BTR

Current saturation of handheld AT weapons pretty much denies any vehicles in the forest.

OPFOR's back.

I originally rooted for A-545 (simpler AEK-971), but I'm starting to lean towards the AK-12 lately.

Check the materials provided, there are some good schematics, that might allow you to estimate.

I am in if anyone explains to me how to do H2H in CM.

Google to the rescue (excuse my laziness, but the translation is actually pretty good. I'm sure you've used it yourself already though.): As for degraded firing ability, I don't think that's relevant to a stationary vehicle, essentially that's the same as being dismounted. Firing on the move, or while moving at night, that's a different thing though.

I'd put it the following way: Ubuttoned gives the following advantages: a lot more FOV, faster spotting in open terrain disadvantages: it degrades observation distance severely, you lose the ability to spot through thermals in adverse terrain (for vehicles that have thermal), and your CO is vulnerable. Therefore, I really see no need to open up a modern vehicle, unless your sensors are shot.

Doesn't look like it's limiting too much here: Live fire exercise: Moreover: http://pvo.guns.ru/pzrk/strela_tak.htm

I usually turned them out in vehicles since that's standard procedure expecting them to operate so. Shame to find out it doesn't work that way.

I believe the three colors was a temporary regulatory stance, and one color in the end has been adopted. If we look at Southern MD and North-Western MD, the coloring is the same. Southern MD, Rostov Region 2014 - http://ru-an.info/Photo/QNews/n7696/1.jpg BSF, Crimea 2014 http://cdn2.img22.ria.ru/images/92984/60/929846008.jpg PF, Far East 2014 http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9150/166203072.2c/0_cb8ac_44f6d109_XXL.jpg BF, Murmansk 2014 http://function.mil.ru/images/military/military/photo/Tank_S.jpg They all look fairly similar (and a lot darker than current light green in CMBS) with obvious adjustment of lighting.

Ever since I got a look at how RA forces look, I've been meaning to get them looking right. Currently the Russian army adopted one single color scheme seen here: Current vehicles, I feel, are too bright (green shade), or too grey. This is my investigation into the tint that vehicles should have: Noticing how the PKM gunner doesn't stand out from the rest of the vehicle (as in the picture), I think I'm on the right track, but being new to CM texturing, I'd like to hear input from local experts. Please ignore green windows and rims, this is just a color demonstration . For comparison, this is how current Tigr's look:

RT Elite, started that way in CM:A, and sort of never looked back.

T-73B3's are most adequate to deal with most Ukrainian army armor. 5 T-72B3's vs 4 T-64BM's + 1 BM Oplot + 1 T-64BM Bulat comes to 3 T-72B3's KIA vs all Ukranian vehicles.

MLRS fire-missions are called at division level (and above) (historically in a soviet-style force system) and, therefore, are above the scope of CM I believe. That would be my guess as to why they are not included.

Baron himself is involved? Much honor .

HEAT shell is still considered to be fairly good against softer targets alike Bradleys, Pumas and alike. You wouldn't waste your TGM's (tank guided munitions is just so much better than GLATGM) on it, your KE is overkill for it, and you might want to burn the infantry inside.

Tank biathlon Russian tanks last year were T-72B3M's, the year before that they were just T-72B3's. There are no T-90's in that competition. Also, to mention, they do not fully use FCS for those competitions and only use training rounds.

If anything, I anticipate Russian equipment would require more baby-sitting to be effective, but can be more effective in a larger variety of situations in comparison to the US. Poorer optics, generally smaller size with a more variable weapon load-out is an interesting combination that takes a certain mentality to use. Ukraine vs Russia would be an interesting match, especially if authentic units are present (T-72B3 vs T-64BM/ BMP-2 vs BMP-2/ BTR-80A vs BTR-4).

All will be revealed soon .

Potentially, an angle of superiority for the Russian equipment is it's tactical flexibility. To illustrate my point, BMP-3 is: -Fast -Tracked -Can cross large water obstacles -Has fair ballistic protection At the same time it has: 100mm 2A70 gun capable of firing: -9M117M1 guided munitions -3OF70 HE munitions 30mm 2A72 gun capable of firing -3UBR6 AP round -3UOF8 HE round -3UOR6 HE tracer round. A couple of PKT's. Same can be said about T-72(90') for instance, since their array of firepower can be very comparable (HEAT, AB, HE, TGM, APFSDS, 7.62 and 12.7).

Strange, Well, here are both links functioning well: http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/

According to this, the production pricing has been agreed upon: http://lenta.ru/news/2015/01/20/armata/ According to this, we might see Armata in limited numbers in the Army: http://www.novygorod.info/news/view/4802

Yeah, micro is always a pain. It seems that a game takes a long time, when suddenly the action drops in and in a faction of a time you find out that you've lost X amount of units in an instance. I imagine this being particularly true in CMBS.

Hm, I'm not picking up those designations outside forum discussions which is why I put 3BM-48 for Svinets-1. In any case, I don't know if we have hard data on those or not.

http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/index_r.html