TheForwardObserver
-
Posts
400 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by TheForwardObserver
-
-
My sparring partner is a tanker and his response to the question of HE/VT against the Abrams is 'it's just a flesh wound.' I have a feeling other tankers would offer more nuanced technical versions of that same answer.
-
John we tested the effects in-game of arty airburst but not direct fire. I think the general consensus was that it'd be nice if airburst had a modest impact on Abrams/Bradley/Strykers.
Not sure about the systems roster, but I think there is an amount of space they have on the panel to display all the vehicle's systems. Damaged systems might take precedence over healthy systems, possibly bumping them off the screen. Like I said though not sure.
I was in a mech company that brought it's Brads to Iraq and we lost enough of them that we co-opted our sister company's Bradleys and they switched to 100 percent humvees. To their credit though the Bradleys always kept our guys alive which was not the case with our humvees. The Brads announce their presence with the gusto of the three tenors which is great because the bad guys all scatter but they always seem to forget to take their stupid IEDs with them and then we accidentally roll over them and then frustratingly there's nobody around to claim ownership or to discuss liability. We mostly used them to establish blocking positions around our cordons. -
Ha! A few of us did some tests and posted our insights on the Russian Motor Rifles tactics thread. Generally speaking Arty/mortar VT rounds produced some damage and the odd knockout against the older Russian vics and the light American vics, however Abrams, Bradleys and Strykers didn't seem to take any damage from airburst.
-
The damage tab that Sublime mentioned for anybody that may not have noticed it before.
Also, as a note, if you fire up a game with Scenario Author difficulty level you can see this information for enemy vehicles as well as your own allowing you to track and test enemy damage in real time. -
I like that you shake and bake your targets.
-
@Jammersix Nothing currently in-game that doesn't involve bringing more tubes-- with the exception being mortars-- you can supply on-map mortars with tons of ammo by bringing loads of humvees, and for scenario games they can all be dismounted and turned into one ammo dump. I just meant as alternatives to my suggestion of having purchasable platoons/batteries with greater ammunition supplies. I think a better solution would involve the supply adjustment drop down menu in the Editor. Right now you can diminish supplies below 100 percent, I think it'd be nice to be able to increase supplies beyond 100 percent, would also bring that button and some of the other Editor options into QBs. Actually, it's un-related but I'd bring the point values from QBs into the editor too. Would make setting up H2H scenario games easier.
-
@kinophile A Paladin carries an internal load of 36 rounds, and a battery will have 6 Paladins. A CATV/FAASV is the ammunition carrier vehicle that a battery's ammo section uses, and depending on the type carries 80-95 rounds. A battery will have one of these per section optimally, one section corresponding to one gun. So that is the amount of ammo you can carry with you on the go, without logistical support, attachments or re-supply.
-
I'd be curious to know how often the typical player is compelled to purchase beyond reasonable numbers of tubes in order to compensate for ammo. It'd be nice to be able to purchase what we'll call "re-supplied" fire support platoons and batteries that might have additional ammo and be more expensive. There are other mechanisms that could probably be deployed to solve the problem too.
-
There are better IR and Near IR obscuring agents irl than Arty smoke (WP/HC/IS) generally duration and volume of fire are your friends on this matter.
Regarding laser designation (John) COLTs use similar techniques when lasing multiple targets for Hellfires. The technique is called Rapid Fire and requires at least 8 seconds suggested between launch of each missile in order for the laser designator operator to adjust onto the new target. A single bird with Hellfires programmed for multiple PRFs can conduct the same process for multiple LDOs, this variation is called Ripple Fire. The Apache can provide this support in indirect fire mode, hidden from behind masking terrain as the missile is default LOAL when fired indirectly.
Jams I keep a running estimation of casualties for my fire missions in game. Not 100 percent but ends up being pretty accurate at the end of the game.Surprising information about the force size totals folks use. For H2H I like an on-map population cap between 200 and 300 and against the computer I'll field 400 to 500. I've got some big maps.
-
Very interesting philosophies and focuses. Generally speaking what casualty rates do ya'll estimate you achieve for a given battle? How about ammunition expenditure, do you find yourselves bringing more batteries/platoons for the sake of ammo or no?
-
I'm curious to know what people like to bring for fire support against the computer and against humans, why you bring it, how you use it, what effects you expect to achieve, what are all the factors you consider in making your choices, SOPs.
IRL one of the chief responsibilities of a FISTER is advising on the capabilities and limitations of fire support as it relates to a particular mission, and it's always interesting to learn folks' expectations.
-
@cbennett88 Smoke is time fuze so height of burst can be adjusted.
-
Aye, everything that's been said is true. The reason an At-14 would be able to hit you through smoke is because the missile's laser guidance is SACLOS, centering itself on the directional beam of the laser and heading to where it's pointed till impact, rather than seeking out the signals reflected from the surface of the target, as US ordnance does.
-
8 hours ago, kinophile said:
Sounds like @TheForwardObserver's wet dream....
Ha! I think I'm less artillery heavy in-game than one might expect
-
30 minutes ago, Erwin said:
That begs another question, is it "gamey" to load up with max ammo load? Sometimes I wonder if in RL, troops do go back to resupply rather than have half a dozen guys carry 5K+ rounds. (I know there is a max AT rocket load. But, I don't think I have ever reached the max small arms ammo load.)
In real life there's nothing stopping you from grabbing as much ammo as you are willing or able to carry, but yes, having vehicles nearby will generally encourage troops to leave ammo with the vehicles. Typically soldiers carry more ammo in the beginning of a tour as the extra ammo provides a sense of comfort. With time and tours the load a soldier carries changes based upon a better understanding of the enviroment/threat. I'm talking hundreds of rounds though not thousands. For example it's very common for troops to carry 300 rounds of 5.56 for their personal weapons instead of your standard 210.
On longer dismounted operations the 7.62 and 5.56 belt fed ammo, rockets and mortars gets spread around the platoon or company, once again though mission, experience and enviroment affect round count much more than army standard load recomendations.
-
Joking and dis-information aside, my golden rule is to focus all initial efforts on removing the enemy armor from the field. That can take many forms.
-
It's true, as children we were always so keen on tales of shrubbery bothering back in the old country by my great grandfather TheNavelGazer.
-
@Jammersix This is American ingenuity. The secret weapon here is that the merciless, ceaseless waves of manpads platoons and flankery from the supply sections-- alone enough to break even the most seasoned of opponents-- are just a diversion from the main event. Lurking in the shadows just short of the front line patiently sits my columns of 1152 humvees ready to exploit a moment of chaos and swarm my opponent delivering that final knockout blow.
-
i like to assault the enemy front on foot with a solid core of elite/fanatic manpads platoons while my veteran/fanatic supply platoons maneuver against the flanks
-
I've done tests to get a feel for how much ammo you need to bring down each building size, but I've never taken building material into account. If I recall correctly it takes about 40-50 rounds of 155 for the 14 story and 20-30 for the 5 story. Houses are around 4-6 rounds.
I tested 82mm Russian mortars on some 5 story buildings and I think it took over 100 direct hits to bring the building down, though if I recall the sheaf was so open it was tough to tell which rounds were achieving effects, the number of rounds that went into sinking those buildings could well be twice that number.
In real life you'd avoid using mortars for most targets that have overhead cover, including hardened buildings. If you had to engage buildings or bunkers with mortars, 120s with delay registered for destruction missions seems to work well against the shoddy construction you find in the ME. The cumulative damage from sustained 81/82s might leave a building in ruins, but it wouldn't be very efficient, you'd be there all day, and there would probably be frames and walls etc that survive despite the unusally large volume of fire. The occupants would have fled long before the building was gutted.
We don't publish recommendation tables for targets like large apartment buildings (though we probably should), but 155s firing in volume really can reduce a building to rubble. Larger buildings are obviously levelled more easily with rocket arty and the various mk-82/3/4 size JDAMs and GBUs.
I might test all this stuff again including building material this time and maybe I'll put a table together that shows the data.
-
Me when I see posts like this
-
Shifty I was just making a joke.
-
So two fish are sitting in a tank. The first fish turns to the second fish and with a curious look on his face asks; "Where did you learn to drive a tank?"
Sorry-- wrong thread
-
The appropriate fuze in real life for targets in tree lines is HE/Delay, for reasons that I have stated here before. Mortar crew members have the most fun in direct lay because they can witness their effects, but the chief advantage of indirect fire weapons are their ability to engage without exposing the system or the crew to enemy fire or observation. Unless the mortar is shooting direct lay against an elevated target ie surrounding mountains in Afghanistan, where bursts can be easily observed in relation to the target, the ability of the weapon operator to adequately engage targets still hinges on his ability to properly identify the enemy target's grid, or alternatively the target's polar data--ie perform the functions of a forward observer, using the GT line rather than OT line. A mortar section is expected to have basic call for fire knowledge, and furnish organic observation elements only in emergencies, or when an actual FO is not present.
A mortar's effective area is diminished greatly against targets that are laying prone
FOs Conduct of Fires Net
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
I've attacked many a wounded Abrams only to find out the hard way that their main gun remains operational.
Re: The fickleness of air. Has anyone done any testing on the vulnerability of the different attack aircraft to the different air defense systems? Maybe someone could buy our two intel guys some cans of strongbow black so we could get some proper charts and slides. I was glad to see Panzer mention SEAD. Sometimes I'll bring Air and I'll give the enemy some Tunguskas for Air Defense. I'll holdout on summoning the birds till those targets are knocked out- adds a SEADy feel to a game. Unfortunately the presence of MANPADS can take the pi$$ out of the plan and against a human, I'm just not sure yet if it's worth the points/risk.