Jump to content
Battlefront is now Slitherine ×

antaress73

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    891

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by antaress73

    M1A2sep (aps) vs. 2x T-90am (aps)

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    Use covered approach .. Use precision arty on them when possible to degrade their external systems and optics or get the rare kill. Get close and come from two directions at once. Use infantry or recon troops with the tablets to recon (more discreet) .. Get spots on those Abrams, let the info disseminate through radio / constellation to your tanks before making a move. Will help spotting significantly. In defense, use higher ground, will negate armor sloping somewhat and give you top turret, top Hull hits even frontally if unlucky. Otherwise, double ambush (kill zones from two directions) with flank shots. If you have air assets or attack choppers, use them solely on the Abrams

    0

    In-game spotting system: are you kidding me?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    Just to be clear:

    I am in no way saying that there is a HUGE bias towards the US view of things, just that its normal and understandable from a sociological point of view if there is SOME bias favorable to the US or detrimental to the russians since BF is staffed by humans and that it is mostly an American company. That's it. The fact that the bias is so subtle as to be a debatable issue is a testament to their integrity and commitment to realism .

    0

    In-game spotting system: are you kidding me?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    I dont think that they overestimate American equipment btw. They have first hand accounts from actual military people to base their guesses on. For the russian equipment thats another story. Even some bugs seem to penalize russian equipment more (not voluntary) like the ERA bug (fixed) and the commander of BMPs not communicating with the gunner bug (affects russians more and not fixed yet.) You cant really escape politics when making a game that is depicting a potential actual conflict and secrecy and disinformation is rampant.

    0

    In-game spotting system: are you kidding me?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    We dont even know what kind of data the game uses. Does it take into account that the T-90AM CITV has the same TI than the gunner.. What are the ways the game takes into account sensor capabilities and which estimation of performance is used ? We dont. There is no way to know if its realistic or not, one way or the other. Russian soldiers are actually told not to discuss their training standards and its enforced . They did mention on the english russia site that they now regularly do live fire exercices . They are not very forthcoming So we have to guess even on that so imagine technical caracteristics of in service equipment.So much we dont know and so much estimation is done that some bias is unavoidable. People are still arguing if russian optics in late world war II were pieces of crap for god's sake.

    Battlefront caters to a western audience so its normal that if some bias is present, it will favor NATO because its human nature and Battlefront is a business. They wont aleniate their customer base when they have the luxury of favoring a pro American bias over giving the benefit of the doubt to russian capabilities when making educated guesses. As long as the game isnt too lopsided and some level of realism is achieved, ie: America is probably superior in many fields but not overwelmingly so to keep the game balanced.

    1

    In-game spotting system: are you kidding me?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    LOL at panzersaurkrautwerfer's post, You are telling me that at a open field 2-3KM away with 14X zoom with a thermal the Catherine-FC cannot identify a M1A2? It is reasons such as this I will not reply to your posts regarding the T-90.  :huh: I guess the T-90A  is meant to fight tanks at lower then 2KM when it has a ATGM with proven accuracy of 100% to 3 to 5 KM. 

     

    what he means is that with thermals the russian tank is more limited regarding range. He's probably using the day sight or IR (at night)  when shooting missiles at long-range. He could detect a temp difference at 4-5 km without knowing what it is and switch to IR or daysight to identify and engage it with the ATGM.

    0

    In-game spotting system: are you kidding me?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    Yes, it would make sense to engage in this way because of the wider FOV and acquisition capabilities of the Sosna-U. The day sight has 12x magnification and the ranger integrated, so you then switch over to regular gunsight, which will already be layed in the rough direction by the FCS, and acquire, lase, then fire through the regular sight. It is only 10cm away from the thermal eye viewer.

     

    How long is it taking spotting now? At night yes, it would be higher as he would switch to IR and search there. But daylight hours, process would not take so long. Its not like the gunner has to turn an extra turret to face the target, the thermal optic and gunner daysight are almost aligned anyway.

     

    Spotting does need looking at in some respects, look at my BTR thread in the tech support section.

    switching sights would reasonably require 1 second of time, this is one second too many when dealings with M1A2s because their gunners dont need to

    0

    In-game spotting system: are you kidding me?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    while the Us tanker would spot it on thermals... identify it and engage it .. a faster time of 1-2 seconds is likely at range then ... seems reasonable and you see that in the game. I've had some success at ranges of 2-3 kms in the valley of death but my tanks were outnumbering the US by a factor of 4 .. even then the exchange ratio was 11-5 for the Abrams. Not something the Russians could substain for long. Like I mentioned earlier, my results at close range are much better (even when just considering who spots first) because then the russian commander sees the M1 .. tells the gunner who engage and shoot it without switching optics. Or the gunner himself detects it and snap engage. Less hesitation and delay because the optics are at that range more or less on equal ground.

    1

    In-game spotting system: are you kidding me?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    Did a quickbattle last night. A fight At close range, 300 meters and less... (Thank you terrain !) 7 T-90As veteran but -1 officer against a platoon of M1A2s with regular crews but +1 officers. The T-90As were attacking and they spotted the M1s that were stationary in some tree lines first most of the time and destroyed them.. Even with partial penetrations on the thick right and left front turret slabs (slightly off-center so the angle was close to 90 degrees). Result: 4 to 3 for the T-90As. So get close !

    0

    In-game spotting system: are you kidding me?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    I havent seen that kind of stuff in my games anyway.. Dont fight the Abrams with russian tanks at long range ! Ambush them at close range when on defense and use covered approachs and precision arty to degrade them before engaging them at closer range and using swarm tactics. Use the kryz for long-range. Hull down and 2.5km + is essential for success with them.

    0

    T-90 tank documentary (2014 in Russian)

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    not all missile systems are out of the fight for the russians.. krysanthema, even without the possibility to engage abrams while completely out of LOS in the game, is very effective and would be even more in real life. THe Kornet and even AT-13 metis can punch through the side turret armor of an M1A2 Abrams even when protected by ERA (not the hull though, double ERA protection there). FIring at Abrams from elevated positions OR higher ground can hit the top turret and top hull which kills the tank (happened many times)  I've knocked out quite a few Abrams with the RPG-7VR too. Not to mention helicopter missiles, SMERCH delivered bomblets, Iskander delivered bomblets (tank park attacks). There also arent hordes of them to field in a war in  Ukraine ... current programs at upgrading to SEP V2 and SEP puts the #s at 1100 tanks. You wont deploy them all in Ukraine, America has other engagements and other adversaries may try to profit from the situation.

     

    And right now, it doesnt sports ERA nor APS. How many systems could be available at short notice from the Israeli firm that build them ? 

     

    ALso the russians could be fielding in great #s the RPG-28 (1000mm+ penetration behind ERA) and RPG-27s and they still have a lot of men of military age to throw at any potential adversaries (140 millions people is not a small country, despite declining demographics). When push come to shoves, don't underestimate the russian capability for sacrifice even in these modern times. A capable RPG behind every bush is not something to underestimate. And the Donbass people are really convinced now they would be genocided if beaten in war, so motivation for them would be high and they would be a formidable supplement to the Russian regular army.

    0
×
×
  • Create New...