yanks with regard to communications equipment than they apparently were back in Dubya-Dubya Two?
-
Since the trend seems to be leaning more toward a German-accented English voice mod rather than an actual-German voice mod, I think can whip something up to that effect. Granted, it won't be purpose-made and fully third-party like what YankeeDog has proposed, but the more the merrier, I say.
Animals vill be bred und ZLAUGHTERED!I love
-
Does New Zealand still have SAS personnel in Afghanistan[?]
NZSAS are still in A-stan, at least as of late August 2011:
The New Zealand Herald – SAS soldier killed in Kabul attack
Also (italics mine):
Stuff.co.nz – Top medal from US for Kiwi SAS commander
Petraeus said that since the SAS had returned to Afghanistan in late 2009, taking over the role of partnering the Afghan crisis response unit vacated by the Norwegians, three successive six-month rotations had made more than 60 high-risk arrests in "deliberate detention operations", seized more than 20 caches of explosives and weapons, and disrupted four potentially "spectacular" attacks, including planned suicide bombings.The unit acted on intelligence generally provided by Afghan sources, typically conducted its raids at night, and executed more than 90% of its operations without firing a shot. The unit's most recent operation took place successfully on Thursday night.
Older, but still pertinent:
On 7 December 2004, George Bush, President of the United States of America, formally presented the United States Navy Presidential Unit Citation to the New Zealand Special Air Service (SAS) at a ceremony held at the Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar, California. The United States Navy Presidential Unit Citation was awarded to those units which comprised the Combined Joint Special Operations Task Force - SOUTH/Task Force K-BAR (CJSOTF-SOUTH/TF K-BAR) in Afghanistan between 17 October 2001 and 30 March 2002. These units were drawn from the United States, New Zealand, Canada, Norway, Denmark, Germany, Australia, and Turkey. New Zealand was represented at the presentation ceremony by the Commanding Officer of the SAS.United States Navy Regulations state that the United States Navy Presidential Unit Citation is ‘awarded in the name of the President of the United States of America to units of the United States Armed Forces and cobelligerent nations for extraordinary heroism in action against an armed enemy. The unit must have accomplished its mission under such extremely difficult and hazardous conditions to set it apart from and above other units participating in the same campaign.’
The award of the United States Navy Presidential Unit Citation is an acknowledgment by the United States Government of the high value which is placed on the contribution made by the SAS to Operation Enduring Freedom. The missions undertaken by the SAS were performed within the operational area defined in the New Zealand General Service Medal (Afghanistan) Regulations 2002.
Gordon England, the Secretary of the United States Navy, was the approving authority for the United States Navy Presidential Unit Citation presented to CJSOTF-SOUTH/TF K-BAR. Gordon England was among those who attended the 7 December 2004 presentation ceremony.
-
Though I agree with you, Vanir, for fun's sake I'm going to play advocatus diaboli a little:
I have heard that two wrongs don't make a right.They do if the first wrong is done by The Man and the second wrong is done against (or to) The Man. In fact, in that context the second wrong can even be painted as a right.
one of those people who gets a little smile on his face when he hears of some US soldiers killed by an IEDIf I were a non-American who disliked Americans and believed that they in general were pretty much the most bigoted, unintelligent, and violent people in the western world, I probably would get a bitterly wry little smile on my face when I heard that 17 SEALs died in a helicopter shootdown just three months after the same unit (though none of the same operators; that'd be almost too much of a coincidence) killed OBL.
-
One of the "ricochet" voice files in CMx1 was, IIRC, something along the lines of:
"Keine Wirkung! Schnell, feuer wiederholen, los!"
Which, if my German is at all correct, means something like: "No effect! Quickly, fire again, go!"
-
A rhetorical question (not in response to any preceding post per se):
What if someone hacked into WikiLeaks's database(s) and published everything they found therein?
Some anticipated responses:
"WikiLeaks isn't a national government that makes money starting totally unjustified wars and killing many thousands of mostly noncombatants, so the comparison is ridiculous."
"WikiLeaks doesn't have the sort of secrets a national government has, so exposing of said secrets wouldn't be nearly as detrimental to them."
"Publishing WikiLeaks's secrets would put its personnel and ts supporters at risk of persecution, arrest, imprisonment, etc., at the hands of the governments they've angered, so yes, WikiLeaks would have a fully justified basis for protesting said publication."
Is it really true that whenever the government doesn't publish something, it's because the publishing of such would expose corruption/human rights abuses/etc., and thus that anything a government keeps secret should be exposed?
http://wikileaks.org/IMG/jpg/ja-main.jpg
Is WikiLeaks keeping governments open? Has WikiLeaks made governments open in the first place? :confused:
To the extent I can discern, it's far too early to tell if WikiLeaks's leaking will be beneficial overall, let alone to the extent its proponents would have others believe.
-
How about perhaps releasing the Ramadi map itself? I've been thinking that a "vignette from the Ramadi equivalent of Operation Phantom Fury" scenario would be cool; and with your permission, I'd like to try my hand at putting together such a scenario.
-
I leveled a building that had a atgm team in it but guess what, they didnt die and got one of my Bradleys later.
The ATGM team was in the building? AFAIK ATGMs can't fire from inside buildings or from balconies, just from rooftops.
I'm not surprised that at least some of the ATGM team survived the building's destruction. What's surprising, not to mention frustrating, is that the ATGM itself survived the building's destruction. Then again, if the "fuzzy logic" (if that's the term I mean) can allow for some occupants of a building to survive its collapse, then I suppose the same "fuzzy logic" can allow for some of said occupants's equipment to survive as well.
Anyway, I agree that it doesn't make sense that an ATGM team can be in a building that gets leveled and weather the leveling enough that they can then destroy an enemy AFV.
-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/sep/02/wikileaks-publishes-cache-unredacted-cables
WikiLeaks has published its full archive of 251,000 secret US diplomatic cables, without redactions, potentially exposing thousands of individuals named in the documents to detention, harm or putting their lives in danger.The move has been strongly condemned by the five previous media partners – the Guardian, New York Times, El Pais, Der Spiegel and Le Monde – who have worked with WikiLeaks publishing carefully selected and redacted documents.
The newly published archive contains more than 1,000 cables identifying individual activists; several thousand labelled with a tag used by the US to mark sources it believes could be placed in danger; and more than 150 specifically mentioning whistleblowers.Reporters Without Borders, a press freedom group which had been maintaining a backup version of the WikiLeaks site, revoked its support for the whistleblowing site in the wake of the decision."Some of the new cables have reportedly not been redacted and show the names of informants in various countries, including Israel, Jordan, Iran and Afghanistan," it said in a statement. "While it has not been demonstrated that lives have so far been put in danger by these revelations, the repercussions they could have for informants, such as dismissal, physical attacks and other reprisals, cannot be neglected."
-
Hm, the only one mentioned in the v. 1.20 game manual (which is the most up-to-date for CMSF without any expansions) is the M4A1. But I'll take your word for it.I am also pretty sure it's the M4A1.
Most-up-to-date, yes, but incorrect. Check the in-game tooltips—US Army riflemen have only M4s.
A note from the forum's resident currently-serving 3ID veteran:
The M4.It's an M4 not an M4A1. The only people sporting an M4A1 are SF and the Rangers, and by Rangers I mean the guys assigned to 75th Ranger Regt, not the regular guys who went to the school, got the tab and returned to their home unit. The rest of us regular Army types have the M4.
An interesting bit I read just the other day in Special Operations Forces in Iraq by Leigh Neville (italics mine):
Intriguingly, the [uS Army Asymmetric Warfare Group] have been forced to hand back their beloved [Heckler & Koch HK416s] due to an Army mandate that they must carry regular M4s as part of their role. A source within AWG explained, "As far as 416s, they've had to turn them in, but kept their Glock 19s. They've also been given the M4 with three-round burst. They hate it."Also, see the v1.11 features list:
M4A1 rifle renamed to M4. -
6. does the second vertical bar from the left in the ammo monitoring area for the squad (lower left area of HUD, next to suppression/C2 indicator) mean all SAW/MG ammo or is it ONLY for 7.62mm ammo like for M240B? If it's only for 7.62mm (assuming U.S. of course), why do some squads start out with any of this ammo whatsoever? I'm talking about basic infantry squads which use the M249 and M4A1.
The two left ammo bars indicate "light" and "medium" ammo respectively. What particular ammo constitutes "light" or "medium" depends on the particular unit. For instance, a US Army rifle squad with M4s and M249s (all 5.56 NATO weapons) will show ammo in the first bar but none in the second. A US Army MMG team with an M240B and a few M4s will show ammo in the first bar and the second, which represents 7.62 NATO. Conversely, a US Army sniper team with an M107 and a few M4s will also show ammo in both bars, but in this case the second ammo bar represents .50 BMG rather than 7.62 NATO.
The M4A1 (semi-auto/full-auto) isn't in CMSF, just the M4 (semi-auto/3-round-burst).
F-22s and Typhoons
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
Not that I'm any sort of TACAIR grog, but in addition to the reasons BlackMoria mentioned, the F-22 probably wouldn't be deployed to the hypothetical Syrian war because the USAF already has F-15Cs that can handle the air superiority mission sufficiently well, even aside from the fact that most other USAF/USN fighters are also quite capable in that role.