DMS

-You Soviets shoot at our German planes! -But... They bomb our airfields! -It is whataboutism! We discuss how you shoot at German planes!

To all guys who said about Russia grabbing something. Did you ever hear about Russian ship "Nord", that was captured by Ukrainians in Azov sea? Just because she visitited Crimia ports. Captain is still in prison. Ukrainians refuse to release him. I think that you didn't. Am I mistaken?

Well, when I heard that I wanted to laugh, yes. That guy is 31 years old... Too old for naive idealist. May be it was just a cool story for journalists. That two ship commanders are local celebrities, they came and song Ukranian hymn during retaking Crimea by Russia in 2014. (Or "annexation", if you want) Ukraine have few such gunboats, commanders are known. Yes, SBU admitted.

Gunboat commander (Roman Mokryak) planned to use "wolfpack" tactics. He said that "Soviet giants can't track many targets" and 1 of "wolfpack" gunboats has a chance to break through and damage a big ship. Some time ago Ukrainian TV made video about that gunboats. Cynic admirals (or special services?) used him... By the way, on the gunboat was SBU agent. Politruk? :) FSB claims that gunboats entered Russian waters that were Russian before 2014.

W. Schneider's "Panzer Tactics" is great book. Company formations, attack by bounds, armored infantry tatctics. Probably the best I read. And... Read manuals! British one: http://wartimecanada.ca/sites/default/files/documents/Infantry Training Part I- The Infantry Battalion- 1944.pdf

Oh, Ukrainian presidential elections have stopped. They introduce martial law.

May be they plan to use sort of semi-direct fire, when tank platoon fires from 3-4 (5? 6?) kms under control of forward observer or a drone? From open position. Enemy tank will have to show up and fire to cover infantry. At very large distance Russian tank armor has a chance to defeat modern projectile. I think that Russian planners are realists and do not expect that tanks will suffer few casualties. If tank wores out barrel - it is a good case. No, I didn't mean that! It was used before, by Soviets too, but not just by Soviets of course. I mean that Soviet generals planned to compensate low artillery numbers in tank divisions actively using indirect tank fire. It was not just a possibility, but a regular drill. For regiments armed with T-10 tanks and ISU-152 spgs. They say it was a joke. Jokers...

So, Ukrainian presidential elections have started! We started to forget about Ukraine, time to remind...

Urban enviroment is a good reason to launch "carousel", reloading 1 platoon of 3. Classic Soviet tactics encourages to use echelones: 1-st echelone attacks enemy in the outskirts of the city, 2-nd goes in being prepared to urban combat. So 1-st echelone would go back to reload HEs, while 2-nd continues assault. Somewhat carousel of larger scale. .

It is not really new. "Tank Carousel" was used in Chechnya. In fact it is just using of echelones. 1-st echelones fires, 2-nd covers, 3-rd reloads. Indirect tank fire is not new either. It was learned by heavy tank crews already in 1950s. But combining with drones and C2 systems it can be interesting. Something like British "pepperbox", but more accurate thanks to modern technologies. Typical formation is BTG, 10 tanks, 30 bmps. Just imagine 40 barrels giving 5-10 shots at their objective ahead before attacking. Compare it to battalion's organic 6 82mm tubes and 6 AGS-30! Why to save 125mm HEs if they explode in burning tank in case of failed attack?

In Soviet tanks also were pistol ports. Firing from pistol ports in the game would be nice... For Barbarossa game it would be usefull feature. In 1944 Germans used fausts instead of getting close and throwing explosives on engine. Another example of firing from vehicles - Su-76. Crewmen took more SMGs and fired to sides.

In 1941 many KVs were lost being left without infantry, sometimes at night. Destroyed by pioners, 88 or 105 guns, set behind or in flank, while main forces were attacking from front.

And headcount. For Red thunder it is more important - in the 1945 there were no 100% strength divisions in Red army. 6-7 men squads were normal. And in Wehrmacht too.

This is line tactics. Like in old times, but with wider intervals and vehicles. Company columns deploy there, platoon columns deploy here. I read textbooks, they are focused on right formation. Russian 2000 manuals are different, more fire and maneuver elements. In late Soviet - no. Infantry manual of 1938 is more sophisticated than manuals of 70-s. Soviet style attack is attack in ideal line formation, perfectly timed. Infantry attacks behind tanks last 300m, bmps stand back and support by fire. (Squads maintain 50 m intervals so bmps wouldn't hit them in backs) In open terrain without big obstacles this tactics is very dangerous. But it can be ruined by defile or any obstacle that must be passed: corner of a wood, hill, town. Or minefield. One platoon will slow down, second will be too fast and line crashes... Bunch of bmps make ideal target for a ATGM battery.

Interesting that slowly moving tank has more chances to survive (happens often enough in version 3.0), but fast moving is hit with almost 100% probability. Looks like simulation of lead mistake. Static target = zero lead, moving target - some average lead (may be 5 mils for example) for any speed.

By the way, do this missiles work right in the game? If my tanks move slowly, they tend to miss with high probability, just damaging tracks. It is it reallistic?

Victory points are well balanced in this scenario - technically I lost (to AI ), but won by points. It was easy to make decision about defending outer ring or attacking fortress: conscripts are just for defence! Or for mounted assault to closest possible range. For me most interesting was armor - infantry coordination. Conscripts use to break down after few bullets passing by. And defenders had a lot of G36s. And veteran shooters. That's why I atacked on trucks. It worked! Interesting to try this trick in other scenarios. Application of German Pulk (Panzer und Lastkraftswagen) tactics to smallest tactical level.

If BFC would make such game, it is no sence in making just 1 period. Only 80-s or only 70-s. Vehicles are the same in most part, uniform is the same, maps are the same. 3 different settings, 60-s, 70-s and 80-s would be fun to play. If in 70-s nukes were really unlikely, in 60-s it was rather possible. I agree, game in nuclear conditions would be unusual and interesting. More meeting engagements, dynamical, vehicle focused gameplay without long foot recce and artillery support.

They are not so owerhelming! Playing for Syrians is even harder. That conscripts... Useless! But T-62s spot better now, unlike old SF. My small AAR, in Russian, but with pictures: https://war-tundra.livejournal.com/3765965.html

Yes, it is possible on company level! But controlling battalion is hard when you have 2 companies in 1-st echelone and impossible when all 3 are in 1-st... Some simple tools would help. Like setting waypoints in line with 50m intervals if you hold Ctrl. Or with 100m intervals if you hold Alt. Soviet manuals are focused on line formations with right intervals, so geometrically regular formations would be realistic, I think. With right tactics good timed Soviet attack had good chances. In theory. When artillery shifts in depth in time, motor riflemen dismount in place and in time and follow tanks... But if unit has to pass a defile or gets flank fire, things turn bad. Or that hull down or keyhole positions... Were they so effective in real landscape? Interesting. Would be great to play such scenarios in the game.

Nuclear conditions would be interesting. So all units out of IFVs would be considered "WIA" if they stay more than few minutes in open air... With fatique, spotting penalties for wearing protection. With different levels of radiation... But it would be completely different game with vast ammount of new features that had to be coded. I don't know about 80s. I think that Gorbachev was preparing to surrender and would never start war. But in 60-s Soviet high staff really planned to massively use nukes. There was a discussion about artillery numbers in infantry divisions, and one of the arguments was nuclear war, when small mechanised forces would search and destroy remnats who survived nuclear strikes. It was considered like "normal" scenario, not just like a bad case of loosing the war.

The problem is nukes. In Soviet doctrine nukes would be used on tactical level, against company defensive positions. How to simulate nukes in the game? And playing Soviet side would be a nightmare without formations options in the interface. (Or some waypoint placement tweaking, so waypoints would be set in line/column/wedge when you click) Soviet tactics was not just rush forward, is was sophisticated enough, with bmps closely following tanks, dismounting just in moment when last shell is falling, riflemen running just behind slowly moving tanks under covering fire from bmps...You don't want to see another "Syrians" with cooler tanks, do you?

Su-76s were used as ersatz-APC sometimes, tank desant loaded inside crew compartment, not outside. May be sometimes it looked like that picture! (Not really, but looks fun)

Kaunitz, thank you! Very interesting regulations. Very close to Soviet SMG platoon regulations, but much more detailed. In Soviet is said that SMG gunners (automatchiki) should attack enemy from flank and rear, but how? German manual develops Soviet (actually late WW I German) ideas in some way. I like German manuals for their focus on details. Soviets translated Kühlwein book about battalion tactics in Russian (Gefechtstaktik des verstärkten Bataillons) before the war, I really enjoyed reading.

Marines with that IARs are interesting. IAR vs PKP at 500 yards with strong wind! But they are too numerous...