Jump to content

sypox

Members
  • Content Count

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sypox

  1. Most would take cover and recover their situation awareness and if they can locate their threat - they engage it. Guys panicking could go bananas, running around becoming easy targets and in some cases probably cause friendly casualites with spray and pray.
  2. Information is for sure a tool to better understand the big picture, but somewhere the game will transform into milsim Im afraid, which probably actract a minor audience. Im more into getting info on how the game reacts to situations like in this thread. Sure you can preform tests to build an understanding of how the game can be played, but will not end the discussion of "feature or flaw??".
  3. Admin needs to enable BB code for video embedding (security issue).
  4. If we knew more about how situational awareness is modelled in the game, we could probably better understand what happend. As seen on the pictures we have a tank platoon facing away from the camera (and the at team). If infantry supported their flanks and rear, the platoon leader would probably not spend time to scan other directions and not passing targets to his gunner. I wouldnt say what happend is unrealistic, I dont have the whole picture and I certainly dont know how the game handle situational awareness.
  5. Most tank crews could get a 360 view from their vehicle. Rotating periscopes was common and later advanced optics and turret prisms was introduced. However, spotting a 2 men tank hunting party during battle was not easy.
  6. I prefer to use smoke as a defensive tool. In a situation when its better to move out of LOS rather then return fire, smoke is often very useful. In a recent battle an infantry platoon was under fire from a AT-gun. Range was about 700 m so returning fire was not an option. Instead I deployed a smokescreen, moved a HMG team in position to suppress the gun and had time to request artillery.
×
×
  • Create New...