hcrof
-
Posts
1,124 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by hcrof
-
-
so propose one!
everyone is always saying the Israel-Palestinian conflict is un-solvable. Lets see if we can at least get the members of the GF forum to agree to one...
Well I actually liked the solution that you proposed (apart from the compensate the Palestinians bit and I would also push for a 2 state solution. I don't however think that it is possible - certainly not right now!
I would start with baby steps; removal of the blockade around Gaza, engagement with the surrounding countries in talks and a massive propaganda 'hearts and minds' campaign in Gaza/West Bank which actually contains substance (actions speak louder than words!). This campaign would try to separate the hardliners from the moderates within Hamas and would pave the way for a political settlement. At the same time I would try to engage with Hizballah - I don't see them as the sort of frothing at the mouth crazies that Israel portrays them as. Same trick really, try to marginalise the hardliners and engage with the moderates.
You will notice that I feel that the ball is squarely in Israels court here. Its not because I feel Israel is better or worse than the Palestinians, it is just because right now there is no way for the Palestinians to be proactive on this one. They are too fragmented and the hardliners have too much influence. Israel will lose more people to rocket attacks, the angry rhetoric will still be coming from the Arab states but they must be firm and not give in to their own hardliners. Every time Israel launches an attack it weakens the peace process.
-
settling the ME problem seems simple enough when you are an outsider:
-give the Golan back to Syria;
-remove Israeli settlers from the west bank;
-lift the blockade on Gaza;
-provide palestinian refugees w. financial compensation and full citizenship to another country of their choice (other than Israel) in exchange for abandoning the right of return;
-give east Jerusalem to Israel;
-recognize Israel's right to exist;
-have everyone (Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Hamas, Fatah, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc.) sign a Peace Treaty;
voilà...
...problem solved. simple really...
I really wish it was that simple. The west bank and the Golan heights are 2 major water sources in the region and I don't see Israel voluntarily giving up water security. I would love to propose a solution of my own but there isn't a 'right' answer. Just a 'least bad' compromise that I don't expect to see any time soon.
-
True enough Secondbrooks, the attacker in CMSF is a lot less casualty adverse than a real world commander and just a single ATGM can cause hours of delay in an attacking force. I think what I was trying to say is that a determined attack will always get through any single position and the tank is the ideal weapon to do this with.
When you have defence in depth, minefields and engineering works, counterbattery fire, electronic warfare, mobile reserves and a competent air defence network then the situation gets harder. The attack is still likely to break through initially but only then does the true worth of the defence begin to show. Can you set up the flanking shots? Is your mobile reserve able to respond in force and on time? Can you bog down the attack and close the gap in the line? Most importantly, can you coordinate everything and respond fast enough? Again though, the tank is the attackers biggest asset here. It can be fast enough to outmanoeuvre the defenders reserve, it is tough enough to shrug off anything but a determined AT defence and carries a huge amount of firepower that can sweep aside resistance as it tears a hole in the enemies rear.
-
It also has to be said that battles in CMSF are deliberately very tough on the attacker so tanks are harder to use as they were designed to be used. Also, as Ryujin said, ATGMs are vulnerable to artillery and are slow. In a fast moving battle they are either not where you need them or heavily suppressed by artillery fire.
Imagine you are the Syrians with 4 Kornet ATGMs and a battalion of infantry. In CMSF you could probably stop the US forces and inflict heavy casualties. In the real world you would come under fire from MLRS systems, aircraft, artillery and then when all your troops are all dead or cowering in their foxholes a Battalion of Abrams sweeps through and mops up. Any AT weapons remaining would not be able to stop them!
Tanks are also useful in the defence as a mobile reserve. Now that you have US forces breaking through your lines you need to plug that gap fast. To do this you will need tanks of your own to meet them in a meeting engagement. (or at the very least BRDM-ATs to quickly move into an ambush!).
-
While I am not going to comment on the legality of the operation (I honestly don't know), I would like to question the methods used. As far as I can make out, Israeli commandos rappelled down onto the deck of a ship with 600 angry people on it and failed to gain the element of surprise. It seems to me it was a bit optimistic to believe that a few commandos could calm the situation down in what could potentially turn into a riot. It did.
The problem with incidents like this is that they serve little purpose except as propaganda for the Palestinian troublemakers and their sympathisers in the West and the Middle East. Israel has the image of the sadistic prison guard in the minds of these people and killing demonstrators will just serve to strengthen this image and make them even more glad to 'stick it to the man' by supporting the various terrorist groups in the region (Hamas' democratic election victory anyone?). Of course the Israelis and their backers are not much better in this regard - they view the Palestinians as criminal troublemakers who are ungrateful for what they get and their backers as either naive or antisemitic.
At the end of the day though, Israel has to accept that it is supposed to be the responsible and civilized party in this conflict (as it so often claims to be) and to actively reach out to the disaffected parties on the other side of the political divide. There are certainly a lot of people who are sick of the fighting and dialogue and compromise is the only way to solve the problem. Episodes like this and Cast Lead etc. are popular within Israel but do nothing to solve the root cause of the Palestinian 'problem'. They just make the symptoms worse.
-
Actually, half the squad does a fast move. If you have 3 fireteams that might be ok (if slow to cover the ground) but with 2 teams they tire very quickly. It is probably best to split the squad if you can and issue timed quick move orders. This is not really an option as the Syrians though.
-
I think quite a lot of people would like to see infantry formations in the future, even if they are quite simple. Contact drills would be awesome too, although they might be harder to implement.
I can see it now, lines of infantry moving forward, formations getting ragged as they come under fire...
Yep, that would be awesome
-
Some build model railways, some make their cars bounce. Aren't all hobbies basically pointless? People love to fiddle with things to see what makes them tick be it cars, computers, power tools or anything else.
Im not joking about power tools!
Lawnmower racing
Pointless yes, but harmless fun for everyone involved.
-
AFAIK MSTAR is not modelled. The extra comms equipment and fire control computers is modelled though so you will find that arty/air strikes come in faster and more accurate when the FOO is located inside the vehicle.
-
I don't know whether this helps:
http://www.armedforces.co.uk/army/listings/l0014.html
Good luck with the campaign!
-
Welcome aboard MugHug! Yep, CMSF is both convincingly realistic and a lot of fun and thats why we love it
-
Will the NATO model include the Dutch M113-TOW variant? It was certainly still in service in 2008
-
6. Infantry can shoot from within vehicles.
Um, they still cant fire from red vehicles. Not through the gun ports or from the hatches on top. Nor can those vehicles generate defensive engine smoke (I know, I know, I'm just being difficult...)
Sorry, I just occasionally feel the urge to just throw my pet peeves out there.
I like that list btw, many of those are the reasons why I much prefer CMSF to CMBB
-
Add on maps (as opposed to scenarios) need to be edited in the editor in order to use. They can't be used as QBs against the AI I'm afraid because they have no orders for the computer.
-
Not knowing anything at all about WW2 calliopes, I ask have you seen this?
The TOS-1 is a MLRS mounted on a tank that fires incendiary warheads. The reason it is on a tank is because the rockets are short ranged, most of the rocket is warhead. The tank armour allows it to get that bit closer to the target.
-
Am I the only person to notice that the guy on the left has the safety off and is pointing his rifle at the other guy?
On topic - yes I hope chest rigs and stuff is modelled in the final game. It is probably just because of the early screenshots.
-
If insurgents are firing from 20m away the warhead may not have armed properly. In addition, penetration is variable over range. Here is a chart I posted a while back:
The penetration is related to the speed of the warhead, too fast and the penetrating jet cannot form properly. This is not modelled in CMSF AFAIK
Edit: Reading through the pdf reminds me: If the round hits and there isn't even cosmetic damage the rounds may have been HE rounds. Either that or they failed to explode properly due to poor maintenance and didn't form the penetrating jet.
-
Interesting test, they seem to hit a bit much for conscript level (which I take to mean basically untrained)
Have you tried the same test with regular troops?
-
Ha - flamingknives was too fast for me!
I would be interested to know how the increased weight of the newer warheads affects accuracy and range of the weapon. That 105mm tandem warhead is almost double the weight of the 85/93mm warheads. Do they use different sights? Do they upgrade the sustainer motor?
I suspect most of the relevant information is in Russian however.
-
Very nice, thanks for the AAR!
-
RPGs (At least in regular armies) have a 2.7x sight on them allowing effective fire to between 300m and 500m. Effective meaning 30-50% of rounds hit the target.
Of course RPGs need thorough training with them in order to be used effectively in combat, they are not just 'point and shoot' weapons like the AT4. This would (among other things) explain the dismal accuracy shown by insurgents using them in Iraq and Afghanistan.
-
The game probably used fuzzy logic and you were just unlucky (unless it happens again!). Imagine that the Javelin misfired and the guys panicked or something. And yes, 450m is very optimistic with an AT-4, even under ideal conditions.
On the cooling thing, the seeker head must be very cold in order to distinguish between heat signatures. I think the cooler your seeker head the better quality picture you get (although there is probably more to it than that and technology has a way of making things possible).
-
Russia is not like Saudi Arabia. It has considerable scientific achievement and its universities continue to produce quality graduates in Science and Mathematics. The difficulty is to commercialise this knowledge and to set up new and innovative industries with all of these graduates. It need to better harness its human resources.
Russia has problems. It is too reliant on energy right now and the old Soviet era specialists and equipment are beginning to be retired. However, the government is well aware of this and is putting measures in place to try to deal with these problems, paid for by its natural resources. The Russian economy is beginning to diversify, in 20 years time I am sure it will look very different to what it is now. In particular, watch the nanotechnology and software industries. They are expanding very quickly.
-
I think you misread the situation.
a) Russia is very self confident right now. It has a strong economy despite the recession, it has Europe reliant on its gas and militarily it is in pretty good shape. Certainly enough to pacify the 'near abroad'.
After the incidents in the Ukraine and Georgia I would say the 'west' takes Russia very seriously indeed. Russia is also reaching out once again to the third world, particularly in India, South America and the Middle East. These regions have more influence than they did in the cold war so it gives Russia great global 'leverage'.c) With stable government and a growing economy the Russians see themselves as only getting stronger in the future. While Russian society has its problems I see no reason why this shouldn't be the case.
d) The G8 isn't as important as it once was anyway. Without China, India and Brazil it is starting to look more and more irrelevant. In the future the important decisions will be made by the G20.
After the incidents in the Ukraine and Georgia I would say the 'west' takes Russia very seriously indeed. Russia is also reaching out once again to the third world, particularly in India, South America and the Middle East. These regions have more influence than they did in the cold war so it gives Russia great global 'leverage'.
World military spending soars in spite of recession
in General Discussion Forum
Posted
DR Congo, Former Yugoslavia and Israel are obvious additions but the power of the internet has found me...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_1945%E2%80%931989
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_1990%E2%80%932002
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_2003%E2%80%93current
Very Peaceful indeed