Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RedWardancer

  1. I haven't been online for about three years, give or take. Great to be back. My dismounts put a wupp'n on the enemy at the SE bridge area. Six shots, six kills with the Javelins! Had the enemy moved any closer, they would have been eating AT-4 rounds! Had to use a CV90 in the counterattack, not one of my more familiar vehicles. But we did well. I can tell when Assassin7 is leading tanks. They were doing so much shooting, I bet they were melting their barrels! How did Nike-Ajax handle all those units is commendable. Usually, and OPFOR needs a few people to get the job done. But this is fine, as they bloodied us on defense fairly well. Now if only I can join in with Kanium for Arma3...heheh.
  2. Yep. In real life doctrine, a defending side that has time will scout out his Area of Operations to determine the best firing positions, minefield deployment, Observation Posts, Dismount fighting positions, and so on.
  3. Well gee wiz! I was hoping to hop into the terrain map to "scout" our starting Alpha positions by creating a test scenario with my IFV before the game starts. Call it, training. heheh.
  4. What map is this being played on? Am I allowed to study our area or is that cheating? I mean, we ARE in defense right?
  6. Is there anyone coming to Teamspeak this morning (0847 EST)? Bought new headset with mic, want to conduct a quick commo check before I get back into online play.
  7. Billions and billions and billions oh my! 😂
  8. Just a pride thing going on here. Brings back memories:
  9. Deploying quickly is a specialty of the Marines, I agree with that. But they can also dig in and stick around for a long time, requiring more organic resources. Cross-branch coordination continues to be a difficult concept in practice for our armed forces, and the Marines, just like everyone else, need their own. However, all we can do is wait and see.
  10. I think the Marines need to remain more flexible compared to setting them up as a pure amphibious unit. They are also a quick response force that is expected to be nearly anywhere at any time. Marines tend to stick around longer than expected when they are deployed, and need as much firepower and support at their disposal. Even since the end of the Vietnam War, we have watched the government make major changes to the military. FEW have been positive.
  11. This is so not good at all.
  12. What in the literal $%&#! So, General Berger (and government) thinks we will become stronger by trimming our forces down and adding modernized "organic" capabilities (robots). Without immediate armored and air assets, this means the Marines will have less. Augmenting three regiments by cutting out other battalions is not the answer. We need more of everything. Damn. Just, damn.
  13. By now, some of us if not most or all, are restricted to our homes due to our jobs being shut down being non-essentials. My status has changed just this afternoon. Just wondering who's been playing SB nearly non-stop as if life is about to come to an end? I can tell you fellow Treadheads that I now have LOTS of time for map conversions, game playing, and scenario designing!
  14. Creating units is easy, be it individually or by templates. The real hard work was the conditions, events, and random spawn locations/routes I had made. For example: each Blue sniper and recon unit that had infiltrated into Red territory had 10 to 15 different starting locations. Each of the Blue platoons had 12-15 random start locations as well. With an entire battalion in defense, with national guard units each with random starts, you can see how much effort I had placed into this. I personally enjoy more randomness in scenarios/campaigns to avoid predictability. The tradeoff is the work put into that. As mentioned before, it's all good. No reason to get mad over it. As of this moment, I'm already sending sabot rounds at foes and drawing up new scenarios. Like the rest of us, THIS Treadhead is having fun.
  15. Ah well, back to the drawing boards. It's all good. Long as I can still play the game no matter the scenarios chosen. Since I did not copyright these, perhaps someone else might take up the reigns and complete them. Until then, plenty of other scenarios to design and/or play through.
  16. UPDATE: So far, the choppy play continues on this and only the Ukraine_vs_Russia_NE scenarios. I tried refresh map, replace map, no success. I currently have 4.163.
  17. This will do. 30x30 is the safe bet.
  18. If maps can be rotated in the editors, then I may have a solution to this. If not... Here's what I have found that comes close to a Norwegian fjord region if map rotation works: #1: Stephenville Airport, Newfoundland & Labrador, Canada. 48-degrees, 33' N, 58-degrees, 34' W. #2: Goose Bay AFB, Happy Valley, Newfoundland $ Labrador, Canada. 53-degrees, 19' 19", 60-degrees, 25' 33" W
  19. Figures. 20km x 20km then. But if the height data won't do, I'll find another equivalent locale.
  20. Recently played a scenario from COMMAND: Modern Operations. The setting is 1994, Russia decides to launch WWIII against NATO. One of the initial assaults is in northern Norway. The Russians intend on capturing all of the airfields in the region, the largest of which is Banak Air Base. Playing as the defending Norwegians, I defeated them in convincing form. Now, I want to play this out in detail for an SB scenario. Need a map. I'd say 10km by 10km will do. This is the closest rendition of the area I can find: Norgeskart.pdf
  21. Aha! Well...with tongue in cheek...I figured out that there already exists camouflage schemes for the Ukrainians. Go ahead, laugh. I deserve it.
  • Create New...