Soviet style mechanized infantry deficient radio modeling? (BMP-1, BMP-2, possibly others)

[Pelican Pal]

Testing C2 with a BMP formation and I found that dismounted infantry very quickly lost contact with their platoon leader and with their personal BMPs (Iron difficulty). I felt that this was odd and was doing some searching and found that (apparently) each squad leader would be equipped with a personal radio (R-126, R-352) for dismounted use. This handheld radio acted as a link between the dismounted squad leader and his personal BMP. The BMPs internal radio then connected with the rest of the formation.

So in this instance Coy Commander at top, PL at bottom right:




The entire platoon and Coy Commander should be connected. But in-game a large portion of the formation is shown as out of C2. They would be in communication via a long game of telephone but they would be in connection regardless and the individual squads would seem to be decently connected to their individual vehicle.  For instance, if the Plt. Leader wished to communicate to his personal BMP he would be able to while dismounted. Further if he wanted to communicate to Squad 2 he could.

Plt. Leader -> PL BMP -> Squad 2 BMP -> Squad 2 and then back Squad 2 -> Squad 2 BMP -> PL BMP -> PL

----

Is there any reason that this is not being modeled or am I missing something?






 

 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

CM:SF2 again.....Yeah Red radios are properly f**ked! 

I've tried to draw @Battlefront.com's attention to this on numerous occasions.

TBH this was a big part of me losing my scenario writing mojo.....Most of what I was doing was Red vs. Red and my missions were failing in testing because information just was not being relayed between radio equipped units and as I used moderately strict C2 rules in my testing, things just ground completely to a halt.

I suspect that Red's awful comms and the very slow response time of their air & aviation assets may have been partly created in CM:SF1 to represent jamming by Blue forces and that somehow this has carried over into CM:SF2 (where we actually have jamming, but Red have almost no functioning radios to jam).

[Pelican Pal]

@Sgt.Squarehead

I did some further testing and found something rather interesting. When a Syrian Plt. HQ is dismounted from his BMP he loses radio contact with elements of his unit.  Seen here is the HQ just outside his track and 3rd squad having no C2 link:

Yet once the HQ mounts his vehicle he gains a c2 link to 3rd squad via radio. 3rd squad has no radio (and their BMP is a kilometer away so I don't think its the R-126

)



I then drove the HQ 1,200 meters away and 3rd squad retained radio comms with the HQ.




My original expectation was that the squads would maintain radio contact with the larger unit via their personal BMP. The R-129 acting as a link to the BMP and then the BMP's internal radio acting as a link to the rest of the unit. Instead it looks like the squads are maintaining a direct link to the HQ and he must be on his BMP

[Sgt.Squarehead]

These inconsistencies are rather bizarre.....My testing mostly revolved around Syrian Special Forces, who were apparently unable to use the radios prominently displayed on their UAZ-469s. 

PS - The behaviour is so inconsistent that @MOS:96B2P & began to wonder if porting maps from CM:SF1 to CM:SF2 was somehow affecting the situation my experiments (esentially a scenario that wouldn't work because the player's units wouldn't talk to each other) were conducted on a ported map.

Edited September 11, 2021 by Sgt.Squarehead

[DMS]

Special Forces and airborne troops also don't have radios. Cheap baofeng radios are affordable for civilian hunters and tourists, I think any unit should have them... (Though enemy can hear what they talk)

[Sgt.Squarehead]

This issue is a bloody mess TBH.....It  made scripting missions for CM:HE absolutely miserable for me as I use fairly strict C2 when testing and developing my designs.

@Battlefront.com  @IanL  @BFCElvis  Is there any chance this will be looked at in the near term.....It's making CM:SF2 a lot less than it should be! 

PS:  PS - If you are going to patch, please, please, please add Breach Teams to the Combatant and Fighter TOE.....Proper urban fighting without them is impossible and we've (mostly) learned how to make the AI use them! 

Edited September 19, 2021 by Sgt.Squarehead

[BFCElvis]

1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

This issue is a bloody mess TBH.....It  made scripting missions for CM:HE absolutely miserable for me as I use fairly strict C2 when testing and developing my designs.

@Battlefront.com  @IanL  @BFCElvis  Is there any chance this will be looked at in the near term.....It's making CM:SF2 a lot less than it should be! 

PS:  PS - If you are going to patch, please, please, please add Breach Teams to the Combatant and Fighter TOE.....Proper urban fighting without them is impossible and we've (mostly) learned how to make the AI use them! 

I put it in to be looked at.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Just now, BFCElvis said:

I put it in to be looked at.

Cheers dude.....It's a biggy! 

PS - Don't forget the Uncon Breach Teams.....They would massively improve Uncon gameplay options. 

[BFCElvis]

Just now, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Cheers dude.....It's a biggy! 

PS - Don't forget the Uncon Breach Teams.....They would massively improve Uncon gameplay options. 

I linked this thread to my comments.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Thanks, as always. 

[Lethaface]

If I may use this thread to also ask attention for the (IIRC) already reported and acknowledged issues with Syrian forces:

* Special Forces & Airborne squads still only have 100rnds of 7.62x54r ammo. (other formations got a fix last patch).
* All Syrian formations in QBs have very limited RPG ammo (like 1 or 2 rounds).
* Syrian Mech Airborne formation in the editor has limited RPG ammo (like 1 or 2 rounds)
* C2 issues like above. I have quite some examples, but I think the issue has already been reported by @akd previously.

Unfortunately those were not in the previous patch, hopefully they will get priority in the next patch. For any PBEM/H2H with Syrian forces those are significant, as well as for Red vs Red or Red vs Blue scenario's and campaigns.

[Muzzleflash1990]

The M249 ammo amount in Shock Force also seems off though, IMO, though because of "rounds sharing" BLUFOR doesn't "suffer" as much for it.

 

[burning_phoneix]

On 10/1/2021 at 9:57 PM, Lethaface said:

If I may use this thread to also ask attention for the (IIRC) already reported and acknowledged issues with Syrian forces:
* All Syrian formations in QBs have very limited RPG ammo (like 1 or 2 rounds).
* Syrian Mech Airborne formation in the editor has limited RPG ammo (like 1 or 2 rounds)

IIRC, these are supposed to reference the difficult logistic and economic issues Syria is facing at the time of the invasion. They can't get as much RPG rounds as they like to outfit all troops and have to ration them out.

[zmoney]

RPG’s are kinda cheap. Especially the ones used by the Syrians. RPG’s flow like water in the Mid East.

[Lethaface]

On 11/20/2021 at 12:38 PM, burning_phoneix said:

IIRC, these are supposed to reference the difficult logistic and economic issues Syria is facing at the time of the invasion. They can't get as much RPG rounds as they like to outfit all troops and have to ration them out.

Never heard that and would be weird design imo. It's just a bug afaik 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

On 11/20/2021 at 11:38 AM, burning_phoneix said:

IIRC, these are supposed to reference the difficult logistic and economic issues Syria is facing at the time of the invasion. They can't get as much RPG rounds as they like to outfit all troops and have to ration them out

No need for Battlefront to do that.....There are already settings in the editor for limited supply options.

[burning_phoneix]

On 11/21/2021 at 7:58 PM, Sgt.Squarehead said:

No need for Battlefront to do that.....There are already settings in the editor for limited supply options.

Wasn't the amount of RPG ammo low only in QBs? Is it more in the editor?