Boomkow
-
Posts
47 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Boomkow
-
-
Hmmm. I quit my FGM membership years ago because it felt more like a white supremacist/tea party kind of forum than a wargaming forum. Here too?
Okay....I'll bite.
What gave you the impression it was a white supremacist group/tea party?
-
Having looked at the WitW OOB and TOE in some detail ... that's a terrible idea.
How is it terrible?
-
Speaking as someone who used to Bradley:
1. If it's a tank, unless I'm on the move, I'm initiating with TOW fire against tank type targets.
2. If I am on the move, unless it has gun tube orientation on me, I'm holding fire until I can somewhere to fire a TOW. This might be simply doing a short halt and risking being in the open, or trying to go to ground first. A lot depends on the range (short range, short halt as the missile flight time is short enough to get a kill before the tank can react, long range I'm going to find some lowground if possible because 30 seconds is a long time to sit in the open for a 3750 meter shot).3. I would only have engaged with 25 MM against tank type targets if the enemy had clearly spotted me and was going to engage, or the firing angle is just perfect (I am behind them, flank shots at 90 degrees with enemy gun tube orientation facing away from me.
I can see the BMP-3 not firing ATGMs first simply because they're likely battle-carrying HE rounds (battle carry is what you load before the battle into the guntube), they'd likely either fire the HE to clear the tube, or unload it, whichever is faster. But for anything with a distinct and separate ATGM launcher, seems odd they'd default to cannon fire.
I'm also less than sold on APS in the game. It was cool starting off, but it's looking less like the Russians are able to field it in numbers, and the US system remains largely hypothetical. I generally play without it because I feel it best captures the modern armor on armor dynamic (and ATGMs are already dicey enough with ERA and advanced composite armor).
Short story:
Interestingly enough, one of the Platoon Sergeants in a Troop I was in for a time had been a Bradley gunner in the first Persian Gulf War. His platoon came in contact with some number of T-72s. His Bradley opened up with one TOW which then caused the affected T-72 to simply explode, like tank now, and then gone. He then shifted to a second target, firing the other missile, which departed the tube and then went no further thanks to a rocket engine failure . By this time the tank's friend is realizing something is up and is drawing down on the Bradley. The Bradley cuts loose with as much 25 MM AP as it can pump out, and after a short time, the tank just out and out explodes. In short order the Iraqi tanks are all destroyed from M3 or M1 fire, and they take a pause to collect prisoners, reload and refit. Absolutely full of himself, the Bradley's gunner pops the hatch to survey his two tank kills. Then he spots something. Strung across the front of his Bradley is a TOW guidance wire. What had actually happened to the second tank was the Bradley's wingman had fired a TOW literally over the frontal slope, right by the turret, before continuing on to the Iraqi tank.
Some of the other guys I worked with talked about ripping up T-55s and derivatives with 25 MM, but consensus seems pretty much if you've got something labeled "Anti-tank guided missile" failing to use it on a tank is a bit of a mistake.I don't use Trophy or Arena either. In addition to the ATGMs, some CAS missiles still are being intercepted. Shtora and ERA are all I use.
-
I still don't understand that after 7 years how modules are taking this long too come out. Battlefront should just buy a copy of Gary Gribsy's War in the East and War in the West. There's your TOE down to the rifle.
-
I think the Romanians, Hungarians, and Finnish contributed quite a few men and resources to the war. Like the Italians, their contribution was dismal. There were many minor nations in the Western Armies and they are including Brazil in the next CMFI module. Perhaps they could just focus on a few formations. Even making them purchasable as single units/vehicles.
-
I like the way Theatre of War handled LOS. It was quick and efficient. Perhaps simplifying the LOS/LOF could avoid a lot of the quirks of the current system and be a little bit more uniform. If it takes thousands of programming hours and tons of computing power then other options should be considered. I know there are many variables to calculate to achieve perfect, simulated LOS/LOF but this is a game. I'd like to play the game knowing some of these awkward variables won't affect my gameplay.
-
Considering this is World War 2, I think we should measure the training that existed at the time. The US and Germans trained millions of soldiers. I don't think that the US or Germans were sending "substandard" troops to the front line. (In the case of the Germans, at least not yet). Were these formations brand new or were they integrated with veterans?
-
Chris stated in the previous stream video (from the 17th) that it is a known bug and they are working on fixing it, and that it should be properly addressed before the release.
Ohh, the LOD stuff he talked about. Great to hear!
-
These unexpierenced troops are going to make this battle interesting.
-
Are all the Germans and Americans supposed to be rated "Green"? If so, is that because the units depicted in the battle were actual fresh recruits?
-
Thanks for sharing.
I am a bit worried about how the shadows behave, I see quite a number of glitches.
I see a lot flickering. Hope they fix it.
-
What about Fallschirmjagers and US Airborne?
-
What are the LOS/LOF check clock timings? I think knowing those might help some of us experiment with our micromanagement skills.
For instance, in relation to timing a turn around a corner? (I want them focused)
-
It sounds to me like the tree "force field" affects more than tank shells hitting trees. This has been an issue for an extremely long time. Tanks repeatedly hitting the tree between themselves and the target. In fact, if some tank crew thinks parking their tank behind a tree is a good idea then their spotting should be atrocious. Trust me, an 88 AP shell would blow through a tree and the fragments would be extra projectiles.
-
Is more or less where I stand.
Also, in real life, we might want to let the Americans pull out unmolested - we're happy to take our objectives, no one wants to die chasing a Jackson that's leaving anyway. This isn't Blitzkrieg...
IT'S THE FINAL BLITZKRIEG!
-
Indeep During Human purchase of the AI forces a player can use the editor F1-F9. Group commands! So I tried two test:
The first map offered 8 specific group setups. I selected a platoon and broke them into 2,3,8 groups (avoiding the default group 1) and ended up with all units setup in Group 7 (notice I did not select that order group) So I did another Map with 5 groups and purchased a company and used group 1 and 2 . All units again want to just one group...4! What bothers me most is that all units went to just one group setup.
I test each QB to make sure group setups and orders are functional and always note the AI tries to fill the setup groups. So these results seem to be a negative unintended consequence. I'll leave you to be the judge as it's your choice/style of play.
So maybe I misunderstood what was happening. In actuality the AI is still deciding on the groups and setup. I hope that Battlefront will continue to add or change the QB AI force selection and placement so that it utilizes AT guns, tanks, IFVs, and infantry in a more believable manner.
-
@MarkEzra I have noticed occasionally in QB testing that sometimes the AI is ignoring my Group assignments. In those cases, it still assigns groups just not to the units I dictated.
-
For instance, I am testing my theory on a medium probe QB with the Holland Elst Town Probe 021.btt
And there are two separate forces attacking. With the scenario editor mode on I can see that A2 is attacking over an open field and A1 is attacking through the town.
-
I checked the QB maps in the editor. If I like the plan, I will use it. Kind of ruins the fog of war, but generally you need to know what the enemy force composition is.
-
I assume you are speaking of an human vs AI QB match.
Once a human player picks the AI forces all control of placement and orders is handled by the AI.
In the QB force selection screen, I choose the AI's forces and assign each group a Group number. I just want the AI to attack or defend without a massive clutter of everything they have.
-
If I am picking forces for a QB, should I assign specific AI groups like A1, A2, A3, etc?
-
I used one of his maps for a CMRT scenario I made. Awesome work by what appears to be a great fellow. RIP.
-
Thanks for the recommendations. I will check out Stepsons.
-
I have been playing a lot of CMSF recently, especially the Red v Red campaigns by Paper Tiger, "Road to Dinas", "Hasrabit" campaigns. However, I was wondering if there were any Red v Blue campaigns?
Looking for Waffen Uniform fix
in CM Normandy Maps and Mods
Posted
I'm looking for the high def uniform to fix the blurry runes. I'm trying to recover all my former mods.