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

    Spotting fired ATGMs

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    I saw m1a2s react instantly many times to an At-13 (saclos) fired from behind .. enough that the tank could turn around and prevent à rear/side armor hit. Many times where the launcher was deployed in a reverse slope position with the targeted tank moving into lOS presenting it's big fat ass to my forces. frontal aspect . yup I can believe it. BUT from the rear while moving .. to instantly react 60-70% of the time..  nope.. the commander must be looking at the right direction.at the right time . detect the launch and warn the driver to turn around ..thats takes a least a 2 seconds delay. Not enough to prevent à rear aspect hit especially at the short range featured in the game.  I agree that The commander will do a 360 from time to time with the panoramic CITV.. but most of the time he will try to detect threats to the front , not the rear or sides.

    0

    BMP-3 commander: how to?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    13 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:

    Well the only bad experience they had were in the 90s during the first Chechen war, 2 BMP-3s were lost catastrophically, but we all know the reasons why the Russian army performed poorly during that conflict. BMP-3s are the best IFVs in service with the Russian army, the only drawback it faces is crew protection (sitting on top of HE) and sensors. Other than that, it has immense firepower, great mobility.

    A Russian BMP-3 platoon basically has 3 heavy direct fire-support weapons that can lob 100mm HE out to long distances, and it can engage tanks (or atleast attempt to with a good chance of damaging or destroying a tank) they're pretty good for what they are. The only thing the Russian army is missing out on is the thermal systems for these vehicles... 

    Yes if the commander stays in the vehicle and you pointed that out anyways. But yes I of course agree that Bradley's are designed with a permanent commander, and then with a squad dismount of course. But a Russian platoon has less dismounts because the Bradley platoons have 4 IFVs. 

    The BMP-3M has thermals. But I guess not many were put  into service since they expect the Kurganets to be available soon.

    0

    AT-4C, AT-13, AT-14, Corsar, Skif

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    5 hours ago, Sublime said:

    The at 13 is problematic idk if .04 fixed it but it shuda been able to penetrate abrams turret and hull sides at angles and cudnt before @antaress proved it. 

    I  also was completely clieless but this iswhy no matter how old or ezperienced u are u shud listen - i had zero clue bmp2ms could have an at14 launcher dismounted from infantry. thats a game changer for me. when my comp works my opponents will rue the day @red_reporter discoveted that lil nug.

    But yes it setsup fadt in bldgs as redfor bldgs are your only real hope besoes extreme long range ( at least 2500m ) kornet fire ( xtreme long range for cm.. )

    And then usually i fot them in a trench kn a hill and there will be other trenches for eother repositioning or so they catch the recon by fire. whilst the statemwnt someone made abt you writing off at assets as soon as they fire - its usually true against the us. especiay if you want a K Kill on US army the ambush is gonna get the wrath. thing is the US army cant trade their m2s and m1s for lousy at13 teams in more or less suicide ambush missions with the recon squada frm the bttn tac grp providing an inf screen and also load wm up with rpg 26s etc so they can contribute. plus i love the sound for that weapon. its distinctly nasty sound and russian distinctly. 

    With ur at 13s and kornetd in bldgs long range doing fire ( give em cover armor arcs and leave em alone is my advice.. m2s are as dangerous as m1s really yes the m1 is more dangerous but jeez man the brad will reliably kill russias premier battle tank from any side even front maybe every time. )

    Backed up by also t90as on defense ams on offense (idk y dont ask me. i never usr t72s ive just had lousy luck with them )

    And with your tanks keyholed and in ambush with khrizs and also rlly try to have  a shuttle platoon of tanks.

    Shuttle plt is this for russians

    3 or 4 tanks. you have to scout yournterrain and based on your defense if possible you want to be able to move them to at least 75 percent of what u consider ur defensive strongpoints or offensice major onjectives.  only use these tamks to move if youre certain the enemy cannot see them whilst in transit and that their transit ends before being in sight of the enemy. ideally they park and the m1 rolls arnd the next turn.

    You use these tanks as a firebrigade and dont count on em for much. even on offensice you basically have to bait the blufor into counterattacis and blunders you have to think defensively even when attacking.

    If youre like me and find perverse pleasure on buying ap mines even though theyre not wrth the points and you.re actuallt good enough to get 8 ton10 US casualties every time you use them ur perfect for redfor.  tip - put ap mines at building entrances and exits. never at barns. Obvious stuff like man size holes.in.courtyard fences or walls.. in like an obvious piece.of cover in sparse area.also  sometimes buy fortifications and put mines in them. the great thing is even if the human doesht fall for it a panicked tacai will :)

    As far as the patch its good mews i havent seen it. im.disappointed that indidnt notice anythin abt abrams armor vis a vis the saxhorn but my biggest 2 gripes are

    BFC is NEVER going to satisfy everyone in the great russkie atgm debate on vehicles.  there should be a toggle. tac ai decides or atgms only.

    And also Non LWR abrams. the us has enuff advantages just make it a choice i mean we can fix on lwrs that dont exist in m1a2s for free and aps we dnt have for more points?

    I think it should be an option.

    And fortiications more expensive. whaaa?

     

    It can now penetrate the m1's turret side on a regular basis in 1.04, tested it. BUT it detects the launch and reacts so fast you rarely hit the sides.

    0

    AT-4C, AT-13, AT-14, Corsar, Skif

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    One things that bugs me is the almost instant reaction the M1A2 has when it is fired upon by an At-13  from the sides or behind. I mean instant ! it detects the launch as soon as it leaves the launcher and start turning to put the front of the armor towards the incoming At-13. even at close range where the reaction time is 1-3 seconds. I mean it's good but not THAT good. Many rear and side ambush shots where ruined by this unrealistically fast reaction time. AT-13 is SACLOS. it does not trigger the LWR meaning the commanderust detect the launch visually.

    0

    Black Sea v1.04 released!

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    6 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:

    Did we ever get the correct ReadMe file for this patch?  I like to try and keep track of patches/updates to the game. 

    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.
     

    0

    Interesting thought about LWRS and Abrams

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    9 hours ago, Sublime said:

    LWR certainly isnt on Abrams. You dont see ERA bc you usuallysee non combat pics of abrams but ERA certainly is applied to them in combat zones and already has for years Antaress.

     

    I think itd make a difference but not the night and day Russian kill fest you describe. However change that and add an atgm toggle etc and the game would be a lot deadlier to less cautious US players and you cant get losers to do map edge Abrams thunder runs where youre entire strategy is just buying dozens of abrams with aps and quicj moving them along the edges.

    (You know who u are)

    Not a Kill fest against humans , especially cautious and capable ones  but against the A.  I  for sure.

    0

    Interesting thought about LWRS and Abrams

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    2 hours ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:

    Did an Abrams once touch you inappropriately or something?

    I was just saying that with ERA or LWR it would be much easier for the Russian side in the game. If I had a tank to choose to fight with in RL, It would be the Abrams or the Armata because they are designed to protect their crews. I have nothing against the tank. 

    0

    Interesting thought about LWRS and Abrams

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    remove LWR and ERA tiles on the M1A2 so their configuration is like the one they have in the real world and it wont be much of a challenge to play the russians against the US when playing single player against the AI. 

     

    For human vs Human it would be great. But good human players can already give a good spanking to US players half the time . The Abrams is a death machine but remove LRW and ERA and you have a good chance of killing it on the sides even with ONE RPG team. It wont get warned when engaged with Kornets, making 100% killing shots on the sides a routine and sure thing. Russian tanks will get the drop quite often and kill them much more easily since human players tend to be really agressive with the Abrams. AT-13 will kill them if they hit anywhere on the side hull and turret without ERA. It would be tough for the Abrams. Gee, even BMP-3s would have a good chance with their missiles against the side of an Abrams with ERA. They would not warn the Abrams with their laser before shooting either. 

     

    0

    Learning the ropes of IFV combat

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    12 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

    It's not the Bradleys I worry about. It's the Javelin-toting infantry.

    ahh yes... but some people are very skilled at using artillery and if playing the Russians you need lot's of it and preplanned targets too. They rely on it heavily in real life and are very good at it and getting even better and high tech  from what I can read. Also, Javelin launchers should be knocked out more often when the guy holding it is a casualty. Right now they seem indestructible which is far from the truth. I've seem squads getting slaughtered almost to the last man by air burst arty and the last survivor  gets his senses back, picks a javelin  up and kills a tank or BMP. It CAN happen, but it happens WAY too often in the game. Using snipers in well hidden and tactically well placed overwatch will help too. I've seen RUS snipers kill javelin gunners when he exposes himself to aim and fire.  Using tree canopies and moving from cover to cover with fast moves will help: Javelin needs a long time to aim. You can break LOS before they can aim. You need every skills to play the russians effectively.

     

    Funny  fact: i've seen arena defeat a Javelin. How ? two T-90AMs close by... the javelin was aiming for the left tank and came into the effective ARENA engagement enveloppe of the tank to the right. I was elated ! I try to do that now... works sometimes. I've should have recorded the thing with fraps.  

    0

    Learning the ropes of IFV combat

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    6 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

    Having a 3rd set of eyeballs does help, as your tests demonstrate, but the commander has a less capable sight (day/night) than the gunner (thermal).

    The better spotting provided by manning the commander's station is probably of greater consequence when fighting Ukrainians than Americans. I find that versus the US I end up keeping my BMPs out of LOS to any likely US positions except to very briefly pop out for area fire on enemy locations spotted by other units (infantry, usually). The exception would be keyholed defensive positions where you expect to make contact with forces moving in the open across your kill zone.

    Well... yes.. at range placing your BMPs in LOS of the US is a bad idea. Its a bad idea against the russians too btw. US superior optics makes attacking easier for them. But placing a BMP Hull down with the addtional commander`s optics , they get the drop more often than people believe against Brads. It also enables the targetting of two  vehicules in quick succession way more often (it happened even against the US in my games) and it prevents situations like 2 bmps attacking a lone bradley by surprise and ending up both dead like it can often happen if you dont put a commander in. 

    0

    Learning the ropes of IFV combat

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    1 hour ago, MOS:96B2P said:

    This also applies to the BTR?  This I did not know.  Thank you.

    This squad leader split and mount back into the vehicle is good for all BMPs (3s & 2s) and all BTRs (82s & 80A)?  

    Yes ... the BTRs have a commander's (leader) position to be filled by the infantry squad leader. It's a totally different doctrinal philosophy and you ignore it at your peril. It can be lethal for the enemy but more costly in terms of losses. They are switching away from it with the armata and boomerang/Kurganets because they dont have the necessary manpower to substain à high level of losses and also modern Russians are less inclined to accept lost lives.

    0

    Learning the ropes of IFV combat

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by antaress73

    I did some tests... 1 BMP-3M  at 300 meters open field against 2 strikers.

     

    Only gunner and driver: average spotting time of strykers and engagement  : 11-12 seconds 

    With scout team inside: 6-7 seconds 

    With squad leader led team inside : 6-7 seconds 

    BUT:

     

    Average engagement cycle and destruction of the two strikers targets with scout team inside: 35 seconds

    Average engagement cycle and destruction of the two strikers targets with squad leader Led team inside : 27 seconds 

    So with squad leader led  3 man team inside (Split team in two equal parts) it doesnt spot faster but is faster at spotting and sequentially engaging and destroying two targets than with the 2 men scout team inside.

    So it's best to use the squad leader led team even if you lose one dismount in the process compared with only splitting a scout team since your BMPS will be more deadly and better at engaging multiple targets which is more desirable than an additonnal dismount.

    0

    Learning the ropes of IFV combat

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    10 minutes ago, Jammersix said:

    If you unload a Bradley, split off two men from the infantry squad, and load them in the Bradley, that means there for four men in the Bradley. There is not another gunner, there is one gunner in the Bradley both before and after the squad adds two men.

    I doubt these additional two men benefits sighting anymore than an additional two men anywhere would.

    We are talking about something specific to the russian BMPs and BTRs. It doesnt apply to the M2 Bradley. They dont have a commander like the Bradley. The infantry squad leader or anyone else for that matter will act as commander and man the commander`s sensors, adding to spotting ability if he`s inside the vehicule. I dont know if there is a penalty if someone other than the squad leader mans the commander's position. 

    0
×
×
  • Create New...