Use of cannon vs ATGM - Some thoughts

[Euri]

I understand that since the latest patch BMPs and Bradleys generally prefer cannon use over ATGMs. Although this approach is mostly correct against AFVs, I think however that it is wrong against tanks (unless the tank is very close). What happens now most of the time is that the AFV opens fire with the cannon, gives away its position and unsurprisingly dies from the tank cannon shot. For an AFV pitted against a tank, firing an ATGM should be the primary choice and the first fire. Cannon should follow if necessary.

An extra point which, I am not sure if it can be implemented or not in the TACAI: An AFV, if faced by a tank, should fire the ATGM and immediately retreat out of LOS. If however the AFV is at 3, 6 or 9 o clock of the tank, then it should keep pounding.

[Ivanov]

+1

I think that Bradleys behave correctly and they launch their ATGMs against the tanks whenever they can. However I've never seen a BMP-3 launching it's ATGMs. I have an impression, that they fire cannon, because it would take longer for them to load a missile, while they prefer to shoot immediately after they spot a target. This is counterproductive because as mentioned above, they just reveal their positions to the enemy tanks and get killed in a short order.

[Sublime]

+1 Antaress and a few others have seen BMP2Ms use their missles but I have never in literally over a hundred BS games involving them.

I HAVE SEEN a UKR BMP and also T64 use their ATGMs once respectively and both  crashed harmlessly into the ground. Still I advocate not for a change in the TACAI but a simple ATGMs only toggle.

[Euri]

+1

I think that Bradleys behave correctly and they launch their ATGMs against the tanks whenever they can. 

True. I did a test and the Bradley indeed fired the TOWs in priority vs a T90

[Ivanov]

. Still I advocate not for a change in the TACAI but a simple ATGMs only toggle.

It would be nice but that would require changes to the UI. It would be much easier ( I know - nothing is easy ), to modify the SOP of the APC's. Namely: you spot infantry or an APC - fire the cannon. You spot a tank - fire a missile, because firing the cannon is utterly pointless and dangerous. As I said, the Bradleys behave correctly in this respect but there's something very wrong with the BMP's.

Edited February 7, 2016 by Ivanov

[Vanir Ausf B]

You spot a tank - fire a missile, because firing the cannon is utterly pointless and dangerous. 

Unless the tank has an APS

[Ivanov]

Unless the tank has an APS

Still it would make more sense than firing 30mm cannon at Abrams or Oplot. The APS deplete eventually.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

Speaking as someone who used to Bradley:

1. If it's a tank, unless I'm on the move, I'm initiating with TOW fire against tank type targets.

2. If I am on the move, unless it has gun tube orientation on me, I'm holding fire until I can somewhere to fire a TOW.  This might be simply doing a short halt and risking being in the open, or trying to go to ground first.  A lot depends on the range (short range, short halt as the missile flight time is short enough to get a kill before the tank can react, long range I'm going to find some lowground if possible because 30 seconds is a long time to sit in the open for a 3750 meter shot).

3. I would only have engaged with 25 MM against tank type targets if the enemy had clearly spotted me and was going to engage, or the firing angle is just perfect (I am behind them, flank shots at 90 degrees with enemy gun tube orientation facing away from me.

I can see the BMP-3 not firing ATGMs first simply because they're likely battle-carrying HE rounds (battle carry is what you load before the battle into the guntube), they'd likely either fire the HE to clear the tube, or unload it, whichever is faster.  But for anything with a distinct and separate ATGM launcher, seems odd they'd default to cannon fire.  

I'm also less than sold on APS in the game.  It was cool starting off, but it's looking less like the Russians are able to field it in numbers, and the US system remains largely hypothetical.  I generally play without it because I feel it best captures the modern armor on armor dynamic (and ATGMs are already dicey enough with ERA and advanced composite armor).  

Short story:

Interestingly enough, one of the Platoon Sergeants in a Troop I was in for a time had been a Bradley gunner in the first Persian Gulf War.  His platoon came in contact with some number of T-72s.  His Bradley opened up with one TOW which then caused the affected T-72 to simply explode, like tank now, and then gone.  He then shifted to a second target, firing the other missile, which departed the tube and then went no further thanks to a rocket engine failure .  By this time the tank's friend is realizing something is up and is drawing down on the Bradley.  The Bradley cuts loose with as much 25 MM AP as it can pump out, and after a short time, the tank just out and out explodes.  In short order the Iraqi tanks are all destroyed from M3 or M1 fire, and they take a pause to collect prisoners, reload and refit.  Absolutely full of himself, the Bradley's gunner pops the hatch to survey his two tank kills.  Then he spots something.  Strung across the front of his Bradley is a TOW guidance wire.  What had actually happened to the second tank was the Bradley's wingman had fired a TOW literally over the frontal slope, right by the turret, before continuing on to the Iraqi tank.  

Some of the other guys I worked with talked about ripping up T-55s and derivatives with 25 MM, but consensus seems pretty much if you've got something labeled "Anti-tank guided missile" failing to use it on a tank is a bit of a mistake. 

[Codename Duchess]

I wonder if Big Army has thought about converting the TOWs onboard a Bradley to Javelins?  What exactly is the advantage of TOW over Javelin?

[Euri]

This just happened 

Edited February 7, 2016 by Euri

[gnarly]

Drives you mad eh @Euri?

 

+1 for some toggle/setting to preference/use missiles over guns seems to be critical in BS

+1 for a better way of implementing shoot and scoot, in tandem with the above. Ie move to this position, fire on this target or fire on armour spotted (with whatever is toggled above) and then retreat. For missiles this would be for one shot, then retreat as soon as it hits/misses.

Shoot and scoot options would also be useful for Jav and RPG teams; right now, you have to guesstimate this with the pause command, as you have to take account of not only the flight time for say the javelin, but the acquisition/spotting/fire prep time leading up to this. Ie move them to this overwatch location, with an Armour Target mode; Pause for spotting/fire prop time, then add further time for missile flight, then move them fast back into cover.

I think for gunfire, one already can do this with pause and reverse commands?

 

 

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

Re: Javelin vs TOW

Its been considered, and may yet happen.  The main differences however:

1. Javelin has a max effective range of 2500 meters vs TOW's max range of 3750.

2. There are a lot of TOWs still in the inventory, and most enemy armor threats are not cutting edge anyone's equipment

3. Anti-armor upgrades until recently have ranked pretty low in the big scheme of things, so there hasn't been the funding/interest.

That said a Javelin ER, with a larger rocket motor seems like a pretty good bet for the not so distant future, or at the least, I would not rule it out.

[BTR]

I'm also less than sold on APS in the game.  It was cool starting off, but it's looking less like the Russians are able to field it in numbers, and the US system remains largely hypothetical.  I generally play without it because I feel it best captures the modern armor on armor dynamic (and ATGMs are already dicey enough with ERA and advanced composite armor).

That is a valid point. I think the APS are modeled in their "Ideal" state having instant reaction, near instant reload times and so forth. I touched on this in the armor thread a while back. 

Edited February 8, 2016 by BTR

[Boomkow]

Speaking as someone who used to Bradley:

1. If it's a tank, unless I'm on the move, I'm initiating with TOW fire against tank type targets.

2. If I am on the move, unless it has gun tube orientation on me, I'm holding fire until I can somewhere to fire a TOW.  This might be simply doing a short halt and risking being in the open, or trying to go to ground first.  A lot depends on the range (short range, short halt as the missile flight time is short enough to get a kill before the tank can react, long range I'm going to find some lowground if possible because 30 seconds is a long time to sit in the open for a 3750 meter shot).

3. I would only have engaged with 25 MM against tank type targets if the enemy had clearly spotted me and was going to engage, or the firing angle is just perfect (I am behind them, flank shots at 90 degrees with enemy gun tube orientation facing away from me.

I can see the BMP-3 not firing ATGMs first simply because they're likely battle-carrying HE rounds (battle carry is what you load before the battle into the guntube), they'd likely either fire the HE to clear the tube, or unload it, whichever is faster.  But for anything with a distinct and separate ATGM launcher, seems odd they'd default to cannon fire.  

I'm also less than sold on APS in the game.  It was cool starting off, but it's looking less like the Russians are able to field it in numbers, and the US system remains largely hypothetical.  I generally play without it because I feel it best captures the modern armor on armor dynamic (and ATGMs are already dicey enough with ERA and advanced composite armor).  

Short story:

Interestingly enough, one of the Platoon Sergeants in a Troop I was in for a time had been a Bradley gunner in the first Persian Gulf War.  His platoon came in contact with some number of T-72s.  His Bradley opened up with one TOW which then caused the affected T-72 to simply explode, like tank now, and then gone.  He then shifted to a second target, firing the other missile, which departed the tube and then went no further thanks to a rocket engine failure .  By this time the tank's friend is realizing something is up and is drawing down on the Bradley.  The Bradley cuts loose with as much 25 MM AP as it can pump out, and after a short time, the tank just out and out explodes.  In short order the Iraqi tanks are all destroyed from M3 or M1 fire, and they take a pause to collect prisoners, reload and refit.  Absolutely full of himself, the Bradley's gunner pops the hatch to survey his two tank kills.  Then he spots something.  Strung across the front of his Bradley is a TOW guidance wire.  What had actually happened to the second tank was the Bradley's wingman had fired a TOW literally over the frontal slope, right by the turret, before continuing on to the Iraqi tank.  

Some of the other guys I worked with talked about ripping up T-55s and derivatives with 25 MM, but consensus seems pretty much if you've got something labeled "Anti-tank guided missile" failing to use it on a tank is a bit of a mistake. 

I don't use Trophy or Arena either. In addition to the ATGMs, some CAS missiles still are being intercepted. Shtora and ERA are all I use.

[Sublime]

I find this ironic as since the start i tried restricting aps use in pbems and people often disagreed while now it seems many are coming around to the idea.

The toggle i think would be easier to implement than tacai changes. Plus the tacai is already the problem and say they tweak it the next complaint is my ifvs use atgms too much. With a toggle noone has anyone to blame but themselves and i dont think it.d require a UI overhaul at all. It seems BFC introduced 3 new UI aspects O can think of immediately cover armor which they said they had trouble with, target briefly which was first in a patch for 2.0 CM and the use of flails with the odds n sods module. The latter two seemed to be easier or at least we didnt hear about difficulties like I remember with Cover Armor.

No, i think the toggles the best option especially since BFC wont have to constantly tinker it to meet everyones different expectations.

Pzsrkraut: while in real life you.re absolutely right they need to clear the barrel from whatevers battleloaded however you will rememver that in CMx2 the correct round is always assumed to be in the barrel. A tank could be driving around and if it stops to shoot at infantry theres no first rounds AP or switching to reload to HE or vice versa with armor. This has been confirmed a few years ago by the developers.

[lordhedgwich]

I find this ironic as since the start i tried restricting aps use in pbems and people often disagreed while now it seems many are coming around to the idea.

The toggle i think would be easier to implement than tacai changes. Plus the tacai is already the problem and say they tweak it the next complaint is my ifvs use atgms too much. With a toggle noone has anyone to blame but themselves and i dont think it.d require a UI overhaul at all. It seems BFC introduced 3 new UI aspects O can think of immediately cover armor which they said they had trouble with, target briefly which was first in a patch for 2.0 CM and the use of flails with the odds n sods module. The latter two seemed to be easier or at least we didnt hear about difficulties like I remember with Cover Armor.

No, i think the toggles the best option especially since BFC wont have to constantly tinker it to meet everyones different expectations.

Pzsrkraut: while in real life you.re absolutely right they need to clear the barrel from whatevers battleloaded however you will rememver that in CMx2 the correct round is always assumed to be in the barrel. A tank could be driving around and if it stops to shoot at infantry theres no first rounds AP or switching to reload to HE or vice versa with armor. This has been confirmed a few years ago by the developers.

As Ukraine I have more luck with T-12 at gun than ATGMs

[Sublime]

Well it doesnt set off lwrs. And it doesnt have to be guided. Hows its penetration?

[John Kettler]

panzersaurkrautwerfer,

That's some excellent information from one who knows! I think I ought to ping my retired from Scouts brother, whom I'll be seeing in a few weeks, about what he was trained to do. He was a Bradley CFV commander and later Platoon Sergeant and Master Gunner for same before being switched to Hummers.

Sublime,

I completely agree with your suggestion regarding having a toggle to select ATGM. As you said, it puts the onus on the owning player. I have very little. I believe adding a toggle would be vastly easier and cheaper (therefore more doable and likely to happen) than modifying TAC AI--unless it's a simple matter of, say, adding something like an IF/THEN to the code. Otherwise, we are likely to need a major fund drive to get the TAC AI reworked! Also, what doesn't set off the LWS/LWR? While we're at it, I'd definitely support something to rein in automatic lasing. Seems to me that ought to be addressed since we know it's causing a lot of avoidable casualties.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Sublime]

The rapira atg hedgewich mentioned using as Ukr. Unless it does lase target?