Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

antaress73

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    891

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by antaress73

    question about weapon optics

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    John kettler,

    I dont know what to tell you, I don't do US armor vs RU armor anymore. It is completely unfair. At ranges of 1200 meters in flat terrain with no obstacles, The T-90AM fails to spot the Abrams. While the Abrams always spots it. And then shoots God's lightning bolt into my poor T-90AM. The T-90AMs both day and and thermal optics are way then good enough to spot the M1A2 Abrams, And get a shot off at it in the first few seconds, Just like the M1A2 can. AT-15s are my only choice against them.

    What do you think about this topic? Have you had any similar experiences. I mean I don't want to be the guy who criticizes the game, I actually enjoy this game very much. But I would greatly enjoy this to be adjusted. I had both the tank crews sent to the same training by the way, Both facing each other dead on, Same leadership. 1 on 1, On every single try the Abrams lases, My T-90AM pops smoke then when the smoke clears the Abrams shoots and sends my T-90AM to tank hell out of 4 times I tried this. Maybe this is bad luck? <_<

    Bad luck Vladimir. I was playing the scenario included in the demo yesterday and I moved my M1 forward in a tree line to get a shot at a russian tank contact and it was dispatched with a nice clean hole in the gun mount, range 500 meters. It didnt spot the T90AM that killed it. Prompting many #$$#$ from me :D

    Not the first time either. Its actually 2-1 for the T90s in that game . I'm using my surviving apache and javelin teams to destroy the remaining T-90s so I got very careful hehe

    When playing the Russians on the attack I use smoke (both arty deployed and vehicule deployed) and regular and constant move orders (to get closer) for my tanks with bounding overwatch and the kill ratio is on average 2-1 or sometimes 1.5-1 for the Abrams against my T-72s or T-90s (both versions) which is not bad at all. I use veteran crews for the Russians .

    0

    Why is US CAS so expensive?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    John, I think you're missing out on the "other factors".

     

    You can target Air assets anywhere on the map without LOS.

    Aircraft are capable of spotting targets and engaging them independently.

    Aircraft can loiter over the area and make multiple attack runs without needing to call them in multiple times.

    You do not require direct observation of enemy forces to hit them with precision air-delivered missiles and bombs.

     

    These are the type of things artillery simply cannot do, and that's why aircraft and helicopters are much more expensive.

    Not to mention the most important factor of all:

     

    When playing against a human opponent, and they hear jets going by overhead, their first reaction is "Oh Sh*t!"

    You can't put a price on that. :D

     

     

    somehow, your last sentence is in perfect harmony with your avatar picture ;)

    0

    AT-13 vs M1A2 side turret armor

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    well i cant argue with tests... but my at13s still work fine :( sorry for your troubles antaress. oddly in the game i got a few at13 kills on monday night one was abrams side turret and caused a catastrophic explosion that left the abrams leaning into a crater

    antaress if you.re really interested i can dig up the save game files one at least (out of like 80) should be easy to find its agaknst a human and the kill was in the last turn or two before surrender. id still try n get someone at bfc to officially check it out though.

     

    Thanks sublime ! I'd like to see that LOL I'll send you my email by private message.

    0

    AT-13 vs M1A2 side turret armor

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    100% stopped on the bustle area.. 2-3 times...

    and in a test I did ... this happened on a regular basis: 3 AT-13s stopped on the turret side with reactive armor hit text. Not the first time. In fact, in 5 tests and many hits, didnt see the side turret penetrated at all by an AT-13;

    CM-Black-Sea-2015-08-27-22-30-46-90_zpsl

    ALso notice the penetration decal on side hull with an empty ERA box, the tank wasnt penetrated by that hit. It wasnt even penetrated on the second hit at almost the same area despite ERA being blown away by the previous hit. No wonder M1s are hard to kill in the game !

    0

    Why is US CAS so expensive?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    They are not counting on their air force alone, but on a combination of air force , insanely dense and sophisticated integrated air defenses and deep strategic and accurate Iskander and cruise missile strikes on enemy airbases to counter enemy airpower. It would work for a few weeks and that's all they need in a non-total war setting like in CMBS. If it goes to total war, nukes would be used.

    So its realistic for a two months limited conflict. You also need to consider air frame availibility for NATO (not great from what i've read. You also need to consider commitments elsewhere). Range is also a factor. If you need them closer to the battlefield for CAS, you put them in danger of missile attacks on their airbases. As for AWACS and air refueling tankers as force multipliers for NATO, the Russians know this and have developed long range asymetric solutions to them (specialized very long range air to air missiles). Their EW warfare and jamming capabilities are shockingly vastly superior to NATO by NATO's own admission. It would be a very difficult and costly fight.

    All of this is exarcerbed by the fact you're fighting near Russia's borders. They stand no chance in a conflict over a remote area, but near their borders its very different.

    Panzer is right: Attack helos on both sides would be much more common.

    0

    AT-13 vs M1A2 side turret armor

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    Antaress its bad luck. Ive killed several Abrams with both side hull and turret penetrations with the 13 recently. Also my favorite a top turret on a downslope headed abrams :D

    I HAVE noticed that barrel launched ATGMs like refleks and cobra seem to be insanely accurate. someone would have to run tests to prove it as mt evidence is anecdotal but ive had four wild misses in that past four days in pbems

    Okay then ! Like Napoleon once said: "I know he's a great officer, but is he lucky ? "

    0

    AT-13 vs M1A2 side turret armor

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    I used to get partial penetrations against the side turret armor with the tandem-warhead AT-13 when hitting the single ERA tiles before 1.03. Now it's never. Are those single ERA blocks supposed to be LESS effective against tandem warheads with V1.03 ? I can understand the double blocks on the Hull defeating less powerful tandem warheads but the single ERA on the side turret ? Because of the way its installed, could it be that there is a SPACED armor effect because of the distance the blocks are from the main armor ? How resistant is the side turret armor on the M1A2 so it could protect against a 900-950mm HEAT tandem warhead missile ? 

    0

    question about weapon optics

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    Way too much work with uncertain results. Especially when an extra  BMP-3 w/APS can be had for the same amount of points, comes with two boomsticks, has smoke and can be deployed anywhere on the map within a minute ;)

     

    And bunching up vs US (even in AI form)? I learned some hard lessons with that on at least 10 separate occasions. That arty comes fast and then keeps on dogging you. Literally everything and everyone can call in arty on you faster than your dedicated FOs and ATCs.

     

    You must be careful :) And you'll lose some for sure. But fighting as Russians (or anyone else) against the US is challenging. Especially in an infantry only fight. But so much satisfying when you succeed :) But yes, the Russians love their BMPs and BTRs and their infantry is not supposed to fight without them in support (thus the squad commander being the vehicule commander as well.. and trained to remain in it and operate it). 

    0

    question about weapon optics

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    But isn't it still essentially one target that they engage, just with a way more detailed visual representation? I always thought of firepower values in CMx1 as a rough representation of how much "punch" an individual squad potentially possessed rather than an actual damage-per-second type of number. I believe CMx1 still had some sort of small-arms ballistics factored in, and the 3 ugly stickfigures still represented a full section under game's hood. Or am I completely wrong here?

    From my experiences, by the time AGS and RPO teams crawl to position, the fight is usually over. Due to US spotting edge and a long setup time, AGS units are extremely difficult to set up in direct LOS of a defender. RPO teams are pretty much bullet magnets as well (gunner usually gets smoked after the first shot). I wish AGS teams had the ability to be used like they are used 90% of the time irl - i.e., setup behind terrain elevations and fire in "overhang" pattern like artillery with no need for LOS. Atm, I stopped taking AGS platoons altogether for offensive battles. For preset scenarios I just use them to occupy ground worth points. Support assets wise, when facing US I found only 152mm and up to be effective with mortars being next to useless.

    Isolate and bunch up. Use keylocking and obtain localized superiority. Easier said than done I admit. Easier to do in urban environment than in rural ones. Dont use them piecemeal but en masse (massed firepower) against a small part of the defense at a time. They will suppress defenders quickly . Lots of work.
    0

    question about weapon optics

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    well that is partly because in CMx1 a squad fired at one target with a set nominal firepower.  In CMx2 each soldier fires individually at whatever target.  The nominal fire power is simply not as relevant.  CMx1 engine worked one way and in that case, that data was readily available and useful.  CMx2 works completely differently and that data is largely just a ballpark figure subject to a ton of variables.

     

    I also wouldn't entirely count out that Russian unit.  Those RPGs can be hell.  Granted they will go through them pretty quick, but you don't want to just run up against a prepared fully equipped Russian platoon.

     

     

    Yeah and also if you fight as Russian, you must fight like a Russian. You must make liberal and well planned use of  automatic grenade launchers (AGS), RPO units and massive amounts of Mortar and artillery fire. Russians believe in heavy firepower, not aimed rifle fire. WHen you do that, they are very difficult if not downright impossible to fight against in infantry-centric battles. Dont use the russians as you would with US infantry. That's fighting on US terms and you will lose. Fight on YOUR terms.

    3

    Russian motor rifle disposable RPGs and rifle optics

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    A variety of Russian rifle optics and the RPG-27 are on my own wish list for the next piece of content, whether that be a module or pack. I think it's a reasonable to expect.

     

    EDIT: I meant something other then RPG-27, my bad. Was referring to the latest tandem HEAT disposable RPG.

     

     

    Why where they not in the first release of the game ? As I understand it.. in a russian platoon, first two squads have 4 scope 1P63 and  third squad 2..

    0

    RPO nerfed/not working well?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    Did à test . A platoon of RPO (10 two men teams) against a US reconnaissance platoon in some standard 2 storey houses. So far, after three battles, 72-1 in casualties in favor of the Russians. They are very effective. Some shots took out 5 soldiers at a time. Three houses were flattened.

    2
×
×
  • Create New...