gnarly
-
Posts
595 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by gnarly
-
-
Urban hell Kino?
-
4 minutes ago, VladimirTarasov said:
Hmm... All this talk gets me wanting a battle. Kino or TFO or anyone else if you guys want a battle let me know. I'm sure someone here holds a grudge against me so... Watching you guys play was fun.
Listening to Kino's trash talk was even more fun!
-
17 hours ago, kinophile said:
I'd actually have liked to conduct a proper retreat but I think it would have just been boring for TfO. I initially offered a ceasefire but neither if us are sure how that works, so it had to be a surrender to end the game.
Basically you press ceasefire then end your turn, and let you oppo know. He then must mirror this (pressing ceasefire) and sending back his turn...
This can then take a few minutes to take effect. Last time for me in BS, took 3 minutes (3 turns each) before ceasefire actually took effect. May be more or less
Important: you must communicate you interest in cease fire to oppo by email/pm/letterbomb/pigeon. There is NO ingame notification that you're ceasefiring. And you oppo can of course ignore you, or string it out for a few turns to gain more objectives/kills /whatever....
-
Commiserations @kinophile!
Thanks for the write up, good DARs are hard to continue when you are getting pounded.
I totally agree on BMPs versus BTR82s; the sheer volume of fire the latter can put out, versus their cost, has generally meant i use them to drown my opponent with their cannon fire. And if a few go boom, so be it.
-
Can anyone comment in the first picture, what the white square of flagging tape in front of the closest BMP over the top of the trench is for? A no-go for trench transit in case the earthworks collapses from the weight of the vehicle behind? Or to help the vehicle see the trench? I think the distant BMP has similar as well.
-
this is a fun little scenario. Played it a week ago again, having forgot I'd played it late last year.
Still fresh and fun!
*** Spoilers ***
The AGS waxed my FO before my MGs suppressed it, allowing HQ to mortar it into oblivion.
However, I forgot to thoroughly suppress the buildings near the HQ vehicles as my fireteam approached, with predictable results. Still major victory it, but it wasn't cheap.
-
22 minutes ago, FoxZz said:
During the final phase of the Lybian war, French air-force used concrete bombs in urban environement against vehicles to reduce risk of civilian casualities because the tanks and vehicles were hiding in cities. And they witnessed that it was a more complicated to achieve than live bombs due to the need of a direct hit to kill the tank, very much like in the video. Consequently they switched to more advanced guidance kits. That's also why they decided to engage the helicopters that proved very deadly later on.
FoxZz you don't happen to have a link to an article/book/similar that discusses the Libyan war in the detail you describe? Sounds like it would be an interesting read about an event i know nothing about....
-
1 hour ago, TheForwardObserver said:
because he kept spraining his fat wobbly cankles
This forum never ceases with the education it provides.
I had to google that....
-
On 11/18/2016 at 2:31 AM, Chudacabra said:
My Tunguskas fared pretty poorly against UAVs (think they got one), but at least they're tremendously entertaining when used as direct fire support against infantry.
They are almost orgasmic when used as direct fire against groundpounders.....
I've got some footage somewhere of a single minute in a PBEM, where my Tu took out 16 men. That was just wow....
Looking forward to the next installment @kinophile
-
2 minutes ago, JUAN DEAG said:
What do the scaled numbers on the left side mean?
see 4th line down, m/s (velocity)
-
And some more clarification (cos I couldn't see the tripod weight in Wiki).
"The Kornet is a man portable system. The tripod launcher with a missile ready to fire weighs about 66 kg."
http://weaponsystems.net/weaponsystem/BB06 - AT-14 Spriggan.html
So a Jav team with 2 missiles (50kg) is still carting less weight than a Kornet team with one missile (66kg)...
-
9 hours ago, Cobetco said:
While that would make a lot of sense, the gunners on the German halftracks will man their weapon no matter what stance, having them open up will keep them at the machinegun, but even if their not opened up if the gunner feels like firing, he's going to fire. only way to avoid that is a short radius target arc. also I will point out (since i was just checking it out) the gunner of the 37mm cannon on both the 250 and 251 stands up and hip fires the cannon instead of using the handy dandy aiming telescope, but i guess that's where the German army put its Rambo wannabes.
Good to know; I've probably been turning off Open Up, but forgetting I'd done so
-
2 minutes ago, Cobetco said:
Nope =p The German 250(old and new) and 251(C and D) do not require an open up command to use their Machineguns, and their protection past ~200m is actually pretty good now, not like it used to be a few years ago. where as the US halftracks are pretty much just trucks that happen to have machineguns, the german halftracks can be used fairly offensively if you know whats on the other side of a crest or building, i wouldn't deploy them defensively however, not the machinegun variants anyhow, the 37mm and 75mm can defend in a pinch.
Cool. But I think you can still turn off the Open Up option for German halftracks, to de-crew (and then re-crew) their MGs?
I still lose those gunners, even if they are better protected....
-
23 hours ago, DeutschRitter said:
I am playing atm and figured it out
You have to select the squad inside the halftrack and give the open up order. I think the german halftrack mgs are automaticaly mounted when a squad enters it.
Yup. Open up 'crews' the MGs. I pretty sure this is true for the German hanomags as well?
You may wonder why this is necessary? These gunners are very vulnerable, and will likely get picked of quickly if they are particularly exposed to small arms on their flanks. You can therefore prevent this by switching 'off'' Open Up, obviously resulting in no MG crewing, but also protects all the occupants from small arms fire.
-
6 hours ago, kinophile said:
It would be nice though to at least enlarge the fires . . . . Those piddly little candle flames on burning IFVs are very... unimpressive . . . .
Yeah, I may have misinterpreted @Reiter's request. Not sure if he is referring to better/more spectacular/realistic vehicle fires (which are often improved by modders), or if he is requesting the (I believe in original CM series?) implementation of grass/building fires?
-
On 03/11/2016 at 0:37 AM, Reiter said:
Seriously I want fire to work in this game .
I think @Battlefront.com have made it very clear that ain't gonna happen. Do a search for Battlefront as the user, and either 'light fire' or 'tinder'.
Most recently:
On 10/11/2016 at 1:57 PM, Battlefront.com said:........
Since the days before CMBO was released we've used the ASL "tinder" factor as an example of how "corner case" features can ruin a game. In ASL you can light fires pretty much whenever and wherever you want. Because there's no rules to reflect the reasons why soldiers don't go around torching everything the feature allowed gamers to do something without suffering consequences. It allowed players to do something that was disproportional to the real world's battlefields. The result was something supposedly designed to make the game more realistic which instead made it less realistic.
......
Steve
-
And just to be a devils advocate with regards to your thread title 'Black Sea Done' (whilst also being mindful of your limited (time) gaming window); have you played it against a human opponent?
That is a whole different ballpark!
-
Just to be a devil's advocate here Euri (since it seems that I've started a thread elsewhere looking for hints and tips, that seems to be degenerating rather badly...
), having been on the receiving end of plenty of ATGMs in game, I have noted that where the opponent has placed his ATGM teams deeper in 'clutter' (e.g. in a treeline, higher than (or with LOS through a gap in a closer treeline) and behind one or more treelines, or in buildings above and behind other buildings) I have generally not been able to ascertain the firing location immediately. I may have a solid appreciation of its likely vector/linear alignment, but not which treeline/line of buildings the damn thing is parked in.
At least for a shot or two.
So I immediately task multiple units with area fire into each 'band' of successive treeline/etc.
-
Good info both, thanks guys! Gives me some good options to consider next time around.
-
I recently launched at attack with a dozen or so BMP-3's with just their default 2 man crews on board (I'd forgotten the above issue existed), as fire support for a couple of mounted BTR mech platoons.
Within a few turns I realized something was seriously wrong , when I had negligible spotting contacts from them, except from the vehicles with the BMP platoon HQ's on board. Essentially, I had a company's worth of BMP-3's that were useless, and gave up the battle as a waste of time.
Question: aside from the obvious of detaching a team from an associated mounted squad permanently to each vehicle (which I couldn't, as no associated infantry squads), does anyone have any other tips of how to add an effective commander to each vehicle? Preferably not by breaking up a team (unless the other half of the squad can 'Command' another vehicle)? Buy a recon team or something for each BMP?
Thanks in advance
-
On 10/24/2016 at 0:06 PM, antaress73 said:
v1.04 Patch Notes:
Infantry Weapons:
* Effectiveness of the M-25 CDTE's HE grenade has been increased against enemy troops.
* More models of recoilless weapons can fire indoors, and with less suppression on the firing troops.
* Infantry mortar teams will now use their mortars when given a Target Light area fire command.
* FIXED: Disposable AT weapons not disappearing from the soldier's kit after use.
* FIXED: Igla S missile offset from tube when launching.
* FIXED: Rarely an AT-14 team would be unable to finish deploying the ATGM inside houses.
* FIXED: M25 CDTE has 5-round magazine.Vehicles:
* IFVs with cannons and ATGMs will more intelligently choose which weapon systems to engage enemy vehicles with.
* Abrams tank side turret armor (both base armor and ERA) is now less effective at defending against tandem HEAT warheads.
* Russian Kontakt-1 and Kontakt-5 ERA are now less effective at defending against tandem HEAT warheads.
* Abrams smoke deploys slightly more slowly.
* Ukrainian tank ammunition loads have been adjusted. Oplot-M now carries APFSDS 3BM42 Mango (instead of Zubr), and T-64BV now carries APFSDS 3BM22 Zokolka (instead of APFSDS 3BM42 Mango). T-6DBV now carries 3BK18 HEAT shells instead of 3BK18M.
* BTR-80A, BTR-82, and BTR-82A are now more willing to area fire in low visibility conditions.
* 2K22M Tunguska does not have thermal optics (the 2K22M1 still does).
* FIXED: The AT-10's tandem HEAT warhead from the BMP-3/3M was too weak against ERA.
* FIXED: Sometimes Bradley and Abrams ERA blocks would fail to function, allowing HEAT warheads to travel through them and hit the base armor unimpeded.
* FIXED: At close LOD, BMP-2M would look like a BMP-2.Support:
* FIXED: UAV thermal vision works better in poor weather.
Quick Battles:
* QB prices of fortifications have been increased.
* Tunguska SPAA QB price increased.Artwork:
* Improved textures for M110.
* Improved textures for Skif.
* Improved textures for AK-74M.
* Added muddy textures for MT-12 Rapira.
* Corrected some mismapped textures in a few flavor objects.
* Small adjustments to a variety of vehicle models.Misc Bug Fixes
* FIXED: M1167 Humvees would sometimes count as a tank kill on the AAR screen.
* FIXED: Unit crossing bridge would sometimes get stuck or needlessly zigzag.
* FIXED: Sometimes a wire fence would stay upright after a vehicle rolled through it.
* FIXED: A specific Independant House building model had opaque windows.
* FIXED: Other minor misc bug fixes.
@Battlefront.com or other staff, It would be very useful I think if someone edited my first post in this thread (post #3), obliterating all the incorrect content there, and replacing it with the correct 1.0.4 patch readme?
Otherwise I think many will get the wrong impression?
Unfortunately there is a timeout on editing ones on posts on these forums.
-
And thanks BF!
-
Patch 1.04 is up
-
From http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2322&Itemid=587
(Note! Battlefront originally posted the wrong patch details, which were posted here and removed by moderator)
You have to select the squad inside the halftrack and give the open up order. I think the german halftrack mgs are automaticaly mounted when a squad enters it.
), having been on the receiving end of plenty of ATGMs in game, I have noted that where the opponent has placed his ATGM teams deeper in 'clutter' (e.g. in a treeline, higher than (or with LOS through a gap in a closer treeline) and behind one or more treelines, or in buildings above and behind other buildings) I have generally not been able to ascertain the firing location immediately. I may have a solid appreciation of its likely vector/linear alignment, but not which treeline/line of buildings the damn thing is parked in.
Is there ever any reason not use teams?
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
That is a very useful tip MOS, much appreciated! I have been struggling with C2 in WW2 cf. Black Sea, so I'll give that a try.