Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Days Won


holoween last won the day on May 3

holoween had the most liked content!

About holoween

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. If youre taking heavy casualties while clearing buildings youre doing it wrong. Being pinned cancels your movement orders with the only excepton being the retreat command. Since they disabled the retreat command for buildings you now have no way of extracting pinned units from buildings.
  2. Only the one actually looking this direction. If we werent in a 360 security at the time we could have missed it entirely. Lol i meant 10 tons
  3. I coan give you an anecdote thats slightly more relevant. On an exercise i was sitting with my squad just off a crossroad in a forest waiting to move on and suddenly on the crossroad a 210ton military truck apeared. Noone had heard or seen it until it stood on the crossroad itself and ony those actually facing the crossroad itself even saw it. And that instance wasnt even with any combat noise around.
  4. They didnt toughen up their morale they simply disabled retreating from buildings making them deathtraps against competent oponents.
  5. In CMSF2 a jevelin is a sure kill if launched. All other ATGMs are far less likely to KO a NATO MBT. With APS youre looking at fairly low killchances even for javelins. If we were living in a world without aps but with javelins id agree with you.
  6. I can tell you i wouldnt want to be the guy having to launch a javelin at an mbt that can fire a 120mm+ airburst he shell, has several thermal optics equally if not more powerfull than my own. I might kill the tank but the he grenade will kill me and my buddies. And if the tank has an APS i cant even expect a kill. And since tanks arent used alone and if the one im shooting at doesnt get me another one probably will. As for economics youre not really making fair comparisons. Every MBT will cost far more to initially acuire but the ammunition is far cheaper. Now take in mind youre not alwa
  7. How difficult is it to kill the abrams vs the infantryman hloding the javelin
  8. Spot first, shoot first, kill first is called into question for atgms with the introduction of active protection systems. So against active protection systems you either have to try to overload the system with several missiles at the same time, deplete the defensive munitions or simply use KE. To defeat een a current mbt with KE from the front you need 120+mm guns which by virtue of their size inherently require larger vehicles and once youre at 30 tons just to get the gun and associated ammo, optice, etc moving you might aswell put enough armour on it to protect it from autocannon a
  9. The issue is that the lower your base armour is the easier it is to defeat it with low tech ammunition. Your lightly armoured fast vehicles like strikers for example will easily get destroyed from autocannon fire from IFVs no matter how much active protection systems you put on them. The same goes for IFVs vs tanks. If anything id say active protection systems have the possibility of restoring armour superiority for the forseeable future. Infantry nowadays relies exclusively on shaped charges to defeat armour which is easily defeated by active protection systems. So with widespread adopti
  10. For some reason the strikers mounted mk19 has a far worse dispersion than the crew seved one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-sjWRH8meo
  11. I didnt but its also not really a training manual more like a faq book for soldiers. To me there is a pattern emerging. the warhead arms somewhere between 25-75m possibly changing between missile versions with the 200m being the doctrinal min range so soldiers dont try to use it too close.
  12. Id echo that sentiment but id also add that this is the primary reason i also like to play huge battles. Once you know how to play well increasing the size adds an entire extra layer on top. because your small unit tactics still matter but they are now put into a greater context and managing an entire battalion sometimes forces decisions that on company level seem stupid but make sense in the bigger picture. So at some point you simply learn more from larger battles.
  13. The ability to split Squads in whatever way i want. The current system works reasonably well and for doctrinally ridgid armies is great but for more flexible ones it really misrepresents what they could/can do. But since were in dreamland let me add more things. Better arty control by allowing barrages to be modified by intensity and allowing a mix of ammunition used. The ability to have more than 1 player per side for pbem Larger maps so properly deploying and using forces becomes possible especially in the modern games. Recrewing of crew served weapons
  14. 1. trench vs foxhole comparison was last patch but the behaviour still exists. 2. Agreed Trenches are awful 3. Id expect buildings to have a far better cover rating than foxholes in the open so as far as im concerned no surprise or problem there. Equally Foxholes in dense terrain provide great cover which is again something id expect. The reason i dont have a larger sample size there is because ive been doing such comparison tests quite a bit in cm and while there are usually some outliers in every test the small sample size is enough to give a rough idea which is enough for me. It r
  15. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1o4nz0sHbp8Z03fFmm9CweH8P8Z8Nf0XiGHwAQvztsZ4/edit#gid=0 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/130RTbJ8HABwYqp4rTvsBU4NASTWebO3K4igNDxL1W28/edit#gid They are great but you cant expect them to act like forcefields making your infantry immune to fire.
  • Create New...