Jump to content

UA doesn't use Grads in 2017?


Kraft
 Share

Recommended Posts

//This is not complaining

BM-21s are (and to some degree the BM-30s) - atleast from my understanding in the current RL conflict - a big part of the UA Artillery force.

The Ukrainain Army even made one of their own versions, the BM-21K. 

 

So why was this not included? Game development resources are probably not the major factor here since it would've needed not much besides rebalancing of values from the CMRT grandpa and a new picture. Was the UA planning to get rid of those MLRS'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll attempt a guess at an answer before going to bed.

I wasn't privy to discussions on the topic but knowing their usual reasoning I'd guess that they considered Grad to be a long range area fire interdiction weapon, not a front line fire support weapon. That was roughly their reason for not including MLRS in CMSF back-in-the-day. Also, frankly there was nothing but complaints about Calliope and Xylophone artillery rockets in CMBN. Players liked the concept but during gameplay they really didn't appreciate facing weapons capable of saturating half the map with HE in a matter of seconds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...frankly there was nothing but complaints about Calliope and Xylophone artillery rockets in CMBN. Players liked the concept but during gameplay they really didn't appreciate facing weapons capable of saturating half the map with HE in a matter of seconds.

I think you mischaracterise the nature of the complaints about Xylophone and Calliope. The complaints I saw on here were pretty much solely about the costs of those systems. People didn't complain about Nebelwerfer batteries.

But I expect you're right about the reasons for not including area-saturation munitions in BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MLRS fire-missions are called at division level (and above) (historically in a soviet-style force system) and, therefore, are above the scope of CM I believe. That would be my guess as to why they are not included.  

Edited by BTR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will be my only post before I hit the sack. I'll check the rest of the forum tomorrow.

 

I decided to not include the currently-used variety of MLRS in the base game because they are actually a complicated piece of equipment with a number of different capabilities. Besides the complex capabilities of the systems, it's also a rather... large scale weapon system for Black Sea's scale. Which necessitates further deliberation. As it is, the game is already stuffed full of equipment and we simply couldn't afford the time to do another big system like MLRS. IF we're going to do MLRS, I'd rather do them right, when we can budget the time to do so. For sure, Black Sea does not model every weapon system used on the modern battlefield; sometimes we have to pick and choose. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the flip side, can't imagine a division of grads salvoing wouldn't be a division of grads for very much longer -- counter battery fire would be on them like white on rice, not to mention US/NATO air assets.

 

That said, and I'm not expert on soviet-era weapons systems, but a grad is essentially a modern katyusha? not exactly a precision weapon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the flip side, can't imagine a division of grads salvoing wouldn't be a division of grads for very much longer -- counter battery fire would be on them like white on rice, not to mention US/NATO air assets.

 

That said, and I'm not expert on soviet-era weapons systems, but a grad is essentially a modern katyusha? not exactly a precision weapon.

 

You don't have to be precise when saturating an area. There are quite a few success/horror stories about Grads in the real life conflict. So, they are being used successfully.

 

As for counter battery fire, like with any other artillery piece, you fire and reposition.

Edited by BlackAlpha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't have to be precise when saturating an area. There are quite a few success/horror stories about Grads in the real life conflict. So, they are being used successfully.

 

As for counter battery fire, like with any other artillery piece, you fire and reposition.

 

Yeah, that makes perfect sense. My point was that many Grads firing at once make for a really big target for anyone on the opposing force.

 

In a perfect world, "grid removers" are neutralized before they get in the fight...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BlackAlpha,

 

The Chinese were the first to have Grad dropped on them, even though it was still classified. Considering what it did to interlopers trying to seize territory deemed to be Russian, the general wasn't disciplined for the security breach. As you can see here, the then CO of the FEMD did okay for himself. To put it mildly.

 

ikalugin,

 

I know there was, at least at some point during the Cold War, laser guided Grad. Scary to think about. Was one of several hundred attendees at CIA for a SECRET (with toppings) classified briefing, during which we were explicitly told of this, as were of massive deployment, on many different weapon systems of laser guided munitions. this was when the US's Copperhead was available in driblets. Was unaware BM-21 Grad had SFW. I know BM-30 Smerch does and don't recall seeing anything to that effect for BM-27, but Afghanistan wasn't exactly overrun by enemy armor. The submunitions alone freaked out US defense analysts used to unitary warheads.

 

Since you're here, could you and your Russian colleagues please start a thread devoted to modern Russian TO&E for Tank Regiment and MRR? Given what ChrisND said about MRLs being divisional and higher, I'd like to see what a Regimental CO has in the way of organic FS capabilities. So far, I've seen precious little in English on Google regarding much of anything on unit organization for today's Russian Army. At brigade level, though, I did find a fairly decent Wiki for a Brigade in Pechenga. Looks to have/had an Independent Tank Battalion of 41 x T-80 and no less than 36 x  Msta-S. Ouch.

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Edited by John Kettler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the safety distance for MLRS type systems to your own troops when firing? I suspect it is quite large. Are the maps in Black Sea even large enough to accomodate this safety distance? I think for the scale of this game, we can probably assume that when contact is made with the enemy, the fire from these artillery systems have already been moved to targets further away.

Edited by JSj
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you mischaracterise the nature of the complaints about Xylophone and Calliope. The complaints I saw on here were pretty much solely about the costs of those systems. People didn't complain about Nebelwerfer batteries.

But I expect you're right about the reasons for not including area-saturation munitions in BS.

 

Exactly. Problem was with game balance.  We may have similar problem with Javelins since they are ridiculously cheap when compared to performance. No much point if Russian player cannot buy tanks because they would be toast anyway. Well, Russians seems not to be too popular  there so perhaps this won't be fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A quick Googling seems to put the safety distance for own troops at 2 km for the US MLRS. I suspect the GRAD systems have similar safety distances. So, it seems these systems have little utility in battles of Combat Missions scale. They'd only be useful on the largest maps, and only if your troops are all on opposite sides of the map from the enemy.

Edited by JSj
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

What is the safety distance for MLRS type systems to your own troops when firing? I suspect it is quite large. Are the maps in Black Sea even large enough to accomodate this safety distance? I think for the scale of this game, we can probably assume that when contact is made with the enemy, the fire from these artillery systems have already been moved to targets further away.

 

F'ing massive.  Basically in terms of CMBS, the MRLS type strikes is better modeled by scenario design than call for fire.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

would something like a tactical ballistic missile i.e SS-26 (first google search) work as point strike weapon in the scale of combat mission?

 

On the blue side you could have M270 MLRS with guided weapons and the OTR-21

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think things like the SS-26 are used to take out strategic targets, like military bases, concentrations of military vehicles, etc. It's expensive and creates a really big boom. So, you want to make it really count when you decide to use it.

 

Rocket artillery, like the M270 or Grad, could be used on the scale of combat mission, but the question is, will it be fun? I don't imagine it will be, too powerful. But that's just a guess.

Edited by BlackAlpha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...