antaress73
-
Posts
891 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by antaress73
-
-
thanks leslie... I didnt read it correctly then hehe
-
redeploying 100 meters away or in a better position but still in LOS of the observer .. not staying stationary because stationary is death
-
I saw that video and the T-90 fared much better. It seriously contradicted what Bill is saying. Maybe a different build. T-90AM got frontal kills on M1A2 on a regular basis ( lowerhull and gun mantlet, which is realistic) and were able to get the first shot also on a realistic basis. I,M not attacking anyone here LOL... His example about a perfect ambush position being not enough made me a little perplexed that's all. Maybe a fluke or the T-90 crew was asleep !
-
I doubt it... from what you are telling me. My point is not that I could do better. Of course not ! You are probably a better player than I am. My point is that the T-90AM spotting abilities are underestimated. Take a look at a video of the modern crew compartment of that Tank. CRTs and french electronics everywhere ! Very good and easy ergonomics, point and shoot. At normal range, I seriously doubt an M1A2 SEP2 would be able to detect a flanking T-90AM in good ambush position, turn the turret and fire and kill it even before the T-90AM can get a hard spot on it. A T-72B3 yes, I could believe that. It really sounds like the M1A2 was crewed by robots with instant reaction times and with totally perfect situational awareness and the T-90AM was no better than a vanilla T-72 crewed by retards (which is not).
-
so lasing for precision guided artillery should be doable even if the target moves a fair bit
-
With Relikt, the T-90AM has some 860mm equivalent protection on the best protected parts of the turret .. the M1A2 around 960mm on the turret except for the gun mantlet . Protection is not the issue. Spotting and engaging seems to be the main difference. Who spots and shoot first win. I remember being able to get 1-1 exchange rates in shock force against M1A2 SEP with T-72M1V-TURMS which is about the equivalent of the T-90AM in spotting abilities (panoramic sight for commander, thermals, modern fire control from Thales). Battlefront has much better information on the M1A2 then on the T-90AM and I believe that they are seriously underestimated in their spotting abilities from what you've been telling me. Crew difference should be the main factor (which most of the time would favor the US, but to balance things out a designer could make the russians equal). I dont know. If T-90AMs cannot be used effectively to kill M1s while achieving a beautiful flank shot position I dont know what can ! Scenarios with M1A2s equipped with APS can deal with missiles (except for vehicules mounted ones, which can fire in salvos of two but then the M1A2 will spot the incoming missiles and kill the vehicule before the missile strikes). So to balance scenarios the designers should avoid putting M1A2s with APS to give dismounted missile crews a chance to kill them with flank shots.
-
It's that bad Bill ? The T-90AM against the M1A2 SEP ? even with flank shots ? Does the M1s always get the first shot despite everything you can try to do to spring a nice ambush ? You did some tests if I remember correctly... what was the exchange ratio ?
-
Try and remember this scenario was set up to show off the new stuff and some things were changed from my original scenario.
The time limit is longer than I would have liked but some extra time for the two commanders to organise themselves was done so that no one was rushed and to allow for planning.
The map was shaved down from the north edge, there was a low ground area and lake. Both are gone for this scenario.
About 400m was removed in the north.
The Western edge was shaved about 300m and the eastern edge lost about 250m.
The areas removed were fairly clear of woods but had gullies running north south with some west east branches.
The reasons for this was that there was some concern that with the forces involved it would be tough on older machines frame rates.
The river was more a dry river bed with muddy areas and water sections, it was filled with water for the scenario.
This should draw Scotts forces toward the middle and southern areas of the map before he drives toward the main town.
Also the objectives are preserve, so shelling them to death costs points.
American forces also don't swim, unlike the Russian vehicles which swim over the river.
American forces will need to cross somewhere to the south of Kricheck.
So the Power Station will play a bigger role as the scenario continues.
Don't count Bil out by a long shot, he knows tactics and will make Scott pay for every inch he takes in the counter attack.
Scott has taken a lot of hits and the modern battlefield as portrayed by Black Sea is a very nasty place.
On the other hand Scott has the reinforcments he needs to push Bil back.
Digging the Russian forces out of their positions will be a lot harder than digging the Ukrainian forces out.
There is a lot more to see before the end of this battle.
Cheers
Stephen
I hope you are right
Wouldn't want to have this turn into a turkey shoot for the US. For the sake of showing off the more balanced correlation of forces in CMBS. Also, for poor Bill sake's ! LOL -
hey Bill ! No hard feelings ! It's my two cents ! (and it's worth as much) You are in an actually difficult position and I wouldn't want to be in your shoes ! I'm just trying to have fun here because I can't play the game yet ! Tough scenarios are like puzzles sometimes... you have to play them (against the A.I) a few times to see what works and what doesnt. Kind of like training versus playing against a competent human opponent (real life). Which is unforgiving. ANd I want you to win because I always root for the underdog ! (not that you are not an accomplished player, you are !)
-
BTW.. Bill's platoon of Krisanthemas are way too close to the deployment area of Scott's US reinforcements. 1km... they are going to fire one salvo of two missiles each IF lucky and be destroyed. Scott talked about a battle against two Krisanthemas at 4000 meters where his two tanks took four hits each before spotting them .. that's four launches... before being spotted.. if they could have had flank shots that's four tanks destroyed or disabled... so at longer ranges they are potent...
-
Now that I know your force composition... try to win it with minimal losses as a challenge ,,,
-
Really the Teacher ? four platoons of M1s ? 16 tanks.... plus Bradleys and lot's of Javelins + support assets against against two companies of BMP-3s and 1 company of T-90AMs ? With Bill having to fight Ukrainians in his rear ? With Scott playing the US ? You have some apologies to give to Bill I think LOL...
-
What ammo type are the US using ? M829A3 should have trouble against Relikt (T-90AM) . That's why they are developing the M829A4 which should appear in 2017.
-
A bit of an exaggeration, sure, but the Syrians were using Russian equipment and Russian combat doctrine, so...
Soviet combat doctrine.. the Russians changed their doctrine. And a T-90AM with Relikt is much better than anything the syrians had.. even the T90S.,.. and the BMP-3s with arena are much better than BMP-2s .. infantry has full body armor and night vision.. thermobaric weapons and the latest RPGs ammo.. Their artillery has precision ammo capabilities. I would have dealt with those Tunguskas with precision artillery strikes and Bill didnt use that capability. Drones and precision artillery strikes where needed to destroy those Tunguskas and pave the way for much less opposed and effective air asset strikes
-
I would not be confortable... not against a competent human opponent...
-
You haven't been watching, listening, or reading very closely then...
Read the last paragraphs from Bill.. In his mind, one company team of US forces should be able to deal with 2 companies of BMP-3 borne infantry and one company of T-90s plus their air assets and a platoon of Krizantema ATGMs. Those are 1 against 3 odds and he would be confortable with it. Means he thinks they are pushovers or that the US is invincible.
-
Ukrainians were going to be easy prey... I expected that. You split your T-90s.. those 10 T-90s were more than a match for a platoon of M1A2 and now they are splitted... if you destroy the M1s you winthe battle.. with air power and all you should have been able to deal with the bradleys and their javelins .. especially with the Bmp3s under tree cover where the javelins are forced to use a direct attack mode where arena can handle them.
Scott won the battle psychologically even before it began. Forget about losses.. they are going to be heavy anyway.. for both sides. This is not afghanistan or Iraq.. this is a real fight to the death between industrialized and technologically advanced nations. Losses are unimportant and life is cheap in this sort of setting.
-
the way I read you guys.. the russians are not much better than the syrians against the US
-
Cauldron ... I had a good laugh ! Those evil french men !
-
-
taking no prisoners is a surefire way of increasing one's own casualties as the enemy will fight to the death instead of giving up
-
There's nothing a well placed Tunguska burst can't solve !
-
You can find videos of almost anything nowadays john. It's not the soviets anymore, they are very open (even too much). And the internet makes it easy to share
-
Speaking of equipment add-ons.. The T-72 upgrades the RF will receive in 2015 are now T-72B4s.. It adds a panoramic sight for the commander (the B3 is discontinued). It gives the tank a hunter-killer capability (greatly improves spotting)
Wouldn't want to have this turn into a turkey shoot for the US. For the sake of showing off the more balanced correlation of forces in CMBS. Also, for poor Bill sake's ! LOL
CM Black Sea – BETA Battle Report - Russian Side
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
I thought bill said he was taking on the M1A2 with perfect flank shot ambush positions and it didnt even work on a regular basis .. of course I wouldnt attack the M1A2 frontally ! that's a given. I got exchange rate of 1-1 in shock force against M1A2 SEP by being stationary with reverse slope positions where I could shoot at the M1s by surprise and with rear/flank shots... even then I only got 1-1 exchange ratios. Going head-on against western tanks is a losing proposition even when equipped with similar western tanks (with the exception of the leopard 2A6.. it can take the M1 head-on with favorable exchange ratios). Precision guided artillery, air assets (choppers and fixed wings) is the way to go against M1A2 on defense in hull-down positions and flank ambush positions under covered terrain is the way to go when defending against them, so it seems.