Jump to content

1980's Tactics Question?


Recommended Posts

This applies to all the modern tiles in general. Spotting is faster and anything that gets spotted dies fastest. Tank and vehicle combat is in big part one shot = one kill. Fire support comes in fast. Infantry moves on wheels/tracks and if you don't move them around they are going to die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, weapon2010 said:

We're the same tactical basics stressed in this era as WW2? such as Hull Down, Recon, Base of Fire?

Yes.

1 minute ago, weapon2010 said:

What Im saying is "Hull down " means considerbaly less when your in an M1 tank. And even if you are HD some super weapon can pick you off anyway.No?

Thats news to the modern US Army then, because they still do berm drills and fight from hull down positions all the time and whenever possible. No one trains to fight in the open. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, weapon2010 said:

What Im saying is "Hull down " means considerbaly less when your in an M1 tank. And even if you are HD some super weapon can pick you off anyway.No?

Thickest armor is still the turret front by far. You don't want to be taking hits to the hull (which for many tanks is were most of the ammo is as well). Ideally you don't want to sit hull down and trade shots, but scope for targets turret down if you can, pop up to hull down to engage, then move. This limits the amount of tank and time exposed while only showing the best armor, which is even more important with accurate and powerful ammo flying around. 

At this time frame there isn't the same line up of super ammo and thermals are just coming in. The original M1 is good, but it really is a "beta" version of the M1, without the many armor upgrades and the same 105 and ammo as your M60s. Things should be more lethal than ww2, but not at shock force/black sea levels of M1s punching through anything they come across. 

Having used the original M1/M60A3 a bunch in steel beasts, it'll be interesting to see how they perform in CM, but I expect the tank fights could easily go to either side.

I think the big thing you'll need to get used to is DPICM (and ICM to a degree). Tanks getting wiped out by artillery is going to be a big shift and you can't just park somewhere and cover an angle safely like in WW2. 

Edited by Ryujin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Ryujin said:

Thickest armor is still the turret front by far. You don't want to be taking hits to the hull (which for many tanks is were most of the ammo is as well). Ideally you don't want to sit hull down and trade shots, but scope for targets turret down if you can, pop up to hull down to engage, then move. This limits the amount of tank and time exposed while only showing the best armor, which is even more important with accurate and powerful ammo flying around. 

At this time frame there isn't the same line up of super ammo and thermals are just coming in. The original M1 is good, but it really is a "beta" version of the M1, without the many armor upgrades and the same 105 and ammo as your M60s. Things should be more lethal than ww2, but not at shock force/black sea levels of M1s punching through anything they come across. 

Having used the original M1/M60A3 a bunch in steel beasts, it'll be interesting to see how they perform in CM, but I expect the tank fights could easily go to either side.

I think the big thing you'll need to get used to is DPICM (and ICM to a degree). Tanks getting wiped out by artillery is going to be a big shift and you can't just park somewhere and cover an angle safely like in WW2. 

This is pretty much dead on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, weapon2010 said:

Does Infantry carry less of an importance?

Not really, while tanks are more powerful, there's a big jump in infantry AT capability. In ww2 you either have pretty much static AT guns or very limited infantry AT capability, which left you with situations where infantry really couldn't hit back against tanks. With unguided rockets in pretty much all squads supported by ATGMs teams and MANPADS you have a lot more options to keep your infantry relevant in ways they wouldn't be in WW2. Almost all of your infantry is going to be mechanized in some way as well, giving you a lot more mobility as standard. You're going to be using them differently as with all the lethality of the cold war setting you're probably going to want to be moving them around a lot more and using them with their vehicles (especially IFVs). 

Basic fire and maneuver tactics should be the same for the most part, less has fundamentally changed here. Squads are more flexible and powerful with the soviets and US having a lower recoil full auto rifle standard. MGs aren't quite as decisive as they aren't the only ones with full auto rifle caliber fire now, they're more useful at range where a larger round and a bipod/tripod makes a difference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way how you handle mechanized infantry units should be different compare to WWII titles. 

Where to put the APC is going to be an important decision. Don't put them too close to the frontline, keep them safe. Too far away is not a good idea , they should be in the right place to extract infantry units before enemy artillery rain down.

the IFV units follow a different rule. BMP-1/2 and early days M2 are very fragile, but they do carry significant firepower. They are the backbone of an infantry squad , just like a MG42 gunner to a WWII German squad. 

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect people who attempt to use the M1 in CM:CW like they would in CM:SF2 or CM:BS (ie: as the 'Landcruiser of Doom') are in for a very rude awakening!  ;)

PS - Nobody has really mentioned TLATGMs yet.....I'm hoping there will be at least one daytime scenario where the NATO tanks will be horribly outranged too.  IMHO it is character building, like playing the Syrians in CM:SF2.  :P

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

PS - Nobody has really mentioned TLATGMs yet.....I'm hoping there will be at least one daytime scenario where the NATO tanks will be horribly outranged too.  IMHO it is character building, like playing the Syrians in CM:SF2.  :P

Trust me, you won’t be disappointed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

I suspect people who attempt to use the M1 in CM:CW like they would in CM:SF2 or CM:BS (ie: as the 'Landcruiser of Doom') are in for a very rude awakening!  ;)

 

This is very true. Even worse, you won't always have M1s, such as they are. Many (most) times you'll be fighting with M60s of some variety, or even M48s. 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recall reading in an article long long ago that 'typical' LOS range in central Germany was something on the order of 1,500m, or perhaps a bit less. There's always an intervening hill or copse of trees or tree-lined road or village cluster obstructing your view. Its the rare instance that you're going to be able to fire down the full length of a river valley. Its unfortunate (for us) that Google Earth Street View is severely restricted in Germany. I'd like to be able to virtually peer over a hill and see just how far LOS goes. You can do just that in a (very) few designated location.

 

sample.thumb.jpg.3bc781d31ae5d413955aacb9626be809.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

I suspect people who attempt to use the M1 in CM:CW like they would in CM:SF2 or CM:BS (ie: as the 'Landcruiser of Doom') are in for a very rude awakening!  ;)

PS - Nobody has really mentioned TLATGMs yet.....I'm hoping there will be at least one daytime scenario where the NATO tanks will be horribly outranged too.  IMHO it is character building, like playing the Syrians in CM:SF2.  :P

As I noted in another thread-

I've had a 21 second flight time At 5 on a BRDM 2 nail an M60 frontally for a kill - just under 3.5 km range and not be spotted.  So do the math, you want to shoot and scoot as US at that range you have 15 seconds to back out of sight. And the BRDM maneuvered into position while the M60 was on overwatch.

The M1 while not the beast of CMBS is still easily king of the battlefield.  The Bradley despite some of it's publicity can shred a Soviet motorized unit.  When you cross that timeline for US upgrades, the whole dynamic of  the cold war changes.  Hence the timeline in Cold War.  You play the optimal moment of Soviet advantage.. and it is fleeting.

Edited by sburke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, weapon2010 said:

 We're the same tactical basics stressed in this era as WW2? such as Hull Down, Recon, Base of Fire? Does Infantry carry less of an importance?

Artillery is more lethal and so is counter artillery, artillery had to be mobile. Every square meter was referenced. I may be a little over the top here, but you get the idea. It must have been an attacker's nightmare. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MikeyD said:

Initial production M1 Abrams has thinner turret front armor than you're used to. It must've been tactically significant enough for the Pentagon to scramble to produce the M1A1 HA and HC uparmored versions.

There was a lot of scrambling, they go from the M1 to the M1IP with a new turret in 1984 before the base A1. The A1 upgrades (HA/HC) then got more armor on top of that. The original M1 seems to have about half the turret armor of something like an M1A1HA . 

Edited by Ryujin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Freyberg said:

Newbie question...

'tank launched' ATGMs...?

The T-80 main battle tank is a further development of the T-64, which had a number of significant drawbacks. It was also a more capable alternative to the T-72. The most significant features of the T-80 over the T-72 are its gas turbine engine and ability to fire anti-tank guided missiles (T-80B and later variants) in the same manner as ordinary rounds. 

T-80 Main Battle Tank | Military-Today.com (military-today.com)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

I suspect people who attempt to use the M1 in CM:CW like they would in CM:SF2 or CM:BS (ie: as the 'Landcruiser of Doom') are in for a very rude awakening!  ;)

Yes.

Looks like a M1, but feels more like a Panther in game. You should be protected from the front, but don’t count on it. You should be able to spot first, but don’t count on it. Your sides are made out of paper so watch those, but spotting to the sides is poor...hmmm. You will never see what kills you...
 

OTOH, if you do spot an enemy AFV first, it’s DEAD...

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
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...