Russians Underpowered, US Overpowered in CMBS?

[Douglas Mac]

I am wondering if anyone else thinks the Russians are at a disadvantage. US vehicles seem to spot faster, react quicker and their APS systems seem to work nearly every time. Its getting to a point where I can always win when I play the US and always loose when I play as the Russians. It would be ok if the difference was close but Russian kit seems woefully inadequate. In nearly every respect the Russians seem disadvantaged, from infantry to armor.

My experience with T90AM (APS) is bad. Their APS sucks compared to the US. I have played dozens of games where it just fails to even go off or be effective when it does, utter garbage... Also their armor seems bad compared to the Abrams. In my experience they are glass canons where the Abrams can soak up hit after hit!

I'm tired of getting wrecked by US when I play Russia and I'm tired of wrecking the Russians when I'm playing as the US. It becomes very boring when one side has such a massive advantage over the other. Anyone else noticing this or is this the great un-spoken topic of the forum because I guess if everyone admitted to it no one would want to play the Russians...

Has this always been like this or has V4 done this? It's starting to wreck this otherwise fine game for me.

Edited March 19, 2017 by Douglas Mac

[Haiduk]

10 minutes ago, Douglas Mac said:

Also their armor seems bad compared to the Abrams.

Not so armor bad, as US APFSDS ammunition better. And yes, fast spotting and "x-ray vision" (C) sorry, forgot author this is big issue of the game. And not only for tanks, and not only for US.

[Douglas Mac]

So when all else is equal (Player experience and troop experience) does everybody just accept they will likely get wrecked when they play as Russia and put up with it? I would say this probably puts new comers off when they think it's a problem with them rather than the game.

I agree, the Russian spotting is abysmal. I am playing a game right now and my poor opponent lost half his forces in one turn. Even when they came under fire his units couldn't seem to see my guys that were right in front of them blasting them to pieces. Needless to say it just ruins the game for us. I think Battlefront needs to address this.

[gnarly]

27 minutes ago, Douglas Mac said:

or is this the great un-spoken topic of the forum because I guess if everyone admitted to it no one would want to play the Russians...

 

Actually I think it's the opposite: it is (or was?) the greatly spoken topic.

 

I think the general consensus in terms of relative superiority is US > RUS > UKR.  I think you will find it very rare that any experienced players participating in a  US vs RUS PBEM game, will not add a number of house rules to even/balance things out somewhat for the Russians (particularly versus the massive force multiplier that is the javelin). From as simple as adding 5 or 10+% purchase points to the Russians, to removing drones, etc. 

 

But you are correct, certainly I believe in a straight out (unaltered) US vs RUS PBEM game, not many players will go the Russians. Exception would be the player @Sublime : do a search for his posts, and you will get some great info on how to play better as the Russkies in the face of the US.

 

Note the same US vs RUS 'imbalance' can been seen to a lesser extent in RUS vs UKR, specifically T-90s vs Oplots.  But the saving grace of the UKR are their man portable ATGM Corsars.... which are almost Javelins....

 

Edit:  For these reasons, I myself have only ever played one US vs RUS PBEM game (my first game ever...).  My other dozen+ PBEMs in Black Sea have all been RUS vs UKR, which have been very enjoyable affairs, outside some issues with Oplots... And even in these, we've always house-ruled out drones, since the UKR's don't have any in game (how quickly reality superseded that! ! )  ;D

Edited March 19, 2017 by gnarly

[Douglas Mac]

Yes I agree with most everything you have said here and thanks for the heads up regarding @sublime, cheers.

Yeah I thought the Corsairs would help...

I disagree on one issue though... to me it doesn't seem to matter what house rules or "crutches" you give the Russians because it doesn't really help to have more crappy units that still die as fast, it just takes longer for the US to mop up the Russians. They still suck even if you have loads of them.

Also most players want to enforce strict arty rules which imo only really hurts the Russians, in the only area where they could have a slight advantage in firepower (but not accuracy).

Also its kinda sad to have to try and "game" the system just to get a "fair" fight.

Thanks for you reply Gnarly.

[The Steppenwulf]

The differences do seem to be excessive in my view - we are talking about Russian optics not even spotting after muzzle flash from enemy cannon. Perhaps muzzle flash aided spotting is not modelled in CM (a slight problem). Another thing, from my experience the Zala drone spots nothing ... ever. It just does not seem to function at all. It is a waste of time.

[Douglas Mac]

2 minutes ago, The Steppenwulf said:

The differences do seem to be excessive in my view - we are talking about Russian optics not even spotting after muzzle flash from enemy cannon. Perhaps muzzle flash aided spotting is not modelled in CM (a slight problem). Another thing, from my experience the Zala drone spots nothing ... ever. It just does not seem to function at all. It is a waste of time.

Yeah excessive is the word and you're right about how bad they are at spotting stuff that is and has been firing at them. That's how I just wrecked half my opponents force. Just rolled up and blasted several IFVs and infantry into the dust and they didn't even see their own destruction. Admittedly I had done everything right but his guys couldn't even return fire, none of them. Over the next few turns I just gave up on being cautious and just started rolling through his lines. I can imagine how un-enthused he is now to continue and offered to cease fire for his sake. It takes hours to set all this up and play out the turns and then it takes seconds for the ultra US to wipe it all out. Ridiculous....

Hmm that's interesting about the drone. Sometimes they take awhile to set up and spotting takes time too but im sure you are aware of that.

[Douglas Mac]

I wouldn't mind so much that the Russians often don't spot first but the real deal breaker is what The Steppenwolf said about: after being shot at the Russian units still take an age to see whats shooting at them. Speed that up and they might stand a chance...

[Ivanov]

Try some realistic, "real life" setup: slightly more numerous, tank heavy Russian force, some vehicles with APS, drones, laser guided arty and a battery of Tunguskas vs less numerous mechanized US forces, no APS on the vehicles and the laughable SHORAD just like in the reality and tell me who wins

[Vanir Ausf B]

There are certain game mechanics that exaggerate the primacy of frontal armor protection and smoke-popping speed. Since the Abrams is the only tank on which frontal armor facing actually matters in US vs RF it benefits disproportionately (the same dynamic is true for T-90s against Ukrainian forces). The Abrams also pops smoke much faster than any other vehicle in the game (that is a bug that will hopefully get fixed.) Also, the version of the Abrams in the game is significantly more advanced than what the US Army actually has. So if you want a more balanced and arguably more realistic matchup the first thing to do is ban the M1 Abrams entirely. You can play mech infantry vs mech infantry or even allow the Russians to have tanks since they are helpless vs Javelin anyways (the Javelin has it's own issues but less serious than the Abrams).

In fairness the Russians do get the benefit of the doubt in a couple of areas. The Zala UAV cannot be shot down by the US. Russian ground search radars work better than in reality. In fact, in my experience the best way to kill Abrams is to bring a lot of Khrizantema-S tank destroyers along with IR smoke popping APCs and shamelessly abuse the radar targeting.

Edited March 19, 2017 by Vanir Ausf B

[snarre]

well had to say to here or actually ask  why then some people dont have problems to deal M1 abraham whit T-90 ? 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

I'd agree strongly with the initial proposition, especially in regard of MBTs. 

Abrams just isn't that good and the upgrades for it in the foreseeable future don't bring it anywhere near the godlike capabilities CM:BS seem to have given it.

I'd suggest giving Russian AFV crews at least +1 training over their US rivals (at the same experience level) to compensate, based on what I've experienced so far.

Edited March 19, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead

[Artemis258]

Been playing an opponent on the few good men in a ruski defence against a US probe... it's early days yet, but I've lost a bit of armour, but he's down 4 (5?) brads and maybe a mission kill on one Abrahms, with hits on two others and a real failed opportunity that cost THE PERFECT flanking shot at 600 meters... 


Bottom line; play ambush tactics against the US. Don't get drawn into open, long range firefights - it's what they do best. Get in close, get on their sides, take single targets or crush them with overwhelming force. Be prepared to take casualties. Use hard cover to block thermals (buildings, REALLY dense forrests, ect). 

it's not easy, definitely a disadvantage, and increadibly punishing of your mistakes. 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

All good points and well made, but the underlying mechanics have to work right and this:

tankguntest.btt

Strongly suggests that they don't.....Elite tank crews should not just sit still and watch while under half their number of Regular opponents shoot the bejesus out of them. 

[The Steppenwulf]

26 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

All good points and well made, but the underlying mechanics have to work right and this:

tankguntest.btt

Strongly suggests that they don't.....Elite tank crews should not just sit still and watch while under half their number of Regular opponents shoot the bejesus out of them. 

Amen

To be fair I would like to hear what BF have to say about this. I mean the game has gone through 3 patches and an upgrade so...

[Chudacabra]

2 hours ago, Ivanov said:

Try some realistic, "real life" setup: slightly more numerous, tank heavy Russian force, some vehicles with APS, drones, laser guided arty and a battery of Tunguskas vs less numerous mechanized US forces, no APS on the vehicles and the laughable SHORAD just like in the reality and tell me who wins

I recently played a huge PBEM as the US against an attacking Russian force with a +25% bonus. The lack of any AA assets beyond Stingers for the Americans was a serious problem. His helicopters accounted for most of my tank loses. I unwisely opted for more tanks without APS, when I should have bought a smaller number of APS Abrams'. I did managed to destroy all my opponents T-90's and his Khrizantemas, and knock out something like 30 BMP-3's. Still, I was eventually overwhelmed by numbers, copious amounts of support weapons, and my own tactical failings.

Edited March 20, 2017 by Chudacabra

[John Kettler]

Douglas Mac,

By "APS" on the T-90AM are you referring not to Arena, but the Relikt ERA on the tank, by chance? If not, what do you mean? In a gunfight with the Abrams, to my knowledge the T-90AM has no system which will defeat KE. I have seen Relikt save a T-90AM, but my refire rate with a Veteran crew was such I was quickly able to get a second shot off, and it struck home. In a PBEM long ago. I killed a T-90AM with an "in the face" TOW 2B shot. Saw no evidence Arena ever fired, but there may've  be some AI logic about not  employing it while placed among trees. That is speculation from me and nothing else. I don't have your extensive depth of play to draw upon, but I would observe US forces are expensive, terribly so. In one battle, to meet the point limit for my core unit, I had to strip a CFV Company to HQ, a full 1st Platoon, a rump 2nd Platoon and no 3rd Platoon at all. My guys started the battle cut to pieces by any reasonable military standard. I also had to do a lot of tweaking on the soft factors as well. 

If cost vs in game capability is off for the Abrams, then I'd expect BFC to address this matter, since it goes to the very heart of the core US/Russian armor battle.  Also, I believe it would be good for BFC to provide earlier Abrams versions. This would close the gap some on day/optics/thermals and would theoretically make the Russians more combat effective. 

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited March 20, 2017 by John Kettler

[Rinaldi]

Everybody take a shot.

[Ivanov]

30 minutes ago, John Kettler said:

By "APS" on the T-90AM are you referring not to Arena, but the Relik ERA on the tank, by chance? If not, what do you mean? In a gunfight with the Abrams, to my knowledge the T-90AM has no system which will defeat KE.

In my battles I don't use T-90AM, only the T-72B3's and T-90A's. I don't know with what type of APS is supposedly the T-72B3 equipped, but in my current battle the APS on this tank has defeated Abrams round already twice. Let's see how long it can survive.

[John Kettler]

Ivanov,

Color me astounded! Had no idea Arena could handle such an extreme threat. Nor is there so much as a hint of capability vs any cannon round, as shown in the manufacturer KBM's own Arena APS product description. Italics mine.

(Fair Use)

"Purpose:

protection of main battle tanks (MBT) and infantry fighting vehicles (IFV) from antitank rocket-propelled grenades fired from any kind of launchers, ground-based and helicopter-borne antitank missiles intended to destroy the target by direct impact and in a fly-over attack."

Presuming KBM understands its own product and what the design threats were, seems to me BFC's modeling a capability so advanced KBM isn't allowed to know of it but which BFC's never sleeping intel network has nevertheless learned! Truly remarkable. Wonder whether this is some glitch specific to the T-72B3 (APS)? If not, then why haven't there been tons of howls from those who've fought the T-90AM? Surely that must amount to tens if not hundreds of games by now. Have used the T-90AM offensively and been on the receiving end of it. In no instance did I ever observe anything to stop a KE hit prior to actually hitting the tank.

 

Regards,

John Kettler

                     

Edited March 20, 2017 by John Kettler

[Ivanov]

John, in real life Arena definitely can't do it, hence I'm not sure what type of APS is it supposed to be. When you select the vehicle prior to the battle it just says T-72B3 APS. On the second thought - it could also be a bug.

Edited March 20, 2017 by Ivanov

[akd]

Please show that APFSDS was fired at this tank.

[gnarly]

I too am confused now by @Ivanov's  post. My understanding of the APS system's modelled in game, was that they would only stop missiles, not main gun rounds?

 

Pages 12 and 13 of the BS User Manual:

Quote

APS systems currently modeled include Trophy, Zaslon, and Arena.

APS detect incoming missiles or rockets, calculate an intercept vector, and then shoot projectiles to destroy or deflect the warhead before it can strike the vehicle. A fire control radar covers a specific arc around the vehicle, and is set to detect only projectiles moving at a certain speed such as missiles or rockets. In this way, faster and harmless projectiles such as bullets are ignored by the system.

and

Quote

Most APS only protects against rockets, missiles, and large HEAT warheads.

Other threats, such as tank sabot or autocannon rounds, artillery shells, small arms, or grenades, are not intercepted. The Javelin missile is also immune to Arena, as the diving profile is too steep for it to intercept.

 

Edited March 20, 2017 by gnarly

[Ivanov]

50 minutes ago, akd said:

Please show that APFSDS was fired at this tank.

[John Kettler]

Ivanov,

"John, in real life Arena definitely can't do it, hence I'm not sure what type of APS is it supposed to be. When you select the vehicle prior to the battle it just says T-72B3 APS. On the second thought - it could also be a bug."

Precisely the conclusion I came to. Either that, as I wryly observed, BFC knows more about Russian APS than the Russians themseles do!

akd,

Don't know the range, but a two-second TOF (1:54:49 when fired, 1:54:47 when intercepted) doesn't seem unreasonable out of the gate. At 1600 m/sec or so for the beefy M829A4, that's of the order of 3 kilometers, which is doable with the right terrain. In fact, there was a situation during WW II in Russia in which an 88 battery was killing swarms of Russian tanks jammed up at a bridgehead from 5 kilometers out. And in an eerie prelude to what the ARVN did to the NVA tanks in 1972, intercepted radio transmissions showed the Russian tankers thought they had driven into a minefield! US tankers have been training to hit targets at 3 kilometers for I don't know how many decades now, so it's hardly a stretch to shoot to that distance. 

Regards,

John Kettler

 

Edited March 20, 2017 by John Kettler