Micromanagement

[mav1]

Will the player be in control of grenades for Infantry and smoke discharges on afv's in cmX2. I dont trust the ai with the smoke discharger.For example one Sherman would launch its smoke in defence, blocking the sight of my other Shermans who were about to aim at the side of the Panther. There was also the funny habit of a tank trying to hide behind the smoke created by another tank thus exposing the side and rear of the tank.

[flamingknives]

Do a bloody search.

Better still, look at the links in the sticky threads.

[Sixxkiller]

You dont trust the AI to use smoke dischargers like we dont trust you to make any valid arguements.

[C'Rogers]

Wow I opened up this thread without looking at the author expecting it to be a post about the worry that there would be too much micromanagement in the upcoming CM:SF. Espeically considering it can be played realtime.

Instead it is a post wanting more micromanagement.

As for one tank using smoke and blocking another tank's vision, nothing unrealtic about that. A lead tank may use smoke to protect itself seeing it as a higher priority than the fire line of the tank behind it (or you know, just plain old fear).

[KiloIndiaAlpha]

I just love this guy's posts, brightens my day up whilst waiting for The Game!

[Battlefront.com]

Needless to say we aren't in favor of introducing micromanagement for features that don't need to be. Or in this case, features that would reduce realism and increaes friendly casualties. Smoke needs to be popped when the danger is sensed, not when the player has a few spare moments to pop it.

Steve

[dan/california]

Modern thermals see through smoke anyway don't they? and virtually all larger vehicle mounted weapons in U.S service have them I think.

[ August 23, 2006, 07:49 PM: Message edited by: dan/california ]

[Battlefront.com]

Yes, thermals can see through smoke, but lasers can't. So while a vehicle with thermals might be able to see something through the smoke, it doesn't mean it can effectively engage it. And of course, the infantry is usally SOL. Javelin is an exception.

Steve

[Michael Emrys]

Wasn't there work in progress about a decade back to develop smoke that would defeat thermals? AIR, it was supposed to give off its own heat signature. Did anything come of that?

In any event, couldn't you take a shot on spec if you had a thermal image even without the LRF?

Michael

[Battlefront.com]

n any event, couldn't you take a shot on spec if you had a thermal image even without the LRF?

Depends. If you guessed the range then you'd probably do just fine. However, some weapons do not use lasers for just range finding, they use them for aiming. For example, if a JDAM is gliding in on a JTAC's laser designator and all of a sudden there is a massive dust cloud that gets in the way, in theory the bomb may not hit accurately. AT-14 uses laser for guidence as well, so smoke popped by a tank can possibly save it by changing locations when under cover of smoke.

Steve

[Michael Emrys]

I thought the wonderful thing about the JDAM was that once it was targetted, it didn't need a laser designator. I take your point on some of the other weapons though.

Michael

[Nidan1]

Is popping smoke by tanks a common pratice on the modern battlefield for the purpose of fooling ATGMs?

Did the Israelis use smoke to fool Hezbollah missle teams, or is that why they did most of their operations during darkness?

Iraq was rumored to have AT-14s during the 2003 invasion, but I dont recall seeing or reading that American armor used a lot of smoke to screen their movements, basically because most of the combat was taking place a close range.

[ August 24, 2006, 08:41 AM: Message edited by: Nidan1 ]

[Battlefront.com]

Some of the bombs being dropped are GPS guided, so once they know where to go they don't need any more input. But others home in on laser designation the whole way.

The problem with popping smoke against ATGMs is that the tanker's first understanding of the threat is usually when one hits. This is why some active defense systems detect incoming lasers and automatically pop smoke and sound off an alarm to the crew to do evasive maneuvering. The US does not have such devices fitted to their tanks, and I am not sure the IDF does either. Up until recently there was little need since the Russian, Chinese, and other non-Western weapons on the market did not make much use of lasers. Obviously the threat needs to be taken much more seriously. Russians and Chinese have these detection systems for exactly the oppiste reasons... the threat of lasers to their stuff has been around for a long time.

Steve

[Vanir Ausf B]

Security officials said the military command decided earlier this year, for budgetary reasons, to halt development of advanced systems that would have protected tanks against missiles. After Hezbollah’s anti-tank missiles killed dozens of Israeli soldiers, the Defense Ministry and army have decided to develop and install the systems, the officials said.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because of the confidential nature of armaments development.

Link

Israeli tanks laying smoke screens in Lebanon:

[mav1]

Originally posted by KiloIndiaAlpha:

I just love this guy's posts, brightens my day up whilst waiting for The Game!

Wow! someone who's happy about my posts.

[Battlefront.com]

Vanir,

Sounds like the US military too. The problem for Western type forces is that up until recently the threat from lasers has been extremely small. Not so for ex-Soviet, Russian, Chinese, and other similar equipment. The threat for them is extreme. So they put their money into defense systems, the Western forces did not. I am sure that Lebanon has got a lot of Western forces rethinking their defense strategies.

Steve

[oren_m]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Yes, thermals can see through smoke

Steve

That's not accurate, you see through smoke only if it's in the same temp' as the surroundings, if the smoke is very hot, you'll just see black/white smoke screen on your thermal sights.

This works kinda same with fog, it's usually cold and full of water, so, if the fog is thick enough it will be like looking into a pool of water.

Oren_m

[Battlefront.com]

Oren, that's true. It's also true that different thermal sensors have different ranges and capabilities. For example, FLIR Gen2 (like used on Abrams M1A2) is better at seeing through smoke than the FLIR Gen1 systems on earlier Abrams. Still better than optical sights, but not picture perfect. We are planning on having reduced effectiveness when smoke, dust, or fog is in LOS. However, we can't simulate it beyond that.

Steve