Pelican Pal

This seems like a good time to link my tests. Artillery, while it does have effect on direct hits, lacks modeling against subsystems. IMO this is fairly important in a sim and doubly so in a modern setting.

This seems like a good time to link my tests. Artillery, while it does have effect on direct hits, lacks modeling against subsystems. IMO this is fairly important in a sim and doubly so in a modern setting.

Just FYI if you've redeemed your game on Steam be sure to put up your review of the game too. Just noticed that Black Sea is rather sparsely reviewed compared to SF2.

This seems like a good time to link my tests. Artillery, while it does have effect on direct hits, lacks modeling against subsystems. IMO this is fairly important in a sim and doubly so in a modern setting.

If you are still experiencing your problem what I would do is install Steam and use it to install Black Sea. See IF the game runs. You can then uninstall Steam but seeing if Black Sea from Steam runs would give you some more info to work with.

You might even be able to grab the Steam BRZs and put them in your Battlefront install.

There are two parts (well really three) parts to morale

Formation: This is what you are talking about. As a formation takes losses they will become more brittle and high casualties over a short time has a shock value.

Element: Any given squad has its own internal morale. This is calculated per-man (each man has his own morale) and the squad morale is the averaged morale of each man in the squad. Splitting a squad means that you get two separate elements with their own internal morale. Because the elements are smaller its easier for them to take a morale hit and I also think there is a C2 hit for the element without the SL.

Just FYI if you've redeemed your game on Steam be sure to put up your review of the game too. Just noticed that Black Sea is rather sparsely reviewed compared to SF2.

I've checked - yes, BTR squads (BTR-4, BTR-70) have this bug, BMP squads have correct splittng. I will report. Though, UKR squads should have (and I suppose WILL have) some other TO&E in the next module - the current is not quite correct...

Really what Battlefront is running into is that for the last ~10 years its become increasingly common for games to get constant updates for no additional fee. Arma 3, Darkest Hour, War Thunder, Verdun, Dota 2, Hunt Showdown, PUBG, Post Scriptum, Don't Starve, Half-Life, half-Life 2, Call of Duty, Command Ops 2, Quake II (now with RTX support), Due Process, Fall Guys, Hell Let Loose, Rising Storm 2, Red Orchestra 2, Heliborne, Planetside 2, Squad, Rainbow Six Siege, Counter-Strike, Battlefield V, Graviteam,  Crusader Kings, hearts of iron, Stellaris, Kerbal Space Program, Prison Architect, Among Us, Barotrauma, Dead by Daylight, The FOrest, Killing Floor, Killing FLoor 2, Magicka, Left 4 Dead 2, Team Fortress 2, Stardew Valley, Talbetop Simulator, Terraria, Call to Arms, Mount & Blade, Unity of Command 2, Birgador, Fallen Enchantress, Mafia II, Superhot, Project Winter  This is just a quick perusal of games and I'm sure you could fairly easy get a larger list but paid features isn't the name of the game. In many cases its actually part of the whole sales pitch that features are never paid for just content (Paradox has gone very heavily into this). To the point that what Battlefront doing is, in fact, not the standard. I actually cannot think of any games that sell features in the way that CM does? Anyway my point is Battlefront is going to bear a certain amount of critical comments because of that system since its effectively a strange thing to see in 2021. If this was 2005 it'd be fairly unique since patches were hardly even a thing but its a full 16 years from that point.

I suspect that packaging engine upgrades with purchases would likely be  seen more favorably than have them exist purely standalone. Since they would seen to be less of a blocker to new purchases. Effectively a wink wink nudge nudge to spend more rather than less.

----

Anyway I think it makes a bit more sense to read this as a buying guide rather than a history given that they appear to be spending more time trying to layout each game and module rather than talking about the actual history of the series. And in the sense of it being a buying guide the comment on the pricing makes sense.
This quote gives it away pretty heavily. And each game gets a little blurb with sometimes inaccurate information. E.G. Market Garden module requires engine 2.0 when it in fact requires that engine 3 or 4 now. Unless you have an older engine 2 purchase?


 
 

 

Bumping since I figure people might have missed this over the holidays.

I'll be running some additional tests with direct fire over the weekend and likely more airburst. Once Black Sea hits Steam I'll also run some tests over there but @Lethafacedid a similar tests in BS and found similar results.

Bumping since I figure people might have missed this over the holidays.

I'll be running some additional tests with direct fire over the weekend and likely more airburst. Once Black Sea hits Steam I'll also run some tests over there but @Lethafacedid a similar tests in BS and found similar results.

Combat Mission 1 (CMBB and CMAK) had the ability to set QB point allotments. For example, if you had 1,000 points to spend you could do:

Infantry 50% | Armor 20% | Support 30%
500 points     | 200 points |__ 300 points

These numbers were adjustable by the player making the QB and this allowed you to create a mixed force that leaned more heavily on infantry for both sides. In CM2 they did not do that and instead we got the very simple (too simple) infantry | armor | mixed. Which is really a rather unpleasant step back.


-------------------------------------

As far as rarity goes its actually a good solution because unlike points cost we can have some determination of it. We can set it to:

STRICT

STANDARD

LOOSE

NONE


Given all armor a basic rarity cost so that they are then affected by this system would be fantastic since its the only reliable way for players to adjust layouts given that the force type is a joke. If you want to play a QB representing two armored Coys running into each other then LOOSE would be the setting for you. If you wanted to play a "standard battle" in the theater then STRICT would be the setting for you.

But by having all these things at zero rarity you remove one of the few tools players actively have to shape QBs. Because right now I play on STRICT and that does jack all to many types of tanks even though tanks were uncommon.


----

Question?

I don't have any of the CM ww2 games installed at the moment but is LethaFace's contention even a problem? In a QB is it possible to not be able to buy armor due to rarity?

My gut feeling is that its not but it would force you to take more common tanks. Which again means that loosening the restriction ought to provide a solution.

Rarity points are criminally underused.

I ran some tests of airburst artillery against armored vehicles. In particular T-72 AVs and BMP-1s.
 

O:10 for artillery call in

2:25 artillery strikes

3:00 review of damaged/destroyed BMPs

8:10 review of vehicles

What I found using a massive amount of artillery is that while it was possible for artillery to destroy the BMP-1s it was unable to do any damage to any subsystem except tracks furthermore no amount of artillery would detonate or disable an ERA block. This seems incorrect to me and likely to be a bug of some variety. Even BMPs that took penetrating hits and crew/passenger losses would not have any subsystem damage. Please watch the linked video and you will see enough artillery to destroy every BMP and level every building on the block. Yet this massive weight of fire does not damage or disable any external system. Not a single DSHK, smoke launcher, AT-4, vision system, ERA block, etc... takes any ounce of damage while multi-story buildings are leveled.











PS: I recently made another post but wanted to create a new one that more accurately identified the issue.

I ran a test again with an ungodly amount of artillery point targeting 3 T-72s.
 

Again the vehicles have no damage beyond their tracks going to yellow after this amount of fire. I would expect, at minimum, that the top mount DSHK would be disabled by this weight of fire.

I've not been able to test this in Black Sea but my guess is that you cannot use artillery to disable APS systems and that they are proof to shell fire.


edit:

And again I am testing airburst because I want to specifically test artillery efficacy against exposed portions of the tank. AA guns, ERA blocks, vision, etc...  There seems to be something up where artillery can really only kill/immobilize a tank but is unable to do any damage to exposed equipment on the vehicle.

I've been running multiple tests with airburst 130mm against armor and what I am looking for any sub-system damage and I've yet to find a single instance of it. Further ERA blocks all also seem proof. The BMPs being included in the test I think helps point to the fact that airburst artillery is penetrating and able to cause damage to thinly armored vehicles. Yet somehow every turret mounted DSHK is unharmed while a Coy of BMPs are destroyed? Something fishy is going on.


I was originally going to a more classic test but figured this absurd weight of fire showcased the issue rather dramatically in a video. The test is quite easy to replicate and in my 5 attempts so far I've yet to see airburst cause any subsystem damage (outside of tracks).

In the video I also did some normal mortar fire on 1 BMP and 2 T-72s and if you notice a T-72 and BMP are destroyed and 1 T-72 is immobilized. Yet for both T-72s their entire ERA compliment is unharmed?

I ran some tests of airburst artillery against armored vehicles. In particular T-72 AVs and BMP-1s.
 

O:10 for artillery call in

2:25 artillery strikes

3:00 review of damaged/destroyed BMPs

8:10 review of vehicles

What I found using a massive amount of artillery is that while it was possible for artillery to destroy the BMP-1s it was unable to do any damage to any subsystem except tracks furthermore no amount of artillery would detonate or disable an ERA block. This seems incorrect to me and likely to be a bug of some variety. Even BMPs that took penetrating hits and crew/passenger losses would not have any subsystem damage. Please watch the linked video and you will see enough artillery to destroy every BMP and level every building on the block. Yet this massive weight of fire does not damage or disable any external system. Not a single DSHK, smoke launcher, AT-4, vision system, ERA block, etc... takes any ounce of damage while multi-story buildings are leveled.











PS: I recently made another post but wanted to create a new one that more accurately identified the issue.

I ran some tests of airburst artillery against armored vehicles. In particular T-72 AVs and BMP-1s.
 

O:10 for artillery call in

2:25 artillery strikes

3:00 review of damaged/destroyed BMPs

8:10 review of vehicles

What I found using a massive amount of artillery is that while it was possible for artillery to destroy the BMP-1s it was unable to do any damage to any subsystem except tracks furthermore no amount of artillery would detonate or disable an ERA block. This seems incorrect to me and likely to be a bug of some variety. Even BMPs that took penetrating hits and crew/passenger losses would not have any subsystem damage. Please watch the linked video and you will see enough artillery to destroy every BMP and level every building on the block. Yet this massive weight of fire does not damage or disable any external system. Not a single DSHK, smoke launcher, AT-4, vision system, ERA block, etc... takes any ounce of damage while multi-story buildings are leveled.











PS: I recently made another post but wanted to create a new one that more accurately identified the issue.

I ran some tests of airburst artillery against armored vehicles. In particular T-72 AVs and BMP-1s.
 

O:10 for artillery call in

2:25 artillery strikes

3:00 review of damaged/destroyed BMPs

8:10 review of vehicles

What I found using a massive amount of artillery is that while it was possible for artillery to destroy the BMP-1s it was unable to do any damage to any subsystem except tracks furthermore no amount of artillery would detonate or disable an ERA block. This seems incorrect to me and likely to be a bug of some variety. Even BMPs that took penetrating hits and crew/passenger losses would not have any subsystem damage. Please watch the linked video and you will see enough artillery to destroy every BMP and level every building on the block. Yet this massive weight of fire does not damage or disable any external system. Not a single DSHK, smoke launcher, AT-4, vision system, ERA block, etc... takes any ounce of damage while multi-story buildings are leveled.











PS: I recently made another post but wanted to create a new one that more accurately identified the issue.

I ran a test again with an ungodly amount of artillery point targeting 3 T-72s.
 

Again the vehicles have no damage beyond their tracks going to yellow after this amount of fire. I would expect, at minimum, that the top mount DSHK would be disabled by this weight of fire.

I've not been able to test this in Black Sea but my guess is that you cannot use artillery to disable APS systems and that they are proof to shell fire.


edit:

And again I am testing airburst because I want to specifically test artillery efficacy against exposed portions of the tank. AA guns, ERA blocks, vision, etc...  There seems to be something up where artillery can really only kill/immobilize a tank but is unable to do any damage to exposed equipment on the vehicle.

I ran a test again with an ungodly amount of artillery point targeting 3 T-72s.
 

Again the vehicles have no damage beyond their tracks going to yellow after this amount of fire. I would expect, at minimum, that the top mount DSHK would be disabled by this weight of fire.

I've not been able to test this in Black Sea but my guess is that you cannot use artillery to disable APS systems and that they are proof to shell fire.


edit:

And again I am testing airburst because I want to specifically test artillery efficacy against exposed portions of the tank. AA guns, ERA blocks, vision, etc...  There seems to be something up where artillery can really only kill/immobilize a tank but is unable to do any damage to exposed equipment on the vehicle.

I ran a test again with an ungodly amount of artillery point targeting 3 T-72s.
 

Again the vehicles have no damage beyond their tracks going to yellow after this amount of fire. I would expect, at minimum, that the top mount DSHK would be disabled by this weight of fire.

I've not been able to test this in Black Sea but my guess is that you cannot use artillery to disable APS systems and that they are proof to shell fire.


edit:

And again I am testing airburst because I want to specifically test artillery efficacy against exposed portions of the tank. AA guns, ERA blocks, vision, etc...  There seems to be something up where artillery can really only kill/immobilize a tank but is unable to do any damage to exposed equipment on the vehicle.

This thread has a good discussion of the subject, mostly from the CM:BS perspective:
 

I ran some tests of airburst artillery against armored vehicles. In particular T-72 AVs and BMP-1s.
 

O:10 for artillery call in

2:25 artillery strikes

3:00 review of damaged/destroyed BMPs

8:10 review of vehicles

What I found using a massive amount of artillery is that while it was possible for artillery to destroy the BMP-1s it was unable to do any damage to any subsystem except tracks furthermore no amount of artillery would detonate or disable an ERA block. This seems incorrect to me and likely to be a bug of some variety. Even BMPs that took penetrating hits and crew/passenger losses would not have any subsystem damage. Please watch the linked video and you will see enough artillery to destroy every BMP and level every building on the block. Yet this massive weight of fire does not damage or disable any external system. Not a single DSHK, smoke launcher, AT-4, vision system, ERA block, etc... takes any ounce of damage while multi-story buildings are leveled.











PS: I recently made another post but wanted to create a new one that more accurately identified the issue.

I ran some tests of airburst artillery against armored vehicles. In particular T-72 AVs and BMP-1s.
 

O:10 for artillery call in

2:25 artillery strikes

3:00 review of damaged/destroyed BMPs

8:10 review of vehicles

What I found using a massive amount of artillery is that while it was possible for artillery to destroy the BMP-1s it was unable to do any damage to any subsystem except tracks furthermore no amount of artillery would detonate or disable an ERA block. This seems incorrect to me and likely to be a bug of some variety. Even BMPs that took penetrating hits and crew/passenger losses would not have any subsystem damage. Please watch the linked video and you will see enough artillery to destroy every BMP and level every building on the block. Yet this massive weight of fire does not damage or disable any external system. Not a single DSHK, smoke launcher, AT-4, vision system, ERA block, etc... takes any ounce of damage while multi-story buildings are leveled.











PS: I recently made another post but wanted to create a new one that more accurately identified the issue.