DerKommissar

Drake's party bus. I did see Milverados at Base Borden. IDK if that answers your question regarding "general purpose trucks". They did look practical for peace-time logistics -- and adapted to many more applications.

My heart does go out to the Sheridan. What a sad little tank story...

I would recommend playing Theatre of War 3: Korea. It's a flawed game, and inferior to any CM title -- but, it's the best you can get in the time period.

Aye, or if one has a field phone setup. After all, wire was the preferred method of artillery communication, even in the US Army. That analysis highlighted how we look over the role of signal troops. Soviet signal corps had to sneak the wire in behind the watchful eye of the Wehrmacht -- and from the analysis, it looks like they were very successful at establishing hidden FOs. Can you imagine if we get actual field telephones in CM 3.0?

In my experience, playing as UKR and USA, is that MANPADs are a weak kind of compromise for AA. By the time they spot the enemy CAS, lock on it and shoot it -- the CAS will already have done most of its work. Add in that sometimes the missiles will miss and other times they won't destroy the CAS. So, how many missiles do you have? Not many. Even dedicated MANPAD teams usually carry 1 reload and solo MANPAD operators just got one missile. Reloading takes time, CAS has fun, in the meanwhile. This makes the suppressible value of a MANPAD limited. Moral of the story is do not expect your MANPADs to prevent CAS from vaporizing your other troops -- especially mechanized formations in open spaces. It's the equivalent to expecting floating seat cushions to prevent your passenger plane from crashing into the ocean. If your MANPADs are your only AA tool -- you're gonna have a bad time. This being said, MANPADs are kinda precious, because there your only answer to Shturmoviks zipping about. I would like to have organic SPAAGs in my battalion. The main advantage of SPAAGs being that they can not just kill CAS, but also suppress it. But it seems that the world has kinda left SPAAGs behind. Love to see the LAV-AD, when they release USMC. Can IFV autocannons and AA MGs shoot at CAS? I know many APCs carry a MANPAD, and I've seen pictures of them being shot by turned out crew/passengers. Can that be accomplished in CM? Turned out MANPAD dudes in a BTR/Stryker?

Shows just how much I know. The T-72 variant game is too strong. Just when I get it down, they come up with a new one! To me, the CITV is one of the most, if not THE most, important upgrade to these tanks. Which is why I am dejected to see them being omitted from T-80BVMs and T-72B3 obr. 2016.

As I understand, the suggestion is even more profound. They're saying that Star Trek: The Next Generation is going to hybridize conventional (old), asymmetric (current) and EW (new/future) elements. The Russians have integrated these elements into their doctrine, becoming much more flexible than the Soviets. Currently we differentiate between asymmetric and conventional to handle either or. The whole concept behind "Maskerovka" is to keep us guessing. Authors also do well to put attention to EW. The old vacuum tube stereotype needs to change, the Russians really put a lot of eggs into EW. Militias, working with mercenaries, working with Army, working with spec ops. You'd best expect the unexpected. EW, and drone, applications that we considered sci-fi a decade ago, are now normal day-to-day procedures. Some old habits die hard though. We usually see the NCO as the backbone of the military, they see the 2nd LT as the backbone. BTR-90 one was kinda funny. Yeah, there's technical discrepancies in this one and some of the info graphics are gamey. Also uses the Spetsnaz term quite a lot, not really specifying /which/ Spetsnaz. Which is like using "vehicle" to differentiate "car" from "truck". I also found the mention of the BMP-3 based self-propelled Kornet odd. I think they wanted the Khrizantema, much more ubiquitous and scary tank destroyer.

You'll also find a few of us, pansysnack salarymen, that are overly enthusiastic about military history and yet never held a gun in their life! Welcome! Come one, come all!

The B3 (obr. 2010) is the one in game. The most modern T-72 variant is B3M (obr. 2014) with new engine, commander thermals, new gun and optional Relikt armour. Most pictures I've seen have the Kontakt-5 -- I presume they are older pictures.The B3 (obr. 2016) is one with partial Relikt ERA (most notably on the sides). ACE mod is probably one of the most popular mods on A3's workshop. ACE 3 has official support for RHS, too. To me, ACE3 + RHS = A2 ACE. I was an SLX fan, myself -- yet, it has no successor in A3.

I started with RTS-mode, because I was more familiar with it in the genre. I liked it well enough, when I started out. I generally find that games take less with RTS-mode and I mostly played macro. Currently, I play with WEGO, I think it's the definitive way to play the game. Tactics games are usually either turn based or real-time pausable -- WEGO is fairly rare. Really giving you time to make elaborate plans and keep track of many units, while still boasting lively action during replay.

Yep, still modernizing 'em 72s. I recently played with the obr. 2016 version of the B3 in RHS. Kinda funny that the obr. 2016 variant isn't in BS.

Recently somebody was discussing Murphy's laws. Number 43 comes to mind, xD. I've seen videos of TOWs or other older, heavier, ATGMs being used in anti-personnel. I assume that fragmentation/thermobaric/HE is cheaper than a proper HEAT warhead.

A friend lent me a copy of the 2nd, I was sold. I didn't even know demos existed, up until now. I think I have a few expired free beta codes lying around, but that's about it. A dedicated Arma community can probably help you out, better than I can (try the steam community forums). I play with the IFA3 and Faces of War WW2 mods.

So, 3.0 had yellow and green tracers? I wonder which weapons got which one. I think with 4.0, tracers have become much more authentic. I think they could still be more "mixed" into the ammunition. With different weapons having different frequencies of tracer, maybe some get tracers at the end of a mag/belt. I think that's already partially implemented, isn't it? Aye, I shed a tear for the Commonwealth infantry. I found that BARs kinda fulfill their intended purpose -- they weren't really designed as LMGs. Ha! When I saw those white tracers, I was stupefied. At first, I thought something GODLY was producing those white bolts towards my foxholed GIs. Turns out it was one of the crappiest LMGs in the war-- but, hey, at least it had style.

It recently occurred to me that most ATGMs are often used against personnel, more often than not in COIN. No wonder all new ATGMs come with anti-personnel munitions. With NLOS ability, that would maybe even allow them to be used as field guns, when needed. IDK if I'd consider it "one step further" though. It's just another, pricey, feature. I'm sure a remote operator mount could be mated with an NLOS missile, theoretically speaking. I think fire and forget is already becoming a requirement for new-ish systems.

With the G3s and galils, I'm pretty sure it's Estonia. Kinda cool to see those legendary rifles still being issued. As for tank fighting robots: I found this concept to be very attractive. From videos in Syria, it seems that the only defense ATGM teams have is concealment. Any vehicle, especially one with thermals, could suppress them. Put one of these things on a roof, and get the operators somewhere safe. While they may not safely reload, they could potentially set up multiples, at different angles. Mount one of these things on an unmanned vehicle... I think this is the future of ATGMs.

I've always had a pet peeve with tracers in games/movies (all ammunition in all guns is orange/yellow tracers). Even though I started with V3, once I read that V4 was going to have proper tracers -- I was converted. Even that annoying crazy infantry bug is peanuts compared to beautiful, accurate and most importantly colourful tracers that are in-game. Something I really missed when playing CMSF1/CMA. The muzzle flashes and guys shooting from corners are also desired additions.

Was Murphy a grunt? Or was he actually an engineer? - Number 43 has some rather wild implications about a lot of new designs. - Number 35, especially, seems inspired by the F-35 program (PAK FA, etc.). - Number 37 is pretty much a real life axiom. - Number 10 can be applied to polarized capacitors, as they are tiny grenades. - Number 26 is a good way to treat overcurrent fuses. - Number 20 seems to hold up, historically wise. Fully consistent with 43 and 35.

Good drill, I learned this one the hard way after blasting near the bocage. xD My advice for breaching buildings is to put the team next to the building's wall (doesn't matter how), then put the BLAST command inside the building (so it's perpendicular to the wall). Be warned that the sappers will storm the building after breach. That's often what I want.

How do you zero in indirect fires support without radio feedback? I think for the Soviets, for the most part, the answer was "you don't". Their doctrine had evolved dependent on the various tools you mentioned. From what I understand, they would scout out, mark and triangulate reference points/lines as part of initial planning for offensive/defensive plans. Soviets LOVED plans. They also loved the mortar, and after 41, they began shifting an insane proportion of their production to them. Funny enough, heavy infantry weapons were found more critical than tank production. After 41, they tried to centralize the organic fire support assets -- so, often decisions regarding mortars would be made at the divisional level (plans, plans, plans). The doctrine of "artillery preparation" relied on LOTS of HEAVY mortars to make up for potential inaccuracy. A hammer would be applied, where the Allies would use a scalpel. Area denial and even psychological warfare were expected effects, rather than destruction of specific fortifications. You can see why they adopted mass rocket artillery as early as they did. They generally treated mortars, even the 82mm, as general purpose artillery. All the while, direct fire capable guns were very emphasized in their doctrine. Divisional guns, especially. These would be put close to the front, and quickly wired via telephone to observers. The wire was extensively used, and almost exclusively, in 1941. You often see photos of guys lugging those big rollers of the stuff around. Soviets were damn sneaky. Prepared observation posts would be camouflaged right under the German's noses. They'd even sneak horse drawn artillery up to the line. As the fighting on the eastern front became more mobile in '44. Those radios, including observation vehicles, which the soviets loved, came into heavy exploitation. My general source has been: TACTICS & FIRE CONTROL OF RUSSIAN ARTILLERY IN ATTACK AND DEFENSE DURING 1941, 1942, and 1944 AND THEIR DEVELOPMENT IN RECENT TIMES BY OBERST (I.G) HANS-GEORG RICHERT The source covers infinitely more on the topic than my overly-enthusiastic rant has -- got plenty of real life examples to boot. Highly suggest checking it out.

Any word on the Warsaw Uprising? It would be! The only way to accomplish that is to either become a government or a bank. All snarky-ness aside, I recently got my hands on FB -- so I can wait for half a year or whatever. This being said, many mods I follow for various games have monthly updates. Every month they put up a big update with screenshots, estimates and changelogs. On many projects, modders got a community manager person. Volunteers, maybe from the community, that do what the devs can't. Sometimes, these guys also function as moderators, and keep the community in check. All of this frees up dev time. I really liked the AARs for CMSF2, they were well-informative for me.

That's some serious frontal armour spacing. I'm guessing the 57 is a grandchild of the S-60, and expected to handle air threats? Seems overkill for a battle-taxi. I am surprised to see that the MG is mounted externally. Any peeks at the 125mm SPG version? Mount this turret on it?

FI is great, especially for those of us who long for early war. Gotta love playing with/against the Italians. From what I understand, the general plans of AI are map-based (and, so, depend on the map maker), and the tactical means-to-the-end come from the actual engine (which is shared across 4.0 games). From my experience, the capabilities of AI in quick battle are roughly the same across the board. You can also customize the amount of points the AI get, much how most RTS "difficulty" works. Good choice, my Romulan friend. I hope you really like hedgerows...

Right after they release CMA 4.0 upgrade on Steam -- with visible aircraft models.

I use Steam Workshop, personally. However, Armaholic is still around and has most of the mods. Workshop has "too many" mods, xD. I think even if you buy Arma 3 on disk, it'll demand that you get Steam. It's a parasite that tricks you into dependence with its forcefully symbiotic ways. I'm guessing it's liquid nitrogen cooled with 64 CPUs, a GPU from NASA, nuclear powered power supply and a terabyte of RAM. Welcome! Any sort of co-op would be fantastic. I've heard of people using the save system to control different units on one side, via PBEM. Sounds promising, but I haven't tried it out. I'd like to see a persistent TO&E from game to game, like in Battlefleet Gothic Armada.