Bulletpoint
-
Posts
6,896 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
20
Posts posted by Bulletpoint
-
-
Attackers will only lose more than the defenders if everything else is equal. Two armies of the exact same size, technology, doctrine, resources, motivation, leadership, etc... In that case yes, then the attackers will lose considerably more than the defender. But few wars are like that.
In case of WW2, Germany lost because they did not have the resources to fight the war they got themselves in. Many people love to obsess over which tank was the best, which MG was the best.. but in the end, wars are largely about resources, logistics, and production.
-
On 5/4/2024 at 2:47 PM, thilio said:
Sometimes it's impossible to give budy aid with another unit. The men of the unit are above the wounded guy but don't give budy aid.
It's like they didn't see him. I try moving them, give a new orientation but nothing happens.
Is this a bug or should i do something else ?
I think this is caused by the guy carrying too much weight, so he can't loot any grenades/MG/etc
-
I think the StG should have higher rate of fire at 200m+ range, firing single shots. Not firing bursts, but the time between shots should be much lower. Then at closer range, 100-200 m, it should fire short, aimed bursts in rapid succession. And then full auto when getting closer than 100.
But the really cool thing would be if the actual rate of fire and burst mode also depended on troop experience, morale state, and leadership.
So if you had rattled green troops left without a squad leader, they would just go full auto on anything at any range, hitting nothing. And crack troops under good leadership would fire rapid and accurate single shots even at medium ranges.
-
You inspired me to go back and play this scenario again. Then I remembered why I skipped it the first time around, years ago. It's simply poorly designed in my opinion.
First try, I split my forces between town and the left flank. Got wiped out.
Second try, I stacked the deck with everything I got in the town, and this time, I got a minor win after 16 minutes of intense shooting at close range.
Was surprising to win it actually, without taking any of the objectives, but causing about 70 casualties for 50 in return seems to have been enough. I could probably have sent a team forward to seize the intersection objective, which would have likely given me a tactical win.
However, it was only thanks to having played the scenario before, and knowing which buildings would be optimal to occupy.
-
14 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Why on Earth would NATO member countries throw in the towel on supporting Ukraine because someone who spent 4 years berating and disrespecting them them says so? No way. And even if NATO caved that doesn't prevent member nations from continuing to aid Ukraine.
In theory we could do that, but I think that if the biggest and most powerful country in NATO pulled out, the minor countries would soon conclude that the war was lost. EU countries would start talking about the horrible humanitarian impacts of war, and how we must have peace now.
Ukraine might keep fighting for some time, but without continued external support, they would eventually be defeated, as they have said so themselves several times. I don't even think it would take that long, since it would be a major hit to morale. So even inside Ukraine, there would be increased political pressure for a negotiated settlement to keep at least part of Ukraine independent.
Zelensky would leave the stage one way or the other, and a new Ukrainian leader would emerge to sign the deal Trump would strike with Putin: Peace in return for Russia keeping Crimea and the eastern "republics". And Ukrainian NATO membership not officially cancelled but indefinitely postponed.
-
17 hours ago, Probus said:
Trump is a loose cannon that can't keep his mouth shut, that's for sure. But putting on my magic thinking cap, I'll bet dollars to donuts that if Trump gets elected he will do a 180 on support for Ukraine. He is only against the war right now I'll bet because the current administration is for supporting Ukraine and it gives him talking points. If Biden were to have been more isolationist, Trump would have lambasted him for it. But that's politics.
War, unfortunately, is big business and Trump, if nothing else, is a businessman. Now that NATO is starting to pull their own weight, as you say, he'll take credit for that too.
While I'm no fan of Trump, I think he will actually end this war if he gets elected. And I think he probably will be.
It won't be a happy peace though. Just like with Afghanistan, the US pullout will leave behind a complete mess. But Trump can at least say it's not a mess paid for by US taxpayers. And I think that carries quite a lot of political weight at the moment, both in side the USA and internationally in a time when many people are losing faith in the US as a guardian of the whole western "rules based order".
In both Ukraine and the US, a stab-in-the-back story will then emerge, claiming that the war could have been won if it had not been for perfidious Trump suddenly dropping the ball. Whether that is true or not will be a subject for historians for decades.
European countries will not protest much, and will quickly change their official narrative to align with the new US position. They will however continue to invest much more in their militaries and slowly drift out of the US orbit. Americans will finally achieve their wish of having Europe pay for our own security, but it will come at the cost of a lot of the American political influence over us.
Both America and Russia will come out of the war worse than before. The US will have lost a lot of political/cultural/moral authority, whereas Russia will be more physically and economically weakened and isolated.
-
I don't like to call Russians "Orks", but this is straight out of Warhammer 40K
-
1 hour ago, Haiduk said:
This man rise own fat a..s from sofa to come and shake pitty fist to Abrams - mother-Russia won over Abrams ! His pathetic life has found own meaning.
This is like something out of The Simpsons...
-
18 minutes ago, Carolus said:
100km 155mm?
Is this the unholy baby of a missile and a shell?
If Ukraine can reduce the GPS jammers, these could have interesting applications.
Great for Rheinmetall stock owners, but what does this do that the Ground-launched Small Diameter Bomb doesn't already do better?
This shell flies 100 km with accuracy of 10 metres, while the GLSDB has a range of 150km and accuracy of 1 metre...
-
12 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:
"Bocage" does not feature in CMFB.
Just because it's Saturday, I felt like adding a bit of extremely uninteresting trivia.
There is actually some bocage in CMFB. One scenario that comes with the game has it. It is not available in the CMFB editor though.
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
I have some questions about this too, but here's what it looks like they are doing...
The shells are VERY old and/or poorly stored. The fuses (or storage plug?) that are on them already are rusted in place. They smash them into the shell, then clean the threads, the put in a new fuse.
What I don't get is that there's no powder in these shells already. So it looks like they were stockpiled empty and have to be filled. But why is this being done in the field instead of in a factory setting?
The brass casing look to be in poor condition as well. Poor quality brass will corrode, so who knows how reliable those casings are. Might not even fit into the breach or could get stuck even if it holds up to use.
Well, that's the best guess I have
Steve
[Edit = cross post with Bulletpoint. Looks like we're clear about what they are doing, but I'm still questioning why someone else isn't doing it]
There's a point where the guy films directly into the shell, and it looks empty, but I'm thinking it's maybe just a trick of the camera - the fuze well itself is empty, but the HE filling is still in there?
-
12 minutes ago, Carolus said:
Does anyone who knows his way around artillery shells know what these Russians are doing?
One of them seems to be attaching fuses. But this whole activity is strange. Are shell housings usually closed off with a cap you need to bash in?
I think what's happening here is that these shells are so old and rusty that the normal protective cap that is usually screwed off before screwing in the fuze is so rusty that it cannot be unscrewed, but it can be bashed in by a hammer. Then after fishing out the fragments, they try to attach the fuzes, but he complains that the fuze won't go all the way in.
-
33 minutes ago, PEB14 said:
And I still don't know how I'm supposed to scout with those damn Panzergrenadiere…
Slowly. Divide into two equal teams, then use bounding overwatch. This takes time but cuts down on casualties.
What they can't do well is the US tactic of sending out a screen of 2-man teams and have them run ahead to very quickly get a feel for where approx the enemy line is.
If you have Kubelwagen, they can be used as Ersatz scouts.
-
The Germans are a bit of a "one trick pony" in this game. Their infantry is inflexible and underpowered, most of their tanks are quite bad, and their artillery takes ages to call in. Everything hinges on those few tanks that are not bad - mostly the Panther, but of course also the other big cats if you're lucky enough to get any of those in the scenario. And of course the Panzerschreks.
But the Germans can be fun to play if you like a challlenge. And at least they are still more capable in-game than the Brits, in my opinion.
-
Also a variable in this test is that in the WW2 version, you're testing with HMG42 which are deployed on a bipod and are bigger targets than the 2-man LMG teams you seem to be testing with in the CW test. The HMG teams also have more crewmembers, which also affects spotting chances.
A better test would be to use German LMG teams.
-
1 minute ago, Kraft said:
They are on that road because they willingly decided to go and kill the defenders at the end of it.
They could have started a mutiny, surrendered, gone to prison for resistance, but reality is they volunteered most likely for money or because they belive in it.
I don't want to get into the whole argument about who is right and who is wrong. Seeing this just makes me sick.
-
3 hours ago, Haiduk said:
Video
This is grotesque. I know I'm supposed to be all manly and indifferent, but this is a crazy and horrible waste of life.
I guess they are Russians?
-
3 minutes ago, Grigb said:
Disagreements are normal. We will eventually get further information to resolve the matter.
I hope you and @dan/california are right that it's a better place to defend than I see it.
And of course UKR command has much better info than this armchair general. I just hope they are defending that place because it actually makes sense on the ground and not for political reasons.
Looking at the Russian side, it does seem foolish to me that they expend so much energy trying to wipe out that small foothold. When they could just contain it and shell and drone it all day long.
-
13 minutes ago, Grigb said:
UKR do not charge into the line of fire in Krynki. They mostly do what they do in Avdiivka - defend it. And it is not a bad position to defend.
This is the main point of our disagreement then. To me, it seems like a bad place to defend.
-
21 minutes ago, Grigb said:
They are not charging forward. They crawl. This is their advance in 4 month and 16 thousand dead.
You could say the exact sme thing about Krynky. The Russians are crawling forward there too.
But that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying they charge into the line of fire and get shot dead. Ukraine doesn't need to do that in Krynky in a position that is also bad for them.
-
2 minutes ago, Grigb said:
The true face of RU war. I will not translate the article (yet), but auto-translation should suffice if you want to learn about the true horrors of the RU situation at Kherson direction.
I'm not uninformed about the Russian casualties.
I just don't see why the same resources Ukriane spends in a poor fighting position on the other side of a river couldn't be better put to use in other parts of the front where Russians are also charging forward.
-
I don't see how the Krinky bridgehead is any advantage to Ukraine if it's only held and not used to go farther inland.
AFU might destroy some Russians coming to attack the location, but UKR could do that better in a position where they are not hemmed in on a tiny piece of land and where they need to carry all supplies across a river.
It seems like it's not even a real bridgehead, but more of a contested area where both sides come and go, and nobody stays for very long since it's extremely exposed.
-
On 2/11/2024 at 1:18 AM, user1000 said:
January 1945 means this isn't the last module for the game, damn......
If they continue the timeline any further, we will play scenarios where we are marching disarmed German soldiers around in a POW camp.
-
11 hours ago, MikeyD said:
In-game if you've got lots of experienced eyeballs all in the chain of command things are going to get spotted pretty quick.
9 hours ago, Freyberg said:The goodies have a lot of infantry that can see you (more than you have deployed forward), who will be passing on spotting intel (the forward-deployed infantry you do have are panicked);
This is not how the game works though. Spotting is done by each individual unit - they cannot help each other directly. Only thing that matters is whether the spotting unit has a contact marker for the enemy unit, and in this case, all of SDG's units have received the marker. What happens to the infantry after they pass on this info doesn't matter for spotting purposes.
But I really don't know what to think of this case. It could simply be massive bad luck that SDG has three vehicles who all kept failing their spotting checks against one single Sherman over multiple turns, even though it's actively firing, which normally gives away the position very fast. And then the Sherman got lucky to spot the non-moving TD in the hedge, even though it's not firing.
It could also be some kind of corner case where the game engine somehow doesn't allow LOS in one direction even though there should be.
Bug Tracker Thread
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted
No, that's what the basic game bases look like ..