Jump to content

The_MonkeyKing

Members
  • Posts

    412
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by The_MonkeyKing

  1. I wonder can they pull it off. Making the AI attack well is hard and building a campaign around this must be extra hard. I have only seen couple of exceptional scenarios where the player is put on defense.
  2. Actually would really interesting to see a comprehensive comparison between the practical capability comparison between the two. Very similar: - Accuracy (Fire control system, optics) - Lethality (ammo, gun) Improvements with the M1 - armor protection (significantly more) https://i.imgur.com/x6C6pXf.png - mobility (significantly more) 72kph vs 48kph - crew protection (compartmentalized ammo, etc.) https://youtu.be/WDs5oQW1vNA Abrams Switchology (this is M1A1 but to my understanding A1 mostly effected mechanical stuff as armor and gun) https://youtu.be/PW0uRHKzXhM M60A3 TTS Switchology http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php/M60A3_(TTS) https://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php?title=M1
  3. Couple of tips for you and any readers: 1. Why do your tank hunter hulldown commands have "hunt" at the end? This risks going to far in the hulldown. Units don't spot fast enough to also get in perfect hulldown against the thing they spot. I manually check with the target command one action spot at a time against the location I want to be in hulldown to. The first action spot that says "hulldown" I put the move order to. (or do you just use the hunt command where I use the regular move orders to be extra sure here?) 2. The "cover arch"-command. It doesn't matter for spotting how wide it is. It only orients the sensors(heads and turret) to the central direction of the arch. It is optimal to use 180 degree max range arch with the middle of the arch pointing at the intended focus area. But of course if you want to prevent the unit from shooting anything else than lets say one unit, it is a good idea to use narrower arch.
  4. In steam version: D:\SteamLibrary\steamapps\common\Combat Mission Black Sea\Game Files\Campaigns
  5. I would be happy with an option for people who own Red Thunder AND Final Blitzkrieg to combine the games in quick battles. Would make for some interesting mods and PBEMs. Might be technologically very hard to do with reasonable effort. I doubt the code base would be so exceptionally modular.
  6. I would think you would lose a lot of BMPs this way. BMP never get the first spot and the infantry would be more expendable.
  7. I wouldn't shoot over my of infantry in the woods. I try to leave fields of fire free for the BMPs And woods are a bad place to be. Not healthy for anybody involved. Scout, if hostiles arty and bypass. If not possible to bypass then tight formation of infantry and IFV after artillery. like this: -------------enemy----------- inf-------inf-------inf--------- ----bmp-----bmp-----bmp--- -------------------------------
  8. Indeed. Also when leap frogging the infantry are always the forward ones and BMPs are the ones leaping second. This ensures were high readiness for any counter attacks (BMPs work very well in defense) and also the before mentioned fire support role. Very important is also when you see them pesky spotting rounds falling you have your comfy BMPs close by to load up.
  9. I think not within the scope of the game really. I doubt nuclear weapons would be shot as close support for units engaged in combat. I would also presume the decision to use these weapons would be made higher up than what the game depicts. For crying out loud we cannot even call in support from strategic bombers like B52 or missiles like SCUD or ATACMS. Why would tactical nukes be in? This would have to be addressed in the scenario start condition and when the map was made.
  10. If you have access (or somebody who has) to steel beasts, could you make some comparison images of different generations of thermal imagers? I would presume the generational improvements are modeled. Also comparisons of different generations of IR or image intensifiers would be interesting.
  11. BMP-2 are good (for the money). When used with area fire commands. Infantry finds the enemy, BMP-2 destroys the enemy by keyholing/peaking/hulldown with sort exposure time.
  12. Yes of course but to what detail? Even old APDS is enough and optimal for T-55 but what will the tacAI choose for the newer soviets tanks if for some reason HEAT would then be optimal.
  13. just finished the first battle. One of the best REDFOR scenarios I have played so far. Felt like a puzzle box playing this one, but not in any unfair way. Managed to get a pretty ok result. I read in this thread before the battle and realized I better bring my A-game. Pretty much everyone critical on ammo at the end. Lots of area fire. [spoiler]: Single most casualties were caused in the "V" shaped part of the dry river bed, A squad and a half got wiped from the enemies at the low wall between the field and the bushes. My result: end state [spoiler]: https://i.imgur.com/J7cECPu.jpg
  14. Exactly, my point was that it makes as little sense to compare US army to South Vietnamese army as it does comparing Arab armies and Red Army. Even though they are in both cases mostly armed by and trained by their "sponsor".
  15. Comparing the fighting potential of Arabs in the Israeli wars with Red army is like comparing South Vietnamese army with US Army.
  16. I think the two are connected. Because CM:FR doesn't have a deadline and CM:CW has a very definite deadline, resources are flowing from FR to CW and I would not be surprised if CW comes out first.
  17. I doubt you have an activation code at this time. You get that when the game is released.
  18. Thanks for the info! I find this strange because it is modeled and working mechanic in CMBS. Now we have the same unit in CMCW but you say is not functional as a mechanic. Does the model have the radar on it?
  19. It seems soviets will get something almost as good as FLIR. Ground surveillance radar! Use these as your eyes and have them well connected to your C2 network. I usually have the recon platoon commander in the same vehicle/actions spot as the highest level HQ/XO, or but the XO inside the BRM. (I have used these in CMBS) CM: COLD WAR TO&E has "BRM-1"https://www.battlefront.com/cold-war/cmcw-base-game/?tab=toemore info on couple of variations of BRM-1https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/brm-1.htm https://weaponsystems.net/system/346-BRM-1K "Korshun"Video demonstrating ground surveillance radar on BRM-1K in CMBS (K just means the command version): https://youtu.be/unTyMNPIGLc
  20. It seems soviets will get something almost as good. Ground surveillance radar! CM: COLD WAR TO&E has "BRM-1" https://www.battlefront.com/cold-war/cmcw-base-game/?tab=toe more info on couple of variations of BRM-1 https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/brm-1.htm Video demonstrating BRM-1K in CMBS (K just means the command version):
  21. Most helpful would be a top down type preview of the map (you could even take the one you see in map editor) in quick battle maps selection
  22. Which if any of the USSR equipment have FLIR in the game?
×
×
  • Create New...