Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

DougPhresh

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    769

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

 Content Type 

Everything posted by DougPhresh

  1. DougPhresh
    My brigade has ditched all the RGs for LAVs. They were an emergency procurement for Afghanistan and not part of the regular battlegroup.
  2. DougPhresh
    I should get around to re-uploading that... I never could manage converting CMBN maps, if someone wants to take a crack.
  3. DougPhresh
    People said the same about Georgia. Nevertheless, Oplot could use some love.
  4. DougPhresh
    I do wonder if Gary Grigsby has saved that kind of wargame. Can you imagine playing WITE and having to lay out that map and roll dice! Similarly, I can't imagine playing even a small-ish CMx2 scenario with Advanced Squad Leader rules!
  5. DougPhresh
    What about Partisan or Gorka? I thought those units used some of the more esoteric kit?
  6. DougPhresh
    Could you be referring to this 1500 hour monstrosity? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Campaign_for_North_Africa There are some though who still do want separate logistics rules for the Italians boiling pasta in their field rations...
  7. DougPhresh
    I'm guessing when (if?) VDV and MP uniforms are added in a future module, there will be a drop down for Russian uniforms.
  8. DougPhresh
    Many a time have I had a BMP start taking hits and scrambled to get everyone out while watching more and more casualties add up. Maybe Bail Out could use more hatches than just the main one for AFVs?
  9. DougPhresh
    That did not come up on my Artillery Signals course (in 2011). Carry on then! You bring up a lot of good points. Sometimes I need to remember the military professionals point and stop focusing on a study-sim. I'm sure like with Steel Beasts Pro or DCS there are people who would be into the Indirect Fire Trainer with better graphics, but you're right - sigs, artillery and arty sigs are separate months long courses even working in the trade and it's asking quite a bit for the average person to parcel out assets as direct and general support and to plug them into a radio net. To address your point on granularity I think field telephones are a great example. Is there historical usage on the game scale? Yes. Even OPs would have wires strung in some cases and depending on the conditions Company and Battalion CPs would be connected by field telephone. Would it make a difference in gameplay? Sometimes. I think the Italians in CMFI would benefit as their lack of radios presently leaves their C2 hobbled. Is it worth the technical problems? Probably not. You would either have to have linesmen laying wire as you advanced or drop from the field telephone net as soon as you moved even an action square or two. You would somehow need to show on the map what is linked by field telephone. Above ground wires were often cut by shellfire, do you show that or not, etc.
  10. DougPhresh
    I'm just waiting for a full Canadian module so I can add myself to the names list I don't work with the HSLD guys, but they wear different helmets than the Spectra us grunts have and wear multicam. A PPCLI guy would be pretty by-the-book except for scrim on his helmet. We're not very exciting in line battalions!
  11. DougPhresh
    A little late to the party, but: 1) Cadpat pixels are much, much smaller 2) The new combats have a much larger flag patch, and deployed units wear subdued colour versions 3) Good luck wearing a giant, full colour regimental patch without your RSM jacking you up, even in garrison 4) I've never seen anyone with a flag on the back of their helmet, helmet bands do have cats eyes though 5) The new combat boots are coyote brown
  12. DougPhresh
    I wish we could set our own nets, especially for artillery and recce. Having artillery units in Battalion Tactical Groups is an amazing addition to CMBS, not being able to assign artillery to direct support for other formations is frustrating. There are times where I want off map mortars closely linked with say a recce unit, and it would be realistic to have them operate on the same comms.
  13. DougPhresh
    I mean more that you would never (I hope) set up an OOB without some artillery support. This is fairly consistent between all the titles. The combined arms team gets their due in CM, you wouldn't leave behind engineers and artillery whereas most games focus on infantry and armour.
  14. DougPhresh
    Very workable solutions, my problem is that I would prefer: 1) Deploy all troop recce vehicles, they radio on the Battalion net of the largest unit in the scenario. 2) Deploy troop recce vehicles, they radio to their squadron HQ, which is sitting in the same CP as the Battalion. (Less ideal) 3) Deploy some recce vehicles, but leave the troop HQ vehicle behind. (Least ideal) I'd rather not leave a perfectly good AFV behind just to be a radio relay.
  15. DougPhresh
    I keep hoping that that will change! Especially with the Dutch OOB in CMSF, if they're coming to SF2, that will need to be looked at, lest the Syrian desert resemble The Somme.
  16. DougPhresh
    I think it was humorous, and wildly optimistic to give Ukraine all of these newer weapons systems such as the Oplot and BTR-4 when really T-72s and BMP-1s would better reflect how things have played out in actuality. I know this comes up in every thread, but the conflict in Ukraine is frozen because of decisions made in Moscow not Kiev. The state of the Ukrainian Army in 2017 is illusory as they could be put to flight as easily in 2017 as 2014. I know that technology is great for public consumption, but the Russian Army could be in Kiev in days, with or without UAVs or thermals at the platoon-company level. That has not come to pass for strictly political reasons, and Ukraine should know that they are in effect not much different than Brave Little Belgium in 1914 or Poland in 1939. Valiant, but ultimately irrelevant in the larger political theatre.
  17. DougPhresh
    I wish I could remember the illustration from artillery school, but if you can imagine two cones starting at the fuse and base of the shell, those have dramatically fewer fragments. E: Not exactly, but close enough!
  18. DougPhresh
    So to have a recce troop working as recce, I need to bring along the squadron HQ?
  19. DougPhresh
    That's exactly what I was thinking! I almost always bring along some armoured cars on Battalion level engagements but never include the recce Company or Battalion HQ. I assumed that they would be on the same radio net as the infantry Battalion, but if that's not the case I'm not sure how to use them.
  20. DougPhresh
    Just musing but does that mean recce has to be integrated vertically? That is to say, organic recce teams will always be better than specialized recce from one of the recce formations? I.E is it better to have three grunts and a pair of binoculars than a squadron of armoured cars with radios, as far as Battalion HQ is concerned?
  21. DougPhresh
    Speaking as an artilleryman, games overemphasize small arms. In the 20th century crew-served weapons accounted for 90% of casualties. CM gets this right. Machine guns, mortars and artillery are the big killers.
  22. DougPhresh
    Ehh, part of it was the switch to the LAV 6.0 program, part of it is anti-tank doctrine being in flux with Eryx retired leaving the just Carl G and M72. Much like the TLAV (M113), there isn't the budget or the manning for true mech brigades right now, so the switch to Battle Groups with only mech elements allowed many of the supporting elements to be dropped.
  23. DougPhresh
    Unbuttoned tank crews also suffer from this issue, even in the modern titles.
  24. DougPhresh
    It would certainly make that Italian SP 90mm more useful!
  25. DougPhresh
    This is all very reassuring. Partisans and expanded Italian OOB for CMFI on the horizon?
×
×
  • Create New...