Thewood1

I just popped in to see if there was any news...I think I am maybe my IQ just dropped.

American elections were always open to big money and influence. Go read about elections in the late 1800's and first half of the 1900's. Many of those elections were bought and sold. Even into the 1960's it was all about stuffing ballot boxes and buying votes. Also, can you say Roosevelts. Americans have this idealized view of our past that just plain didn't exist. Watergate was a turning point in Americans really looking at the ideals of the constitution and realizing it wasn't what we had. As bad as some large media outlets are, there is a lot more transparency and opportunities to get at information today than at any time in the past.

John, you have brought those things upon yourself. All those things you posted have come back to haunt you. You set yourself up for this kind of stuff. You can't undo the internet and really wished you could think before you post.

btw, I am not expecting "volunteers" to do this...but it was stated as reported and then shows up. Its on BFC for the very scatter=shot approach to bug reporting. I thought I saw someone saw that it was actually reported. So is it still showing up?

I am surprised this is just being reported...it was discussed and confirmed in December of 2014.

I can see some benefit, but I can see one unit pissing away all the ammo without you realizing it.

So what is the benefit fo doing it this way? There must be one that I have not encountered yet.

This is the same issues pointed out in the CMBS ATGM thread. The right shows total including shared ammo with nearby PIATS. The left is the team's actual ammo. It can be very confusing at first glance and am not sure of the benefit of doing it this way.

I think I understand the ammo sharing now, still seems a little odd from an ammo accounting standpoint. but the misses thing sure seems like the bug from CMSF raising its head again.

In that save did you notice how many missiles hit the ground right in front of the teams. It seems a pretty high % to me. btw, no missile ever overflew the target. Every single miss was into the ground a short distance from the team.

I was tracking all team's ammo and the ammo count never went up on the other teams. Those teams had the same issues with ammo disappearing. Maybe it is due to the ammo sharing routine, but I think something is messed up with it. You can count to total number of missiles fired for all teams combined and there are 6-7 missiles missing.

There is definitely some weird stuff going on. I just tried the same setup with AT14s. It was hard because the M1s kept firing smoke and hiding. But I got one AT14 to fire. The the middle one went through the motion of firing, then the ammo decremented by one and the animations went to look like aiming again. Something is either totally screwed in ATGM teams or I am doing something seriously wrong.

Crap...I missed the upload... ATGM A13 test 001.zip

Take a look at the middle 13 in my save. There is no password and its hotseat. The middle one fires and within 3 seconds it loses three rounds. The 13 on the right and left do not gain any missiles and also lose 2 at a time with only one missile launched. I am going to check other ATGM, but at least with the 13 there is a very serious issue that hamstrings Russian ATGMs. btw, there was a bug in CMSF at one time that had ATGM plowing into the ground way too many times and was eventually fixed. The high number of misses reminds me of that bug.

I like to kill the enemy too. But having 7 missiles and only seeing two fired is a little disheartening. The more I think on it the less likely it is sharing. Because I saw the depletion in the other units also.

Could be...But it is happening instantaneously. I'll check on the save.

OK, here is a very small test I set up to look at a couple odd things with the 13. 1) 4 hits and three misses in one run through and 8 hits and 1 miss on another...seems like some wild swings in there...but it lead me to this... 2) I noticed that the ammo count iterates down 2-3 rounds between shoots on each ATGM launcher. I thought it might be the salvo double launch, but seemed to sometimes decrements 3 missiles between launches. 3) I had a couple M1s take multiple hits yet not change state even with all accessories knocked out, engine gone, and weapon killed. Not a lick of suppression. Having large warheads hitting my tank and with all components destroyed, I would think would at least get a bar of suppression. I mean the ATGM missles picked up suppression just shooting the missiles. Note that all modifiers were even at 0 motivation and leadership with regular experience for all My next test is on T-90s and see if the pick up suppression. Can anyone explain #2 after replaying the save? Also, if the decrements in ammo are the salvos, they aren't shown graphically.

My tests were straight on and not hull down.

I guess I am just clarifying...with APS, the round never hits. It gets killed before hitting. So are the missiles going completely of course or are they getting close and not hitting?

quite few posts on that already.

I just ran a test using the 13 on M1s without APS at 800 yards. 15 launched and one missed with regular Russian troops.

If those M1s have APS, there is a good part of your answer. In CMBS, they are very effective. I thought you meant just getting to the target.

I think the point has been missed by a very large margin here.

I am certain of it

I don't think it was a quote...its known as a paraphrase. A quote typically is stated as a quote or with "". I read that as a paraphrase. If this is where you are at this point in the debate, you should call it quits. You specifically used the wrong words in a very big way that completely changed your arguement. You failed to understand that is what people were arguing about, So now you are down to arguing about how people are quoting or not quoting yet. Let's net this out...You shouldn't have used the word certain or certainty? Yes or no? If you meant to use "certain"...let the arguments continue. If you didn't mean to use certain, well then I don't know what to say since the last 10 pages discussions have been about the certainty of Russia producing the Armata in numbers.