Ivanov
-
Posts
1,047 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by Ivanov
-
-
8 hours ago, Aragorn2002 said:
A lot of propaganda about these days. I sometimes wonder if that also didn't play a role in the Brexit and the alienation between US and Europe. Let's be careful.
It's a rhetorical question.
-
Is spamming with memes acceptable now on this forum?
-
On 4/9/2019 at 2:40 AM, Badger73 said:
@Ivanov - Thank you. I didn't realize there was an already existent European Defense Agency. It seems that this is the group which would formulate and disseminate the training priorities and tactical doctrines for EU army units. Correct?
EDA was established in 2004. It focuses on the coordination and improvement of the military capabilities and industrial cooperation of the EU members, rather than the tactics and military doctrine.
https://www.eda.europa.eu/Aboutus/Missionandfunctions -
To answer those who question the purpose of "EU army". It is needed, because there are some tasks, that the US led NATO is reluctant to undertake. It's supposed to be complementary to NATO, not to replace it. Basically NATO is now back to it's roots, namely defending the alliance against the conventional threats. But currently Europe has also other types of problems. The EU marine forces conduct operations on the Mediterranean to manage the refugee crisis. EU troops are also present in Africa because that's where the refugees are coming from.
Polish troops during the EUFOR mission in Chad 2008-2009. At the same time Poland had a contingent in Afghanistan as a part of NATO mission there.
-
One of the current projects of European Defence Agency, is the focus on the modernisation of the Leopard 2A4 fleet used by the European countries. The participants are: Austria ( 114 tanks ), Finland ( 139 tanks ), Grece ( 183 tanks ), Poland ( 142 tanks, already being modernised ), Spain ( 108 tanks in the storage ).
https://www.eda.europa.eu/info-hub/press-centre/latest-news/2019/04/02/wanted-industry-solutions-for-optimisation-of-mbt-capabilities
-
On 2/28/2019 at 5:41 AM, Battlefront.com said:
I'm still not sure about this one. What was the range? And if someone in the Jav team could see the exposed commander, why didn't the Javelin fire? It only takes one man so both shooting at the tank with their own weapons should be possible.
Steve
The ranges were about 390 and 320 meters. In the first case the tank returned fire and wounded one member of the Javelin team. In the second case the tank didn't spot the shooter and the team fired the missile during the subsequent turn.
-
14 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
For the most part weapons teams will not engage with their small arms. That's SOP and at one point, long ago, it was followed like a fanatical religion. However, the battlefield laughs at straight forward logic and ridged rules, so pretty quickly the TacAI was modified to allow weapons teams to engage with their small arms in dire circumstances or if team weapon is not up to the task (damaged, range, reloading, no LOS, etc.). The closer the weapons team is to the target, the more likely they will use their small arms. I don't know what the circumstances were that prompted the Javelin team to use their small arms, but there must have been something that prompted that response.
Steve
Currently I'm playing the Al Hawl scenario. It's urban, where US forces have circa 6 Javelin teams. Within the span of 3 minutes, three different teams fired at the exposed tank commanders of three different tanks. In each case the Javelin team was safe and unspotted ( until their fired ). Now I realize, that I never noticed this behaviour in modern games, because due to the good optics, people tend to keep the crews buttoned up. In my current game, the guy I'm playing against is a vet tanker ( and a famous youtuber ). He decided to apply some real life tactics while operating those not so modern Syrian tanks, so he keeps the tank commanders unbuttoned.
-
23 hours ago, Xorg_Xalargsky said:
About infantry using small arms against tanks : they will try to shoot at an exposed commander.
If a WW2 sniper is doing that, then it's fine. But In my current SF2 game, the two man Javelin team, fires first at the tank commander, instead of keeping it's position hidden and launching the missile. In this case, firing small arms will only piss off the tank, which may return the fire. Such a behaviour is suicidal, while self preservation should be the priority of every moving unit.
-
In the scenario UK outmanoeuvred, the Syrian tactical map shows UK support assets instead of Syrian:
-
My list of modern, post WW2 CM titles would be:
1. CM Middle East - mainly Arab-Israeli wars.2. CM Fulda Gap - hypothetical WP vs NATO confrontation - different modules, from the 50's to the 80's
3. Ultramodern conflicts in the spirit of CMBS, more Russian and Chinese modules.
4. CM Vietnam, - a combination of conventional and unconventional warfare in the spirit of CMSF.
To be honest, the modern warfare is what I miss most from the offer of contemporary games. -
I bought CMSF2 bundle a week ago using PayPal. No problem so far.
-
39 minutes ago, Erwin said:
There is truth to this. What puzzles me is if most players are over 50 now, why were gamers mostly into East Front and playing Germans 20-30 years ago, and now we're told that the market wants to play the US or Soviets? When or how did that taste change?
I think still a lot of people like playing as the Germans. I'm also in this group, because their combined arms and support weapons work better, than in case of Allies or the Soviets. Still, I rarely play as the Germans, because most of my opponents insist on playing as the Huns
What's new, is that there's a bigger interest in playing as the Soviets. Maybe it's because of the end of the Cold War? Maybe because more research has been done on them during the last 20-30 years, so now they are seen differently, than just drunken, faceless masses?
-
I think 90% of sales on the wargaming market is the US ( the traditional grog wargaming, not World Of Tanks or FPS crap ). I know this, because I made pools on the boardgaming and computer wargming FB groups and such were the results. More than 60% of the players are also 50+ years old. That's why we will continue getting Normany over and over again.
-
CM Fulda would be an instant success because it would include the American forces and the people who were in their twenties or served in Germany in the 80's, are probably the biggest demographics among the CM players. Right now, there's a huge resurgence in Cold War going hot on the board gaming scene.
CM Blitzkrieg probably wouldn't sell that well, because there would be no Americans plus there's a common perception, that those campaigns were uninteresting walkovers. Strategically and operationally maybe, but on the tactical CM level, the French or the Poles had some tanks, anti-tank weapons or small weapons, that were at least equal to their German counterparts. Consequently there were a lot of small scale engagements, that were far from being one-sided.
CM Middle East, as @slysniper mentioned, the Arab-Israeli fighting was the only high end and high intensity warfare during the Cold War, that could serve as a template for the potential NATO-WP confrontation. Personally I find this topic fascinating. The Lebanon 1982 could serve as real life Shock Force game, that would include a mixture of conventional and unconventional fighting, but again - there would be no Americans in it... -
1. CM Fulda Gap
2. CM Blitzkrieg: Poland, West, Balkans, Barbarossa
3.CM Middle East -
Ok, thanks.
-
I'm planning on buying the CMSF2 Big Bundle. If I get a completely new game ( no upgrade ), will it be already patched and will it have all the modules reworked to the CMSF2 standard? Thanks.
-
A great book on battlefield psychology is Brains & Bullets.
https://www.bitebackpublishing.com/books/brains-bullets -
OK, I see it now! So it was a false alarm. Thanks.
-
2 minutes ago, sburke said:
if you look in the editor there is a 5 minute variable for the arty reinforcement. So it can show up between 7:30 and 7:35 but the notification shows as soon as it's earliest availability. Try running a couple turns and see if they wake up. They are probably finishing their coffee.
OK, I'll wait a little more, but it was already 7:37 when I played my turn.
-
In the scenario Verdenne and victory, the Americans are supposed to receive the artillery support from 0730 hrs. There's a message around this time, that the artillery arrived as reinforcements. But then the arty is not available for the fire mission selection. It could be a bug.
-
ERA is usually not a great obstacle in this game. The most common US ATGM is Javelin, which is top attack. The Russian Cornet or Metis will also defeat ERA. Basically ERA is only effective against LAW or RPG ( but not the one equipped with tandem warhead ). ERA also doesn't offer much protection against the modern tank rounds.
-
Well hopefully it will be addressed in some future ( CM 3 maybe ). Since the guns are practically immobile under the attack, it would greatly improve their survivability under fire.
-
Is there a way to detach the anti-tank crews from the guns ( for example for the duration of the enemy artillery fire ) and then attach them again? There's the Bail Out command, but I it seems that it's impossible to reattach the crews back to the guns afterwards.
European Union Army
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted · Edited by Ivanov
English is a modern day Latin. Everybody from Estonia to Portugal speaks English nowadays. It's not XIX century for people to communicate in French