Oleg
-
Posts
44 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Oleg
-
-
On 12/14/2019 at 7:15 PM, Sgt.Squarehead said:
I'm sure you've all used the BTR-4 many, many times by now.....Does anyone else find them to be too heavily armed for their own good?
In a recent game I had two of them 'Target Light' the upper floor of a structure, just on the minuscule off-chance that the enemy had an OP or sniper team overlooking a de-busing site.....The homicidal maniacs used their auto-cannons! For the full minute! In the process they managed to completely level both floors of the building!
Then there's their tendency to choose the same 30mm auto-cannons to provide close support for their dismounts, usually amongst trees or other obstacles liable to cause premature, and all too frequently fatal, detonation of HE rounds!
All of the above is a lot of fun, but it can be misleading too.....After watching them lay waste to half the map in a matter of minutes, it's all to easy to start treating them like tanks, which they aren't, as you will soon find out if they encounter anything much bigger than an LMG that fires back!
IMHO these things are insane.....I feel much safer with the BTR-70!
Ingame BTR-4 is just BMP-2 on wheels with tall silhouette. They dont use their agl often or effective enough to make impact. They almost never use their atgms, and when they use them, laser warning systems on all enemy armor defeats it (while irl laser warning system shouldn't be triggered by beamriding atgm), and atgm on bmp-2 dont trigger laser warning cause its old style optical guiding. RWS module on BTR-4 ingame modeled as conventional turret (you can see it if you move camera inside hull), line of sight for its weapons comes from hull not from turret, so it cant shoot over cover as it should be able irl using its high mounted rws to advantage. If its weapon was modeled correctly ingame as RWS, it shouldn't for example be destroyed when hit in passenger compartment with ap rounds, cause there is nothing important to penetrate.
Ingame it just boring vehicle overall, which get detected more easily than bmp2 cause its so tall but dont compensate this disadvantage with anything that bmp2 cant do.
-
On 11/25/2019 at 6:15 PM, IMHO said:
Bulat is too overweight for its engine/transmission.
Thats false news from the mouth of pro-russian propaganda. In reality Bulat has more horse power to weight ratio than soviet t-64bv. Bulat upgrade package includes new more powerful engine.
-
Russian forces shooting AGS from the window of civ apartment.
-
On 9/8/2019 at 11:06 PM, zmoney said:
Do the Ukrainian T-84 tanks only have one round of APS does anyone know. Playing the Shield of Kiev campaign and had a tank go to close to a building. The tank intercepted one rpg round but another one hit the reactive armor. Wasn’t sure if the T-84 only has one or if my tank was angled the wrong way for the second round. I read somewhere that the Russian/ Ukrainian APS only works frontally.
I also seemed to notice the APS system wasn’t showing up in the equipment list after it fired its one shot.
IRL ukrainian APS has 2 charges per module, second charge is being deployed instantly after first is expended. You can install as many number of modules on a vehicle as you wish, but realistic number is 2 modules per side, so 4 charges for each side.
-
T-80bv in training (comes in middle of video)
-
Dont know if already posted, but here some decently clear video from operator of BTR-4 shooting
-
On 11/11/2019 at 7:27 AM, ishfar94 said:
Quick question. The guide says t90s have aps but is that even true? I've been playing quite a bit with Russians and had multiple dudes take at6 shots at me from the front but never have I seen the aps go off.I know in terms of quality the Russians are supposed to be inferior (lack of funding and all that) but in game they are hilariously bad. Sure they've some good units like the khrys but it becomes a joke when your tanks struggle to spot even muzzle flashes from 700-800 metres away while everyone starts dying around them. Have there been patches/can we expect some patches to fix this in the near future?
Russian APS is pure fantasy. Even prototype of T-90AM that was actually built for parades but never even considered to be in service does not have and never even tested this fantasy APS.
While ukrainian APS is real and even exported to other countries, like Turkey. Ukrainian APS should have much much lower rarity ingame, and allowed to be mounted not just to Oplots but also to BTR-4s.
-
Russia in this game is uber over equipped. IRL they dont have t-90am in service, they dont have bmp-2m and and bmp-3m in service, they dont have brm-3k in service. Almost every shiny tech that russia has in this game irl is just fantasy or just prototypes. And those that is actually in service made overpowered in game. For example btr-82a irl has much worse optics than btr-4, but in game its reversed. Airburst munitions for btr-82a is not produced by russia, it was ordered from europe, and after sanctions its not possible anymore. Kornet atgm is much much older and inferior system than Scif, but in game they are equal or even kornet stronger. And so on.
-
On 10/1/2019 at 2:33 PM, zmoney said:
How many T-84’s does the Ukraine Army actually field? I’ve looked online and from what I found it seems that they only field a very small number. What about T-72’s? Do they have any in service? I know the T-64 is in use but in what numbers roughly?
I know there are some members here that have knowledge pertaining to the Ukrainian forces and am curious to know their thoughts.
Ukraine Army at this moment does not have any Oplots. But Oplots themselves is much more real than russian T-90AM. Number of Oplots built is bigger than T-90AM, this russian fantasy tank is not in service in any country currently, even not in russia itself, Oplot at least in service of Tai army.
As for other tanks. We have several hundreds of T-64bv in storage(it was made in ussr), they being restored from storage and put into army in quantities currently needed. Also about 100 of this tanks was upgraded to T-64 bulat, and current version of Bulat has thermals.
Also we have many t-72 in storage, but they was ditched cause they actually inferior to t-64's. People thinking if number in the name of t-72 is bigger means its better tank, but its not. Soviet union made t-72 to be downgraded version of t-64 in every aspect.
Also we have about hundred of t-80bv's in storage, they being put in service in decent numbers.
-
I tried only "demo" version, which is on old engine. So question is, does problems that was in old engine got fixed in new engine?
For example this one
Also it seams even when commander is not bugged out by rotating glitch, he still cant spot anything cause looks like in game thermals only got gunners sight, but on actual oplot thermals are for both gunner sight and commanders panoramic.
or this
Or other that i discovered myself with btr-4
In manual it says that it has rws that gives it higher viewing point on battlefield helping it to see better, but ingame (at least on old engine) it does not. For example if you park btr-4 near the wall that just tall enough to cover its hull but not turret - it cant shoot, cause actual line of site for its weapons comes from the hull not from rws turret. And im not even talking about its deployable telescope tower which comes standard for its rws module, so in theory it can spot targets with this telescope while being totally covered, and shoot at indirect targets with its AGL.
Also Scif portable atgms as well as BTR-4's atgms(cause its actually same rocket mounted in turret) should not give laser warning for target cause its system works by automatically aiming laser slightly higher above the target and guiding rocket at that trajectory until last second before impact it lowering laser on target and rocket follows it, giving the target no time to react on laser warning. And Oplots atgm system i think works the same as well as t-64 bulat (uses same atgms as oplot).
-
Still manned turret?
-
9 hours ago, akd said:
Totally unknown: whether or not this has an effect on vehicle vision. I would assume not.
If this bug is not source of Oplots poor spotting - then its just Oplots spotting characteristics in game is seriously under-powered. Oplot has same second-generation thermals as russian tanks, and they both make their thermals sights from imported french thermal sensors. Nor Russia Nor Ukraine has its own full cycle production of thermal imageres - they both import key parts for their thermals from abroad.
-
40 minutes ago, John Kettler said:
why is it that an AC with a 12.7 mm /HMG armed RWS rates thermals yet the 30 mm auto cannon and Bar ATGM armed BTR-4E doesn't?
Maybe cause KrAZ "Spartan" is made in co-operation with Canada, and BTR-4 is solo Ukrainian product?
40 minutes ago, John Kettler said:Seems an insane set of choices to me.
Dont try to find logic sense where corruption is involved. And cause of BTR-4 is solo ukrainian product - it sure has alot of corruption in it.
-
1 hour ago, John Kettler said:
There is a sequence, starting at 6:36, in which it sure looks like to me the operator is working a FLIR
Yes, there is a notation in ukrainian at top part of aiming display saying that this is thermal image. But its not BTR-4E, its KrAZ "Spartan" armored car.
-
2 hours ago, John Kettler said:
You have no idea how grateful I am no war broke out with the Russians in this period
US have and always had superior Naval Fleet. In that period(and any other period) US could got in land war(where all flaws you described could metter) with Russians only if US attacked them first on their land.
-
4 hours ago, Machor said:
All this means, though, is that the Ukrainian side is massively disadvantaged when it comes to thermals. I assume, then, that playing as the Ukrainians offensively in QB requires truly 'out of the box' thinking using Oplots as recon vehicles and whatever thermals are available to infantry (Do they have any other than Skifs?). I'm all ears if you have any advice.
Use "elited" BRM-1K(not sure about IRL, but in game im sure they have thermals) and PRP-4M. Oplot is currently bugged in game, it cant spot. BRM-1K and PRP-4M are best spotters ukraine side in game currently has, they spot a little less then russian tanks, but not much little, and BM Bulat does not have thermals so he cant spot anything outside of bright day.
-
14 minutes ago, John Kettler said:
Can anyone here read what the display notations say on either, or better, both of the videos? If the readout says either White Hot or Black Hot, then this is a telltale of a FLIR display.
Here i found picture (unfortunately low quality) of BTR-4 aiming display
All notations i can see are "АВТ" (auto fire), "ПКТ" (PKT coaxial mg), "ГР" (grenades for coaxial AGS-17), "OФ"(HE shells for 30mm cannon), "БТ"(AP shells for 30mm cannon), and in bottom corners "УП" and "УВ" (aiming angles)
-
On the other hand. BM Bulat and BTR-4 both have possibility to install thermals - its only cause of financial issue they dont have it IRL. But in this game this virtual Ukraine side has enough money to en-mass such expensive equipment as Oplot tanks, Skif atgm(with thermal sight and remote control(not modeled ingame)) and so on. So why this virtual Ukraine does not have money for thermal sights for Bulat and BTR-4? Also in this game Ukraine has very close co-operation with US, and in manual even told that Ukraine side has platoons of US troops (they just not buy-able ingame cause they meant to be of-field for radio, ew, coordination and other indirect support). So why in game Ukraine does not have US-made drones, night vision googles and other equipment. Since now, at this moment In Real Life - US actually provided Ukraine army with US-made drones(ravens), night vision googles(AN/PVS-14), and counter-battery radars(AN/TPQ-36). And in terms of gameplay this will be balance as ingame US has more advanced than "raven" drones, more advanced than AN/PVS-14 night vision googles and so on.
-
14 hours ago, John Kettler said:
Oleg,
Okay. I got that part wrong. But I am dead certain the BTR-4E does have thermals fitted. I've shown the proof in two different videos.
Regards,
John Kettler
I think its just high-contrast black and white picture. Here site of the manufacturer of its sight system there is nothing about thermals http://www.chezara.com/catalog/special-equipment/trek/
-
17 minutes ago, John Kettler said:
They are listed just as such things are shown on other AFVs so equipped: IR Optics.
"IR Optics" tag in game does not equal to thermal imaging. Its more like "any night vision capability" and almost every vehicle in game has this tag
Here is quote from manual
Almost all armored combat vehicles such as APCs, IFVs, and tanks are equipped with either night
vision or thermal vision. Because the imaging units on these vehicles are much larger, they
have a higher resolution and zoom, and thus can typically spot better and further than manportable systems. You can tell whether a vehicle has night vision systems by opening the
BLACK SEA 39
subsystem tab in the vehicle info panel (it is the middle tab). "IR Optics" will be listed here if
the vehicle possesses such technology
-
6 hours ago, Machor said:
Does the BTR-4E have thermals?
No
6 hours ago, Machor said:The PRP-4M should have a Soviet thermal sight. Any experience using it?
It has first generation thermals. Its more like thermal photo camera than video. Its give thermal scans of target with slow update rate. In game i think it works. PRP-4M and BRM-1K spots further then any other ex-soviet vehicle like btr-70 and bmp-2. But less then modern second generation thermals like on t-72b3 and t-90 and Oplot (Oplot currently spots less cause of bug, realistically it should spot as good as rusian tanks)
-
22 minutes ago, kinophile said:
Oplot is not a valid choice for spotting comparison - it's commander has a known bug where he spots but then is constantly 'rotating' for the rest of the game. This significantly degrades the Tank's spotting ability.
It should be. Since T-72B3 has terrible commander optics it should not add any spotting power, especially at night at bad weather conditions(this situation i used in test). So in that test commander of T-72B3 should be as good at spotting as comander of Oplot with 'rotating' bug
-
12 minutes ago, kinophile said:
You're better to use an elite '64 (BV or Bulat, I forget which one is more "advanced").
BV and Bulat does not have thermals.
13 minutes ago, kinophile said:in RL doesn't the Ukraine have 72s of its own?
Few old modification of 72s was restored from storage as act of desperation, when our army needed any tank they could get. Officially t-72 are not in active service.
-
14 minutes ago, Vanir Ausf B said:
It's not clear from you screenshots what you mean my "outspotting". Does the T-72 spot things that the Oplot never can or does it just spot them faster? If it is the latter, how many times did you run the test?
I launched map with night and thick rain condition in Hotseat mode, controlling both sides put Oplot and T-72 at front one another with clean line of sight, and move them close till some one spot the opponent. T-72 spots Oplot first and Oplot still need to move a lot closer to spot T-72
MBT performance difference between sides and ammo selection AI
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted · Edited by Oleg
Oplot ingame has bug when commander some times stuck in forever "rotating" state during which he dont spot anything.
Bulat has naturally better optics than BV
IRL Bulat also has better commander sight than T-72B3. Not sure if its true for ingame
Shooting atgms instead of sabot is just lazy bug of ingame ai. Cause of this i actually think t-64bv ingame is best ukrainian tank cause its just does not have those stupid atgms so it stuck using right ammo choice.