db_zero Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 I just saw the video of it in action. If you or opponent have exposed infantry nearby when it operates will they suffer casualties? Judging from the video it doesn't look like it will mot be pleasant to be anywhere near a tank when that thing does off. You would also think that in a MOUT operation where it would be desirable to have infantry close by supporting armor that a system like Arena could complicate things. Can you turn Arena off? If so in real life and if BS will cause casualties to infantry nearby, can you turn it off in the game? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Arena and its ilk is only activated when the tank's a microsecond away from being blown up and its occupants killed. Its a valiant TC who would prefer to sacrifice the lives of his crew for a sake of a few 'crunchies'. So Arena stays on. Its one of those real world modern day tactical considerations to keep your inf a respectable distance from these vehicles. You're not supposed to be anywhere near an Abrams simply due to the gun's blast! US vehicles have their own automated countermeasure that could be considered 'annoying' during gameplay and testers have requested an 'off' switch too. But vehicle with an 'off' switch tend to not survive battle for long. After your fourth unprotected Bradley gets blown up by an unseen enemy automated countermeasures doesn't sound like such a bad idea. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
db_zero Posted November 30, 2014 Author Share Posted November 30, 2014 Arena and its ilk is only activated when the tank's a microsecond away from being blown up and its occupants killed. Its a valiant TC who would prefer to sacrifice the lives of his crew for a sake of a few 'crunchies'. So Arena stays on. Its one of those real world modern day tactical considerations to keep your inf a respectable distance from these vehicles. You're not supposed to be anywhere near an Abrams simply due to the gun's blast! US vehicles have their own automated countermeasure that could be considered 'annoying' during gameplay and testers have requested an 'off' switch too. But vehicle with an 'off' switch tend to not survive battle for long. After your fourth unprotected Bradley gets blown up by an unseen enemy automated countermeasures doesn't sound like such a bad idea. Thanks for the info. What sort of anti-missile defense system does the Bradley have? I hope for the sake of the infantry the Bradley carries a anti-missile system defense system that is infantry friendly considering it is an infantry fight vehicle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Some Bradleys come with APS, a near-future protection system equivalent to Trophy. (Tests have been conducted but unrestricted facts on the ground are scarce). I would not want to be standing under Bradley when that thing is activated. All Bradleys (I think) come with a laser warning receiver which pops an automatic cloud of smoke and allows the vehicle to escape. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
db_zero Posted November 30, 2014 Author Share Posted November 30, 2014 Some Bradleys come with APS, a near-future protection system equivalent to Trophy. (Tests have been conducted but unrestricted facts on the ground are scarce). I would not want to be standing under Bradley when that thing is activated. All Bradleys (I think) come with a laser warning receiver which pops an automatic cloud of smoke and allows the vehicle to escape. I wonder what the manual (SOP) in real life states regarding this-deactivate when infantry dismounts. Re-activate when they are mounted. Perhaps in the future instead of having an on and off command as requested by playtesters it could be automatically on when the infantry is mounted and turned off when they dismount. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Nearby infantry don't fare too well when a Bradley blows up regardless. Whether its a pre-detonated ATGM missile or a stowed TOW warhead cooking-off inside the vehicle you're still dead. Russian Arena, though, seems to pack considerably more 'punch'. The difference between shooting down a missile with a shotgun and knocking it down with a satchel charge. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leakyD Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 I wonder what the manual (SOP) in real life states regarding this-deactivate when infantry dismounts. Re-activate when they are mounted. Perhaps in the future instead of having an on and off command as requested by playtesters it could be automatically on when the infantry is mounted and turned off when they dismount. Yeah, that'd be nice, but sounds gamey, unless something similar is SOP. My guess for dismounts dealing with APS is something along the lines of: 1. Don't dismount in a "hot" AO 2. Get the hell away from the "track" ASAP. And make sure your under cover. Above is usual under "Normal" situations, but an emergency situation?... shudder! What the hell do you do with multiple incoming rounds. Stay in the track and pray, or dismount and...pray some more? Being a former US dismount team leader, Bradley gunner, and Bradley TC (GW1), I'm looking forward to Black Sea. Shock Force was neat, but too one-sided, and I'm not into the desert thing. Glad to FINALLY be in the modern ETO! Unfortunately, as the Beta AAR is showing, we're all going to have a LOT of unlearning to do.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Here's a hard-to-see video of Israeli Trophy knocking down a Kornet, followed by an incoming RPG. Not quite so 'dramatic' as an Arena satchel detonating overhead but I'd still want to be well away from that vehicle when it went off. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leakyD Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Damn. Shrugging off Kornet AND RPG-29? Not bad! Looks like the new manner of dealing with armor w. APS is volley fire, with, oh say... at LEAST 4-6 rounds? More? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 LeakyD, Checkout the RPG 30 or 32. They are designed to deal with the current generation of Trophy and have been around for a few years. They fire two warheads a fraction of a second apart so if the APS takes out the lead warhead the second gets through. Jordon already produces the RPG 32. The Kornet – D does exactly as you suggest to overcome APS. I bet these will turn up in future updates. But APS and AT systems designed to overcome them will from now on have their own private arms race so all depends on which generation of systems are up against each other. All fun stuff, All the best, Kip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leakyD Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 LeakyD, The Kornet – D does exactly as you suggest to overcome APS. Kip. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kornet-D Hah! Next up: MIRV ATGM's! RPG 30/32 looks interesting... not sure how it will hold up in the field. Maybe that's why Russian APS blast is so strong? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 I just saw the video of it in action. If you or opponent have exposed infantry nearby when it operates will they suffer casualties? Judging from the video it doesn't look like it will mot be pleasant to be anywhere near a tank when that thing does off. You would also think that in a MOUT operation where it would be desirable to have infantry close by supporting armor that a system like Arena could complicate things. Considering that armored vehicles are a magnet for enemy fire, infantry have no business being in close proximity to them, regardless of whether they have an APS system or not. Of course, though, that's been the case long before systems like Arena or Trophy were even in the design stage. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Here's a hard-to-see video of Israeli Trophy knocking down a Kornet, followed by an incoming RPG. Not quite so 'dramatic' as an Arena satchel detonating overhead but I'd still want to be well away from that vehicle when it went off. Edit: oops I clicked on a follow up video that I was referring to not the original video @MikeyD linked. The marketing video is here: That marketing video says that soldiers in proximity "rarely sustain injury". But those explosions don't look like injury would be rare to me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 The Kornet – D does exactly as you suggest to overcome APS. What you're seeing here is anti-tank assets becoming more cumbersome and expensive trying to keep up with the technology. 'More expensive' usually translates as 'fewer' on the battlefield. RPG-30 is never going to be as ubiquitous as RPG-7. And let's not forget infantrymen lugging around weapons that weight half again more than the previous generation's AT weapon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Mikey, hi, RPG-30 is never going to be as ubiquitous as RPG-7. Well... pretty close, certainly to do the AT role the RPG-7 does . But , yes... the RPG 28, check it out, coming to somewhere near you soon, is bigger and heavier. The battle between AT systems and APS will be nothing really new or different. But tanks that keep up will certainly still be powerful. All the best, Kip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Their is about to be a new spec that matters a LOT too tank design, total electrical power available. Radars, ECM, laser base point defense, and who knows what that is not publicly discussed yet will suck down wattage at an astonishing rate. Indeed supplying electrical power on a protected platform may be the role that keeps 40+ tons of mobile armor worth having around. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 What you're seeing here is anti-tank assets becoming more cumbersome and expensive trying to keep up with the technology. 'More expensive' usually translates as 'fewer' on the battlefield. RPG-30 is never going to be as ubiquitous as RPG-7. And let's not forget infantrymen lugging around weapons that weight half again more than the previous generation's AT weapon. This has analogues in the WW2 timeframe, too. Early war 37-57mm ATG were relatively handy for their crew to lug around and easy to hide. Even the PAK40 was quite low profile. As the armour the guns needed to defeat became thicker, though, the guns needed to get bigger, and the PAK43, 76mm and 17lbers are hefty beasts, not easy for infantry to muscle around, to the point that they almost had to be mounted on a tracked chassis to be effective in mobile warfare. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antaress73 Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 RPG-28 ? how come it is not in the game ? 1000mm + of armor penetration and adopted for service in 2011 by the Russian Federation .. that would balance things out 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMS Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 There is a question, how far to introduce future weapons. If you add APS in game, should you add weapons like RPG-30 and Kornet-D. "Shield and sword" race, where dose it stop? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 DMS, hi, There is a question, how far to introduce future weapons. If you add APS in game, should you add weapons like RPG-30 and Kornet-D. "Shield and sword" race, where does it stop? I agree... Battlefront has done a near impossible job very well. And as time goes on we will slowly come to actually “know..” what kit has been fielded by 2017. The Kornet – D should wait till introduced into service. But the RPG – 30 should I think be there as Battlefront have made assumptions about US APS. The RPG – 30 pre-dates US APS and is fully concurrent with first generation Trophy. It is the equal and opposite assumption. But .. no matter.. it will come in a module or update with much more too.. CMBS also will come with its editor.. so all of us can tweak to fit our own personal assumptions. BTW.. there is also an Arena - 3 that will no doubt turn-up on the latest Russian AFVs later too... All the best, Kip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antaress73 Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 I like the RPG-28. 1000mm + after reactive armor penetration and 125mm warhead. Adopted for service by the Russian federation in 2011. Against the M1A2 side armor it would be deadly and would make russian infantry more dangerous to it. Here it says its the most modern in service in the RUssian army http://world.guns.ru/grenade/rus/rpg-28-e.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 Here it says its the most modern in service in the RUssian army http://world.guns.ru/grenade/rus/rpg-28-e.html Far too generic of a statement. The Russian army is not exactly small, and certain weapons are employed only by certain forces. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antaress73 Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 probably... must be difficult to find which force use what.. Tried to find it but to no avail ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 Don't forget - this game not withstanding - Russia's not planning to fight anyone fielding Trophy or Arena anytime soon. So they'd be in no particular hurry to start equipping their forces with a heavy, expensive new AT systems for a threat they're not going to encounter. Perhaps by 2017, when/if the US is fielding the Active Protection System their priorities might change. But then again, they're not exactly anticipating open war with the US - again, this game not withstanding. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckman Posted December 4, 2014 Share Posted December 4, 2014 I'm pretty sure at least one Israeli soldier was killed or seriously wounded by Trophy in the recent Gaza war. It's like standing close to a big shotgun blast, so obviously dangerous. But I guess the risks, and resultant casualties, are less than you would get without said protection. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.