A Canadian Cat
-
Posts
16,534 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
55
Posts posted by A Canadian Cat
-
-
On 6/4/2024 at 2:01 PM, Battlefront.com said:
Which gets us back to how can we protect thousands of weight restricted vehicles from being blown up by UAVs costing as little as a few hundred USD? All resources and attention need to be focused on that.
Given the current ideas of APS, ERA and Gatling guns that automatically shoot anything that flies will not work on a truck.
APS - proximate explosions are super bad when you are driving a truck with no real armour projection.
EAR - and explosions directly next to you are even worse
Gatling guns - sure fine for *my* truck but what about my buddy in the truck in front - he's not going to be happy when 1000 rounds of .556, .762, .50cal or 25mm or whatever shred his truck because the drone got low and in font of mine.
So, currently we got zero ideas on how to do this.
Oh right I forgot EW. As someone pointed out autonomous targeting will decrease the effectiveness of that possibly to zero for trucks. Current self driving tech can already ID trucks so the work to get autonomous targeting to work on logistics trains is way ahead of the work to get jamming into every convoy.
-
On 6/1/2024 at 10:45 AM, Haiduk said:
And one of these already done it work
Tis but a scratch.
Seriously though you quoted a story about real guns sometimes getting repaired multiple times. This decoy gun looks pretty repairable. I wonder how many of them have been wrecked multiple times.
On 6/1/2024 at 10:45 AM, Haiduk said:I wonder how much of such stuff mistakingly counted by Orix team as real losses.
The after action analysis that will no doubt be still happening in 2030 will be interesting. We are going to need to keep this thread around for some ground truth to support / refute that analysis.
-
Yikes. That's some new stuff for me. I recommend you ask the professionals here: Battlefront Helpdesk
-
On 5/29/2024 at 3:08 PM, Brille said:
Mostly I use it when I don´t feel like micromanaging split teams. As you said you would have to put some more thought into it than just doing the movement order.
I do that too.
It is also super useful for pathing around through obstacles. For example a small gape in the bocage can cause guys on other teams to get tried of waiting and seek another way around. If you use the assault command the only one team at a time is trying to go through the gap. Cuts down on taking the long way into trouble.
For the same reason it is my default for building entry too.
-
On 5/28/2024 at 2:09 PM, Centurian52 said:
I believe this is possible. Set the scenario date to sometime in 1943, grab a formation, then set the scenario date to sometime in 1945. The date change shouldn't delete the formation, though I haven't tested this. I think you'll just have to give it a try and see if it works.
This is correct and will work as he describes. You can also switch from blue vs red to red vs red to add red forces to the blue side and visa versa.
-
On 5/24/2024 at 11:35 AM, Sequoia said:
Would satchels take out IED's when thrown at suspected locations?
There is no way to use a demo charge against and IED directly or indeed target just any old thing with a demo charge. You could use one against a wall or a building and trigger an IDE I suppose. I have no idea if that could happen though.
-
10 minutes ago, poesel said:
"We were always at war with Eurasia" - there is really no problem explaining that to the Russians, since the English guy wrote the handbook.
LOL Yeah, I often think of 1984 when reading the propaganda coming out of the Kremlin.
-
4 minutes ago, sttp said:
These are some of the finer points of the engine for sure, but I don't have time for much testing these days, and I'm sure some of you already know the answers. Plus it could help other players. So...
1) Can satchels/explosives be used to clear forest brush and / or trees enough so that a vehicle can pass through?
(From limited observation, I think this answer is NO... though explosives CAN be used to clear wire, fences, house walls, hedges, bocage, and CMFI vineyard rows. (Seems like two vineyard rows per satchel, of approximately vehicle width.) Hedgehogs? Some bunker types? All enemy armor types or just most?No, no clearing forest.
Interesting I didn't know you could blast vineyard rows - cool
Hedgehog I'm not actually sure about. All bunkers yes and any vehicle. That's a guarantee that all vehicles will be destroyed necessarily.
4 minutes ago, sttp said:2) Can smallish flavor objects cause a vehicle to redirect or get hung up? i.e., will it seek to go around the flavor object in god knows what direction? Or does it depend on the precise vehicle and precise flavor object?
No, flavour objects are not obstacles. Size doesn't matter - BFC have tried not to make flavour objects too big so we don't miss understand them.
4 minutes ago, sttp said:3) In tight city streets when needing to turn a vehicle (let's say 90 degrees), where exactly should the waypoints be placed in order to minimize the chance of it getting hung up? Several precise waypoints through the turn? Just 2 waypoints that are farther apart, and let auto-pathing figure it out? Something in between? Or does it depend on the particular vehicle, driver skill, MOVE vs SLOW, etc.?
My go to for around corners is two. One on the first road and the next one on the second but close together so that the vehicle stays on the road. The driver will slow down for corners on their own.
4 minutes ago, sttp said:4) When sneaking a tank around buildings at larger angles from the bearing to target (to get a shot at side armor, for example), must our friendly tank be able to spot the CENTER of the enemy armor, or can it see and fire at "pieces" of that armor that hang out past the obstruction? (I think "pieces" can work -- seems like I get spotted that way! -- but it may just take significantly more time to spot? Other factors?)
-No, there is no need to see the centre of vehicles. That kind of things only applies to buildings.
4 minutes ago, sttp said:5) Bridge Bug related:
--Does move speed/type affect probability of bridge bug appearing?
No.
4 minutes ago, sttp said:--Does letting the waypoints "snap to" each end of the bridge mitigate the bridge bug?
Well I place one just on one side of the bridge and the other just on the other side. The game doesn't snap anything so I think that is what you mean. Yes, crossing a bridge is best done by placing a way point just on the near side and another on the other side.
4 minutes ago, sttp said:--Does vehicle TYPE affect probability of the bridge bug?
No idea.
4 minutes ago, sttp said:Yes, I despise the bridge bug. It just ruined another scenario. (Lost a Wolverine I shouldn't have on Umlaut's outstanding Tiger By The Tail.)
Just for a little clarity. There is no single bridge bug. If it were that simple it would be fixed already. There have been multiple issues involving bridges - as we all know. Many have been fixed some are suborn. Often they are not reproducible reliably. If anyone has one that is testers would love to report it and have it looked at.
To be clear reproducible means that a turn saved before orders are carried out leads to the same problem each time the orders are executed. If you have a save of the replay the actions of the vehicle are baked in and replaying them over and over is not reproducing the bug its just showing you the bug again and again. The former is super useful the latter can still be sometimes but I think we are at the maximum for replays being useful.
-
1 hour ago, Harmon Rabb said:
Mike Johnson makes a statement regarding Ukraine...
Mike's boss has not approved this message.
-
40 minutes ago, MikeyD said:
A historical question. What prompted Russia to withdraw from Afghanistan, and can we draw any conclusions from it in regard to the future of Ukraine? How is it similar? How is it dissimilar? We've had plenty of similar debates circling around why the US withdrew from (Vietnam, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the Philippines, etc etc etc).
My understanding was it was $ and upset citizens (especially mothers of casualties).
On the subject of $ back then, like now, the war cost a lot and it was effecting people's standard of living which they didn't like. But unlike now there was no "deal" with citizens to improve their standard of living so it wasn't as serious an issue back then.
On the subject of upset citizens, there were protest groups protesting the loss of their loved ones. This was tolerated since it wasn't viewed as direct challenge to the authority of the Kremlin. It got out of hand especially combined with the previous issue. Or there was a concern in the Kremlin it could get out of hand. Since they didn't view the Afghanistan conflict as existential they could pull back. Note they kept control of key parts of the country for a while after the pull out. The Najibullah government lasted for several years without the issues of the Soviet occupation.
Putin could be facing the same pressures except he learned from the Afghan war and the fall of the Soviet Union. All protests are a direct challenge to his authority, period. He has been dealing with all protest harshly from the beginning. He also realized that if the people don't know the truth then they cannot complain about it. Hence his work from the start to take the old Soviet "you cannot trust any source as correct" propaganda method but dialed up to 11 and combined with just covering up the number of casualties.
Back in the Afghan war the "loss" of the war was not existential to the Kremlin - they started it to quell Islamic unrest. While the loss itself seemed bad they really maintained control for a long time after they pulled out through their usual proxy arrangement so it didn't seem so important compared to the cost any more.
Whereas this current war is existential to Putin since he made it that way when he started.
That's the Cole's notes from memory.
My take away is that Putin learned the lessons of that part of history well and applied them here.
-
On 5/18/2024 at 2:25 PM, Vacillator said:
In 'Real Life' I'm sure it happened in CMBN 'areas/dates' but maybe not so much.
Meanwhile it was doctrine for the Soviets which is why it was added in CMRT.
Riding on tanks in non combat was fairly common for the western allies but only the Soviets planned, intended and specified from on high to do it during combat. I'm sure someone can quote an example where that happened on the western front but it was very atypical. Hence it was not in CMBN. I'm not sure why CMFB gets it other than we all asked for it
Re-doing all the models in CMBN would be a large task - large testing task mostly - so it has not been undertaken.
-
16 hours ago, sttp said:
My gut tells me the arty spotter needs to see the impact point,
A caller can call artillery slightly out side their LOS - over a hill for example. So, no they do not need to see the ground impact. They do have to see something so your original suggestion of see the explosion effects are likely true. My guess is its more of an abstraction than actually see the displaced ground in the air.
However if the spotting round falls too far away or behind other obstructions then additional spotting rounds will be called in. As per what @Ultradave is talking about.
This is why if your FO has crappy key holed visibility it will take longer for FFE because the have to wait for something to land where they can see it to give direction. As per @MikeyD
My experience makes it seem pretty reasonable overall. If your FO has great visibility the spotting to FFE proceeds quickly and smoothly. If your FO has poor or spotty visibility it takes longer. If your FO has really bad or no visibility then it can even never resolve.
-
On 5/13/2024 at 3:21 AM, Brille said:
The thing is that you have to be exactly at the tile where the soldier has fallen.
Indeed. My trick to getting to those hard to reach guys is to move a team next to them and then give that team a slow move to another square such that the move path goes right over top of the casualty. I'l make that order a long as needed to line things up. Then I pause in the adjacent square for 45s (if my guys are already in the next square) or shorter depending on how long I figure it will take to get there.
Then next turn I cancel the move order. Usually that is either perfect or near enough that my guys can help out the casualty.
When I do this I position the camera low and right with the aid team that way next turn I don't forget to cancel the move order. Yeah done that a few times makes buddy aid exhausting and super long - nut just for me :-).
-
On 5/11/2024 at 12:29 PM, Vacillator said:
I suppose either way you'll probably lose the use of the jeep
Can't anyone get into a jeep and drive? I thought so but maybe I'm wrong. There are lots of units that are jeep borne and one of them is the driver. Perhaps they are special. I think I just reached that conclusion form that observation and never tested it out.
On 5/12/2024 at 10:49 AM, Halmbarte said:maybe the driver won't be spotted as easily
For sure but lets fact it he will get spotted and shot. Either their commander will get cocky and take a risk or Murphy's law will just get him killed.
-
2 hours ago, dan/california said:
Hey question for those that might know. I hadn't really thought about but a friend asked me and all I could say was "beats me":
How are they keeping these long range drones in contact with the remote pilot? The US has said they don't want the UA doing this so they probably are not using the US satellite network and starlink has been denying them usage in Russia. So how are they doing this?
Clearly for 10s of Kms and maybe even 100s of Kms you can just use a radio carried by the drone to stay in contact to a location in Ukraine. Over 1000Km wouldn't that just take too much power and be too weak a signal?
-
I listened to this on my way to work this morning: https://pca.st/episode/4f1c5971-2b30-4198-9047-da1050e9f673
It's a good podcast. They don't always have things right but it is interesting to listen to them talk about politics in various eastern Europian countries.
This episode is about Turkey, China and Russia battling for influence in the Asian former USSR republics.
Gives some glimpses in the internal rot inside Russia and China's growing influence.
-
2 hours ago, The_Capt said:
Putin's best bet is that Trump is so focused on revenge and retaliation which will result in a tidal wave of law suites and counter-suits, the US becomes even more dysfunctional.
Honestly I always felt that this was Putin's hope all along. It's not even Trump specific. Putin has done everything he can to just sew chaos (I call him a Chaos Monkey). If he can get an adversary focused on something else he's happy. If he can get allies to squabble his double plus good happy.
Not exactly a grand planner just create as much chaos as possible and throw your weight around while everyone else is busy trying to figure out who did what to whom. It never was a grand 4D chess game with.
Not exactly a new thought here.
-
45 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
Putin had better damned well care about how Trump looks because his entire freakin plan is resting on Trump as president actually moving in directions that support Russian interests
OK perhaps but I don't he needs that.
There is one other thing that is consistent about Trump though:
- is an incompetent manager and has even lower skilled people surrounding him.
This means that if Putin decides to make a move he kinda doesn't care if he annoys Trump because he's all bluster. Plus, see ego line above, a little BS and platitudes his way would probably be enough to keep Trump feeling like a winner and Putin gets to do what he wants anyway. Look at some of the interactions between them in the past. Putin utterly embarrassed him and he didn't even notice (I'm thinking Helsinki). Trump then spend the week talking about how great Putin was. Any other leader would have noticed the slight and been pissed.
It is likely not relevant though because it will take Putin longer than four years to get his army's **** together. Unless.....
-
2 hours ago, The_Capt said:6 hours ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:
Putin thinks the war will end through Donald Trump becoming the President of the US and successfully implementing his plan to pressure Ukraine politically into armistice on the basis of status quo in early 2025.
...
This sounds about right.
Yeah it does.
2 hours ago, The_Capt said:An invasion would need to be after Trump leaves office otherwise Putin risks making him look like a weak chump who got duped, and Putin definitely does not want to do that.
I seriously doubt that Putin gives a rats *** about how Trump looks. The fact is he will need at least 4 years (really more as you point out) to even begin to contemplate mounting a new invasion.
2 hours ago, The_Capt said:And even if it does, the EU still gets a vote
Indeed. Even a lower level of support from the EU would mean trouble for a weaker RA. As several people have pointed out Ukrainians would still fight on their own even. Clearly the less support the harder it gets but even with Putin's collapsed options it looks pretty bleak for his success.
-
On 4/27/2024 at 2:20 PM, Holien said:
And hyperbole to the Canucks
What?!?? We would never, ever stoop to that level. What a gross mischaracterization!
-
14 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:
Not a great fan of alternate history
Other than the alternate history where you are still alive that is
-
I believe this is a problem of compatibility. The old version of the code doesn't run in Win 8 (or maybe 10 I forget). One of the updates fixed this issue. I recommend contacting support - they know exactly which version works with what and can help you figure out what upgrades you might already be entitled to.
-
12 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
The Kerch Bridge does little to support any of that beyond making us feel better.
But, but, but I want to feel better :-<
I say use the new ammo and missiles to mess up as many attacks as possible and hit as many logistics and HQ targets as you can find. Rinse and repeat.
-
1 hour ago, Vacillator said:
In my mind I thought I'd done that, but I suppose I might have been a bit sloppy about it.
Yeah, I have had occasion where my method did not work as expected too. I usually figure I messed up but now you are making me want to test it
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Oh cool so we could start looking for mock M177s in the data already. I'm trying to figure out if that would be a fun project or a massive pain in the ***