Jump to content

Russian Representation in CMBS


Recommended Posts

As has been discussed previously, Abrams side turret armor is presently set too high in the game and will hopefully get fixed in 1.04. This rarely affects PG-7VR since it wouldn't penetrate the ERA+armor anyways. It does sometimes affect AT-13 penetration and possibly 30mm APDS. AT-14, AT-15 and 125mm sabot will go through anyways. Side hull armor is accurate as are all other areas to the best of my knowledge.

The Abrams (and Bradley) do not have LWRs in reality. There have been plans to outfit them with such for 20 years but budget cuts and a lack of immediate need have prevented that. Current plans are to wait for the Quick Kill APS. However, there are off the shelf options available now and it appears BFC has assumed those are used similarly to the Trophy APS. I would personally like to see versions of the Abrams and Bradley without LWRs in the next module.

Vehicles with LWRs should not be auto-rotating their hulls towards the threat. This is not an issue specific to the Abrams but it does affect the Abrams more than Russian tanks since it's front armor facing matter more.

I am sure spotting will be given a second look. Tweaks may be made but I would not expect major changes. The US military has spent vast sums of money to unsure they "own the night" and it shows.

T-90 side hull armor tops out at around 60mm thick. That should be enough to stop up to 12.7mm and even 14.5 at longer ranges but 25mm APFSDS will penetrate up to 100mm at 3000 meters so there you go.

M829A4 has entered service in the US Army as of July, IIRC.

Russian tanks in-game use 3BM-60 Svinets-2 APFSDS. Penetration is probably round 700-730mm RHAe although I don't know what numbers BFC actually uses. Bottom line is it penetrates the Abrams where it should and doesn't where it shouldn't.

All Russian small arms have day/night sights in the game so I don't know where the idea that they don't have sights comes from. If/when VDV are introduced I suspect we will see a smattering of more advanced thermal-type optics outside of ATGM teams.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Vanir Ausf B
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes Vlad, the AM isnt a 20 year old tank, but its based off essentially an old model with upgrades.  And whereas the version of Abrams is currently in service, the AM is not and has not entered service. That was definitely BFC giving the Russians the benefit of the doubt.

The US military currently plans to and has adopted the XM25 and M302 and both have seen plenty of field tests in actual combat conditions in Afghanistan, the idea that since weapons that already are definitely going to be bought and have seen combat are unfair additions compared to weapons just recently invented and that have never seen combat, or have not definitely been fielded by the Russian Army (AK12, RPG30, Kurganets, T14) is laughable.  While I do not doubt the Russian MoDs plans to introduce the Kurganets and T14 into service I think its quite debatable whether they woud by the 2017 period depicted in game.  As far as introducing AK12s and RPG30s, that is much more debatable.

I think a stronger argument, especially after reading the lessons learned in Ukraine thread document, should be for implementation of the DPICM munitions the Russians are using that combine top attack AT rounds, thermobaric rounds, and mines.  This would be most interesting artillery option and is currently in use in the Ukraine, doubtlessly would be used in a 2017 war, and is currently in Russian service.

As far as T90AMs being junk thats just nonsense. (OPs assertion)  You.re just using them wrong.  Thats like saying Shermans in WW2 titles are junk.  If you drive them straight at Panthers you're going to get lousy results.   But they're great anti infantry platforms (as the Russian tanks are with the Ainets rounds) and using them in numbers, and trying for combinations of other AT weapons and or ambush positions, or shoot and scoot tactics, and such and you can and will get Abrams and Bradley kills. Just like anything in life it takes practice and whining that its garbage because you've been playing combat mission 3 months and have barely scratched the surface of a game thats taken me years to achieve even a somewhat above average win rate in PBEMs that models a profession that nobodies perfected in millenia of human history is just utter nonsense and really doesnt even deserve the attention this thread has gotten.  The T90AMs are not garbage, as noted above I have DARs that prove it I  had 1 T90AM kill 2 Abrams in one PBEM that I also killed several Bradleys.  I did lose the battle, but the map was very small, and mostly I believe a lot of my loss was due to the small map size making US thermals have an outsize advantage and the enemy tanks quickly being able to close into minimum engagement ranges. That said several Bradleys were killed by RPG26s and 7s, 3 Abrams were killed by 2 T90AMs and 1 T90 was killed w.o killing an Abrams.

I fought a notable battle against another PBEM opponent who I fought to a surrender and I was defending.  I lost about 4-5 T90As and 6-7 BTR 82As and a Khriz. I destroyed 6-7 Abrams and about 12 Bradleys with one left all subsystems destroyed and immobilized. If he hadnt surrendered it was going to be destroyed next turn.  This was done with the Khriz killing a few Bradleys and 2 Abrams, T90s destroying some abrams and Bradleys, an AT13 killing an Abrams an and another a Bradley.   I actually dont think my AT14 teams killed anything that battle.  My infantry losses were roughly on parity with his - I had about 70-80 KIA and 40-50 WIA, and so did he, but I had a couple hundred men left, and he had about 10-20.  This is something else the OP didnt bring up.  You can buy reg/veteran Russian infantry waaaay cheaper than US troops. And used effectively Russian infantry can hold their own against US infantry.

Oh and as far as T90s being trash, in my Russian Revenge DAR I have a T90AM thats taken 6 excalibur 155mm hits directly on the tank which only immobilized it and caused slight subsystem damage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would ascribe it less of a "It cannot spot it" and more of a "Failure to OODA* loop. I wouldn't mind a more transparent rendition of spotting just to see how it is actually working, but given similar spotting circumstances seems to be the Abrams will more rapidly acquire and destroy a target.  Spotting is one of those things were rarely does the capabilities gap narrow based on environmental factors**

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_loop
**Or rather armor and weapons superiority does become less pronounced with less range involved, even fairly old KE rounds fired from very close range can have an outsized effect on a vehicle, while if tank A is totally immune to tank B's AT rounds at 2000 meters, but it can suffer penetrations at 500 meters, the disparity in armor is largely irrelevant...if the battle is happening at 500 meters.

However even in all but the most barren, thermally polarized environments (or anything that isn't a heat source is too cold to give a false positive, and the only heat sources are targets), the vehicle with the superior optics (in quality and quantity) will generally win the race to get the first shot off. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It might not be the thermals though.  It might be the number of optics, or the crew load and training.  If the Abrams has a larger number of "eyes" and a crew that has more time in a tank, it is going to more quickly spot a target, begin the engagement cycle, and fire at a rate faster than the Russian tank could attain.  Also with the exception of during the physical act of loading the crew work load is better spread out over a four man than a three man crew which more effectively puts eyes "out" vs "in" the turret.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

i just finished a battle with russian player. 50 soldiers out of combat, 2 bmp3s , 2 t90am(edit) , whole right flank destroyed into oblivion, ready to push the unprepared center , my loses are   8 men in total out of combat (counting Wia and kia)+  targeting on abrams is red/knocked out ,but he managed to destroy 1 t90am after that lol...  , other 6 abrams are unscratched,, he surendered. yes its not impossible to beat US army in this game,but its far harder than it should be. 

i ordered fast command for abrams tanks and when poor at 14 lased them, abrams just threw smoke (+ i ordered them at one point just in case) and continued to eat their flank, 4 out of 7 abrams tanks were sent via a corider 5x5 m2 and broke that flank,with support of 120/150mm artilery and few machine guns..

i will play only russians from now on (yes i might beat new players who are playing americans) and i ll try to win vs an average opponent, or at least destroy 1 abrams tank, ill be happy if i dammage 1 abrams

http://imgur.com/PVGW6w6

those icons on his right flank are shattered/panicked or wounded useless troops, so only at the center he has some firepower left. and those in the center and his left are small teams,icons gives false impression of his strenght

Edited by Hydaspes
Link to post
Share on other sites

Aurelius long distance shots. Only sit them in ambush in keyhole positions like you woild with a big german TD without turret.  They can shoot through smoke. If you need to reposition them then only use interior lines of communication that will still end out of LoS of the enemy.

Hydaspes look at my Because Bradley thread. One T90 killed 2 Abrams. Another got another and 2 Bradleys.

I also have saves where Ive completely destroyed abrams and bradley heavy forces that had vet/crack crews with vet/reg russian troops.  You need for real combined arms as in T90s in numbers preferably coming from ambush and or multiple angles of attack and preferably a simeltaneous engagement of some AT 14s or 13s

Also its good to have some AT14s and 13s with long LoS to lase abrams and bradleys. Of course they will auto pop smoke and i take this as a matter of course. But their pop smoke isnt unlimited at all and  y lasing far away they probably wont spot your at team, especially in a bldg and will pop smoke.

At long ranges heavy woods is ok cover but remember the US thermals rock and at closer ranges will see through woods like they arent there. The only real surefire protection against thermal spotting especially for close range attacks is buildings.

However when using Khriz in ambush or sometimes tanks or bmps in ambush woods are excellent because often javelins will strike trees instead of vehicles.

If you look at my DARs i almost always advance armored forces in bounding movement with overwatch tank fire. Think infantry but with tanks. I always try to end my tanks move orders with a buiding blocking one of its sides or a whole wood blocking a side. In ambush the best way is not to jump the gun let the US advance close and roll into the LoS of T90s sitting behind buildings. Often best if your tank is at say a 90 degree angle to advancing abrams. Also important to have an infantry screen in buildings nearby so US inf dont spot your tanks or kill them.

Also on the auto pop smoke dont forget the T90A readily does this just as well as an abrams. In fact i prefer russian pop smoke it launches way further out and is perfect for attacks.

Finally hydaspes my offer still stands you can buy any US force and Ill take Russians attack or defense. I GUARANTEE if I dont win I will definitely destroy several abrams and bradleys and plenty of your GIs.

Your assertion that getting a win as Russian is way harder than it should be is based on what exactly? What recent conflict or conflict at all since the Russian civil war post ww1 have US and Russian troops fought besides isolated incidents in Ww2 and secretly in planes in Korea?

The only evidence available at all isnt full Russian models of equipment but if you do use foreign Russian models vs US equipment in almost any conflict of your choice the Russian stuff loses generally and pretty poory at that. X2 or x3 with US or Israel using the Western equipment.  And yes bla bla thats export models and not Russian forces but the question stands - exavtly what are you basing your assertion that its way harder than it should be to get a win as Russians?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly dont see a problem with it.  Maybe a slight alteration for units with APS.  But as it is I think its pretty balanced.  You get significantly more Russian infantry than US with same points, and more tanks.  Maybe not a huge amount more but more.   I still stand by the idea that the game isnt an RTS about balance - theres games like Wargame Air Land Battle etc for that, but that its a tactical simulation.

And I still find it highly ironic that it only seems to be Russia that everyone is getting all upset about over this.  You dont see people demanding changes for US Shermans saying theyre nerfed.  You dont see people saying anything about the Ukrainians at all - and they definitely get the shortest end of the stick in the game.  And in SF I dont recall people posting thread after thread after thread about how the Syrians were nerfed and BFC fix or do sumfink it shouldnt be this hard to win as the Syrians!!!

It is what it is.  Its harder to win as the Russians. If you play them exclusively in PBEMs you WILL get better and start winning more than you lose, and win you lose you'll make the other side pay dearly.  The same with the Ukrainians. The US is the most forgiving but same applies to them - you play them constantly and you'll get consistently better as them.

It applies for all the CM titles, really the only side in any x2 game thats almost hopeless to play is Italians and even them Im sure if you insisted on playing endlessly you could become pretty adept at. But their largest problem is not nationality based it's equipment, in which their tanks and infantry AT ability is basically hopeless.

For the Russians though a lot of their equipment isnt as great as the US its cheaper. And they do have strengths you can play to, as well as the fact that the Russians are entirely a different league than the Italians in FI because the Russian T90A or AM, though inferior to an Abrams, is still perfectly capable of killing an Abrams, even from the front.  Even a comparison of Shermans isnt apt unless you're comparing Sherman fireflies to T90AMs which I feel is very apt.  The T90AM or A can generally penetrate every US vehicle from the front.  However any shot from an Abrams to its front is almost definitely going to kill it.

The QB point values as far as battle types.. just use probes.  The thing is that the assault/attack/probe point values in the WW2 titles arent as noticeable.  The weapons arent as deadly, nor as expensive, though in a PBEM the defender still basically has a hopeless time in an assault.  But an attack isnt nearly as difficult in a WW2 title for the defender as it is in BS where its still almost a guaranteed loss for the defender.   MEs are extremely rare IRL and unrealistic, and I dont like them.  So the best option for realism as far as one side attacking another defending, with the attacker getting a point bonus that isnt excessive is probe for BS.

Also @Aurelius I gave you advice in the post above.  But your experiences are honestly just you.  Ive had multiple kills with Khriz in single games, let alone cumulatively all together with dozens of abrams and bradleys killed, with and without APS.  One good thing to do is buy a pair of Khriz ( I always buy a pair or one singly and attach it to my tank battalion 31 I buy along with a battalion tac. group) and give them veteran rating maybe one of them crack.  More experienced crews on such a piece of equipment is very important. Also do not take them on maps that are small (smaller than large is too small) or dont have at least a few places with 1000 meter plus LoS. It takes practice and they are fragile, and because engine limitations and the fact its a game the Khriz cant use some of its real life strengths, such as engaging two targets at once, or just have the missile launcher mast exposed.  Also in real life a crew would know when to use the radar, when to use its thermals, etc.  In the game the AI cant decide as well as a human.  In real life a Khriz crew may be told over the radio, use radar only we're laying a smoke screen down so you can shoot at the US without being shot back at, in game they dont know this.  I honestly dont know how the game handles spotting cycles and spotting for units with things like thermals, radar, and enhanced sights, but Im sure its still not handled as well as humans would use it.

Another good example is close range engagements. In real life T90 crews engaging US tanks would probably not lase them first but just aim and fire.  Same vice versa.  This wouldnt activate the LWR on the Abrams, (though in real life it apparently doesnt have one) and in real life it wouldnt activate the LWR in the T90AM. But because its a game the target gets lased, and its very difficult to code the AI to know when to lase and when not.  If the designers simply said do not lase under 500m then people would be screaming why are my T90s missing shots at impossibly close range because situations where lasing may help the tank but theyre just using a boresight or sights without lasing and estimation of range.  Its very hard to find the sweet spot.  Ian perhaps you could bring up to the devs the possibility of having tanks not lase under a certain range however, like maybe in clear day and night conditions  under 250m or something...

Edited by Sublime
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sublime, I mentioned Ukrainian spotting problems a few times. I feel as if there is a bug with their spotting, As if they have a certain spotting delay. I did a game where I was playing as a Ukrainian defense against a combined arms assault, And my T-64s weren't spotting targets 400 meters from them while the enemy T-72B3 were blasting them away. I feel as if instead of simulating spotting there is a delay code for the vehicles to spot. Sure I seen a few videos on M1A2's thermals, Shows everything clear and all but I know for sure even in plain T-72B from 1986 (saying so because I have been looked through its sight before) you can spot a tank like target from 1000 meters away with ease in flat fields.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes especially in clear daytime conditions any tank from even the 70s or 80s should be able to spot another tank in a flat field at that distance.

The T64 the Ukrainians have I noticed does spot better unbuttoned.  Ive had such lousy luck with T72s Im loathe to use them but if forced I even unbutton them usually.  But almost always T64s.  However you're running a huge risk unbuttoning any Soviet era or Russian tank - the three man crews mean a loss from shrapnel or small arms of a crew member is disastrous for the tank.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly dont see a problem with it.  Maybe a slight alteration for units with APS.  But as it is I think its pretty balanced.  You get significantly more Russian infantry than US with same points, and more tanks.  Maybe not a huge amount more but more.   I still stand by the idea that the game isnt an RTS about balance - theres games like Wargame Air Land Battle etc for that, but that its a tactical simulation.

And I still find it highly ironic that it only seems to be Russia that everyone is getting all upset about over this.  You dont see people demanding changes for US Shermans saying theyre nerfed.  You dont see people saying anything about the Ukrainians at all - and they definitely get the shortest end of the stick in the game.  And in SF I dont recall people posting thread after thread after thread about how the Syrians were nerfed and BFC fix or do sumfink it shouldnt be this hard to win as the Syrians!!!

It is what it is.  Its harder to win as the Russians. If you play them exclusively in PBEMs you WILL get better and start winning more than you lose, and win you lose you'll make the other side pay dearly.  The same with the Ukrainians. The US is the most forgiving but same applies to them - you play them constantly and you'll get consistently better as them.

It applies for all the CM titles, really the only side in any x2 game thats almost hopeless to play is Italians and even them Im sure if you insisted on playing endlessly you could become pretty adept at. But their largest problem is not nationality based it's equipment, in which their tanks and infantry AT ability is basically hopeless.

For the Russians though a lot of their equipment isnt as great as the US its cheaper. And they do have strengths you can play to, as well as the fact that the Russians are entirely a different league than the Italians in FI because the Russian T90A or AM, though inferior to an Abrams, is still perfectly capable of killing an Abrams, even from the front.  Even a comparison of Shermans isnt apt unless you're comparing Sherman fireflies to T90AMs which I feel is very apt.  The T90AM or A can generally penetrate every US vehicle from the front.  However any shot from an Abrams to its front is almost definitely going to kill it.

The QB point values as far as battle types.. just use probes.  The thing is that the assault/attack/probe point values in the WW2 titles arent as noticeable.  The weapons arent as deadly, nor as expensive, though in a PBEM the defender still basically has a hopeless time in an assault.  But an attack isnt nearly as difficult in a WW2 title for the defender as it is in BS where its still almost a guaranteed loss for the defender.   MEs are extremely rare IRL and unrealistic, and I dont like them.  So the best option for realism as far as one side attacking another defending, with the attacker getting a point bonus that isnt excessive is probe for BS.

Also @Aurelius I gave you advice in the post above.  But your experiences are honestly just you.  Ive had multiple kills with Khriz in single games, let alone cumulatively all together with dozens of abrams and bradleys killed, with and without APS.  One good thing to do is buy a pair of Khriz ( I always buy a pair or one singly and attach it to my tank battalion 31 I buy along with a battalion tac. group) and give them veteran rating maybe one of them crack.  More experienced crews on such a piece of equipment is very important. Also do not take them on maps that are small (smaller than large is too small) or dont have at least a few places with 1000 meter plus LoS. It takes practice and they are fragile, and because engine limitations and the fact its a game the Khriz cant use some of its real life strengths, such as engaging two targets at once, or just have the missile launcher mast exposed.  Also in real life a crew would know when to use the radar, when to use its thermals, etc.  In the game the AI cant decide as well as a human.  In real life a Khriz crew may be told over the radio, use radar only we're laying a smoke screen down so you can shoot at the US without being shot back at, in game they dont know this.  I honestly dont know how the game handles spotting cycles and spotting for units with things like thermals, radar, and enhanced sights, but Im sure its still not handled as well as humans would use it.

Another good example is close range engagements. In real life T90 crews engaging US tanks would probably not lase them first but just aim and fire.  Same vice versa.  This wouldnt activate the LWR on the Abrams, (though in real life it apparently doesnt have one) and in real life it wouldnt activate the LWR in the T90AM. But because its a game the target gets lased, and its very difficult to code the AI to know when to lase and when not.  If the designers simply said do not lase under 500m then people would be screaming why are my T90s missing shots at impossibly close range because situations where lasing may help the tank but theyre just using a boresight or sights without lasing and estimation of range.  Its very hard to find the sweet spot.  Ian perhaps you could bring up to the devs the possibility of having tanks not lase under a certain range however, like maybe in clear day and night conditions  under 250m or something...

ok lets play. same map as in my previous battle? its large map, medium funds? day,clear,1hour

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes. I I like your idea thats the general way I do it as well - whatever the battle size in points I do one size larger in the map.  Whose attacking, whose defending?

Jeffreypclark86@Yahoo.com

you can directly send files to me there or you can send me a dropbox invite. I can usually get a couple turns a day at the least one  a day.

I will take the Russians.  If you like lets do no APS or APS for HQs only. If you want no restrictions on APS so be it thats fine as well. standard rarity, mix of units. give me Russians, Attack or defend, but set it as a probe so whoever attacking doesnt have an outsize point advantage.

 

Interesting you quoted me halfway and attributed the quote to my name backwards... =) ??

Edited by Sublime
Link to post
Share on other sites

yes. I I like your idea thats the general way I do it as well - whatever the battle size in points I do one size larger in the map.  Whose attacking, whose defending?

Jeffreypclark86@Yahoo.com

you can directly send files to me there or you can send me a dropbox invite. I can usually get a couple turns a day at the least one  a day.

I will take the Russians.  If you like lets do no APS or APS for HQs only. If you want no restrictions on APS so be it thats fine as well. standard rarity, mix of units. give me Russians, Attack or defend, but set it as a probe so whoever attacking doesnt have an outsize point advantage.

 

Interesting you quoted me halfway and attributed the quote to my name backwards... =) ??

ok i ll attack. lets do without restrictions on aps (just to make it harder for you to know what i ll pick) . i ll send the file in 30m-1h

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the midst of a pbem (CMBN) with Sublime. My money's on him. I think he gets a bigger advantage when he gets to use his playing style and gets Russian forces.

Let's get an AAR!

Are you ready to ruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuummmmmmmmbbbbbbbbbbbbllllllllllllllllllleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee????????????

Link to post
Share on other sites

ugh. fine Ill do an DAR. Someone has to help me embed the screenies. And Hydaspes you cant look. Im taking you at your word on it.

i have a problem, i keep getting deployed at  your deployment, tried 2 times now, turned of Cmh aswell , how do i fix this?

also dont worry about thread,knowing where your enemy is just kills whole point of combat mission 

edit:i didnt exit the purchasing screen during any moment,but bug still happened

Edited by Hydaspes
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.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...