hcrof
-
Posts
1,124 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by hcrof
-
-
lol, google translate is good with russian. Long prose is almost readable but maybe informal speech is a bit harder. Still not bad though:
"Bolt but, thank God, that after figs knows what count so wa about Syrian trucks and Shilka they did cdalis, the hell with them with the details, will be a pleasant surprise"
On topic, I am now really looking forward to this module. The Canadian Leopard C2 will be an interesting match for the more modern T-72s and the variety of different armies will make for some varied battles.
I am also beginning to think of early 80s cold war battles too. Leopard C2=M1 Abrams anyone? FV432=M113? AT-7=Dragon? Its close enough!
-
Great screenshots! Thanks for this report - it makes for very entertaining reading
-
Buy one get one free - they sell the game in twos to encourage multiplayer I think. It looks like a great game but unfortunately I don't have the time right now to play it
-
I know it has been brought up before but as of v1.21 there has been no fix. Warriors will fire away all their HE ammo on the BMPs before finally destroying them quite quickly with APDS.
30mm HE will cause damage too but it is so rare as to be irrelevant in a normal battle. The crew will sometimes get injured and bail out. (Assuming immobilised BMPs and conscript crews who cant spot the attacker)
But yeah, back onto Wiggums uniform bug...
-
Also on the subject of Warriors. In the next patch I hope Warriors and LAV-25s will stop firing HE at BMPs, Strykers etc. It makes for some extremely unrealistic engagements. This behaviour was surprisingly common on my firing ranges.
Sorry for slightly derailing the thread!
-
PT- yeah the Photo is taken from a guesthouse on the other side of the valley in April 2006. After coming out of the Desert it certainly felt like Scotland!
I too am looking forward to the NATO module. For some reason I really want to play as the Dutch!
-
x2 PT
Of all the middle eastern countries I have visited, Syria was the one I enjoyed the most. The country is beautiful, the people are very friendly and the food is fantastic.
As for history, it has some of the best ruins I have seen - Palmyra is spectacular and Krak des Chevaliers is a must see for any medieval enthusiast. Damascus and Aleppo are truly historical cities and not just for the Mosques and castles. You could spend a happy day just wandering around the streets and Souks of the old town.
As for 'temperate'
Yep, thats Syria
I want a holiday...
-
That looks pretty awesome Webwing - Thanks!
-
On Iron mode, you will lose contact with them which makes them very difficult to control.
On other difficulty settings though, all killing the HQ squad does is lower their morale (especially amongst Syrian troops)
-
I am also less than exited about transparent armour tbh. Composite armour is probably stronger and when are we going to develop transparent spall liners and radiation shielding? Also, how do you camouflage your big windows?
I can see it being useful in some specialised locations (protecting existing style sights etc) or on light vehicles like the HMMWV or Tigr but not on tanks or IFV's.
Similarly, crazy ideas such as walkers (can't sustain a rapid advance) and hovertanks (honestly!?) are unlikely to be seen in the future IMO. If the MBT is to continue into the future it will remain fundamentally the same. It is a mature technology, nothing revolutionary is going to happen.
Sealed nuclear reactors? Railguns? Now that sounds more interesting! (but you still wont get the fabled "30tonne tank"
-
Alex - are you sure they have cancelled the T-95? The deputy defence minister called the T-90 "an upgraded T-34" (i.e. old and not as good as western tanks). Surely that is a sign that he wants a new tank?
-
I think the T-50 PAK-FA is pretty important, even if it is not in production yet. A Russian F-22 apparently.
The BRAHMOS missile too, but again, not in production yet.
The legendary T-95 (legendary because noone has ever seen it
)The Russians are also working on a new battlefield management system with the associated drones etc.
Russia has also introduced a number of new small arms such as the Kord HMG and a MMG that replaces the PKM (I forget the name). To go with that are new sights and better uniforms and body armour.
I think we will see a good number of cutting edge new systems coming out of Russia in the next decade even if rumour has a habit of overshadowing facts in this area.
-
I had always wondered why the commanders cupola was on backwards. I always assumed that BFC wanted the MG forward to easily provide fire support.
Personally I would prefer it if the MG is facing backwards.
-
Sounds great, Im looking forward to this!
-
The CH47 is being used to pick up some special ops guys. They just drive a fast boat straight up the ramp with the rotors still turning. I know the SBS do it, maybe SEALs do it too?
Having said that, there are a couple of other British pics in the collection so maybe it is the SBS?
-
That worked just right, I turned off compatibility mode and checked all the boxes and I am back to normal. Thanks!
My display is 1280x800 btw and I like to run CMSF at desktop resolution usually, although I was fiddling around with it to try and get the game to work.
-
I recently upgraded to windows 7 64bit and CMSF will now minimise to desktop as soon as the intro video is finished. Obviously this makes it a little difficult to play the game!
I actually managed to find a workaround which involves setting the desktop to 1280x800, opening the game and when it minimises, changing the desktop to 1440x900. The game will then run in a 'window' without minimising. Obviously this is not ideal and I am worried it will damage my screen.
Can anyone help? I'm using a GeForce 9600 GT driver version 197.13 (I think)
-
I cannot emphasise enough the importance of electronic warfare to the Soviets. While the west regarded their lack of 'sophisticated' command and control as a weakness,the Soviets regarded it as a strength.
On the modern battlefield a radio operating at full power can be located in less than a minute and artillery used to destroy the source, both sides planned to use massive jamming on enemy communications and nuclear weapons would knock out electronics with EMP. However spectacular the battle on the ground would have been, the battle for the electronic spectrum would be equally hard fought. In this situation, command and control for both sides would be seriously degraded but this was the way the Soviet army trained and expected to fight. Units kept in radio silence until contact with the enemy and the use of pre made plans means orders can be kept brief and simple on the radio.
That is not to say the Soviets would not have used more radios if they could have afforded it, it is just that given how useless they would become in WW3, there use was kept to a minimum and the funds and training allocated elsewhere.
-
Very interesting, It seems that when I originally posted that image, I misinterpreted the aspects of the reserves. I hadn't realised that the 'lines' were future positions for the reserves and always wondered why there were so many AT assets shown. I must also say to other readers that although the positions seem to be all the same, company commanders were given some flexibility on how to deploy (line, 2 up, 1 up etc) according to the terrain.
The defence aims to slow and attrit the enemy before channelling them into pre prepared areas within the defensive area then block and destroy them. Note the 'backwards' facing tank!
Given time, this defence will get more and more elaborate with more mines, trenches, fireplans and wire and the commanders will have time to 'wargame' possibilities and make new contingency plans. The Russians love contingency plans
Alek, Please continue with your description of the lower levels. It is always better to get the information from a Russian language source than western books
. Are these field manuals available online so I could use google translator?The use of reserves could also be used more often by scenario designers to make for a more interesting battle. No more wading through lines of static defence!
*runs off to make a new scenario*
-
Thanks for the DAR, an interesting read. You are right though, the 'H2H' scenarios are not balanced. I did manage to force a stalemate on one as the Syrians but I think it was more mind games that persuaded my opponent to give up, my force was in bad shape
. -
Ok I have updated the guide to specify more clearly which ATGM is used for each vehicle. I have had terrible trouble with gun launched ATGMs though. NATO designations seem to cover a wide variety of missile. For Example the AT-10 seems to refer to an entire family of missiles fired from different platforms but I can't find more specific designations.
If anyone wants the new version of the guide then PM me, until the repository goes back up I can't really distribute it. The new version has a number of changes to tank penetration values based on further testing and new NATO designations for vehicle mounted ATGMs.
-
Maybe the stone came from a rockslide. The car was parked by the side of the road but when the stone came from the bottom left hand side of the screen and hit the car it pushed it into the tree before rolling onto the roof.
Either that or it is a film set and they dropped the stone with a crane.
Am I right?
P.S lol @ McAuliffe
-
The short answer is that the BMP-2 can carry one of two variants of ATGM and in CMSF it carries the lighter one. Without delving into my note I would guess that the reason I wrote those values is that the BMP-2s are carrying a Konkurs (AT-5A) and the BRDM-2s are carrying Konkurs-M (AT-5B). I remember being confused about this and checking it on a firing range so I am pretty confident I am right on this one!
That is not to say there are no errors in my Armour Guide. I have a newer version on my computer with a few corrections and I am sure more will come to light in the future!
-
Percentages are ratios - it is a ratio of x:100
http://www.mathgoodies.com/lessons/vol4/meaning_percent.html
As soon as you get out of the extreme edge of the percentages it becomes quite intuitive
)
Russia To Build Nuclear Reactor in Syria
in General Discussion Forum
Posted
Russia has gas. Europe needs gas. Russia can do what it likes (within reason).
On the other hand I don't really have a problem with this. Its a long way from reactor to bomb especially if the Syrians didn't actually research the reactor themselves, and besides, the Syrian leadership is not irrational enough to actually use a nuclear device.
This will just give the Russians more leverage over the country and that is not necessarily a bad thing if it can help with the Middle East peace process.