Suleyman
-
Posts
109 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Suleyman
-
-
If that was the case they would not be launching assaults on multiple directions around Severodonetsk and driving north from Popasnaya. They lack manpower but it isn’t that bad yet to where they only have one unit capable of offense
-
3 hours ago, sburke said:
Big question is - is there really a force in Belgorod capable of counterattacking? I find it hard to believe if such a force existed it wouldn't have already been committed to stop the Ukrainian advance.
If there isn’t enough manpower as western analysis suggests, they’re probably not willing to commit those forces unless they can do it with a initiative or apply the forces on a weak point. Offense is a different art compared to defense, they may be just waiting for the right moment.
Or they might just be on RU territory playing defense just in case the Ukrainians push through. A lot of maybes going on, time will tell.
-
Back to my previous comment about UA pushing down the axis from Kharkiv, I forgot that there is a Russian force in Belgorod that may attack them if they try a big push south.
-
If UA keeps pushing on the Kharkiv axis and starts driving south, RU is in big trouble
-
17 hours ago, Artkin said:
A M1A2 company is 14 tanks, no? Thats nearly double
I accidentally said a company didn't I haha. I woulda torched the company too though. My ATGMs were on point.
-
I don't get all this Turkey talk, I'm an American born with Turkish roots so I gotta get in on this in real quick. Who is the person who decides who's a terror group and who's not? If the Turkish government is fighting an insurgency in the country that is largely opposed against, and you arm those groups, isn't it normal for them to want some payback towards the supporter of its enemy?
Our American government, is very decisive against countries that support groups or nations we do not agree with let alone the ones we name terror groups. I personally don't care if Sweden joins NATO, nor if Finland joins NATO either. Russia will not be invading those countries any time soon. Love them (Turkey) when they send TB-2s to Ukraine, but hate them if they stand up for themselves over their interests? Double standards.
37 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:Looking at images of the failed bridge crossing paints an even worse picture of it. Worse? You might ask, but yes worse.
On the west side of the river, just north of the crossing, is a hotel resort (now largely destroyed). You can find it here:
48.95494513799378, 38.22276322102467
Based on some images it looks like at least 4 more loaded PMP (pontoon trucks) and one truck with a tug on it (BMK?) on it. That's yet another river's worth of bridging likely gone from immediate use.
Other footage shows that they made it about 3km down the road to the south, about 2/3rds of the way towards Bilohorivka. Here they lost at least 9x T-72 and 7x AFV (BMP and maybe MT-LB). They appear to be knocked out or abandoned.
48.56611, 38.144375
These vehicles were no doubt included in the counts that pushed the number of known destroyed to around 100. However, I think the count might be higher because there are supposedly three other locations the advanced to that so far have not been documented.
Steve
I'm curious, were all these vehicles wiped out by artillery according to Ukrainian claims or were there airstrikes and or ambushes on the ground?
-
If they keep losing manpower and armored vehicles at the rate they are and make minor gains the Russian army definitely will have to withdraw.
-
75 T-80Us? That’s crazy they’re gonna run out of tanks if we apply this casualty rate across their entire tank fleet in combat. Is there any chance that there may be propaganda at play or is it fact?
-
Not overpowered just increase the experience level of Ukrainians and it actually gets nasty for RU sometimes. Russians still have capable troops remember, it’s their leadership that screwed them over from being able to showcase it.
Even with T-72B3s I was able to take on a M1A2 company + 2 stryker TF companies head on, on a huge map. 11 T-72B3s out of 12 lost, 7 out of 8 M1A2s lost.
One thing I would love for battlefront to do is add the ability to have M1A2s without ERA or LWS. Actually the main issue and unrealistic thing in the game (in my opinion) are Bradleys being the most overpowered thing to exist on the battlefield, the LWS + instant targeting makes them monsters. When I play as the US I do not use Bradleys.
If we could get the option to toggle US armor that would be cool and probably more realistic, not every armored brigade that’s gonna pull up to the fight is gonna be top of the line.
-
Yeah to be honest even if the Russian push succeeds in Donbas’ slightly or in a major way I don’t see this ending good for them. They learned a lot of lessons so did UA forces, the future RU forces may look very different. When the war concludes I’ll be happy that no more death will happen in the region. I hope the world sticks up for other countries that get invaded too. I can name a few now but off topic and I might be public enemy # 1 on here if I do haha.
RU lost the initiative, and chose the wrong areas to attack. Kiev would have been a good feint if it was actually done as a feint, for example: didn’t rush into it heavily but instead went in slightly with say 20K forces, farther out from Kiev, to draw strategic attention. Then the rest of their armed forces should have just directly went for Donbas’. Pull the feint back and reinforce their Southern and Eastern front.
-
Let’s say after they fully capture Mariupol, they get a brigade+ a couple BTGs worth of units to back up their offensive. It would help them but I don’t see this war going too far from Donbas’ anymore. Maybe that’s their only focus now, get a major or minor victory in the region and call it a day. Learn lessons and rebuild their military.
-
Forgot about that battle. Those Egyptians were impressive. Applying IQ is very important, and I’d argue that it’s the biggest capability that matters for war.
-
Ah, so why not just send conscripts if their professional forces make poor decisions like that. Even when I play war games like combat mission, I'm completely conscious of when my tank feels out in the open and I move it accordingly. Crazy...
https://t.me/DonbassDevushka/6685
Can any Ukrainian tell me if there is importance of this engagement? Which pontoon crossing was this. Obviously not as bad as what happened to RU forces.
-
3 hours ago, dan/california said:Yet more suicidal Russian tank operations. "Lets drive around unsupported until the Ukrainians kill us, it will be fun."
It looks abandoned to me, they don't send tanks head first for recon. Must have been mission killed and abandoned.
-
Double Post* don't mind this
-
It does restore hope that the RU forces aren't all evil drunkards if that they drove the vehicles there to abandon them. I wouldn't be surprised if they decided to arty those vehicles as well since the UA forces are good at capturing equipment. The KIA/WIA count should be lower than said now then. I don't understand why the forces that crossed over didn't decide to just hold out and be supplied, they still could have put up a formidable defense until they sorted out the situation. Seems like they might have been completely surrounded across the river.
UA claims victory in Kharkov, since the city is out of attack range from RU forces (although the city never was in danger, too low amount of RU forces to even consider an attack) I wonder if the Russians will start to target UA forces that are away from the main city defenses, or will they just keep them there with the mass force they got in Belgorod. ( still a great victory for Ukraine )
How effective have MLRS like BM-21s, BM-27s, and BM-30s been in this conflict so far? Does anyone have good information on that. Before this war started, I assumed the Russians' main advantage in conflict with any force would be their MLRS and artillery.
-
What a scummy pair of soldiers shooting security guards for what?
-
51 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Actually, I think most of those vehicles were actively attempting to cross, were destroyed, then towed to where we see them now.
What this indicates is that they tried to cross in continuous columns. This is not necessarily a bad idea as it means you get a LOT more stuff over a LOT quicker, but you have to be pretty sure that you're not about to get hit with artillery. This gets back to Russia not operating as if Ukraine knew where they were and would plaster them with artillery.
If they had crossed the way they should have, there would only be maybe 3-6 wrecks in total, not 70.
Steve
Makes more sense. Very foolish that they didn’t expect arty, going off the pics it’s confirmed 70 vehicles huh? I bet a lot of the infantry scrambled into the river and the others dispersed into the woods.
-
It's the fact that as Steve pointed out, their staging area was literally right next to the pontoon. They don't know how to disperse their units to avoid heavy strikes like what happened. They would have been better off just sending mechanized units to float across and set up over there and then at night lay out the crossings for the tanks and non amphibious vehicles.
I seen a video of a recent strike on a Ukrainian pontoon west of Izium, however they did it the right way, there was no vehicles lost during that crossing it was completely empty.
-
Some of the tanks seem to be able to be recovered, but 90% of the IFVs and APCs are completely destroyed. Very incompetent to say the least. That offensive in that crossing is done, you got to pull that unit out from the front lines now.
-
The RU command doesn’t know what dispersion or concealment means, can someone check the Russian dictionary if they have those terms.
-
In just 3 pics I see 20+ AFVs destroyed together with a picture not from the pontoon crossing. Those are crazy losses, RU command has to be snorting something illegal to only have one pontoon bridge for crossing. One thing I don't like about this conflict is putting music into videos where people are getting obliterated. Both sides do it I end up muting every video.
-
The Russians withdraw instead of putting up a fight in the Kharkov area from what I’ve been hearing. They know they are outnumbered and at a disadvantage currently. They’ll probably withdraw back to the border for a counter-offensive if they’re serious about this war; if they want to play it safe they’ll just hold the border.
-
Just now, sburke said:
I've seen this mentioned a couple times now about the Russians massing in Belgorod. The figure that seems to be tossed around is some 19 BTGs. What exactly does that mean I wonder. t is pretty certain they aren't full strength. Question is whether they are functional at all.
They should be functional. The Russians are learning slowly, the hard way. 19 BTGs worth of soldiers is the estimate could be even more since homeland turf, conscripts are assigned for sure.
Using guess work, they will have heavy artillery and airforce support since it’s Russian grounds. CAS will be available heavy artillery, MLRS. This is the area close to where the T-90M got torched (by what idk it is a pretty good tank) so they might have some top of the line gear. Logistics wont be a big issue since their supply line is right behind them.
If even with these local advantages the Ukrainians trash that new force build up then I would assume that the Russians will throw in the towel to avoid getting KOed
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
I think in their minds, they have one major focus but they split the attacks in support of one another to form “cauldrons” they call it. Even if it’s small, they like to encircle the enemy (I think most militaries prefer this style of offense) they have the support of artillery and aviation so their minor success in Donbas’ isn’t a shocker, they’re not gonna win the war but since they call it a special military operation I got a feeling they just want a victory in Donbas’ before they call it quits.