BMP-3M - PROOF of ATGM firing!

[Kinophile]

NOTEs:

1. This is a scenario, "First Clash", about 5 mins in

2.  I haven't personally observed (granted,I haven't been paying attention) if the BMP-3M fires its ATGMs in quick battles.

3. I have not checked any other BMPs. Ukrainian BTR-4Es do fire their ATGMs, and very effectively too.

 

 

Edited March 17, 2016 by kinophile

[Ivanov]

My BMP-3's launched ATGMs twice during one quick battle. I had an entire battalion of them. One of the missiles missed the target and another was stopped by the reactive armor of a Bulat. So yes, they launch ATGMs. What's annoying and counterproductive, is that much more often they fire a cannon at the enemy tanks revealing their positions and getting killed in a short order.

[Kinophile]

As it happens, this BMP fired off every single one of his ATGMs, alternating with autocannon fire as neccesary. If I moved him he would still fire his ATGMs, as did his partner to his left.

Run this scenario, dont repo an RUS forces, and watch him work.

 

Edited March 18, 2016 by kinophile

[Jotte]

As someone posted elsewere, I'd not mind if we got the ability to thoggle the use of gun or missile or leave it to AI as now ala Steel Panthers. But I suspect that is starting to slip down the micro managment sloop that BFC wants to avoid. 

[Sublime]

That was me. And u mean bmp2ms right there is no 3m. Personally Ive never ever not even once seen a Russ vehicle besides Khriz fire atgms. Ive seen it once with a Ukr T64 and once with a Ukr BMP2. Both missed and were annihilated.

[Sublime]

Nope you meant BMP3s. I dont really give a toss for the 3s. Its nice they shoot missiles. But its nowhere near as nice as seeing proof  of a 2M firing its kornet would be.

[Kinophile]

We could Open this scenario in the editor and change the 3s to 2s...seeing as how we know this bmp,  in this map,  at this location and facing DOES fire it's ATGMs then we can use it as a base to test the other BMPs. 

[Sublime]

Just realized i sorta double posted/cross posted there. Anyways kino pls check it out and let me know. I dont need proof your words good ivr watched  since you started postin here and you dont fall into the uber biased category imo. Check it out though.

[Kinophile]

Thank you. Yes will do.

[Nefron]

On 3/19/2016 at 0:20 PM, TJT said:

As someone posted elsewere, I'd not mind if we got the ability to thoggle the use of gun or missile or leave it to AI as now ala Steel Panthers. But I suspect that is starting to slip down the micro managment sloop that BFC wants to avoid. 

 

I think there is already plenty of micromanaging in the game, since you can position your units within a square meter, and the terrain is detailed enough for you to have to do so. 

 

I'd love to have things like weapons selection and stances, rather than having to micromanage some elaborate dance ritual to make my Javelin team actually stay act in overwatch, instead of burying their faces in the ground. When that nicely positioned BMP opens up with the cannon instead of a missile, or that ATGM team operator stares at a rock, those are the things that incredibly frustrating. 

[Kinophile]

I agree that a missie/cannon toggle would not be micromanagement,  considering how detailed our orders can grow,  especially in turn based. 

I could see a real life order of Engage from.A distance with ATGM only. 

It could be a case of a vehicles primary and secondary weapons having their own arcs -  ie I could set the ATGM's fire arc to Armor only,  and the Autocannon to General Fire as two separate arcs. 

What would probably be necessary would be the ability to set the DEPTH of the fire arc -  ie ATGM Armor arc from 3K in to 500m, AC General Fire arc from 1K to 0m.

Eiturr way,  it feels like the IFV AI need's some extra notes on where/when to engage. Adding a separate fire arc for the two main weapons could probably be easier than re-coding the AI's threat evaluation algorithms. 

[Jotte]

Well, the toggle IS micro managment. We already have quite a bit of it but BFC have, iirc, stated they are wary of going much futher down that road. As I said befor, personally, I'd love to see a Steel Panthers like toggling of weapon systems, squad/team members weapons on and off. Couple that with an expanded arc system like kinophile suggests would be even more to my taste.  But I have my doubts that BFC want to go much futher down the micro managment path regarding this. They have to draw the line somewere befor the feature creep overwealms them.

[Kinophile]

Well,  I know what I want for Christmas.

[Kinophile]

SO!

First Clash, modified to use different RUS IFV types.

Went through green-regular-crack for each. BMP-3Ms morelikely to fire (and hit) with Crack and above.Much lower probability of firing if Regular or lower.

BMP-3/3Ms - fire ATGMs , DEPENDING on physical location. Move the same BMP to a different position and the odds of firing are almost random (based a 5 different rounds, real time).

BMP-2/2M - do not fire ATGMs, ever.

Just for the sake of completeness I also did a UKR v,. US version.

UKR BTR-4Es sometimes fire ATGMs, very dependent on experience. I have faith though, as Ive been playing a lot of R/T UKR lately and I my BTR-4Es are great at missile ambush.

UKR BMP- 2Ms do not fire ATGMs, ever.

Naturally, Bradleys fire the bejaysus out of theirs.

-----

@battlefront - Do RUS BMP-3Ms have a better optics than BTR-4Es?

If so, then we can cross off optics as an issue (ie if UKR BTR-4Es fire their ATGMs, even with lesser grade optics, then it is not a spotting issue, it is an AI decision making issue).

If RUS are comparable, or weaker than the UKR in optics then it is a modeling/calculation issue and also possibly AI.

 

 

Edited March 23, 2016 by kinophile

[Sublime]

I KNEW IT! It was anecdotal for me but after hundreds of pbems exclusively as Russ and bringing BMP2Ms about 60% of the time compared to say playing Poking the Bear as US in single player in one go through and seeing Strykers Brads and Humvees (oh my!) All launch ToWs numerous times respectively...

Can we get some comment from a BFC source? Kino also I believe its just the BMP 3 there is no M model for the 3 AFAIK.

Also this I think is strong evidence for BFC to look into a tweak or toggle. Russian forces having IFVs with Kornets that are as readily available for purchase as BMP2Ms would probably greatly affect the Russian players ability to stop Abrams attacks.

Edited March 24, 2016 by Sublime

[Kinophile]

Yes there is, but i use the 3M all the time. It's right there in the selection window. 

This issue and oplots commander constantly rotating would be my highest priorities for a patch, as they directly affect gameplay, force balance,  tactics and realism. 

Edited March 24, 2016 by kinophile

[Panzerpanic]

Easy fix guys!!! Just switch the ai of the Oplot who fire way to much its atgm and the bmp2m who nerver fire its atgm and its done!!! ;P Just kidding. I know it wouldnt work but those two unit need to be looked at.

[Sublime]

Yes can we please get a cmment from  BFC or any beta testers. Ive been harping about this issue for almost 6 months now.

[Vanir Ausf B]

I can't speak for BFC and my NDA limits what I can say except that this and related AI ammo usage issues are not news to us.

[MikeyD]

Is ATGM firing at all dependent on what its firing at? Will a lower-penetration missile like AT-5 fire on a side-to Abrams but not a forward facing Abrams, or on a Stryker but not an Arena Bradley? That's something I'm not too sure about. Also, when facing lighter stuff the 30mm gun will do just as well as the ATGM, anyway.

[Kinophile]

That's an interesting question  -  is the AI  aware of the APS and it's effectiveness v missiles, ,  thence deciding "screw it,  use the gun". 

However in the First Clash scenario above the BMP-3M emptied his ATGM magazine firing at APS'd M1A1s, head on or quarter profile. I should check though if he swaps his targets once a missile is intercepted (ie "****, APS on that guy! New target!  ") 

I should check if the BMP-3 will also fire if we swap out the Abrams for Bradley's, non-APS Abrams,  trucks and hummers.

[Sublime]

Ok well speaking from personal experience Id say that 95 percent easy of all my BMP 2M experience against mostly M1s and M2s and occassionally strykers ALWAYS results in auto cannon and I can never see a reason thatd be preferable to the kornet especially salvo fired at any range to any abrams aspect. Of course unless within minimum range.

This confidence is based upon my insistence that neither I nor pbem opponents use APS

Edited March 28, 2016 by Sublime

[Sublime]

Again I cant stress the issue enough. The ATGMs the BMP2M packs are the best in the Russ arsenal next to the 15s the Khriz has and theyre in pairs.

Unless the missiles are at an impossible range or the target is infantry outside of bldgs, trucks or humvees I cannot see any situation thatwouldnt warrant immediate Kornet firing against Bradleys and Abrams that can KO and turn the BMP into a fireball from any aspect any range.

I think it would do a lot to literally shut up the HATO conspiracy of video games crowd to make one of the most easily accessible Russ vehicles that can be fielded in large numbers cheaply and effectively to use its absolute trump card. It wouldnt change Russ spotting or T90s not being the equal of abrams but it would make the battlefield a lot more lethal to US forces. I would argue against their use since the 2M has never been officially adopted. But we have Abrams with LWRs and APS. And T90AMs and Oplots which are essentially fantasy for real life TO&Es.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

1.  The BMP-2M is another fantasy piece of hardware (kind of, in that it exists but has not been selected by the Russian Army last time I checked).

2. The 30 MM is the correct weapon for IFV/APC type targets.  It's why IFVs mount autocannons instead of HMGs, to effectively allow them to fight like vehicles. It is a more dicey shot against a BFV with ERA etc, it's not a behavior I'd see as totally unrealistic.  

3. On the other hand, virtually NEVER should a tank type target be engaged by an autocannon.  There's a few cases where I'm incorrect (flank shots on T-55s, the tank literally just turned a corner and there you are etc), but the missile is the only system that gives a reasonable chance of killing a tank, or disabling it fast enough.  It's almost always the correct answer to hold fire until you can unleash your most lethal weapons system for that target type.  

In that regard, some sort of AI fix would be a good idea.  Having a toggle to help the player mandate missile behavior wouldn't be the worst thing ever if the AI still proves non-compliant.  In that regard, many of the ATGM systems in game require some preparations (halting the vehicle, deploying a launcher, etc) so having a command telling the vehicle that it is now time for missile engagement wouldn't be too out there.  

 

[Kinophile]

On 3/24/2016 at 9:00 AM, Sublime said:

Kino also I believe its just the BMP 3 there is no M model for the 3 AFAIK.

 

Edited March 28, 2016 by kinophile