Jump to content

Panzer_Leader

Members
  • Content Count

    1,318
  • Joined

  • Last visited

7 Followers

About Panzer_Leader

Personal Information

  • Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
  • Interests
    Ancient, early medieval and military history, especially manoeuvre warfare. Running and boot camp.
  • Occupation
    Managing Director, digital media.

Recent Profile Visitors

5,070 profile views
  1. I think so No concern on my part; I was just thinking out loud after reading your interview, as it seemed like a possibility.
  2. Great article and great find @Breakthrough7! Good to have the T-14 Armata finally confirmed after all the speculation. Personally I’m quite excited about the MB G 300 CDi (I was wondering if it would be included after seeing it on one of eSim’s mugs) as I can use it as a close proxy for a Cold War Danish recce vehicle in a scenario I’ve had in mind for years... (a sequel to ‘Armoured Infantry Company Attack at Rydsgard 1991’). A few other vehicles confirmed too but I won’t spoil the surprise for others. With CROWS now fully modelled, I wonder if there’s an option to add it to M1A2 SEP?
  3. I generally don't like speculating about the content of updates and am grateful for the content that is included but, with 4.1, I'm genuinely intrigued by the two tank icons that I understand remain unidentified or revealed and what they might be, as I'm sure a lot of people are by this stage. I'm convinced one of them is T-14 Armata and here is my best guess at the remaining one in descending order of belief and/or hope: 1) T-72B3; 2) T-80BV or; 3) M1A1 SA. Am I close? Time will tell.
  4. Thanks @Ssnake I’ll make that change in the CS template. One last favour (I hope): can you please provide your recommended call sign for the M113 in the headquarters? I don’t have a “best guess” for this one and would like to finalise it before play-testing and publishing the scenario update, hopefully in the next week. Thanks again!
  5. Yes, a fantastic title on Challenger 1, my favourite Cold War tank. But, I’d highly recommend the two Photosniper volumes and the Tankograd title to round out your collection. There are more on Challenger 1 but these are complementary and the best, in my opinion.
  6. A new book on the Chieftain, published 19 April 2019, that I haven't seen before but looks credible: https://www.amazon.com/Chieftain-Britains-Flawed-Masterpiece-Green/dp/8365958295 I'll put it on my Wish List and wait for some reviews to come in before purchasing as I already have some very good books on Chieftain but, if it is good, another one won't hurt!
  7. Fingers crossed. I guess a properly modelled Protector is better than a generic RWS on an ASLAV-PC even if you can’t use the hatch, assuming you have the patience to learn all its functions.
  8. Yes, great to see a fully modelled Kongsberg Protector in 4.1. Perfect for the ASLAV-PC.
  9. Okay, following input from @Grenny and @Ssnake, here's where I've got to: I've left the the BergTrp (Wisent ARV) and SanTrp (M113A3/Medic) separate per earlier scenario version 2.1 (these call signs were based on input from @Duke(911)), though combined at scenario start. I've then created a separate "section" of the same "platoon" with the KpFW [CSM] (Unimog 1300L/Supply, MG3), Stellv. [XO] (MB 240GD) and "YYY" (M113A2G, no troops). I appreciate this is getting tedious but, what I'd really like to understand is, what is the best "call sign" (even if they didn't actually have one) for the M113A2G in this context? I should then be good to go. The beauty of this arrangement is that all call signs are part of one platoon and can all be combined, allowing the XO to run all call signs, or put the BergTrp and SanTrp closer to the CO and run a second "section" with XO, CSM and M113A2G, or split the XO's MB 240GD out on its own ultimately. Here's how it will look at mission start: This way you know from the unit graphics one "section" is primarily supply and the other recovery (and medic). I'll probably remove any annotations in closed brackets from the call signs before publication. Thanks for your patience with my undiagnosed OCD and please let me know if you have any further comments before I adopt this call sign structure
  10. Exciting and virtually scary all at the same time!
  11. I was wondering about that too (though spotted the answer above. I thought APS would be another very advanced step in simulation programming, beyond scope of 4.1). Does the Kurganets-25 mean the 9M133 Kornet is implemented in 4.1 though?
  12. You’re welcome. I certainly enjoyed reading it and thought others here might too.
  13. This blog, Russia Military Analysis, contains an excellent summary of last year's large Vostok 2018 exercises held by Russia: https://russianmilitaryanalysis.wordpress.com/2018/09/28/assessing-vostok-2018/ Use the "PREVIOUS POST" navigation at the bottom of the linked article to work through the previous blogs on Vostok 2018 which provide an almost daily update on the course of the exercise: Day 7, Days 5-6, Day 4, Day 3, Day 2, Day 1 and Exercise Plan in reverse order. What I found really interesting from the blogs and photos, beyond the analysis of the exercise itself, and what's relevant to Steel Beasts, is the equipment featured and the fact that many of the units involved continue to use T-72B1 (m.1985), BMP-2, BMD-2, ZSU-23-4, 2S1, 2S3 and BM-21, at least in the eastern military districts. More modern equipment featured includes BTR-82A and 2S19 (both coming in 4.1) and T-72B3. There isn't a mention or picture of a T-90 or BMP-3. In many cases it seems you can look beyond Russia's signature equipment programmes, such as T-14 or even T-90, and reach straight back to late Cold War equipment even for contemporary scenarios... I also found this very helpful resource on Russia's contemporary order of battle and geographic distribution if you're trying to visualise and understand the military districts and units involved in Vostok 2018 or more generally: https://www.dropbox.com/s/pnxxfx41cs5d3gq/Russia's Military Posture%3B Russian Ground Forces Order Of Battle_ISW_Mar18.pdf?dl=0 Cheers
  14. Thanks @Grenny, appreciate the input. I'll use more generic call signs for these vehicles. More for my benefit as I think about organising the vehicles in their "platoons" in the scenario, would: The XO most likely be found in the M113 (fitted as a command post as I understand it) or the Wolf? And, if the XO is in the M113 would the company sergeant major (German equivalent) be in the Wolf or vice versa? Finally, would you expect the bergepanzer and M113 medic from battalion to be organised with these HQ units or kept separate? At the moment I'm anticipating a combined "platoon" or echelon with perhaps the M113 separate as an XO's CP, depending on your answer above. This will help me organise the HQ and attachments as best I can for the next iteration of the scenario, which I'm hoping to play test by the weekend. Cheers
×
×
  • Create New...