Halmbarte
-
Posts
460 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Halmbarte
-
-
I've never actually seen this happen before. A M150 got taken out by my 9p149 Shturm:
Just caught the commanders cupola and didn't do the gunner or mount any good.
I always just figured the missile coolant was methanol based and the gunners were hardcore alcoholics based on their spotting performance.
Maybe these ones are teetotal?
H
-
Baseless speculation here for modern titles:
India - Pakistan war
China - Russia
H
-
12 hours ago, Ultradave said:
Oh, I would too, but at the time it was more rare than VT fuses! Maybe there were huge stockpiles of it somewhere but we got very little for training.
Dave
Not shocking considering the tendency for ICM munitions to turn into minefields due to UXO problems...
H
-
10 hours ago, Ultradave said:
VT fuses of the CW worked great, but we didn't have a large amount of them. I don't know if we had a WW3 in Europe if we would have been provided a lot more or not). You can't fire them over water because they'd get a very strong return off the water and explode too early. And by firing over water, you're probably ok if the body of water is at the apex of the trajectory. If it's closer to the target you may get premature firing. A small stream isn't going to do it. A wide river, small lake definitely would. The same can be true over forested areas if the tree cover is very dense. Strong return off the forest canopy means the fuse can fire too soon - above the canopy. A snow covered canopy would be even more likely to prematurely trigger the fuse. Firing at personnel in heavy woods we would have used Time fuses so that the fuse explodes at a preset time of flight. That flight trajectory is adjusted when computing data so that the shell explodes in the air about 7m above the target rather than impacting the target (basically lifting the trajectory so the point of impact would be behind the target). With time (Mechanical Time) fuses, there's no "radar" component, just a clock, so no chance of that VT premature triggering. You can also use "Quick" fuse (point detonating/impact) and get good results because some of them are going to go off when hitting a tree, creating an airburst in the middle of the woods. (think of the Bastogne perimeter episode of Band of Brothers where they are in their foxholes and trees are "exploding" around them.)
So that tracks pretty well with the in game results above with VT fuses into woods. The game doesn't model mechanical time fuses at all. It's either HE Quick or VT, or later, some time of precision munitions.
Pretty good but very short article on US designed fuses. The mechanical time fuses I saw were the MTSQ-564 - first pic, left hand fuse. Rotate the top to select the time. They'll still go off on impact if for some reason the time doesn't work - either failure or hitting something before time expires.
http://www.inert-ord.net/usa03a/usa6/fuzes/index.html
Dave
Barring access to VT I'd take ICM. ICM works for a lot of the same applications I'd pick VT for, plus I might get lucky and actually hit an IFV with one.
H
-
I preferentially use VT fuze unless I'm targeting a vehicle or building. Given I've had friendly fire hits from VT at 200m I'm suspecting that VT gives a much wider area of coverage than impact fuze.
I have had near misses from arty punch thru M113 & BTR armor. I don't remember seeing fragments ever make it into a tank, although I have had plenty of tanks immobilized by arty near misses or direct hits.
H
-
I use the hull down command a lot as a time saver. The method that works for me is making the endpoint the point where I don't want the vehicle to move past, then setting a firing point to the spot I want to be hull down to. There are a couple of limitations:
1) The target spot is ground hight, not vehicle height. The difference can cause problems*.
2) The problem* that gets me the most often is that I'm hull down to the spot I wanted, but another, unnoticed location has a better line of fire, again leading to problems*.
H
*Problem = significant emotional experience for the crew.
-
3 hours ago, Centurian52 said:
As I've said several times recently, I can almost guarantee that the next western front title will be in North Africa. In fact it is almost certain to be Tunisia 1943.
They haven't gone backwards since Sicily because they prioritized finishing up the late war first. The late war is finished. There is no direction to go now but back. The next step back in time from Sicily 1943 is Tunisia 1943. It's going to be Tunisia 1943 next.
I would be all over that like ugly on Danny Trejo.
H
-
13 hours ago, MikeSinn said:
I'm really enjoying the module for Final BlitzKrieg but have a question on whether the pintle mounted 50cal MGs on the Pershing and some late war Shermans are usable. I've run several tests trying to get the 50cals to fire. I've tried target light with tank unbuttoned, buttoned, and even a squad of tank riders. In all cases, no graphic of the 50 cal firing nor does the 50cal ammo count ever decrease. Are these unusable currently or am I just doing something wrong?
Will tank riders fire the .50?
H
-
44 minutes ago, Thewood1 said:
It is very easy to make that distinction between all of those functions. But as you say, its the designer that has to do it. And map size isn't really an issue. Again the scenario designer has to adjust what they put into the OOB and the mission parameters. A quick way to validate that...how many people have played a scenario where just spotting a unit gave you points. That objective parameter is screaming recon/counter-recon battle. I'm not sure I've ever seen that objective used.
One of the things I did way back when I played a lot more CM was to inventory my troops for experience and fitness. I kept a good leader with few of them and used them as scouts.
Conversely green troops with poor leadership are great for 'exploding mine detector' recon.
If you're a heartless bastard.
Like me.
H
-
You can turn it around too.
Use MGs and mortars to get the German TCs to button up and take away that advantage. If you manage to plink a TC or three it's a bonus.
H
-
My short version of the excellent write up by Centurian52:
Using Sov tactics to beat the Germans/NATO in RT/CW:
Time spent on recon is never wasted.
Time and resources spent killing enemy recon is never wasted.
Have a plan and execute it.
The artillery fire plan must support the maneuver plan. The maneuver plan dictates the fire plan and they must be mutually supportive.
A company of Sov tanks spots better than any single German/NATO tank.
Take away the better spotting offered by the German/NATO habit of fighting unbuttoned. Get them heads down to decrease their situational awareness.
When you attack, attack! Don't poke him with one finger at a time. Make a fist and crush the enemy with overwhelming force.
Use a platoon to crush a squad > use a company to crush a platoon >> use a battalion to crush a squad. Fair fights are for suckers.
Keep pressing attacks until they aren't feasible anymore, but don't reinforce failure. The Germans/Americans never have enough troops/tanks.
Just because you have mass doesn't mean the only way forwards is a frontal assault. There are other ways to win that don't involve sticking your dick into the meat grinder until it jams. Recon routes that bypass the enemy, the Germans/NATO never have enough troops/tanks to cover every avenue of approach. Infantry infiltration is a thing.
If you're playing the Sov: Your man portable ATGMs (>AT3s) are scary. Use infiltration tactics to get the ATGMs forward into range to support attacks. Make sure to protect the carriers since they are stuffed with reloads and make big boom if hit.
Take your time, don't be in a rush to die. You'll probably run out of people, tanks, and/or ammo before you run out of time.
Urban warfare:Don't move in the streets. Mouseholing is optimum, then back gardens, then alleyways. Stay out of the streets. Use supporting weapons to create mouseholes and gaps in walls.
Don't go in through the front door. If you can arrange it start at the top and clear down.
Suppress every building that has line of sight to your maneuvering force. If you can't suppress or smoke it don't move that way.
H
-
When playing the Sov I generally have the recon guys unbuttoned. If I'm using tank destroyers or tanks for recon I'll unbutton them.
If they are the follow on forces I'll generally leave them buttoned up. Either way I tend not to try to force them to unbutton manually.
H
-
3 hours ago, Sequoia said:
I think having Engineers be able to deactivate spotted IED's would be a great feature.
Any unit can deactivate a mine or IED.
Once.
H
-
8 hours ago, AtlasActual said:
Demining vehicle like a mineplow. It was made in BN
Yes, we have mines but no way to clear then so a vehicle can pass.
H
-
3 hours ago, Simcoe said:
I used to be a big modern CM player but I'm firmly in the WW2 camp now.
Modern games exacerbate all the weaknesses of the engine. I think most people will agree the biggest issues in the game are aircraft(control is very basic and you either shoot them down easily or it's an enemy that you have no control over and completely random), vehicle spotting (T-62's in Cold War especially are crewed by Stevie Wonder) and artillery interaction with tanks (there's a bug where subsystems can't be damaged on tanks.
Modern modules all have more airpower, more tanks and more subsystems.
Until these issues are fixed (when hell freezes over) I'll stick to T-34's and Tigers.
It seems like that sometimes. And sometimes you get this:
T62 crossing open ground spotted the M150 launch, got off a shot and a hit while the missile was still in flight.
H
-
45 minutes ago, Rob2020 said:
As a long-time player of CM1, years ago, I've only dabbled with the demos for CMA and CMBS, so take this comment with a grain of salt, but why all the rage for the 1980's? I wouldn't mind going back to the 1950's-1970's.
I really, really want the Arab-Israeli wars. Interesting mix of equipment, capabilities, and terraine on both sides and it is the last time entire nation states went all out prior to Ukraine-Russia.
WWII Africa would be acceptable too.
H
-
32 minutes ago, billbindc said:
So far, I’m only at the point of thinking I want the Sov’s to come to me first and then counter.
I tried that vs the AI and got whipped. T64s & BMP2s are a rough ride for M60s & M113s.
Plus it's a tiny map with short sight lines so TOW & Dragon get spotted and ventilated very quickly after launching.
H
-
13 minutes ago, billbindc said:
So...if I may impose one more time...I'm looking at Stem the Tide as the American player and I haven't the foggiest idea how to think about it. Site lines are short, contact ranges look like they will be point blank and I don't have much in the way of infantry.
I would be curious not for a how-to...but a this-is-how-you-should-thing-about-it approach to the problem. Thanks again!
Resign your commission and take a plane ride back to the land of the round doorknob?
Stem the Tide is a tough ride for the American player. That one & Rumpenheim Rumpus are a hard row for the US.
H
-
9 hours ago, The_Capt said:
Definitely more robust and better resourced than what we saw in '22. One could argue the Soviets invented modern operational manoeuvre - or at least upscaled it well past anything the Germans had. There were failures and warts but Soviet manoeuvre at the end of WW2 was nothing to poo-poo.
There is a beauty in the blunt brutality of the Soviet system. What we will never know is if it would have translated into a modern era. But as you note, the signs were already on the wall. ATGMs as "manageable by smoke, mobility and c-fires" was never really tested beyond the Arab-Israeli wars. The effect of precision on the battlefield in CMCW is obvious, but in real life we never really tested it.
The Soviet Army had very good teachers in WWII. It was a pass/fail course, and by about the 3rd year of the war the survivors had learned how to do dynamic operational warfare at least as well as the early war Germans and they were resourced to a level that the Germans couldn't dream of.
H
-
I usually fight in alignment with the doctrine of the forces. US I keep TCs out as much as possible. Sov I'll turn out the TCs if the tanks are doing recon, but if they button up due to threats I'll leave them alone. Same with APCs/IFVs.
About thermals, as far as I know nothing in CW has independent thermals for the TC. So I'd expect the spotting advantage from thermals to stay entirely with the gunner and have a very limited FOV.
H
-
5 hours ago, AlexUK said:
Is it just me that has a problem with the LAV TOWS not seeing anything in second mission?
No, I had very bad problems with getting them to spot the tanks.
H
-
38 minutes ago, Erwin said:
The shock one feels going from CM1 to CMSF will probably be similar to the shock going from CMSF to CMBS. One can afford hardly any mistakes in CMSF. One cannot afford ANY mistakes in CMBS. Good game tho'.
The1st time my guys hiding in a building got hosed by multiple 30mm auto cannons from BMP2s was shocking. H
-
Maybe I'm just not seeing it when I search, but where is the CW demo? I want a buddy to be able to try the game out but can't find a link to the demo for CW.
H
-
23 hours ago, wyskass said:
All good advice.
How do you manage ATGM threats against vehicles? I do try to lead on foot and clear/observe, but too often end up moving up thinking it's safe to get better angles for fire from vehicles, and get blown up out of never observed shooter. I generally consider them for standoff fire support, but not entirely sure how to use IFV's properly since I get into trouble with them. When best to give squad protection during movement, and when to use as fire support. Can't seem to square both contradictory usages.
As to Humvees? I have even more trouble with those, especially TOW ones. I guess standoff again.
Exposure times and angles.
Where would you put ATGMs if you were the enemy? Get eyes on those areas and if you have the assets hit them with arty or airstrikes. Minimize exposure of your vehicles by moving them down covered routes and don't expose them long enough to be spotted, aimed at, and have ATGMs guided onto you. Suppress spotted enemy elements and those 'really good' locations before moving into the open. You'll still lose units, but fewer of them. Don't advance into obvious kill zones w/o stacking the deck in your favor.
H
The year to come - 2024 (Part 2)
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted
I usually link to imgur.
H