Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yeah, looking at how the Abrams naming mod went, while cool, you will for sure have multiple tank 212s.  This isn't as big of a deal with gun tube names as you need to get close for those, but tactical numbers it'll be super-obvious.  


Perhaps you could choose from a series of divisions, and have seperate files for different divisions?  I get the impression it would be uncommon to see T-90s from different divisions in the same BTG, so giving us the option to have a mix of one discrete division's markings and unmarked in a series of mods vs one unified mod that gives our Battalion a mix of markings from several divisions.


Good mod though, the dark green makes it all look aggressive, and the modernized cold war stuff looks less tired and more like it's part of 2017.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 174
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Dropbox it is then.   ENJOY

Another progress report:     Another question, tactical markings, yay or nay?   Example: http://i.piccy.info/i9/b8c123787bcaa4f484acfffc80f947e5/1421705561/24359/857457/6.jpg

After several stages I think I've found what looks most authentic in CMBS's lighting (T-90AM in the middle):  

Posted Images

Just FYI, there is only one motor rifle division and only one tank division in the Russian Ground Forces right now. All other MRDs and TDs were reorganized into brigades, which are subordinate mostly to the various Combined Arms Armies, and some - directly to the Military Districts. (Though I am sure comrade BTR knows that already.)

And if the Soviet practices for tactical markings were not changed much, then each brigade will get a tactical marking in its own distinct shape, which will then be modified with alphanumerical and pictorial symbols for each of the battalions and independent companies. Therefore, down from the line battalion level, the tactical marking should be the same (which means it should normally be the same for the bulk of the force you are given in the scenario, and the attached forces from other units of the brigade should have similarly looking markings, just with different symbols inside them; you should get an entirely different marking only if you have units from another brigade). Therefore, if it is impossible to control how textures are assigned to vehicles, perhaps it would be better to just have a single type of tactical marking, or maybe a collection of different replacements to be swapped in for variety in different missions (i.e., in one mission you have mostly units from x bn of yy bde and put in one type of symbol plugin, in the next - z bn of yy bde, so a plugin from a set of similar symbols, and in the next one you have a completely different bde, so a plugin with a completely different symbol).

The tactical numbers are a much tougher case - since they are unique for every vehicle of a certain type in the brigade (i.e., one tank can have the same number as one IFV, but every tank has its own unique number), and are supposed to adhere to a structured order (established on the brigade commander's discretion within the set of numbers assigned to the brigade), it would probably be impossible to get them right. Perhaps the best option would be to assume that the number set follows this system: xyz number, x = number of the battalion in the brigade, yz = number of the vehicle in the battalion (the highest one I can think of is 41 for the MBTs in the tank bn). Since you rarely get more than a battalion worth of any type of vehicle in a given scenario, it would probably be possible to make enough texture variants for every vehicle to have a unique number, and for the number range to be relatively authentic too. The numbers would still be mixed up within the units though, but what can you do (well, perhaps we can petition BFC to make a variable to connect the unit place in the TOE with the kind of texture it gets). :)

In any case, BTR - thank You enormously for this outstanding work. Our vehicles already look better than ever, and I can't wait for the final polished version (well, technically, not polished, but a used and dirtied up one). :)

P.S.: I am relying on this analysis for my assumptions: http://army.armor.kiev.ua/hist/opoznav.shtml

Edited by Krasnoarmeyets
Link to post
Share on other sites
Independent formations get their own tactical symbols. By the book, independent formations are the ones which are counted as separate military bases and have reinforced structures. Brigade formations are all reinforced and therefore independent. Following soviet tradition, battalions within a brigade get variations on brigade tactical symbol with their order number. Tactical groups pre-formed outside battle sometimes also receive tactical markings separate from their original parent formations. Conversely, all formations which don’t count as independent, don’t have variations. 
How does that translate to what I can do in-game? First part is simple, give similar quality of equipment similar tactical markings:
T-90AM+BMP-3M+BMP-2M (fantasy force) (A )
T-90A+BMP-3+BTR-82 (B )
T-72B3+BMP-2+BTR-80 (C )
A much more interesting question is what to do with common vehicles used in all formations? My answer to this is to arrange them aligned to previous equipment ratings. 
BRM-3K+BRDM-2M (fantasy force once more) (A )
BRM-1K + BRDM-2M (C ) 
But that doesn’t end there, what to do with all the specialized support? This was more clear to me than previous part. Arrange them by their use inside specialised formations. Most independent supporting elements would have entirely different makings from line elements anyways.  
1V152+9K22M1+9K35 (AA support) (D )
PRP-4M+9P157-2+9P149+9P148+9P148M (E )
1V14 (F )
So, what is left? You’ve noticed I’ve left out MT-LB’s. First of all, MT-LBM is present in almost all organisational charts, so it’s best I leave it unmakred. MT-LB’s are in a bit of special place at the moment, and usually entirely separate, sometimes specialised, formations use them. Therefore, all MT-LB’s with weapons will receive their own symbol. 
Ural and UAZ, just like MT-LBM’s, are too common to be placed in one category over another, therefore they will have no markings. All in all, 16 different makings broken into 7 independent common groups should do well for realistic scenario making. Now, I'm a little uneasy about using actual unit tactical symbols, so I'll probably "make up" my own. If that is such a deal-breaker, let me know. 
Obviously, if BF introduce a dynamic decal script of some sort, all of this would be much easier :P . 
Edited by BTR
Link to post
Share on other sites

A question though: If there is no camouflage to applied anymore since 2012, why are there so many vehicles still seen in 3-tone patterns? Will these be repainted? Vehicles from National Guard/reserve units?


Just asking becasue I don't know much about the modern stuff but always liked those Russian camouflage patterns and was hoping to see some of them in the game...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some camo'd vehicles are factory demonstrators (most likely to appear in images), some are old training junk, some just haven't any ordered paint. Any transition for a force of 800+ K is going to be a long process. Lack of camo is the norm for well groomed formations.


VDV might have their own idea though, they always do. 

Edited by BTR
Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is not too much work, how about a version with a good old solid red star? :)

(Всех с днем Советской Армии и Военно-Морского Флота!)

Will-do some time over the weekend.



I think they did right getting rid of blue for the new symbol, it really looks like an uplifted traditional star:




Link to post
Share on other sites

Good question. Given the situation in teh ukraine, those tanks might not have been painted becasue they are needed at the frontline.


Remember that German tanks during WW2 were issued in PLAIN yellow - to be camouflaged by the crews according to the local situation. In my opinion it's most likley a time issue in this case. Plus, in this weather the vehicles will soon be covered by a thick layer of mud, dust and other dirt and you wouldn't see any camo pattern anyway...

Link to post
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.

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.

  • Create New...