cbennett88

Yup! I hope you understood that I am in no way faulting you guys in my statement above. I am agreeing 100%.

Bahahaha!! You did read the whole article didn't you?? Look... "The project was abandoned by the Army, but completed by the Soviet Naval Infantry to increase protection for about 250 older T-55 tanks in 1981–82 " Last time I checked...there are NETHER T-55s or Russian Naval Infantry in this game...not to mention that the game isn't called "Height of the Cold War: Soviets vs NATO 1980's"! Lol "Drozd APS was later replaced by the simpler non-APS Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armour."..."AND... It was subsequently discontinued." Thanks for doing the research to support my argument for me... But hey...I would actually prefer that the Russians HAD deployed some sort of APS system in their Army, because I want to feel the game is justified in giving that side the option to "buy" APS if wanted. Why (and not the US side?)? Because the US already has a weapon that defeats it...the Javelin. And pretty much every squad has one.

Ahhhh...you going to have to show me some proof for that. I have been "arguing" on here for awhile that until CM:BS adds a module that brings the Israelis into the mix, all arguments about APS being realistically deployed by the vehicles in the game are worthless. Show me ANY other military that has operationally DEPLOYED APS on their combat vehicles? NOT "in testing" or "soon to be added". The US Army has been "promising" to buy a system for years...and yet we still aren't any closer than "in testing"! Here is my proof..."The service made a decision to buy Trophy for Abrams on Sept. 29, Dean said, and now the Army is moving out to deploy the systems to Europe by 2020." https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/ausa/2017/10/09/europe-bound-army-to-urgently-field-abrams-tanks-with-trophy-active-protection-system/ "...deploy the system...by 2020" ...is NOT a valid argument that the US(or any side) should have it available in the game that we have been playing for the past couple of years. It is also why you won't ever see me "buy" APS for my vehicles during QB. I am not faulting the game designers for including it when they created the game(~2015 I think) because it probably seemed like the sort of development that the US military(and the Russians) would have recognized as needed. But people keep forgetting that military procurement is "glacially SLOW!!" So...just like the back-n-forth on whether the Armata should be included next...until someone shows me pics of an operational unit (say company size or up) in the US military that has APS installed...I'm going to say "NO WAY!" P.S. I double checked on the US Marine Corps b/c I know sometimes they "cut through red tape" quicker, but "no" they haven't purchased it operationally yet either. http://defense-update.com/20160415_army-marine-corps-want-to-test-israels-trophy-aps-again.html

Discussing ONLY the BMPT.... Totally agree with you on all those points. Is it just me or does it seem like someone is trying too hard to cram every single weapon they can think of on here? Is this the "age of the Mechwarrior"?? How often are you going to have a target that cannot be dealt with by the twin 30's (which I like) or a single co-ax 7.62 MG? Why 2 co-ax MG's... AND a 30mm AGL? The missiles make perfect sense for dealing with tanks, etc. But there has to be a better way to mount/protect them! They look slapped on as an afterthought. This is NOT a "spacious" vehicle so....having 4 DIFFERENT weapons types HAS to come at the expense of ammo storage. Better to use the interior space set aside for the AGL ammo, to carry more for the autocannons. Honestly...WHAT besides an MBT...cannot be dealt with by those twin autocannons??? If that odd looking square box is the sighting system...then it looks poorly designed for anything other than straight ahead. No traverse. Not even any ability to elevate so the auto-cannons can be used against upper story buildings or helicopters. The vehicle has blind spots in every direction NOT directly in front of the turret facing. And...the sight stands out too much as an inviting target. All this being said....I am highly supportive of any and all improvements to the Ukrainian military and it's defense industries! There is some real potential in the equipment they are displaying at this expo. But as for this PARTICULAR vehicle...they need to totally re-think it's design before going any further. Just my opinion...

I'm not so sure about this. Either I read it somewhere in the manual...or on this forum...but I am thinking that the demo blast also "stuns" the soldiers occupying that floor, and that gives the advantage to the attackers during their assault. IRL at least, that is how it works...

Retreat???

BEST answer yet!!! Lol

Exactly my understanding also. But...why let the assistant recover the laser designator? It's not like I even "instructed him" to! How nice would it be if we could instruct each "medic" soldier to..."grab those grenades...and that AT-4...but leave this and that..." Regular infantry cannot "recover" blasting charges from fallen engineers when they give "medic" function. Nor can they pick up a laser designator from a dead FO. I am guessing the game is coded so that troops can only "recover" items they have the ability to use(assuming those items are not damaged). Just seems strange that in that one case, the assistant DID recover the designator.

@c3k Unfortunately game is finished and I've moved on to a new battle...

Yup! I know this "issue" all too well! But...no, I made sure to put them(stationary) in a tree line that had no vegetation(just low grass/no bushes) rather than in the wheat fields across which the tanks arrive. I even gave them Hunt commands over short distances to see if I could "trigger" them. Honestly...with so many games under my belt, I'm beginning to think that on rare occasions there is an unexplained random glitch in how things happen in game. Maybe somehow a single line of code was skipped...and now in this one instance...my scouts "possess" the javelins...but the game engine doesn't "see" them with it. Kinda like the assistant FO picking up the laser designator example I mentioned above. Only ever happened that one time. Yes...don't AT-14 teams do the same? I notice they will ignore even BRDMs & BTRs to wait for tanks. I had to manually Fire them b/c I knew that the battle had no tanks.

Well within the 2500m range. But...never as close as the 75m minimum.

I have experienced that before, so I understand what you are talking about...but I am already half through the game (well past the appearance of the MBTs *spoiler alert!) and these squads just let the MBTs roll by. I watched them during the turn. They just stay in "spotting" status the whole time. None of them change weapons to the javelin (watching the side info box). In fact...even looking at the individual soldiers, I see their AT-4...but no sign of the javelin being carried... Lol! But these are listed as "crack" troops!

Not necessarily disagreeing with you but I have seen examples in game where this is not the case. For example...I had a situation in game where my lone FO (I was playing as Russia) got killed, but his assistant(I think they are usually radio operators) did a "medic" on him and somehow recovered his laser designator. Hooray for me I thought! Especially since he was my only FO and we all know that the Russians NEED their FOs if they want to get any sort of timely artillery support. But...No...the assistant was "X'd out" from calling any artillery. I thought to myself..."Then WHY did he bother (and the game allow him?) to recover the laser designator??? Only time I ever seen that(recover a designator) happen though...

That's what I thought, but...the team has 3 rounds and the the thermal sights. I'm beginning to think US "regular" infantry and cavalry troops are trained to use...but maybe not scouts. The first two carry it as part of the regular loadout. Don't remember US scouts ever having any in the game. It certainly isn't in any of their "scout version strykers".

Playing "Rolling on the River" against the AI. Here's my question....I am well familiar with the much discussed "issue" of javelin teams remaining prone when you REALLY need them to be kneeling/ready to fire. Especially in wheat fields, high grass, etc. But...does any know if Stryker scout squads(not snipers) are coded/able to fire Javelins? In this case, I decided to equip my scout squads with Javelin launchers & missiles b/c I was planning on pushing them well forward and I wanted something more powerful then the .50 cals and Mk19s that their Strykers come with. To do so, I had to "strip" the weapons out of the infantry stryker vehicles. But...no matter what they spot (tanks, BTRs, AFVs) they won't seem to use those javelins!! Am I assuming too much in thinking that, although not specifically given an AT gunner in the squad, no one knows how to use the javelin?? I'm interested in hearing everyone's opinion...

Hello Jim! I'd be happy to be your an opponent in a PBEM game. I have CMBS, with all the updates. I use CMH and Dropbox. I am fine with any type of game/any side. Very few rules or restrictions... Email me at cbennett88@gmail.com to discuss things further...

First though...you have to "master" how to upload to dropbox...

Up for pretty much any style of engagement...any side. Very few "hard rules" Dropbox/CMH/Latest version CMBS Cbennett88@gmail.com

I can only confirm it's use (by me) in game.

Yes...Russian tanks do have FLIR, but from my experience in the game, they suffer some percentage of degraded spotting ability through smoke. I think both "in game" and IRL, the Russian FLIR systems are at least a generation behind the West. Maybe US FLIR systems do too, but I have not experienced it in any noticeable way. The spotting advantage seems clearly on the US side...and as the game shows time and time again..."He who fires first almost always wins!"

The first thing to keep in mind is...unlike tanks...they are NOT "shoot while move" weapon systems(especially the TOW's). The 50 cals and the MK19's seem to shoot fine at low/med speeds (in game), but you will need to set the TOWs up in ambush positions to use them properly. As has been mentioned above, there are significant differences in how to employ these weapons "in game" vs IRL. As an example...IRL, units would almost always seek to use the TOWs at maximum range...and the plt ldr would employ "TOW decoy charges" (simulate the missile blackblast) to confuse the enemy as to the actual firing unit's location. Here's my advice... Depending on whether your 50 cal and Mk 19 Humvees are equipped with LRAS3(FLIR), I have found that dropping an artillery smokescreen between you and the enemy will give you the advantage in being able to fire when most Red units are unable to shoot back. TOW FLIR sights can see through smoke just fine. With proper placement, you should easily have the upper hand by the time the smoke clears!

So...this confirms the suggestion by one of members that "giving" a Javelin sight enables the FO to spot much more effectively... Thanks @MOS:96B2P for sharing this info!

I saw a player post that he always had his FO's take the Javelin launchers out of his Bradley's just so they could have thermal... Seems sort of "expensive" (as in lost AT firepower) if you ask me.

@John Kettler Great "catch" John! Definitely shows how busy Russia has been with developing and "field testing" new UAV's and other interesting pieces. I am now going to do some research on some of the EW systems mentioned. The one that defeats proximity fuses in artillery is (scary) fascinating! Thanks for submitting it.

Damn! So much for all those "practice FFE missions" early in a battle, in hopes that rounds will come sooner later on when I REALLY, REALLY, need them!