Jump to content

APS changes everything!


Recommended Posts

I execute the most perfect missile ambush in the history of Combat Mission.  1600 meters, from the flank, complete surprise, the bad guys spread out like a target range.  One tank is giving me a perfect REAR shot.  APS swats every single Skif missile.  I caught him looking so bad the two teams got like five shots off, and APS swats every single one.  PBEM by the way.  I had been trying to set this up the entire game!  I get nothing!@$%%@@

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The impression BS is giving me is that modern tanks are basically Gundams nowadays. It's like we're circling back into a time of the Guderian-esque tank army. Infantry screens can't hope to win everytime or even very often. Just to get lucky every now and then. The AT-4 must be the Boys rifle of our time.  :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The impression BS is giving me is that modern tanks are basically Gundams nowadays. It's like we're circling back into a time of the Guderian-esque tank army. Infantry screens can't hope to win everytime or even very often. Just to get lucky every now and then. The AT-4 must be the Boys rifle of our time.  :D

 

...or you could use the Javelin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Troof. I'm still not really sure which way things are going for the future. Everytime some new anti-tank gadget comes out a chorus chimes in claiming the days of the tank army are over, the and MBT has been relegated to infantry support. When you make a better sword someone just goes and makes a better shield. First it was the shaped charge, then the attack chopper, then etc etc.

 

Now the problem is the Javelin is different. It's not bulky and immobile like a TOW, it's way more common than an attack chopper, almost any rifleman can wield it and strike out at a tank from a range some tanks can barely reply from. Maybe it's the musket and tanks are the Knight. :v 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Now the problem is the Javelin is different. It's not bulky and immobile like a TOW, it's way more common than an attack chopper, almost any rifleman can wield it and strike out at a tank from a range some tanks can barely reply from. Maybe it's the musket and tanks are the Knight. :v 

 

The historical counter to dense ant-tank networks is liberal amounts of indirect fire from mortars and artillery, applied in such a way it has a minimum chance of harming the tanks (i.e. airbursts) while suppressing any AT shooters not also under armor, closely followed by liberal amounts of machine-gunning to keep them suppressed. As long as the dismounted soldier remains vulnerable to artillery and machine gun fire, there will be a place for tanks. They might look a bit different, but mobile, protected firepower is just too valuable on the battlefield.

 

Also, mounted heavy cavalry (what I assume you meant by 'knights') remained relevant well into the era of the musket -- they just cut down on the pointless armor and adopted firearms for themselves.

Edited by Apocal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah but the armor became pointless for a reason. It was because it was a lot of work to manufacture and provide and no longer gave much protection from weapons any peasant in a levy could use. The horse continued as long as it did because as long as Armies were too small to construct proper frontlines (like the kind measured in 50+ miles) then maneuver was still relevant. Direct combat tended to produce a lot of casualties in Cavalry and it seems rather conspicuous to me that in the American Civil War, cavalrymen almost always fought dismounted. 

 

Once you've got a weapon that's ubiquitous and practical enough for everyone to use than the classic infantry-as-screen to some other core unit (mounted heavy cavalry/tanks) relationship reverses.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Javelin is highly effective against the current generation of APS systems. The people who build those systems have to be working on the problem. It is the obvious hook to sell next gen systems.  And the poor bleeding Ukrainians don't have any javelins, I mean bleeding in the literal sense of the word by the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What can I say.. APS ftw :) you had a particularly bad luck in that you targeted pretty much the only APS vehicles in my speartip which I had ofc placed to draw any atgm fire. :D but honestly in all my games so far APS had never failed. They are very very good.

I was afraid you would spot them if I waited.  It would have been just as bad to get mortared trying to be cute.  And I bet you were worried for half a turn or so. :P

 

As is I can't quite figure why it would take two weeks for the Russians to be in Kiev. Four or five days seems like plenty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Javelin can be intercepted by trophy but trophy only has two shots I believe. I played blue on blue and my javelins failed to destroy any Bradley or Abrams. Now that NATO is once again identified as an enemy in the new russian doctrine, wont be long before the russians develop and field a Javelin countering APS . It's all about doctrine (program funding allocations). Their APS was made for low intensity or regional conflicts and countering RPGs and older missiles, not a high tech war with NATO. No near-abroad country had a javelin-like missile so they didnt see the need. Now that has changed. I also expect they will field a Javelinski pretty soon.

Edited by antaress73
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah but the armor became pointless for a reason. It was because it was a lot of work to manufacture and provide and no longer gave much protection from weapons any peasant in a levy could use. The horse continued as long as it did because as long as Armies were too small to construct proper frontlines (like the kind measured in 50+ miles) then maneuver was still relevant. Direct combat tended to produce a lot of casualties in Cavalry and it seems rather conspicuous to me that in the American Civil War, cavalrymen almost always fought dismounted. 

 

Once you've got a weapon that's ubiquitous and practical enough for everyone to use than the classic infantry-as-screen to some other core unit (mounted heavy cavalry/tanks) relationship reverses.  

 

Cavalry mostly fought dismounted during the ACW because firearms technology had moved far beyond the original. I'm just saying there was a considerable overlap (at least four centuries) between the widespread adoption of firearms (1400s) and the practical obsolescence of battlefield heavy cavalry. Tanks are going to be far from useless for as long as artillery and machine guns can threaten infantry, although they might shed some of their armor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Javelin can be intercepted by trophy but trophy only has two shots I believe. I played blue on blue and my javelins failed to destroy any Bradley or Abrams. Now that NATO is once again identified as an enemy in the new russian doctrine, wont be long before the russians develop and field a Javelin countering APS . It's all about doctrine (program funding allocations). Their APS was made for low intensity or regional conflicts and countering RPGs and older missiles, not a high tech war with NATO. No near-abroad country had a javelin-like missile so they didnt see the need. Now that has changed. I also expect they will field a Javelinski pretty soon.

 

There is no APS system in the game that can defeat a Javelin firing in top-attack mode, if the Javelin is fired horizontally than yes it can be intercepted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cavalry mostly fought dismounted during the ACW because firearms technology had moved far beyond the original. I'm just saying there was a considerable overlap (at least four centuries) between the widespread adoption of firearms (1400s) and the practical obsolescence of battlefield heavy cavalry. Tanks are going to be far from useless for as long as artillery and machine guns can threaten infantry, although they might shed some of their armor.

 

A bit of that was also the lack of any sort of cavalry tradition in the United States.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think APS should be heavily restricted.  It is the biggest change on the battlefield since ATGM, and the direct technological answer to them.  You just have to keep the balance issues in mind.  And I am playing a competent human not the AI. So when he realuzes he has the advantage things get severe rather quickly.

 

 For what its worth anyone who thinks troops cower to easily is playing a different game.  These under equipped Ukrainian pixeltruppen have died in their positions with bloody hands on the triggers of their RPGs, I am sure they thought kindly of me with their last digital breadths.  :P

Edited by dan/california
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

You forgot Custer

 

Nah.  He's talking more in terms of "Cavalry" as men specially trained to fight chiefly from horseback.  The US Cavalry tradition was always closest to Dragoons in the European sense, which was a soldier who used a horse for battlefield mobility, but chiefly fought from the dismount.  This is not to say Dragoons did not operate from the mount from time to time, or Cavalry never dismounted, but we're talking in terms of primary use.

 

The US Army stood up three regiments of Dragoons (technically, the 3rd Regiment was stood up as a "Regiment of Mounted Riflemen" but same difference), and then started standing up Cavalry Regiments in the 1840's.  Ultimately the distinction was discarded as the distinction between Dragoon and Cavalryman blurred (effectively, the US Cavalryman was a Dragoon who was trained to be able to fight from his horse when tactically advantageous, but still generally actually fought from the dismount).   The three Dragoon regiments became Cavalry Regiments, and the Cavalry Regiments were re-numbered accordingly (which is why the 4th Cavalry Regiment's lineage actually starts off as a the 1st Cavalry Regiment).  

 

TLDR: US Cavalry would be US Dragoons under European standards, thus a lack of Cavalry tradition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been experimenting with no APS, infantry-heavy custom QBs and I like that style a lot. The game has a very different feel.

 

Inclusion of APS will need to be managed carefully by designers. At this point, I'd say go very light on it.

 

The real controversial route would to be give it to the Russians but not the Americans, although I can see why BFC didn't do that. If nothing else, it would knock a bit of shine off the Abrams as apex predator of the CMBS battlefield.

 

 

A bit of that was also the lack of any sort of cavalry tradition in the United States.

 

A bit, sure. But European battlefield cavalry didn't exactly show itself to be a relevant battlefield arm during the Franco-Prussian War a few years later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how much APS will change armor warfare in the future. Would it be possible for APS to become so reliable and capable of also intercepting KE rounds that they might replace heavy armor completly and bring future MBTs in the same weight range as MRAPs (to protect them from small arms and IED)?

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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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...