Jump to content

CV90 variants


Marko

Recommended Posts

  • Members
So, the best vehicle is a CV9040C with a TOW 2B team in the boot?

Well, what would be the consequence. A tripod launcher plus one missile will take up the space of one dismount. For every three or four spare missiles you lose another man in dismount strength. Is that worth the price?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well, what would be the consequence. A tripod launcher plus one missile will take up the space of one dismount. For every three or four spare missiles you lose another man in dismount strength. Is that worth the price?

Not in the real world. But in SB you don't lose a dismount.

Edited by Marko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Not in the real world. But in SB you don't lose a dismount.

Yeah... one day we'll have to address it. I can but recommend that mission designers apply some common sense when creating scenarios involving the transportation of missile teams and their armament so that, once that we have implemented such load limits, this won't break most of the scenarios made in the meantime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not in the real world. But in SB you don't lose a dismount.

No...you lose 3. I believe the total troop limit still applies. If you want to pick up a 3-man ATGM team, you have to lose half the existing squad. Sure, you can max their ammo compliment, but you still won't have more than the usual 6 troops in a squad. (In the case of the CV-series.)

The current balance to the ATGM-in-IFV issue is the fact that it is manual operation only. CC units will never pick up non-native dismounts. You can't even program them to do so in the editor. That is severely limited in anything but a fully-manned operation.

It also begs the question of "why are your IFVs running around hunting tanks when there are much more capable platforms to do so?" Protection from tanks is one thing, I agree. But to put ATGMs in every IFV is a foolish use of resources, especially considering the extremely low manpower count of almost all modern mechanized infantry formations. Ask any commander who went from 10-11 men per APC to 6-8 in modern IFVs about how much ground they can really control. I will bet that lack of boots on the ground and an extremely low loss-tolerance would be high on his list of care-abouts.

Fact is, infantry in SB is not as potent as in the real world, so many often downplay their importance in-game. (Woe to the player who ignores them entirely or doesn't know how to counter them effectively)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No...you lose 3. I believe the total troop limit still applies. If you want to pick up a 3-man ATGM team, you have to lose half the existing squad. Sure, you can max their ammo compliment, but you still won't have more than the usual 6 troops in a squad. (In the case of the CV-series.)

The current balance to the ATGM-in-IFV issue is the fact that it is manual operation only. CC units will never pick up non-native dismounts. You can't even program them to do so in the editor. That is severely limited in anything but a fully-manned operation.

It also begs the question of "why are your IFVs running around hunting tanks when there are much more capable platforms to do so?" Protection from tanks is one thing, I agree. But to put ATGMs in every IFV is a foolish use of resources, especially considering the extremely low manpower count of almost all modern mechanized infantry formations. Ask any commander who went from 10-11 men per APC to 6-8 in modern IFVs about how much ground they can really control. I will bet that lack of boots on the ground and an extremely low loss-tolerance would be high on his list of care-abouts.

Fact is, infantry in SB is not as potent as in the real world, so many often downplay their importance in-game. (Woe to the player who ignores them entirely or doesn't know how to counter them effectively)

You cant add more troops then the compliment of the vehicle you are using but.

You can carry extra weapons. Also i find if you delete the dismount troops attached to the IFV/APC.In the mission editor It makes loading missile teams and other teams easier.and More controllable in terms of loading and unloading in game.there are many advantages With carrying a missile team.i also carry a FO team and a AGL team in the reccon Role.

Match that with the main armaments of your IFV of choice.It gives you a lot of firepower

And in certain circumstances it can be more useful then a tank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Fact is, infantry in SB is not as potent as in the real world

To a certain extent I agree, but the question to me is what remedy there is. What's the fundamental reason why they aren't as good as in real life (aside from the fact that light infantry, caught in the open by armored forces, really haven't much of a chance).

It may be that they are being spotted too easily at too long distances, therefore allowing to call in artillery with precision when in real life the situation usually is less clear.

Maybe they are also too vulnerable because our artillery is too good, or because there isn't enough diversity in the terrain and our solution to have them sink into the ground isn't sufficient to compensate for it.

The question really is, how can we make them more powerful without giving them unrealistic weaponry, and without transmogrifying the user interface into a horridly convoluted mess. I'm open to suggestions.

Try to be specific. "Make them smarter" is not helpful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

adding the ability to crawl would make infantry a lot more survivable.

currently, whenever infantry needs to reposition themselves, they stand up and walk, even if it's just 1-2 meters. when they do this, they are easily sweeped off with coax.

you also cannot adjust the engagement direction when under fire from an unexpected angle, that'll only get you killed quicker.

no ability to crawl also cripples infantry when you want to move them to and from a battle position, or overlook position. you cannot walk to the to a berm, and then crawl the last meters, if there is an enemy vehicle on the other side.

you cannot crawl from the outlook when coax fire is raining down. you have to stand up, and fully expose yourself to coax fire. usually it's better to just tell the infantry to sit tight,

and hope they don't die too quickly.

you cannot assault enemy infantry positions, it'll fully expose your soldiers, who cannot fire back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...don't make them kneel when firing their AT-weapons.

Hide them better in buildings. I mean, it was a step forward to make them spot-able in buildings in the first place. But currently the are sitting directly at the window. So sometimes AI spots troops in buildings from 1000m and further. I think thats a bit optimistic.

They should be inside the room, as far away from the window as a sensable field of fire allows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Understand that my comment was not an overt criticism of the infantry modelling. I was merely opining that some SB players are willing to give up boots on the ground, where in real life, the exact opposite is true, in my experience. SB tankers want more ATGMs and less rifles, since they just want to kill tanks.

I do agree that the legs are too easy to spot, and can't yet be as dynamic as the real thing. That's OK. The interactions at present are still challenging. ever try to completely eliminate even on platoon of dismounts from a small village? It's damned time consuming, and (as Grenny mentioned) your troop losses will be very high. "More explosives!" seems the rule of the day :)

If anything, I'd like to see some type of link between shooting and moving of squads. As said above, the short runs expose the troops...BUT, if the squads are bounding with good awareness of a vehicle that is engaging them, they are much harder to hit. It's the "whack-a-mole" game where if you adjust aim to the squad that's running, they are back down in cover by the time your aim is on. This is very-small-unit behavior, I admit, but might make the dismounts more survivable upon engagement.

On the other side of the coin, I would REALLY love an order to a unit that determines target type. i.e. I want to tell a platoon "ignore infantry" just like I can limit their engagement range. That way, the 3 troops cowering next to a dead BMP 1000m to my rear don't cause my gunner to focus on them while I'm driving at another armored threat 500m to my front. Even from the TC spot, I either have to constantly override, and can't stop the other vehicles in the platoon from looking the wrong way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It may be a trade off answer I think.

Currently we have advance FCS and optics in our AFV's and little or no such options in our Inf, (some can bring up a sight).

Thus we have a situation where one side (AFV's) can see and engage another (INF) at ease.

My thoughts would be make it a even match, give both the ability to engage with their wpn system, by that I mean , if a Inf squad have ATGM systems they should have the ability to aim, and shoot in a realistic way (standing/kneeing and prone) by bringing up the sight for the user.

Same for the MG and AGL teams.

I would suggest that having such a match up would even the playing field along with crawling to off set what is currently present.

I have had a ATGM team watch and let AFV's pass by, if I had complete control over the FCS of that wpn it would have been much easier to control the out come.

I know this is a Armour sim, however we have progressed beyond that now I feel. The need to bring the Inf option to where the Armour control over their FCS's is now needed to get the match up in realistic behavior This will need to be done soon, as the end of the world is coming up this December, but maybe a few TGIF's can be done.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What 12 Alfa has said made a lot of sense.

I would take it a step further and say since the introduction of the 3d inf,

To the sim it seems there has been an inordinate amount of interest.

From Newbies and some players returning back to SB after many years.

Of course SB will always be a Armour sim. And in my opinion the best on the market.

But i also have to admit the infantry side of the game has really engrossed me.

I am spending a lot more time trying to increase my understanding of infantry tactics against Armour.before the Improvements were introduced they were just a inconvenience to be cut Down with my coax.

I really Feel there is a massive potential for Esim to capitalize on this aspect of the market with Out Deviating to much from Its core business.any way here,s my thoughts on how to improve the infantry.more squad commands. I don't know The proper military phrases.but a command to take cover. attack, covering fire, i know we have the suppress command And assault but its a bit hit and miss in terms of the response you get also different color smoke grenades for the Infantry IE A green smoke grenade to mark a LZ.

Edited by Marko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

We can certainly expand the possible commands for infantry, but that would help only in very small scale scenarios where all squads in contact can be effectively controlled by human players. This won't help us however in cases where infantry is scripted (e.g. opposing forces) or where the players have to manage larger formations where you simply can't control directly everything that's going on.

I am primarily concerned with these cases. If we can improve the way how automated infantry behaves, it will lead to better simulation results (hopefully) and a better player experience.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...