Thewood1

My test of an M3 firing 25mm APFSDS penetrates the left upper hull multiple times consistently at 500m. No real damage seems to be done, but there are no other penetrations. The odd thing is no hit decals show up anywhere on the T-90. Do 25/30mm shells not leave marks. I have seen .50 machine guns leave them.

It should take 10 minutes to test it yourselves. While not disagreeing with the OP, it makes it better to go in and test it versus just piling on with a big "Yeah" or +1. I am off to take a look...

btw, if you don't like the reactions to losses, motivation plays a big role so you can go into the editor and modify it. In CMSF, it took a lot to break US forces and uncons because they tended to have high motivations.

I would have to double check, but in Steel Beasts Pro, the procedure that you are trained on is to always lase before shooting from an M1A1/A2. Couple caveats; the procedures might be outdated based on development cycles...and it is only a simulator; be it one used by quite a few militaries to train tankers. I know there are a couple real tankers on the boards and maybe they'll step in and clarify instead of everyone assuming.

Even more bizarre...It now says almost 800Mb... https://battlefront.sharefile.com/download.aspx?id=s3444d2ae2c6464da

No, I checked both zip and unzipped.

I really don't thinks its a big deal either way, but that rationalization is quite stretch, considering this effect is all the WW2 titles also. Not many cameras broadcasting real-time then.

While its 4-5 years old, these discussions in the CMSF were a pretty good starting point for understanding modern armor and ammunition arms race. Damian90 always had some good information. Most of his pictures are missing, but I copied a bunch of them at the time. If anyone wants a specific pic, PM me and I'll see if I have it. There is a lot of discussion and formal charts comparing Russian and US ammunition against T-90s, T72s, and M1s. http://community.battlefront.com/topic/89357-modern-armor-internal-arrays-what-defeated-them-or-might/

It has come up in most CM iterations. I remember it being discussed in CMSF with no resolution. I am pretty sure it was discussed in CMBN also.

I noticed the BFC page says 600Mb, but the actual patch zip is 200Mb. Seems to work OK though.

Hasn't it been like that since CMBO?

Tooling is incredibly difficult for DU. IIRC, there was a scandel in the 80's around Germany selling machine tools that would have been used in USSR for turning DU materials. So it just might have been the lack of good tooling...just a guess.

Thanks for the work on that. It looks good.

I hope modders can keep posting mods here on the forum for a while. Its a heck of a lot easier to download. It will become unwieldy after a while so I hope the repository face-lift happens soon.

Sure...I guess

Good, because you seem to be the only one not seeing what the real point here is. You asked specifically for a currently serving member of the military to step in and he did. You don't seem to like his answer. You seem to be the only one not getting the point that this discussion is not just about reinforcements, but a design issue under specific circumstances.

I tried that tact with people arguing this issue and it was useless. This is a topic that should have stopped 4-5 responses it.

Well, I guess Lucas got his answer.

I think a military person already said the way reinforcements show up in this way is not right...on the first page. So there is that.

I have to assume its also time to manage it. A new section does not appear overnight. And it requires maintenance as well. I thin a better solution is to get an official repository that people want to use as a first resort, not a last resort. If GaJ does nothing new with his site, just maintaining what he has is a benefit to the community.

I must be missing something in some of these replies... The poster isn't saying reinforcements are a bad thing. I can't see where he is saying that. He is saying reinforcements ending up right next to his units with no warning in the briefing or in game. I have seen this in all CM games. Why are people trying to school him on reserves? I don't really think that is what he is talking about. This is as much a scenario design issue as anything.

Why not nuclear weapons then...or fuel-air explosives. The firepower is there, but not at the front line tactical level. MLRS would be used as either pre-bombardment ahead of the battle line or hitting behind the lines. In fact this was discussed here on this board to death today and yesterday.

In CMSF I built several scenarios that were all about a recon force trying to penetrate a screen. I had a battalion HQ far back that the recon unit had to get a bead on. I used the ID unit objective with casualty points to set the win/lose. I also built a couple flank screen battles where the recon units have to ID specific units and hold objectives. I use reinforcements set to come in after a specific time to represent a main force redirected to this axis. The whole point of the recon elements is to withdraw in good order while maintaining contact. Scoring really didn't work well because at the time CMSF didn't have the capability. I never released them because I couldn't get AI plans to function properly. Let's fact it; scenario building in CMSF was VERY hamstrung by limitations in plans and orders. So I just used them to play hotseat with myself. I plan to some day build similar scenarios in CMBS.