.png.91b60a5bafb4dcb6f45c202eabcb3ba8.png){kind=avatar}
exsonic01
-
Posts
415 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by exsonic01
-
-
5 minutes ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:
@Codename Duchess
Speak of the devil, and he shall appear.
There's enough stuff I learned in classified boxes that I cannot share, but the jist of what I can share is China will not aid the DPRK in attacking the South, and in the event of a DPRK collapse and ROK/US intervention, it will fortify its border to keep North Koreans out because that's the last thing they want is North Korean refugees wandering around on its side of the border.
The DPRK's value to China is limited to being a captive market. Once it goes to war it loses all of that value, and China is more inclined to try to curry favor with the ROK to maintain regional influence.
This isn't a time of great powers and wars of national survival. A US-China land war in Asia is about as likely as a Chinese assault landing in California.Nah, you guyz too much underestimate the PRC's will to achieve the regional supremacy. If Kim regime falls, they will send troops over the border, try to set the puppet government in the northern part of Korean peninsula. PRC will never allow unified Korea as a democratic nation and one of western ally. Their first priority is to keep the Korea divided. To achieve that, they will support Kim regime if it is needed. But if that option is not viable, they will try to make their own.
-
1 hour ago, HerrTom said:
CMBS really needs to render at least the attack helicopters. It'd be pretty damn cool. I had to add them in for the stream of tracers coming out of nowhere haha
Russian forces engage a dug-in Ukrainian force as they attempt to force a river crossing over the Dnieper river. (Click for full 3,000x1,000-ish pixels!)
A Russian scout team observes the fire mission preparing the opposite bank. Lt. Popov identifies a few armored vehicles and relays the information to the supporting tanks.
+1, I really wish to see choppers and fast movers flying over my units with flare. That would be awesome. Did you gave some after effect to the second picture? Looks cool.
-
No one knows the future of this program, but personally, I think the project is 99% downed. Not sure who is lying, ATK orbital or H&K. But anyway, it might be safe to remove XM25 from next module. Well, but if CMBS continued on 'artificial history' time line, then it would be OK.
-
10 hours ago, John Kettler said:
Bufo,
Totally support this--provided it accurately reflects how things really were on the armor-anti-armor front and other key areas then. Have written extensively on this matter. Talking pages and pages devoted to what I learned directly from the CIA's own experts about the dire imbalance the US faced in killing Russian tanks and its vulnerability to Russian tanks and other weaponry. Have provided a few examples.
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/123637-cm-games-id-like-to-see/?page=8#comment-1704493
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/120835-motiv-armor-piercing-submunition/#comment-1632182
Regards,
John Kettler
Wow, so many great and interesting articles. You already suggested this idea. I didn't know that. Anyway, I also really wish to see CM FG or CM NGP (Northern German Plain) but it will take quite a time IMO.... May I ask what is the Granit SFW? All I know about name "Granit" in weaponry is cruise missile....
-
53 minutes ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:
There's a lot I wish I could say. Here's some considerations:
1. DPRK is a poisoned chalice. It's terrible. It's broken. Whoever winds up with it is going to be committed to decades of undoing all the damage that like, it's not "underdeveloped" it's "maldeveloped" in that it's poorly thought out and set up in ways that are directly counter to being a functional country. There's mass malnutrition, no "functional" industry (nothing that isn't done elsewhere for many times better and cheaper once you remove unfree labor forces), disease, infrastructure, all terrible.
Right now? it's the DPRK's problem. China can tut and then disapprovingly and maintain it's buffer zone. If it all burns down though? Do they really want to inheret that dumpster fire? They won't have the old "It was Kim's fault!" excuse, it'll be their terrible DPRK zombie baby.
And the PRC is too smart for that.
2. Once the DPRK is no longer intact it loses its value as a buffer. Using non-intervention as a negotiating position makes more sense ("Okay we sit this one out, but no US forces north of ## parallel and everything from the old State Mines 1-8 you'll sell to the PRC exclusively!) than placing blood and treasure on the line to become the king of craptown.
I wouldn't rule out a narrow "humanitarian" buffer strip to keep the North Korean refugees out of China (as that's high on their heartburn list), but nothing that'll get their hands too dirty or obligate them to nation building.I never said PRC likes DPRK, and I know that he Sino-NK relations began to crack from 1980s, when Deng pushed the economic reforms and official relationship with RoK, and it is getting worse and worse since 1990s. And I'm pretty sure, that PRC also knows well the DPRK is failing and even more worse and worse as time goes by. Still, they support DPRK just because they can, not because they like them, and anyway DPRK well serves as buffer zone against US, Japan, and RoK.
Like I mentioned, as they are really good at copy and paste anything, PRC is trying to follow the old Soviet style or current Russian style. They want to make the buffer zone, as 1st island chain and 2nd island chain, and Korea is inside the 1st chain. Whole Korean peninsula is the region of 'vital national interest' to PRC, just like what Russians called the Crimean peninsula and whole Ukraine region. They don't want to allow any potentially hostile factions close to their border. They will try to do anything, regardless of economic sanctions, to take at least a part of Korean peninsula, just like what Russians did.
Based on that, if something happens, first, they will try to save the original DPRK regime. If that option is not viable, they will try to control whole northern part of Korean peninsula. And if that is also not viable, they will try to take the land as much as possible. This whole assumption depends on the economic ability of PRC at the moment, but they will try as much as they can at given circumstance.
Zombie baby? Well said, that is exactly what they want. They don't need 'good-looking' nation, they just need the meat shield, to prevent direct border against western influences, such as US, Japan and RoK. No nations will officially approve or acknowledge such puppet nation as official sovereign country, but do you think they will care? I think not. Russia and China will approve and that will be done. First they will try to use old DPRK social and control structure as much as possible. Soon, they will try to build infrastructure, roads, buildings, and social support, to upgrade the 'puppet' in some degree, at least to survive by its own ability. It has very good cause, like "PRC is supporting NK refugees and orphans" or "PRC is supporting hungry NK citizens, who were suppressed under terrible dictatorship" or etc...
-
18 minutes ago, Codename Duchess said:
Negative. The PRC has already promised not to engage in a military engagement if there is war meant to disarm Kim on the peninsula. They have a hell of a lot more to lose by war with the US than they stand to gain by propping up that regime further after hostilities begin. I think expectation of a Korean War 2.0 that is identical to 1.0 is not going to happen.
If we talk about the current ongoing situation only, official response from PRC is that they will not going to intervene if the US only attempts surgical strike to nuclear-related sites. They will intervene if any faction try to change Kim regime. Plus, even in the imaginary artificial scenario, I don't believe such opinions from the nations like PRC, i.e. communist or totalitarian or dictatorship nations. Frankly and historically, such 'promises' are not that meaningful and reliable from those nations....
They will not gonna allow the direct border against the unified Korea as strong western ally, and they will try their best to prevent that. They will attempt to take at least 70~100km northern part of Korean peninsula, and will declare pro-China puppet government, denying all of the charges of illegal intervention, saying "the people living in those lands want to become a part of China by their election" "All of Chinese forces inside the Korean border are not official PLA, they are all just volunteers" Sounds quite familiar, isn't it? I bet my 50 cents
I also think there's not that much chance of full-scale land battle at current state. But no one knows the future, this really depends on what will going to happen at the top circle of the DPRK leadership, and economic state of PRC.
-
50 minutes ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:
Re: Korea
Having been there for a spell, it just never felt like a likely scenario in modern times. This is not a statement on our readiness, we'd have murderivated our way clean through the DPRK etc, but the DPRK is so broken these days it's really hard to imagine it summoning the credible forces to invade the South, and if we're going North it's because the DPRK has totally and utterly folded and we're looking at some sort of stability operation+cleaning up what parts of the old DPRK disagree with this sort of operation.I agree that the readiness level of KPA is far below the reliable line at current state, but almost all of the second Korean war scenario includes the PLA intervention. Oh yeah, I'm pretty sure they will, if something happens inside the DPRK, like uprising or coup or any other urgent political events. This depends on economic situation of PRC, but I'm certain that they will intervene for very very good chance if something happens.
The prime logic behind is that the PRC is trying to follow the old Soviet Union and current Russia. They wish to make 'buffer zone' from their main land, so called '1st island line' and '2nd island line'. All those artificial islands on the South China Sea are one of the good examples. From the same logic, PRC does not want to meet the direct border against the democratic nations, i.e. unified Korea under full South Korean control. If something happens, they will push southward at all cost, to save DPRK, or they could eliminate DPRK and even make puppet government in the northern part of the Korean peninsula.
So, IMO at least several scenarios are possible to become an interesting CM scenario. But not sure what is the BF's plan. And I agree that if they compete over CM Cold War vs CM 2nd Korean war, I think they will go for CM Cold War. I love to see CM Cold War as well
As far as I know the, Type 99 is comparable with T-80UD, and Type 96 is comparable with early T-72. But not sure about Type99a2. All of estimations I read were just overestimated fanboy fantasy.
-
IMHO the second Korean war, PLA + KPA vs RoKA + US army, on the Korean peninsula would be good enough for the first CM game for east-Asian theater. Then BF could include more modules with other nations.
-
I used to enjoy John Tiller's Fulda Gap 85, and currently playing Flashpoint Campaign Red Storm. Both are excellent cold war strategic games. And now I'm waiting for Flashpoint Campaign: Southern Front, with enhanced game engine and more factions.
It would be really great if the CM-Cold War came out, showing excellent depiction and realism of tactical level battles of cold war units. Personally I wish to see 88~89 era, to see the battle between T-80BV and M1A1(HA), and preferably Northern German Plain, which was expected to be the main thrust route of red army.
Most of NATO vehicles and AT assets were equipped with thermal sight, though 1st generation thermal visions were not that great like modern ones. But it was still far better than nothing or light-amplification method.
CM already has Afghanistan, and modern lines such as SF and BS. So I think it would not be critically or impossibly difficult to develop the CM-Cold War if they want to make one. But considering BF's usual cycle, it would be hard to see one in near future (under the assumption that they have a plan), and we even don't know about the future plan of BF.
-
31 minutes ago, LUCASWILLEN05 said:
Seems reasonable enough to me. In real life a squad will probably bug out when it comes under heavy fire as you describe. They have, as you say taken a couple of casualties and are pinned down. Even veterans might consider bugging out under these conditions particularly if their cover is not great where they are. In terms of game play maybe it is annoying.
Maybe look for tactical solutions like putting another squad on overwatch and attempting to suppress enemy fire which would at least give the targeted squad a better chance
14 minutes ago, General Liederkranz said:I agree, I generally like the morale under Upgrade 4. It seems more realistic and forces me to use better tactics. The place where it seems off is only when troops run from hard cover, and especially when they run towards the enemy.
It was very long time ago I served in army, but I can tell you that is not realistic at all. Running away from foxhole or trench or well fortification position, without clear and direct order, would earns court martial and good years of army prison, especially even more harsher if it was during the middle of firefight. Plus, it is not realistic at all, that soldiers running away across the open field or open street without any cover, in the middle of firefight, showing back to the enemy fire. That is just suicide. They will be pinned down and will dug in more deeply, but will not runaway immediately when the bullets are flying right before his or her ear, like that. Running away in the middle of firefight because 2~3 buddies are downed? I can't imagine such behavior from any of ppl I served with. More realistic response of well trained army would be, first, try to smoke and pull the fallen buddy, and second, pour a lot of fire to suppress enemy again, and third, try to find the retaliation with full of hate and anger. At least I learned in that way.
Same as artillery shelling situation. If they are in good cover, or in relativity better position, they should not give up their position. I'm not sure how many times I watched my pixeltruppens stupidly washed away by the mortar and artillery and following machine gun fire, in the middle of wide open street and field. They could live and fight back if they just stayed in the house and trench. And that is kinda 101 from the training school, that keep your head down and stay in your fox hole if the shelling begins, not running away like that. The only moment we need to run is when the chemical shells are falling. I tried everything during the command turn, but I was unable to stop their stupid 'ultimatum'. Current TACAI should be modified in a way to reduce such irrational behavior.
-
I'm not sure about others, but I usually suggest 5 minute no air strike no artillery at least. If any, I also suggest no UAVs to Russia when against UA, since UA doesn't have UAVs.
-
I usually use infantry squad of veteran, high morale, fit, and +1 leadership conditions. Problem is, whenever they engaged against enemy infantry and get the 1~2 casualty, they get pinned down, and just run away to the other direction in the next turn. Even though I reordered them to get back to the line in the next turn, they anyway run away eventually, ignoring my command. It seems I can't prevent them when they decide to run away. The runaway situation occurs from the infantry engagement, not by the artillery shells.
How can I prevent this cowardly actions? (I really wish to have political officer when I play redfor
) Does the extreme or fanatic morale helps? Is it worth to invest the points to that amount of morale during QB?
-
10 hours ago, Erwin said:
"...players are unable to cancel the pause command at the setup phase."
Don't understand what you mean. One can always cancel a PAUSE. You have tried repeating the PAUSE command till it cycles back to 0, yes?
Really? I didn't know that. When it cycle backs to 0? After 2 min pause?
-
Several more things I wish to have in CM series:
1) Simplified and easy ammo acquire for infantry from vehicles.
Instead of roll-down and click, there would be easier and simpler way. How about give players an option to directly input the amount of ammo when acquire from vehicle? Like "(425) 5.56mm, (523) 7.62x54R, (3) RPG-26 and (4) PG-7VL", Or any other brilliant simpler way.
Also, please let players to return some extra ammo back to the vehicle. Acquiring 2160 5.45mm by mistake is very annoying, because there's no way to return those huge amount of ammo. In this case, one needs to load the turn file, and issues all the commands from the beginning again, this is too harsh for that one mistake.
2) Option to "mark" or "check" some specific points on the map.
Sometimes I really wish move a unit to a specific point. Problem is, it is really hard to find the "specific" point in the middle of command phase. After observing the map, you move your screen, click your unit, and try to issue "move" command to that point, but now you forget where was that bloody spot on the big wide wheat field.....I think a lot of CM players experienced this inconvenience. If we have an option to check or mark a point on the map in command phase, which should be visible during command phase regardless of unit select, this would be great.
3) More freedom to "pause"
Give us 1 or 2 sec based "pause" option for all units. Current 5/10/15sec pause is sometimes too inconvenient. Also, players are unable to cancel the pause command at the setup phase. Please solve this issue.
Please make CM interface a bit more easier, straightforward, and intuitive. That would be greatly helpful for beginners of CM series.
-
I'm under several PBEM games now with v2.0. If I (and my opponent) purchase the battle pack, can we still load the savefile from previous version and continue the PBEM without any issue? Or is it safe to wait until the end of this match, and then buy the battle pack?
-
Can I have any idea about when the next CMBS module will come to us? Just approximately, any rough estimation is fine.
Also, I'm currently under several PBEM games. Does opponent requires this battlepack (with 2.1v patch), if I already purchased the battle pack?
-
T-72B3 obr 2016 equipped with new engine, Relikt ERA on front / side of the turret. I think this toy lies somewhere between T-72B3 and T-72B3M, and already quite comparable with T-90MS, except RWS, some electronics, and welded turret. This toy also could be the possible new tank line for next module of CMBS. Could be expensive than T-72B3, but cheaper than T-72B3M. But I have no idea how much B3 obr 2016 and B3M will be fielded this year.T-14 and T-72B3 obr 2016 confirmed in V day parade this year, but no T-90 lines?
-
3 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:
I'm assuming the tank crew was the battalion HQ
usually the laser warning systems on the Abrams end up with my T-72B3s murdered. Good kills
Thanks, they are just veteran crews with high morale. It is almost the end of the game, and those Abrams already used up their smoke grenades.
-
The first one ambushed by my T-72B3, getting two shells at the main gun mount and knocked out. The first shot silenced his main gun. My TC was lucky, he barely escaped those 50cals. It was ~600m distance.
The second kill was achieved in the middle of stand-off situation. Both tank's sight was slightly blocked by the house and a tree. Then, my opponent found my RPG team approaching to his tanks from the woods, and I slightly maneuvered my tank to have a full sight of Abrams and Bradley. He got 152mm shell to the top hatch few turns ago (surprisingly he survived 152mm to the hatch), so his optics or FCS might be damaged. Anyway, I shot first, and the first shell killed the Abrams and shocked the Bradley, and second shot finished the Bradley as well. It was ~400m distance.
See, the Abrams in CMBS is not super OP tank. It is true that playing Russian in CMBS has more steeper learning curve, and I agree it is much more challenging in most of conditions. But, I believe that it is about tactics and terrain. And this makes playing CMBS redfor much more interesting.
-
3 hours ago, Reiter said:
Do you use HQS sound mod?
Yes, HQS 2.4 CMBS
-
3 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:
I mean seriously, Russia needs to upgrade the tank fleet. The T-72B3 upgrades are good and all but the commander still lacks a thermal imager, which is dumb as hell... Just the B3M upgrade would bring the Russian fleet's quality up. But nah they like the B3s more I;m assuming. LOL
I agree, I think T-72B3M (or B4) is close to T-90AM in CMBS now in some degree. (http://uralvagonzavod.com/products/special_products/6/)
It would be better to concentrate on new T-72 program, which is cheaper, faster, and easier than T-90M upgrade, considering their recent sequestering.
-
23 minutes ago, Sophist_13 said:
It is BMP-3M with modern sight "SODEMA" (thermal). KMZ is producing them right now.
Do they have that much ERA / Shtora / Arena BMP-3M variants, which would convince the current rarity point in CMBS? From this point I'm not sure, but I will remain skeptical point of view about it.
-
Just now, Sorrow_Knight said:
And same question to you- What russian equipment is really such "fantasy" as you saying here and shoud be cutted?
What I can think right now is BMP-2M and T-90AM. I'm also skeptical about BMP-3M as well, if we really consider reality, at least BMP-3M variant's rarity point should be increased. There will be more if someone extensively search for those data.
-
As I mentioned in early replies, will be hard to see plenty number of T-90Ms in real life in 2017, and foreseeable future. I expected 50 in this year, and that is still too many. It has good chance that actual number will be less than that.
Replacing main cannon is not easy at all like you imagine, it is not like toy model tanks. 2A82 cannon is bigger than 2A46, and this brings lots of problem, many equipments inside the turret are needed to be rearranged. This may bring turret design modification. It would be minor but still not easy & fast task. Plus, Russians claim that their 2A82 cannon will shot different penetrator, which is longer than previous ones. This will require modification in their autoloader.
Their Malachite NERA is not ready yet, and it is even not sure if the Malachite NERA is already under mass production mode or not. Plus, even though it is under mass production, it is not a cheap armor, and there's good chance that T-90M program will suffer from lack of armor supply. Will they downgrade the armor to Relikt instead of Malachite? I don't know.
And they are under sequester now. Do they really can upgrade all 400 T-90As to T-90Ms in 2017? That will depends on their plan and budget, but my $1 will be on impossible opinion.
The only reason we are able to see T-90AM in CMBS is because of BF's "hypothetical story line" balancing. They assumed (in 2014) all-in full scale war between NATO and Russia (in 2017), each side bring their "the best" equipment at 2017 (expected from 2014). That is why we are seeing so many T-90AMs in CMBS, which is fantasy in current real life Russian Army, and LWR + Trophy in SEP v2 as well. If you don't like LWR+Trophy of SEP v2, you need to accept major part of current CMBS Russian army should be removed (including T-90AM), and you will cry out loud about how much the CMBS is the NATO biased game.
I expect the BF will bring T-90M in next module, and they will keep the T-90AM, based on their "hypothetical story line". It is alternative history. But the rarity price of T-90M will be, and should be expensive than T-90AM.
) Does the extreme or fanatic morale helps? Is it worth to invest the points to that amount of morale during QB?
Combat Mission Shanghai Pact: Ring of Fire 2021
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted · Edited by exsonic01
Well said, now the world is connected to each other more than ever. But that never means that PRC will give up their strategic plan of 1st / 2nd island chain, just because of economic reason.
It is well known that there are overall 2000+ tanks under Northern Theater Command (previously Shenyang Military Region), and ~1000 of them are supposed to be ZTZ 99 and their later variants like ZTZ99A2. Is anyone in this forum really thinks that that amount of 3~3.5 generation heavy armors and mechanized forces are there, just only for the refugee control and humanitarian missions? Really? Is this just really a coincidence, that major part of their annual drills and exercises are performed very close to PRC-DPRK border, instead of PRC-Russian border? They have very very clear intention and objective for their 'vital national interest' like Russians do now.
We need to understand PRC's intention is to build the buffer zone against western influence. They would invade into the DPRK border at the very first sign of coup against Kim regime or any other 'irregular' situation. I bet PRC already secured wide spy networks and links inside the DPRK, they would know very fast if anything happens. First they will try to save the Kim's regime, try to keep the Korea divided as much as possible, saving DPRK head and system, and keep everything as same as possible. They really don't want change anything. They wish DPRK to alive, to perform the 'meat shield' role. If that option is not viable, PLA forces would occupy the northern part of Pyongyang, and they will try to make the new puppet government, easier to control than Kim's regime, but good enough to play the 'buffer role' as much as possible against RoK and US ally. Then PRC will withdraw their forces, after 'approve' the puppet as 'sovereign state', leaving several elements of 'advisory group' inside.
In part, you're right, there's not that much chance of land clash between US army vs PLA even in this scenario. However, if, only if, RoK + US demands PLA to leave from entire Korean peninsula, and demand them to cross the border and go back to China again, then there's some chance that we could see some action. It is one of the most possible and very plausible scenario. But, like I mentioned in the prior post, this depends on the economic ability and potential of PRC at the moment.
Vast amount of KPA forces are deployed south of the Pyongyang, as a result, northern defense line of Pyongyang would be relatively weak. Plus, western part of NK (including north Pyongyang) are not that mountainous, relatively flat. All of those conditions are perfect for the PLA mech/armors. Plus, I think PRC thinks that they would not need to face the US forces, if they are really really fast enough to occupy the north of Pyongyang.
Overall, from my knowledge and information gathered from here and there, PRC would not give up DPRK. If Kim's regime fails, they will try to build the new meat shield for them.