bmp3 weapon choice.

[ishfar94]

Hi,

Just had a few questions about how the bmp 3 chooses it's weapon for engaging different targets. The bmp3  right now has a really bad habit of opening  up on tanks with the autocannon while it clearly has a far better choice of the atgm right there. I was playing one of the russian campaigns and got a spot on  a ukranian t64 bv. now that doesn't have a laser warning receiver and so i thought cool the bmp will launch an atgm and that will be the end of that. If it still doesn't go down then the autocannon should be enough to mop up. but the bmp just wastes about 5 seconds using the autocannon by which point the tank spots it, shoots and then the bmp decides to use the atgm. shot connects, missile connects, both dead. I feel like the bmp refuses to  use the missile much at all unless the engagement range is very long. By the way the tank was literally out in the open and the bmp (zero subsytem damage) crew was a veteran crew and so i don't think the risk of the missile hittting terrain comes into play.

 

[Aquila-SmartWargames]

A possible explanation for this observation without guarantee that it is true for the CM simulation here or reality:

1) The BMP-3 has a 100mm and the 30mm. The 30mm is loaded with belt(s) and ready to engage before the engagement, the 100mm is not

2) The BMP-3 crew identifies the tank and starts to engage the tank right from the beginning with the 30mm while the ATGM is now ordered to be loaded into the 100mm and made ready. This might take some seconds.

3) when this process is finished, the crew aims and fires the ATGM

For most situations this "maximum firepower" approach of the TacAI is also what I would prefer as AC fire even without penetration can severly surpress enemy tanks despite causing significant damage to optics etc. In my playthroughs in several similar situations the enemy tank was suffering from a combat-ineffective some sort of "stunned" state, buying time for the BMP-3 or others to take out the tank.

However true is that for some situations especially when an "ATGM-only" approach might be preferred, opening up with the AC can be semi-optimal and enable the target or other enemy vehicles to identify the BMP-3 faster before it even can bring its ATGM to bear or deny its option to retreat. At long ranges the BMP-3´s TacAI seems to handle things this way. I imagine finding a general sweet spot distance between TacAI "maximum firepower" and "ATGM-only" might be hard if not impossible as it is very situation and tactics dependant. 

One could experiment if issuing a "Target Armor Arc" and/or "Hide" command to the BMP-3 might change something. I suspect not but I didn´t test it out. 

 

Edited March 6, 2020 by Aquila-SmartWargames

[Bud Backer]

Yes, point 2 above seems to be the answer. I believe what happens is that the ATGM is not what is pre-loaded in the 100mm. So, whatever is in the gun must be removed and the ATGM loaded. This takes time during which the 30mm is free to engage. 
 

Edited March 6, 2020 by Bud Backer

[John Kettler]

The default projectile in the breech of the 100 mm ought to be HE frag, for that is its go to round. And the tactical drill should be to fire  that immediately, then reload with the ATGM. That's faster than unloading the HE round, clearing it away from the breech, then loading the ATGM.

Regards,

John Kettler

[ishfar94]

20 hours ago, Aquila-SmartWargames said:

A possible explanation for this observation without guarantee that it is true for the CM simulation here or reality:

1) The BMP-3 has a 100mm and the 30mm. The 30mm is loaded with belt(s) and ready to engage before the engagement, the 100mm is not

2) The BMP-3 crew identifies the tank and starts to engage the tank right from the beginning with the 30mm while the ATGM is now ordered to be loaded into the 100mm and made ready. This might take some seconds.

3) when this process is finished, the crew aims and fires the ATGM

For most situations this "maximum firepower" approach of the TacAI is also what I would prefer as AC fire even without penetration can severly surpress enemy tanks despite causing significant damage to optics etc. In my playthroughs in several similar situations the enemy tank was suffering from a combat-ineffective some sort of "stunned" state, buying time for the BMP-3 or others to take out the tank.

However true is that for some situations especially when an "ATGM-only" approach might be preferred, opening up with the AC can be semi-optimal and enable the target or other enemy vehicles to identify the BMP-3 faster before it even can bring its ATGM to bear or deny its option to retreat. At long ranges the BMP-3´s TacAI seems to handle things this way. I imagine finding a general sweet spot distance between TacAI "maximum firepower" and "ATGM-only" might be hard if not impossible as it is very situation and tactics dependant. 

One could experiment if issuing a "Target Armor Arc" and/or "Hide" command to the BMP-3 might change something. I suspect not but I didn´t test it out. 

 

So i saved my game right before my bmp begins the whole engagement process and loaded repeatedly to see if anything changes. Did that about six times. Now out of those six times, twice the bmp behaved like how i expected it to behave originally. it stopped, a slight delay( which i am guessing was the dudes loading the atgm) and then ko'ing the bv in a single shot. Now mind you all i did was just load the game and let it run six times and so the engagement range, situation etc was all the same(mind you tank never spotted me on any of the runs, at least not before i took my first shot so there can't be a situation where the crew panicked and let fly with whatever they had). i feel like there's some other variable that influences the choice of weapons at mid to close ranges.  And yeah you are right at long ranges the tacAi works much better. It loads atgm to deal with tanks, autocannon to deal with apcs and such and autocannon/100mm to deal with infantry

[Lethaface]

AFAIK there is no 'ready round' concept in CM.

[Aquila-SmartWargames]

5 hours ago, ishfar94 said:

So i saved my game right before my bmp begins the whole engagement process and loaded repeatedly to see if anything changes. Did that about six times. Now out of those six times, twice the bmp behaved like how i expected it to behave originally. it stopped, a slight delay( which i am guessing was the dudes loading the atgm) and then ko'ing the bv in a single shot. Now mind you all i did was just load the game and let it run six times and so the engagement range, situation etc was all the same(mind you tank never spotted me on any of the runs, at least not before i took my first shot so there can't be a situation where the crew panicked and let fly with whatever they had). i feel like there's some other variable that influences the choice of weapons at mid to close ranges.  And yeah you are right at long ranges the tacAi works much better. It loads atgm to deal with tanks, autocannon to deal with apcs and such and autocannon/100mm to deal with infantry

So twice it did not use the AC but ATGM-only and the rest it approached the situation like in the 1st post while nothing was changed, that´s interesting and indicates that there is something else involved or some sort of TacAI randomization. Did you try if a hide command changes anything?

I was no tanker but from what I know AFV usually don´t ride around with "ready rounds" in the cannon breech like portrayed in many video games but it is loaded before the attack. Augmenting this is the claim that AFVs usually don´t "unload" ordnance once it is loaded into the breech no matter if it takes longer or not. Could be that it involves certain hazards to crew and ordnance, too complicated, and that some autoloader systems not even have the ability to (easily) extract loaded ordnance again. 

I am talking about the "big" cannons here such as 120mm or the bmp3´s 100mm here and it might be not true for specific (wartime) conditions and might be not true for how all armies and vehicles handle things in real life.

Edited March 7, 2020 by Aquila-SmartWargames

[IMHO]

@Aquila-SmartWargames, some points against your logic:

1. BMP-3 has an autoloader so it takes just couple of seconds to load a round. My guess would be aiming 30mm takes more time than loading an ATGM.
2. AFAIK autoloader does not support unloading the rounds. If you have a round loaded you have to shoot.
3. For an autoloader to work the gun inclination must be within certain limits so it means aiming 30mm may well result in ATGM not being loaded.
4. ATGMs and 30mm aiming angles will be different obviously so aiming 30mm actually delays an ATGM discharge.

AFAIK IRL the standing order for BMP-3 crews is to engage tanks with ATGMs and NOT 30mm. So if TacAI behaves like this it simply contradicts real life.

Edited March 21, 2020 by IMHO

[IMHO]

On 3/6/2020 at 6:47 PM, Aquila-SmartWargames said:

1) The BMP-3 has a 100mm and the 30mm. The 30mm is loaded with belt(s) and ready to engage before the engagement, the 100mm is not

2) The BMP-3 crew identifies the tank and starts to engage the tank right from the beginning with the 30mm while the ATGM is now ordered to be loaded into the 100mm and made ready. This might take some seconds.

3) when this process is finished, the crew aims and fires the ATGM

My post was a reply to this one.

[Aquila-SmartWargames]

On 3/21/2020 at 6:17 PM, IMHO said:

My post was a reply to this one.

Its not a claim of how things fare in real world as I was neither a tanker nor did I command a Russian BMP-3 equipped unit in real life.

On 3/21/2020 at 6:14 PM, IMHO said:

@Aquila-SmartWargames,

1. AFAIK autoloader does not support unloading the rounds. If you have a round loaded you have to shoot.

Thats what I stated:

On 3/7/2020 at 6:12 PM, Aquila-SmartWargames said:

some autoloader systems not even have the ability to (easily) extract loaded ordnance again. 

Again to make it perfectly x-ray clear:

On 3/6/2020 at 4:47 PM, Aquila-SmartWargames said:

without guarantee that it is true for the CM simulation here or reality:

 

On 3/7/2020 at 6:12 PM, Aquila-SmartWargames said:

and it might be not true for specific (wartime) conditions and might be not true for how all armies and vehicles handle things in real life.

So I am likely the wrong recipent for this inquiry as I only have the usual OSINT knowledge of said vehicle. Beside this, were you involved with the Russian Armed Forces, specifically with operating BMP-3s in your unit? Because using terms like "standing orders" in this context doesn´t really sound like it. No offense meant, just curious.

Edited March 23, 2020 by Aquila-SmartWargames

[IMHO]

On 3/23/2020 at 9:52 PM, Aquila-SmartWargames said:

Beside this, were you involved with the Russian Armed Forces, specifically with operating BMP-3s in your unit? Because using terms like "standing orders" in this context doesn´t really sound like it. No offense meant, just curious.

1. No, I wasn't involved in BMP-3 operations.
2. As far as I remember the use of ATGMs over 30mm I lifted from the talk of BMP-3 trainer that was posted to UAE when they bought BMP-3s. They have pretty rigid rules of what ammunition to use in what situation though I'm not sure it's followed to the letter in real-life combat situations. Actually it was pretty lengthy and interesting description of how BMP-3 behaves in hot and sandy environment. It looked very balanced - neither a poster propaganda nor a senseless bashing.

PS I got the impression from his description that original BMP-3 simply stands little chance even against a modernized T-55. But that's my own interpretation. Like if you see a tank in broad daylight just hide somewhere immediately, if you're not able to then shoot an ATGM and hide anyway. He was kind of critical of original BMP-3 sights/battlefield awareness yet he praised BMP-3's ATGMs themselves.

Edited March 24, 2020 by IMHO