Ivanov
-
Posts
1,048 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by Ivanov
-
-
How does the hull down command is supposed to work? I give this command to the tanks, they go where I tell them to go, but they don't look for any better position, than the one I designate for them with the waypoint.
-
16 minutes ago, Myles Keogh said:
Juju's UI mod appears to work fine with the 4.0 upgrade. (It was surprising to see how the new Hull Down command appear as if Juju had already integrated it into his mod. It blends seamlessly into it. Plus, it functions properly.
Excellent news!
-
25 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:
In the past when I upgraded game engines my mods still worked with the sometimes exception of user interface mods. The interface modes sometimes had to be updated by the mod creator and then re-downloaded after deleting the old mod. IIRC all the other mods still worked. This time BFC has created some newer stock mods such as muzzle flash, tracers etc for Engine 4. The newer stock muzzle flash & tracers may be better than our mods. So after I get Engine 4 I will probably pull out my mods for muzzle flash etc and see if I like the new stock ones better. But all the Aris vehicle mods etc should still work and not need to be re-downloaded if the 4 upgrade works the same as 2 and 3 did.
OK, thanks for the info. I guess the UI mod won't work because there is a new "hull down" command. I hope the UI mod will get updated pronto by @Juju
-
I have two standard questions:
1. Will the old save files still be compatible after upgrading to 4.0?
2. What about the previously installed mods? I have all the possible mods installed in my both CM games ( vehicles, sound, interface etc ). Will I have to install them again? I really hope I won't need to do it, since it would probably take a whole evening of my time for each game.
-
The malware was able to retrieve communications and some locational data from infected devices, intelligence that would have likely been used to strike against the artillery in support of pro-Russian separatists fighting in eastern Ukraine, the report from cyber security firm CrowdStrike found.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/report-russia-hack-ukraine-1.3908398 -
"The Air Force command of Ukraine's armed forces acknowledged to Reuters that the Ravens supplied by the United States had a fundamental drawback: Russia and the separatist forces it supports can intercept and jam their video feeds and data".
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-ukraine-drones-exclusive-idUSKBN14A26D
Time to introduce electronic warfare in CMBS? -
-
33 minutes ago, gnarly said:
Do you do/not do drones in both those situations? I presume not (as UKR don't have any anyways, which is therefore a significant bonus to RUS).
No drones in Ukr vs Rus. They are allowed in Rus vs US.
-
1. No APS on the vehicles. 2. No air assets - it's pointless to have them, because they get totally negated by the air defence. I prefer to have more cash on the ground units.
My favorite setup is Russian vs Ukrainians - they are fairly balanced or Russians vs disadvantaged US forces . For example heavy tactical Russian combat group built around tanks vs US Stryker force with no tanks.
-
1 hour ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:
It's worth bearing in mind the Obama administration started off with a "reset" to relations with Russia in an attempt to improve relations. Wouldn't exactly count chickens at this point.
Me neither with Mattis as Defense Secretary and Mitt Romney as possible Secretary of State.
-
1 hour ago, VladimirTarasov said:
No problem since Mr. Trump will be improving relationships I welcome such a beast into service
no provocation there.
Let's hope for the best!
-
1 hour ago, VladimirTarasov said:
Obviously I made a joke c'mon man
Ok, ok
-
1 hour ago, VladimirTarasov said:
Are those things actually going to be put into service? (30mm)
Yes and they are going to be deployed to Europe - Poland and Baltics. I guess the reason for it is to further provoke Russia
-
21 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:
Not only that but Russian artillery crews show their mastery skills... You think he accidentally got the round bouncing off the Lada?
-
3 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:
Un-bogged yes. Immobilized no. Once bogged they will un-bogg themselves or go to immobilized. Once immobilized they remain so for the remainder of the mission.
That doesn't sound encouraging
Thanks for the info anyway.
-
21 minutes ago, Michael Emrys said:
It is certainly possible for a vehicle to become unbogged. I watched one do it just last night. It rocked a bit for a turn or two and then completed the movement I had set for it.
What I find puzzling is how 3 is 67% of any whole number. Did you start out with 4.5 vehicles?
Michael
Well I hope then, it will soon become operational
I meant one third of my whole armor force got immobilized. That is one vehicle out of three. Hope that makes sense -
Ehm, is there a possibility that a bogged down vehicle may become unbogged during the same game? In one of my games, 33% of my armor just got immobilized ( it's a tiny battle, so I only have 3 vehicles there ). This is a devastating outcome
-
17 minutes ago, Cobetco said:
the "Stealth" tank! that would be a must for a polish module, i mean sure it may not see mass production but it would be fun, and hey the US has APS so why not?
The stealth tank was a bull**** tank - a cardboard mockup designed by a computer game studio, put on the CV90 chassis. The cardboard pieces of it are still laying around in the Bumar Labedy factory - I know a guy who saw them there. From the real stuff - the fleet of Polish Leopards 2A4 is undergoing a modernization to 2PL standard:
Apart from that, there are Leopards 2A5 in thePolish inventory. I've recently found out that our German friends are also secretly supplying us with a modern APFSDS, but I'm not going to elaborate on it here
-
41 minutes ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:
As far as the testing against Soviet type barrages, what we're seeing in CMBS is a much lower order attack, those tests were intended to basically measure assets firing saturation at a level well above what I think even our esteemed Forward Observer would bring to battle.
That's certainly true.
-
Re: conventional artillery vs tanks.
I remember reading about the tests conducted by US Army in the 80's. A dug in mechanized force, was subjected to a typical Soviet style artillery barrage ( conventional munitions ). The results were pretty devastating. If not completely destroyed, the tanks and APS were severely damaged what would result in them being out of action for some time. I know that an IED made out of 155mm shell is not the same, as the shell falling from the sky, but the video gives you an idea how powerful the artillery could be.
-
So I guess the invite is closed now
-
Anybody interested in a PBEM? I'd go for a quick battle, large map, medium, mixed force, AI picks the map. Don't mind the side, we could switch after each game. If anyone's interested, please send me a PM.
-
In CMBS there are no DPICM or fuel-air explosive munitions, that would be most devastating against the vehicles and that wreaked havoc among the unexpecting and unprepared Ukrainian troops in Donbas. Having said this, I think a standard HE 155mm or 152mm shell exploding next to an armored vehicle, could easily disable it, but I've never seen it happening in CMBS.
For the record - I don't think that artillery firing DPICM would work well in the scale of CM. You could just plaster the whole area general where you expect the enemy to be and go home. -
9 hours ago, Ithikial_AU said:
Fixed for me. I could finally continue my playthrough of the Ukrainian campaign.
Excellent!
no provocation there.
Thanks for the info anyway.
4.0 Upgrade Looks Fantastic --Thanks, BF!
in Combat Mission Red Thunder
Posted
So in that case the tank is supposed to stop movement when it encounters a perfect hull down spot?