Razor

Yes, and Russia is still doing the same thing today, with the "Putinjugend" organizations.

Sorry Red2112, I am not lashing out at you specifically, but I am so sick of everyone that bashes Arma 3 for being buggy and having low performance, for all the reasons that Dslyecxi mentioned in the video that I posted.

Yes, did you watch the video I posted, which explains why you can't expect perfect performance with all kinds of mods? Most games don't even allow mods, but Arma 3 (note the correct spelling) does, and you expect perfect performace with all mods? Learn the difference between a sandbox game that is open to modding and games that are not allowing such things.

After almost 5 years, this video, about Arma 3 supposedly being extremely buggy and having poor performance is still very valid:

I love the meaning of BILL: "Bofors, Infantry, Light and Lethal". Not just a perfect description of the missile, but really cool too.

And talking about years ago. It was many years ago that Arma was called ArmA, short for Armed Assault. But for ages now, it has been called just Arma, meaning "weapon" in latin. So stop with the capital A please.

Elon Musk needs to learn a thing or two from the Aegis Dynamics company in the Star Citizen universe... 🙂

I don't understand all the hate against Star Citizen. It's like people go out of their way to hate it. I have personally spent 35$ on an Aurora, and it's been the best money I ever spent on a game. Yes, SC is still in development, and it will take several more years before it's fully released, but how many AAA games released lately didn't have years and years of developement? They were just not revealed at all until many years into their development.

So true! 👍

Great video Red. The Chieftain is a channel that everyone who is interrested in tanks should follow. He even managed to make a video about watching paint dry interresting:

Sure, but no, these light vehicles are not tanks, of course.

I'd say it's a video for A-10 fanboys, those that actually believe that a 30 mm gun can do much more than scratch the paint on a tank.

Haven't watched the S-tank video yet, but from reading the video description, I see that the old myth that the S-tank was a defensive tank, designed to be used from ambush positions, or basically a tank destroyer, is still going around. This article clearly busts this myth: http://tanks.mod16.org/2016/08/19/stridsvagn-103-was-not-a-tank-destroyer/

Sure, but the Kurds are muslims, so opressing their women, by forcing them to cover up with scarfs, are much more important to them than things that make sense tactically.

Really? You're using Rainbow 6 as the infantry standard, and not Arma 3? Even the old Rainbow games, before Ubisoft turned the series into an arcade crap shooter, were vastly inferior to Arma as an infantry simulator.

You think that's expensive? Here in Sweden, a beer out in a pub will cost you about the equivalent of 7-8 pounds. To get back on topic, I haven't been playing SB for more than a year, but this seems like a very good time to dive back into it, when the 4.0 version is released. I'm looking forward to the release next month!

Russia invades Georgia... button? Russia invades Crimea... button? Russia causes unrest in Eastern Ukraine... button? IX_d_vMKswE

Yes, really old. I thought the delay was going to be a few weeks, not many months.

If you switch out your motherboard, you'd better also reformat the hard drive. You need to remove all the drivers for the old MB, and install the new ones. Otherwise, you can run into all kinds of problems. Just changing your graphics card, upgrading the CPU or similar minor things is different, of course.

The first rule of Internet: Assume that everything is fake, unless proven otherwise.

Don't you people ever read the video comments? It was an April Fools Day joke, this was his own house.

Agreed. Andrimner, you've made your (very valid) point, but some people just don't seem to get it. Trying to convince these people by repeating your arguments will not help, it will just waste your time.

To sum up my thoughts in a short paragraph, and make it a bit more abstract, to apply to all kinds of situations: The attacker will concentrate superior forces on the point of attack, so the defender should expect to be outgunned and outnumbered. Therefore, facing the attack head on, frontally, is usually a bad idea. So, standard defensive tactics is to place defensive positions with front cover, and use flanking fire against advancing enemy units that move into the line of fire. Because of this, the tactical concept of "overwatch" is dubious, as the overwatching element is unlikely to be able to see and fire upon the defenders that are engaging the bounding/moving/assaulting element.

I have to agree with the original poster of this topic, but I'll frame my reply in infantry terms, as that is the area I have given a lot of thought and studying to over the years. This is not an exact analogy to this discussion about bounding overwatch, I know, but it seems closely related. I've read lots of field manuals and books covering offensive and defensive infantry tactics, and they all pretty much follow the same format. For a defensive fighting position, always put yourself somewhere with front cover, like behind a small hill or rocks. This is explicitly stated to be done in order to defeat enemy direct suppressive fire and overwatch from the front. Your firing arcs will be to the sides, defilading any advancing enemy that passes into your fields of fire. You will also be covering the front of the fighting positions next to you, who will in turn be covering your front (which you can not see and fire upon yourself because of the front cover). You would think that the offensive tactics are then designed to counter this form of defence? Nope, the offensive tactics are on the line of "bring up your heavy weapons, (and vehicles, if you have them), to provide overwatch and suppress the enemy with direct fire, and then have your assault elements close with and destroy the enemy under this covering fire". Yes, I know there is also artillery and other means to use, but the whole concept of finding, closing with and attacking the enemy by this method seems flawed. Your first contact with the enemy is going to be your forward elements being engaged by flanking fire, with the supporting and overwatching heavy weapons unable to intervene. I've always thought that there must be a better method than the one put forward in pretty much every field manual and book I've ever read. Here is a good example: http://www.2ndbn5thmar.com/fight/InfantryAttack.pdf Look at the first picture, the support element (1), is suppressing the enemy, which clearly has no front cover. Why? Why would this enemy be so incompetent and not follow standard defensive infantry tactics? (as outlined here, for example: http://www.2ndbn5thmar.com/fight/individualfightingpositions.pdf) The first point in that PDF says: Select some natural frontal cover – trees, rocks, earth, or rubble – that protects you from enemy direct fire.

I guess you're all following this excellent blog regularly now (if not, you definitely should), but in case someone missed it, another SB AAR is up, this time it's the "Flank Attack" scenario: http://kriegsimulation.blogspot.se/2013/06/steel-beasts-prope-aar-flank-attack.html