Silver Dragon Posted July 14, 2008 Share Posted July 14, 2008 CMx2: SF has center in Striker Brigade Blizriegk campaing and future CM:SF-M in marine corps, I see the equipment available and I see great black holes in the equipment available: All UAV disapear: no RQ-1 or RQ-9 or other UAV suport at troops, with camera, IR and weapos No AC-130, Harrier, F-18, B-1, B-52 or coalition CAS capability No Heavy Brigade Artillery Support: Tanks, Bradleys are presente, but no present MLRS with rockets and ATAMS variants availables? No TOW availables? No Antitank DICMP artillery fire, or Rockeye boms or Fragmentation Submission artillery delibery or air sumbission bombs ordenances? No FASCAM air or artillery delibery warheads available? ingame Mortar vehicule or infantry mortars, and AT or Artillery canons?. no AAA or SAM teams and vehicles ingame? sirian heavy GL utis? AT-18 metis-E ATGMs? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flanker15 Posted July 14, 2008 Share Posted July 14, 2008 AC-130: Useless in conventional battles. Harrier/F-18: In marine modual? B1/B-52: Strategic bombers which are out of the scope of the game. Tow: there are TOWs available. MLRS: Maybe later? Syrains already have BM-21. DICMP: Already banned by almost every Western country, US shouldn't be too far off. FASCAM: See above. However Syians have DICMP and wouldn't have many qualms about using them so maybe later for them? Onmap mortars: Left out for whatever reason, may be put back in. Onmap AT guns: I'd like those too but not in yet. AAA and SAM: Abstracted at the moment but onmap AAA like ZSUs and Shilkas for anti-infantry would be nice. H-GL: Syrians have a GL at the moment don't know if it's the heavy GL you're talking about? At-18: Does Syria have these or want these? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lampshade111 Posted July 14, 2008 Share Posted July 14, 2008 "DICMP: Already banned by almost every Western country, US shouldn't be too far off." More politically correct BS. Luckily the United States has no plan to agree to such a ban as such weapons which can be very useful when deployed correctly. Plus we are constantly reducing the dud rate of the submunitions. FASCAM could end up being banned, but a replacement could take it's role. The AC-130 would be quite nice for maps against unconventional forces but I don't believe there is any way it could be restricted to that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted July 14, 2008 Share Posted July 14, 2008 FWIW the B-1B is used extensively in Afghanistan in the CAS role. Though in a conflict with Syria they probably be too busy with other stuff. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Dragon Posted July 15, 2008 Author Share Posted July 15, 2008 AC-130: Useless in conventional battles. Tow: there are TOWs available. MLRS: Maybe later? Syrains already have BM-21. DICMP: Already banned by almost every Western country, US shouldn't be too far off. FASCAM: See above. However Syians have DICMP and wouldn't have many qualms about using them so maybe later for them? At-18: Does Syria have these or want these? AC-130U+4 has tactical CAS capability with busmaster cannon, future 120 mortar and BAP missiles TOW: Hummer and fixed missile post no available. MLRS: US Army no has adder this equipment, for What?, Striker Brigade has no MLRS but Heavy Brigades has M270 MLRS or has retired? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 FWIW the B-1B is used extensively in Afghanistan in the CAS role. Though in a conflict with Syria they probably be too busy with other stuff. Is there a difference between a 2000# bomb dropped by an F-16 and one dropped by a B-1? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 AC-130U+4 has tactical CAS capability with busmaster cannon, future 120 mortar and BAP missiles Against a credible ... heck against a minimal AA threat the AC-130 will be staying on the ground. MLRS: US Army no has adder this equipment, for What?, Striker Brigade has no MLRS but Heavy Brigades has M270 MLRS or has retired? Not in SBCT. Not in HBCT. "DPICM" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 Is there a difference between a 2000# bomb dropped by an F-16 and one dropped by a B-1? The B1-B is favoured for it's long loiter time. There's good odds there's one overhead when you need it. Hence a minimal wait. Also, a 2000lb bomb dropped by B1-Bs is more sociable and made lots of friends. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Field Marshal Blücher Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 The MLRS is not really within the scope of CM:SF. You don't really want to call in an MLRS strike even on the opposite side of a CM:SF map. MLRS strikes would precede your force, not occur simultaneously. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 The B1-B is favoured for it's long loiter time. There's good odds there's one overhead when you need it. Hence a minimal wait. Yeah, that's IRL. How does that play out in game terms though? Wait times are already pretty minimal. Also, a 2000lb bomb dropped by B1-Bs is more sociable and makes lots of friends. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 The US us moving away from DPICM because the duds are increasingly a manuever hazard to US forces. The Army has found the risk great enough that they are voluntarily restricting it's use, especially as the same thing can be accomplished with different munitions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Dragon Posted July 16, 2008 Author Share Posted July 16, 2008 The Us Army have not a successfully counter Armour artillery munition? in CMx2 the antiarmour artillery round has poor effective in saturation attacks vs immobile targets. Otherwise, Syria has great quantity of old and obsolete equipment, BTR-40/50/60/70 and BTR-152 ideal for paramilitary and 2 and 3 line troops 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Field Marshal Blücher Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 The munitions are fine if they actually hit the enemy armour; I've never seen them fail to destroy a tank. The only problem is that they just almost never hit, which isn't really the fault of the rounds. See results of my testing: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=82066 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.