Sorrow_Knight
-
Posts
20 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Sorrow_Knight
-
-
Interesting, but pbem is easier to play with random opponent. There may be issues with freetime sync.
-
8 hours ago, HUSKER2142 said:
What prevents the United States from putting on the battle machine the gun "M61 Vulcan" + missiles "ground-to-air" , along with radar and optical sights.The range will be smaller than "SAM" Tunguska , but it's better than nothing.
Religion...
-
I`m in =)
-
Just now, Raptorx7 said:
Two campaigns (1 US, 1 Russian with 11-13 missions each), 25 new QB maps and 7 standalone scenarios.
Thats not bad for 10 bucks!
Well... v4 Engine had some usefull content and mechanics, and it worst 10 bucks, but couple of maps while there is qute good map editor rght in game...well... it may cost $3-5, not $10.
-
Good... but... are you serious? $10 for just a map pack???
-
Just now, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:
ERA has been around since 2008. LWR there's some legacy stuff in storage but there's bolt on units available from several sources.
Shtora, ERA, Arena etc already is in mass production. But you still didn`t answer my question- is there SO MANY ERA to equip every single M1\Bradley\Striker? Or at least is there enough ERA to convince its rarity in CMBS (actually it`s same question)?
-
Just now, exsonic01 said:
Does 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.
Does US have that much ERA\LWR etc. to convince current rerity point in CMBS for M1\Bradley\Striker???
-
Just now, exsonic01 said:
you need to accept major part of current CMBS Russian army will cut (including T-90AM), and you will cry out loud about how much the CMBS is the NATO biased game.
And same question to you- What russian equipment is really such "fantasy" as you saying here and shoud be cutted?
-
5 minutes ago, shift8 said:
I fully expect that the Russians should be equivalently stepped down, since they have received the BULK of the fantasy gear. Fair is fair right?
And question right for you- what Russian gear is so "fantasy", or at least MORE "fantasy, than LWR, APS and ERA on US vehicles (wich is changing performance vs russians)?
-
2 minutes ago, Rinaldi said:
I do, and I'm not.
If you think the addition of bolted on ERA and LWR and off the shelf APS is in anyway comparable to the addition of a full modernization of the T90 that may or may not be in universal service (hint: Its not) along with the inclusion of a Chassis that, to the best of everyone's knowledge, is not in active service, than you are tilting at windmills. Green man go home.
I ask once more- why in game there is restricted Russian tank built in quite big numbers (at least half of batallion) in 2016-17, but implemented US tank that will probably be in service in... 2025 or even later?
Actually I`m not interested in any new toys like T-14 and others, but if there is no of them, M1A2 shoud be stripped down to it`s REAL state of 2015-2017, without it well =) I will continue to insist on T-14, T-15, and both BMP and APC on Kurganets-25 base. =)
-
Just now, Artkin said:
My point is, everything is secretive. We dont know jack about most mbts and most apcs. No clue how many AM's if theyre ready to be fielded etc... There are scarce propaganda videos floating around sure. And this is primarily where most of us get our information from (Web articles included). BF made assumptions on the vehicles and their potential.
We definitely dont know how Russian tanks perform. T90A's have never seen real combat besides in Syria lately AFAIK. T90AM's are questionable altogether, and nearly falls in the same category as the Armata.
I actually could say the same about every(!!!) US unit in BS, because I can`t really say where is pure propaganda and where is real combat performace.
-
2 minutes ago, Rinaldi said:
That the OPLOT is essentially a T80 with French-style (but locally produced) Optics? There's much more information floating around that can be extrapolated. There are 10 with the Ukranians, more abroad. I can read Wikipedia too ;).
You are welcome to dream about the inclusion of the Armata, of course. Dreams, I suspect, are what they will remain. I'm not going to be repeating myself, my point has been made.
there is nothing in Armata equiment, wich characteristics is totally unknown and\or secret. And one more question: why there IS M1A2 Sep2 with functions, that it haven`t (first of all- LWR), but T-14 is somehow restricted... why both sides cant have a bit "fictional" (if you think that Armata is more fictional than Oplot, so be it, I don`t whant to argue with you about that cause it`s useless to change your mind about that, even if it is totally wrong) top tanks? Why there can`t be options for recent M1A2 and Armata and RALISTIC M1A2 and T-90\72?
-
8 minutes ago, Rinaldi said:
Ultimately this all goes back to the fact that we know nothing substantial about the Armata and that alone should prevent its inclusion in a game that prides itself as an accurate simulation.
And what you personally know about, for exampe Oplot? And again there are already at least 20 Armatas, and only 5 to 10 Oplots... I think, that even this make T-14 rihgt to be in CM (very expensive ofcourse)
-
Just now, Artkin said:
Included in that assumption is Russia doesn't have enough Armatas to field.
There already are about 20 Armatas produced.
-
5 hours ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:
vs entirely fictional Russian hardware, and Ukrainian stuff that exists in small numbers.
And what Russian hardware in game you think so "entirely fictional"?
Ukrainian army at moment almost hasn`t anything really numerous, so some "small numbers" hardware may be in the field.
-
7 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
No doubt.
But I agree with you, that russian tanks and other vehicles have too long spotting\reaction time. There maybe real problem with strong identification of targets, but there should be possibility to shoot " somewhere there" if there is any signs of target especially vehicle, that is very big and very hot, and actually can`t be unspotted. There may be some penalties for accuracy, but firing at not identificated target shoud be possible.
-
7 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
That and Russian tanks seem just a bit myopic, no matter how good they are.
may be, but esterday that myopic didn`t stop T-90 from killing my M1 while not being even seen.
-
Actually there is no problem with Ru underpowered, US overpowered. The only problem is that there is some equipment, that is in service, but not introduced in game, some equipment that should have a bit more options in force constructor, and finally some equipment, that don`t work as it must be.
-
Just add some ideas here =)
1. As it already mentioned- RPO is useless. Even US M25 (actually still XM25) is more powerfull, than RPO that is specific antyinfantry weapon, but in game it can do nothing. I`ve tested RPOs against infantry batallion, that was groupped in very-very tight "formation". As effect of about 20 RPO shots was only about 20-25 casualties among several hundreds of "targets". RPGs with HE rounds killed over 150 "targets" in same conditions. Some video about hou RPO works in real life (see video below)
2. US armor lacks of difference. In game there really should be M1 with several SEP mods, M1, Bradley, Stryker without ERA (actually I don`t think, that "if they feel they need it, there is enough ERA sets to install it on EVERY tank, APC or IFV of task force, or batallion).
3. Russian and Ukrainian armies hasn`t some weapons and vehicles that is already in service (Sophist already mentioned the list, so I don`t think i should wright it once more)
4. Russian army don`t have much flexibility both in formations (company tactical groups, which is different from companies of batallion TG should be included in game), also in formations should be more options. For example- ability to swap sniper in BTR infantry squad with rifleman with scoped AK, or AK with grenade launcher), also I think that there should be option of scoped AKs for whole squad\certain soldier roles and there may be some weapon instead of "normal" AK.
5. Also I think, that night vision equipment and night scopes of russian infantry is too "weak" in comparison with US ones. I`ve seen that equipment, that already in service or just near it and i can say that it is at least as good as EU\US ones. It may be not massed yet, but... well it may be one more option for suggestion above.
Russian / Ukrainian Breaching kits
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
I think, that with current behaviour of buildings, democharges gives infantry only problems: the only advantage of democharge is that infantry not needed door to enter building, but it destroy whole section of wall along building side, it reducing building HP and making it easier to demolish (that is bad if you manage to defend inside), democharge will not give any advantage to assault building from outside, just make team, trying to plant it vulnerable for enemy fire from inside (infantry in building already have to big defensive bonus, that makes infantry assault of occupated building something near sacrifice for attackers).