Jump to content

Will see we these unities?


Recommended Posts

i would really like to see shilkas in the game.

wikipedia says syria has about 300 of them. i guess that will hardly be exact but if they have at least 200 their enought to be in :D

the 23mm quad gun opening up on "anything" must be pretty cool to watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Modern will continue to be developed for a long time so who knows what will happen in the future. But for the near term, I can say:

*Stryker Mortar Carrier (MC)
No. There is no support for on-map mortars so that would have to be added first. The good coms of US units means the chances of mortar assets being on-map would be accidental rather than purposeful.

*Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV)
No. It's not fielded yet and the guesses as to when it will be are (last I checked) still uncertain.

*M113 Armored Personnel Carrier
No. It's used in a support role for some HQs only, and generally even those are not within CM's scope. Other uses outside of HQs is not within CM's scope.

*M224 60mm mortar
Same answer as the MC.

*Russian Tunguska
As far as I know the Syrians do not have this. They have the older ZSU-23, though. Still, this would be nice to add in the near future. We have no specific plans for it though.

*Syrian air support...
We will likely add Soviet era air power at some point, probably will add when we get to the point of adding more-or-less pure fantasy stuff into the game.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Syrian air support...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We will likely add Soviet era air power at some point, probably will add when we get to the point of adding more-or-less pure fantasy stuff into the game.

end quote

Hmm, I for one would love to see some Red air support in the game for the Syrian side. We don't ALL want to play US vs Syria missions (although most folks do). It's certainly not fantasy as the Syrians DO have an airforce. And of course, they'll lose it on day one of any conflict with the US but it would still be nice to have it in the game. I am working exclusively with Red on Red missions and the lack of a proper air support option for Syria is a bit of a handicap.

If you're really worried about people shamelessly abusing it to create utterly fantastical scenarios with US forces being hit by Red airstrikes (and they will), just make it an option when the mission type is Red v Red.

Ach well, I guess there's just not enough of us who need this to warrant you spending the time implementing this feature any time soon.

Still, at least I know that when you do eventually get round to doing it, you'll do it properly with all the whistles and bells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*Syrian air support...
I have read some weeks ago that it's possible to make a blue vs red scenario & purchase units, than switch to red vs red and purchase red units for the blue side, than switch again to blue vs red.

Maybe it's possible to add Blue Airsupport to red units that way; not very realistic, but since we can only see the effects of airsupport, it's maybe a conceivable workaround? I'm no scenario designer, so I haven't tested this!

[ May 02, 2008, 07:04 AM: Message edited by: Scipio ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scipio, Yes, it's possible, and quite easy to do. When you set up a new mission, you select Red v Red in the data section and buy your forces. If you want to buy some air support for the 'Blue' side, you then change the mission to standard Blue vs Red and all the US units become available to the Blue side. Or Blue v Blue if you want the Red side to have air support.

However, it doesn't work properly and perhaps that's intentional as, in the game, the Syrian side at present doesn't have any trained air support liaison officers in their OB. You don't get the TYPE menu when you're calling in your air support so you can only use the plane's HE and cannons. Therefore, there's no anti tank capability even though you have an Apache on call with it's full complement of ATGM missiles and the A10 just makes things go BANG spectacularly. And the spotters 'cross' is the worst imaginable.

While the Syrians probably have a lot of 'cool' stuff to drop from their planes in real life, it's certainly true that the US forces would NEVER have to face any of it and that's fine by me. Since the vast majority of players play the game as US v Syria, and playing as the US, it's not an important omission and there are many more important things that can be improved before the time is spent to do Red air support properly.

I also wonder if this same logic will be applied to the WW2 Normandy title and therefore there will be no air support available for the German side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Originally posted by RommL:

in marine module we will see these unities:

*M9 ACE

*riot gun

*AH 1W super cobra

*F/A 18 Hornet

*AV-8B Harrier

*EA-6B Prowler

M9 ACE: Probably not.

riot gun: not really sure what you mean by this, assuming you mean some kind of crowd-control weapon, probably not, because of no COIN ops.

AH-1W super cobra: probably.

F/A-18 Hornet: probably.

AV-8B Harrier: probably.

EA-6B Prowler: probably not, EA-6B mainly used for ECW and SEAD, as far as I'm aware, both of which have little relevance to the game.

I'm in no way any kind of official voice on this, though.

-FMB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

luderbamsen,

Per Isby's WEAPONS AND TACTICS OF THE SOVIET ARMY, Fully Revised Edition, pp. 326-327, the ZSU-23/4 has elevation limits of +90 degrees and -10 degrees and fires one round of AP-T or API-T for every three of HE-T or HEI-T per belt, per gun, with 2000 rounds carried. It has optical and radar fire control. The ballistic computer may be either analog or digital. Rounds self-destruct after 5-11 seconds of flight. Would guess that the shorter destruct time applies to the much faster AP projectiles, while the lighter HE would correspond to the longer value given. Properly modeled, this could make things exciting for recipients in, say, trenches, foxholes, drainage ditches and the like. Remember, the Shilka is intended to combat the "flying tank" (attack helicopter) and ground attack aircraft. Better armored aerial threats led to the fielding of the Tunguska.

Regards,

John Kettler

[ May 17, 2008, 07:39 PM: Message edited by: John Kettler ]

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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.

×
×
  • Create New...