Jump to content

Learning the ropes of IFV combat


Recommended Posts

Ah...  so is the following only good for Strykers, or useful for or IFV's like BMP's??

"Only gunner and driver: average spotting time of strykers and engagement  : 11-12 seconds 

With scout team inside: 6-7 seconds 

With squad leader led team inside : 6-7 seconds 

BUT:

Average engagement cycle and destruction of the two strikers targets with scout team inside: 35 seconds

Average engagement cycle and destruction of the two strikers targets with squad leader Led team inside : 27 seconds"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, that's what I originally thought and then I confused myself by thinking this referred to Strykers...  Confused...?  Join the club. 

So... What I meant to ask was do these tests apply to all Red IFV's (all BMP's and BTR's) or does this research apply only to a certain vehicle or vehicles?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems only only apply imho to bmp2ms and 3s. Btrs i havent noticed or cared. Theyre so weak armor wise that i only rely on them to target known enemy positions from.keyholes or after anything that can kill it has been destroyed.

In fact the key reason I pick BTR82A bttn tac grps over the 2m ( this will have the be reassessed since ive finally seen a kornet fired from a 2m ) was the btr tac grp gets a lot more atgms. Youbparse out the btr 82s frm the bttn to only a few ( you.re defending anyways ) and you can add a couple of khriz and some nice tanks...

The at 14s should be used for long range fire from bldgs so thermals dont spot or a trench. The saxhorns preferablly closer but only buildings. Buildings can be impervious to thermals if the team is alrdy hidden in place unlike even the thickest woods. And the saxhorn can set up in about 15 seconds. You can get some really nasty ambushes in. Maybe you wont kill the abrams though i have but you.ll start blowing up bradleys which still seems to upset people :)

 

Afaik this doesnt apply to any western vehicles so far.

Edited by Sublime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/30/2016 at 0:32 PM, antaress73 said:

You lose 80% of his spotting ability if you dont detach a scout team from its infantry squad and leave them in the vehicule. If you dont dio that, yeah you`ll get crushed since only the gunner with his limited field of view will spot. 

Having a 3rd set of eyeballs does help, as your tests demonstrate, but the commander has a less capable sight (day/night) than the gunner (thermal).

The better spotting provided by manning the commander's station is probably of greater consequence when fighting Ukrainians than Americans. I find that versus the US I end up keeping my BMPs out of LOS to any likely US positions except to very briefly pop out for area fire on enemy locations spotted by other units (infantry, usually). The exception would be keyholed defensive positions where you expect to make contact with forces moving in the open across your kill zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/2/2016 at 7:12 AM, kinophile said:

QED. 

Also,  it's a heavier cost in BS as the smallest team is two men.

So you essentially have a redundant extra pair of eyes stuck in your gunned up tin lunch box.  Not only is your boots on the ground reduced but you now have 4 men as a nice juicy target.

OK fine,  BMPS/BTRs need their extra guy but it's a bit of a UI flaw that a basic RUS MI tactic is not properly  accounted for w/r to squad breakdown. 

There badly needs to be some kind of option such as "BAIL (-1)" , as in, all leave but one. 

This would not affect the min team size of 2 as that only takes effect once the walking bags of raspberry  jam are outside the vehicle. 

I would like to have the ability to split off only the squad leader/vehicle commander. But those two extra bodies are useful on occasion. The BMP-3 has an usual feature: two bow machine guns. In conjunction with the coax MG a BMP-3 can lay down serious suppression on a building under assault by friendly infantry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

Having a 3rd set of eyeballs does help, as your tests demonstrate, but the commander has a less capable sight (day/night) than the gunner (thermal).

The better spotting provided by manning the commander's station is probably of greater consequence when fighting Ukrainians than Americans. I find that versus the US I end up keeping my BMPs out of LOS to any likely US positions except to very briefly pop out for area fire on enemy locations spotted by other units (infantry, usually). The exception would be keyholed defensive positions where you expect to make contact with forces moving in the open across your kill zone.

Well... yes.. at range placing your BMPs in LOS of the US is a bad idea. Its a bad idea against the russians too btw. US superior optics makes attacking easier for them. But placing a BMP Hull down with the addtional commander`s optics , they get the drop more often than people believe against Brads. It also enables the targetting of two  vehicules in quick succession way more often (it happened even against the US in my games) and it prevents situations like 2 bmps attacking a lone bradley by surprise and ending up both dead like it can often happen if you dont put a commander in. 

Edited by antaress73
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

I would like to have the ability to split off only the squad leader/vehicle commander. But those two extra bodies are useful on occasion. The BMP-3 has an usual feature: two bow machine guns. In conjunction with the coax MG a BMP-3 can lay down serious suppression on a building under assault by friendly infantry.

It sounds like I should buy a bunch of cheep cheep igla teams, travel them behind the BMPs and load them in once the infantry exit. 

Which is an aggravating as it's gamey,  but this core UKR/RUS mechanism is obviously wonked, and I'd rather not lose pixeltruppen. 

I wonder if inserting an elite sniper team into the BMPs instead would give better results. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

It's not the Bradleys I worry about. It's the Javelin-toting infantry.

ahh yes... but some people are very skilled at using artillery and if playing the Russians you need lot's of it and preplanned targets too. They rely on it heavily in real life and are very good at it and getting even better and high tech  from what I can read. Also, Javelin launchers should be knocked out more often when the guy holding it is a casualty. Right now they seem indestructible which is far from the truth. I've seem squads getting slaughtered almost to the last man by air burst arty and the last survivor  gets his senses back, picks a javelin  up and kills a tank or BMP. It CAN happen, but it happens WAY too often in the game. Using snipers in well hidden and tactically well placed overwatch will help too. I've seen RUS snipers kill javelin gunners when he exposes himself to aim and fire.  Using tree canopies and moving from cover to cover with fast moves will help: Javelin needs a long time to aim. You can break LOS before they can aim. You need every skills to play the russians effectively.

 

Funny  fact: i've seen arena defeat a Javelin. How ? two T-90AMs close by... the javelin was aiming for the left tank and came into the effective ARENA engagement enveloppe of the tank to the right. I was elated ! I try to do that now... works sometimes. I've should have recorded the thing with fraps.  

Edited by antaress73
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, antaress73 said:

Also, Javelin launchers should be knocked out more often when the guy holding it is a casualty. Right now they seem indestructible which is far from the truth.

I am going to try to get that changed.

5 hours ago, antaress73 said:

Funny  fact: i've seen arena defeat a Javelin. How ? two T-90AMs close by... the javelin was aiming for the left tank and came into the effective ARENA engagement enveloppe of the tank to the right. I was elated ! I try to do that now... works sometimes. I've should have recorded the thing with fraps.  

Now that is interesting. Theoretically it should work if the vehicle spacing and missile approach vector are just right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

antaress73,

In the case of AB fire of any sort, the Javelin amounts to a considerable portion (someone more knowledgeable and artistically gifted can figure out and show how much) of the Presented Area on a soldier, as seen from the warhead's perspective. Unknowns for me include: frag vulnerability of missile launch tube, missile in the tube and CLU, with the reasonable, I feel, expectation that the CLU would be tougher than the missile launch tube to, as much as possible, soldier proof that all-important item. I strongly suspect the launch tube on the Javelin is considerably tougher than say, the notoriously flimsy thin steel tube on a bazooka.

In terms of DF, I feel fairly safe in asserting an assault rifle bullet into the front of the missile tube would Mission Kill that missile. Depending on distance from burst and size thereof, frags or API could lead to further excitement.  In the latter case I  mean 7.62 mm x 54 mm full MG, 12.7 mm Dusha or 14.5 mm KPVT, since I would hope a direct 30 mm hit wouldn't be an issue in CMBS. The excitement could well include abrupt removal of the missile, CLU and operator. Any bullet into the CLU optics results in a dead CLU and almost certainly wounded or possibly dead operator, too. What sort of strike would it take to get through the CLU case? Unknown. That assessment would depend on the thickness and metallurgy of the case.

Regarding the Arena kill vs. Javelin, unless the Javelin was in DF mode, barring some very peculiar engagement geometry, I don't see how either tank could've engaged it with Arena, since it comes in above the Arena's elevation limits.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because JK he had another arena tank next to it. It could easily happen for examplw if the tank being shot at was in lower elevation and the second tank was right next to it behind cover and perhaps slightly higher.

Plus aps in game is messed up. It shouldnt be able to swat down kh 25s and kh66s (iirc) fire from aircraft. And i doubt aps would do much to a maverick either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally got a new password to sign back in! ;)  Having the two tanks right next to each other is a great idea, its really cool that it works.  If ever there was a real life tactic to be inspired by someone playing combat mission, that seems like a reasonable stop gap measure for Russia to use if they were to fight Javelins, if it worked in real life too.  Seems like there is a chance it would.  Really brings to mind the old Land Ship concept.  Which then brings to mind those silly scifi giant tank scenes.  Have a few super tanks in the middle with long rang Anti Air missiles and have it surrounded by shorter range AA missle carriers and have it be a regular land ship battle group ;)

Edited by cool breeze
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2016-09-05 at 1:48 PM, antaress73 said:

Funny  fact: i've seen arena defeat a Javelin. How ? two T-90AMs close by... the javelin was aiming for the left tank and came into the effective ARENA engagement enveloppe of the tank to the right. I was elated ! I try to do that now... works sometimes. I've should have recorded the thing with fraps.  

 

22 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

Now that is interesting. Theoretically it should work if the vehicle spacing and missile approach vector are just right.

 

Humm how does this work?  I think what you are saying is that the Arena IR signals cause the Javelin to follow the wrong signature end up hitting nothing.  Do I have that right?  And I so why doesn't Arena just work for the target tank when it is all alone?  Please enlighten me as to how this could work even theoretically?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're confusing Arena with Shtora. Arena is a hard kill system that uses Doppler radar while Shtora attempts to spoof the missile with IR emitters and smoke. Arena is usually ineffective against Javelin because its engagement envelope does not include the space directly above the vehicle, but if the missile is targeting something off to the side of the vehicle but still very near it may pass through the engagement envelope on the way down.

I am not confident this would work in reality since the missile would be within the engagement envelope for a very brief time but it's not outside the realm of possibility.

Edited by Vanir Ausf B
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

You're confusing Arena with Shtora. Arena is a hard kill system that uses Doppler radar while Shtora attempts to spoof the missile with IR emitters and smoke. Arena is usually ineffective against Javelin because its engagement envelope does not include the space directly above the vehicle, but if the missile is targeting something off to the side of the vehicle but still very near it may pass through the engagement envelope on the way down.

I am not confident this would work in reality since the missile would be within the engagement envelope for a very brief time but it's not outside the realm of possibility.

I too am in the not confident it would work in reality camp.  It seems like if anything you'd program the APS to NOT shoot objects that are landing some distance away from the tank.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recent Discovery: Javelins are not nessisarily the be-all and end-all either... for the first time I've had javelins miss in two separate battles, as well as a hit that failed to penetrate... All were from relatively short range (300 meters ish) - can someone confirm the Jav is hampered at closer ranges outside the minimum?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Artemis258 said:

Recent Discovery: Javelins are not nessisarily the be-all and end-all either... for the first time I've had javelins miss in two separate battles, as well as a hit that failed to penetrate... All were from relatively short range (300 meters ish) - can someone confirm the Jav is hampered at closer ranges outside the minimum?

The Javelin has issues with flight path in three situations:

 

1. The target disappears behind IR-blocking smoke. In this case, the Javelin will fly to the last known target area, and then tries to reacquire when it's time for the terminal dive. It sometimes fails to reacquire, or does it too late so it goes into the ground.

 

2. The target is close, so there's not enough time for it to complete its "rise to set altitude, fly for a while, then dive" flight path. From my experience, it might hit turret front ERA when this happens.

 

3. Sometimes it hits behind the tank due to the tank's positioning (e.g. in a slope) or maybe due to some bug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Sublime said:

Oh man javelins never were end all be all. Theyre fantastic but occasionally you.ll get a missile that tries to recreate the apollo missions

Crazy NASA conspiracy

The inevitable result of building a highly complicated combination of rocket and electronics by the lowest bidder.  

Of course, the Russian stuff is built by the lowest bidder and a semi-educated workforce so your mileage there will be fuuuuun.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

interesting in-depth analysis and description of the BMP-3:

 

https://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.ca/2014/10/bmp-3-underappreciated-prodigy.html

 

He says that the self-sealing  fuel tanks located in the front hull greatly add to the protection of the crew compartment on that part of the vehicule. Interesting, like the front glacis of the M1A2 (where the fuel tanks will protect against penetrations).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:

Of course, the Russian stuff is built by the lowest bidder and a semi-educated workforce so your mileage there will be fuuuuun.  

Haha dude do you know Max Uriarte or something? I know hes a jarhead but god you kill me sometimes :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, antaress73 said:

interesting in-depth analysis and description of the BMP-3:

 

https://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.ca/2014/10/bmp-3-underappreciated-prodigy.html

 

He says that the self-sealing  fuel tanks located in the front hull greatly add to the protection of the crew compartment on that part of the vehicule. Interesting, like the front glacis of the M1A2 (where the fuel tanks will protect against penetrations).

He has interesting opinions, although it's certainly an opinion I would not care to have to take cover behind when someone is shooting 25 MM at me.  

 

 

12 hours ago, Sublime said:

Haha dude do you know Max Uriarte or something? I know hes a jarhead but god you kill me sometimes :)

If you're talking about the Terminal Lance guy, I only wish I was as cool as he is.  

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.

×
×
  • Create New...