DerKommissar

Funny you mention the Su-57, it was deployed to Syria, while the Armata was not (to the best of my knowledge). Mi-28s and Su-34s saw significant combat, so did various AA, EW, drones, naval and air munitions. These are practical tools that are required, and, therefore, are getting used and improved. In my recent readings, I've come to the realization that not all military hardware, especially tanks, were produced with combat in mind. Much how the colours and patterns evolved on various animals to dazzle predators, or attract mates. It's not surprising that many folks on the other side of the pond are overly enthused about it. The tank is a cultural icon. Much like the Char 2C, the Armata is a celebrity. Regardless if people like it or hate it, it was made to generate buzz.

Are there going to be any units that take advantage of the anti-aircraft feature in Engine 4? Great to know that the Marines will actually become amphibious.

I saw that Polish tank in the Chieftain/Military history visualized video: Looks like they got many old soviet vehicles lapping about. If the smoke is disorienting to the audience, I can't imagine how disorienting it is for the tankers. A curious tactic... hopefully we'll get to test it out in CM soon.

Western tanks were designed to hold the Fulda. They're heavier, bigger and designed with ergonomics in mind. They were to hold out as long as they could, focusing on the anti-vehicle role. Disable as many Eastern vehicles as possible, in order to slow them down. The Eastern tanks were designed to be dropped off at the front lines by rail and race through Europe, taking as much land as they could. Dug-in infantry and fortifications would have to be quickly defeated. They needed a lighter, smaller and more disposable tank with an HE focus. What's the Armata designed for? Parades, mostly. The greatest success stories in weapons' history took years of improvements. Armata needs to get tested, prior to serial production and, even more so, prior to adoption. It's not being tested. What are they going to test it on? What is the pressing scenario that requires the deployment of the Armata? Since the reveal of the Armata, the requirements have changed. Their military has becoming smaller, and more focused on fast, decisive, intervention. It seems that for "colonial" duties, the last century's tanks are doing the job and getting constant experience and improvement. Armata saw little else than being on parade for a few years. Meanwhile, T-72s are still rolling around at tank competitions. They're easily shipped to allies, which have the logistics and training for them. They are rolling around in horrible environments, supporting infantry and smashing buildings. When the geographic and socio-economic factors change, they'll need to come up with a new tank. I doubt that it'll be the Armata.

Gives me half a mind to play a few American Civil War 2 quick battles. xD Has anyone tried to make maps set on mainland America? Kind of like World in Conflict?

Curious: does the quality of the assistant have any effect if the leader is still alive?

Yeah, I myself often get mystified by where my smokes get popped. I usually try to do FACE to the direction and then do POP SMOKE. Yet, the BTR smoke has a mind of its own. Landing wherever and then being pushed by the wind. Pretty effective at protecting infantry, though. I'm curious: is the "black" smoke's effect on thermals any different than the usual "white" variant? Is it easier or harder to see through?

WoT actually has a health bar too. Any post-impact ballistics are abstracted as damage. WT has a cool feature that lets you see an X-ray of the post-impact damage. It's a silly game, with virtually immortal crewmen and buttoned-up track repair. They should really put that X-ray playback feature for other tank games. Squad, its main competitor, has an armour system close to Men of War (no health bar). I'm guessing Postscript will eventually update their tanks to that level.

That's a long T-55, with a curious muzzle breaks... where's the gap behind the first road wheel?

I'm currently playing that campaign, too. I am on the third mission. Which one are you? The second in command for platoon HQ? Is it the guy with the STG-44? I can see if I can replicate the issue.

Yeah, that's why I honestly can't say I'm too excited. Why do we need a recreation of Private Ryan or BoB? They're fairly recent films/shows. I'm tired of D-Day. Why can't we have something about the Italian front? North Africa? Crete? China? Burma? It was a WORLD war, right?

Yeah, I don't know the story around BFC and ToW -- I could be wrong. I'm sort of an AFV pervert. I like to see where/how they got penetrated and the full consequences of the penetration. One problem with 2d games is that they RNG where the projectile hit and the resultant damage. It'd be cool if SP could let you focus different systems of a target, like the old Fallout games. Should I target its engine for 30% hit, or target the whole vehicle for 50% hit? I have tried, many times, to get into Close Combat. There's a lot I like about those games. But half the time I have no idea what is going on (2d ToW). I'd also recommend Battle Academy, if you're into turn based stuff. Very cheap, too. Recently got Conflict of Heroes on Steam, and I still need to get into it. I may get that one. My only issue with those types of games it that they're multiplayer only. I would like to have an option to play against bots. Maybe a coop mode? I am also curious regarding the armour system of PS and Squad. Is it health point based? Do they have driver/gunner/loader/commander?

I'd say Armored Brigade (I played the demo, recently) is a bit more like Close Combat, mixed with Wargame (larger scale than Close Combat). SP is a hex-grid turn based game, and I still play it -- from time to time. It's good light fun. It's hard to compared these games to Combat Mission, though. They are literally missing an entire dimension. Does that cannon have LOS on that part of an enemy AFV? Do buildings have floors? How does the terrain /really/ look? I would like to recommend that people pick up the Theatre of War games, on Steam. They're insanely cheap and deserve to be played -- also, BFC worked on them! They have everything from the invasion of Poland, to Kursk, to the Korean war! There's also a weird Combat Mission knock off, that feels like CM 1.5, almost. It's called Panzer Command. It's whole thing is that it does from Barbarossa to Berlin. Man, they really cranked up the prices on Rome 2 -- and many of the other total wars. Crazy for a game that was barely playable at launch.

So, I recently beat the Shield of Kiev campaign (BLUFOR tactical victory), some things I learned, the hard way: - RPO was a complete waste of space, I'd take an RPG team over it. - My Oplot-Ms would freak-out when things would heat up. Shaken and Panicked would happen. The Green tanks would sometimes sneak up on a T-72b3, get a visual -- then pop a smoke and retreat! - ATGM teams did take their time engaging enemy armour. - BMP-3s would knock out Oplot-M's guns with the autocannon, after only a few hits -- from the front! All of this being said, the only one I would consider calling a bug would be the last one. I think I saw someone else complain about it, or is it just me?

Never actually used a T-70 for recon. I generally found myself with these BA-64s, a relatively newer Soviet vehicle and a dedicated scout. They're really fast, good off-road, equipped with radios and have a protected, but open-topped, turret. It's like a smaller German 222. My only gripe with it is it's too tall, lost a few to AT guns. There's also the GAZ jeep, which is my preferred recon. It usually carries forward observers. The White scout car would be a neat addition (really good scout car), as well -- I remember reading that the Soviets loved them. Not sure about halftracks, they're kind of slow and maneuver awkwardly.

Good to see good old Carl G. on the field. We were just talking about him.

I used Open GL in Uni -- actually my big project was optimizing an Open GL app via parallel computing. Our school computers ran primarily on Linux, and it was a platform we were most comfortable with. The focus of this exercise was the parallelization of the program (cores vs performance), as opposed to using Open GL to create something beautiful. Network and the security aspect was the one that took us a while -- seizing university computers, connecting them, establishing trust, and slaving them from 1 master, in order to get MPI to work. As a uni student, and a C fanatic -- I really liked Open GL. It was easy to integrate into our Frankenstein monster. As far as libraries go, it gave us plenty of options, but at the same time, not too much. Plenty of top notch documentation, and all our Uni comps already had the libraries natively. So I got respect for the OpenGL, and have always wanted to see Combat Mission on Debian. I can imagine the games would run much better. I have a disdain for verbose and clusterf__k nature of (modern) Microsoft's design philosophy (I am still on 7). My desktop is a mid-range AMD build that's capped by its 2011 mobo, it doesn't like a lot of games and AMD drivers aren't the best. My CM games don't like many shadows, but are completely playable. I've only ever had 2 crashes across all CM2s, and both of them were while saving a game (not graphics related). All this being said, I am happy to see BFC looking forward. DirectX is really the consumer's environment. Unity has piqued my interest and have seen a lot of good games, from smaller companies, on that platform. Just a disclaimer, I don't claim to be an expert. High level programming has always boggled my mind -- and generally, graphics stuff is the worst. Architecture of 32bit systems annoys me (I'm looking at you, ARM), let alone 64 bit CPUs -- with which I have 0 experience with (a 64 bit word is like a byte of 8-bit registers -- wtf kind of settings do you put there). Just sharing my 2 cents, in a system with the lowest physical currency being a nickle. oh and, speaking of CM3... (Fulda Gap, Fulda Gap, Fulda Gap...)

Can mortars shoot from the top of the building? And if so, which ones?

I did the same for my first post. Welcome to the forums! Great to see another Cold War obsessive. I haven't seen many people ask for counter battery fire. Nobody wants their arty assets to just go missing, xD. It's a good idea, though. I like how Number 1 is Fulda Gap. Fulda Gap! Fulda Gap! Fulda Gap! Surprised that the inclusion of an Operational Layer or Steam integration aren't up there. xD IDK about the formation button. I kinda trust the TacAI to adopt the right formation for the terrain. They generally do a good job, and I don't want the headache of updating all squads' formations every turn. Wasn't always fan of the feature in the Theatre of War series. As an entirely optional feature? Sure.

American answer to the German UFO?

I haven't done that campaign. However, I can share some advice: - Do you have artillery? It's an invaluable tool against stationary targets. HE can damage Panther's optics or even force the crew to pull back. HE can also work as a general debuff to the Panther, kicking up dust and shaking the crew. Heavier HE can wreck a tank, or force crew to run! - Smoke can allow your Shermans or AT assets to get closer, mitigating the Panther's range advantage. - What sort of terrain lies around the Monastery? Are the flanks guarded? Normandy is bocage country. A good way to surprise your enemy is to sneak by the cover of the bocage into positions where the Huns do not watch. If you have infantry with satchel charges, you can make paths where one does not expect. - Try to divide and conquer, try to engage one tank where others cannot. - Hug them! In general, closer ranges mitigate any technological advantage. Hope this helps, fighting well-placed German armour is almost always frustrating.

I am surprised no one has made any Bieber jokes. I suppose this thread is too classy for such buffoonery.

Aww, I was rooting for the loaned 2a6Ms. Still, the C2s are beauties -- shame they're getting axed. Reminds me of the bad old days when they wanted to replace all tanks with MGS (remember THAT?). Wonder if the C2s include MEXAS by default, or if the MEXAS equipped variant is simply not shown... Should have named someone Sajjan, would have instantly won.

@HUSKER2142 OMG, an M3 Medium! Restoring it will be tough. Looks like it's missing the top turret, and I can imagine most of the internals are long wrecked. I do not know where they can find replacements. I hope that they do -- it's a unique piece, for sure. Must have been secretly looking for Evlis Pressley's underwater rock & roll kingdom.

The only Javelin Canadians used was the MANPAD, which has long been deprecated. ERYX left service in 2016, so it should still be around. I don't know if it's in SF, though. ERYX isn't even comparable to the Javelin. It's designed for very short range (half a kilometer, roughly). Still, it's relatively light, mobile and can tackle an MBT. Kind of like a, more potent, wire-guided, Carl Gustaf.