Bolt out of the Blue 4.4

JDR Dragoon · (This post was last modified: 10-04-2009, 02:41 AM by JDR Dragoon.)

Kuriltai Wrote:I have to say I am enjoying the Hell out of this thread !
Perhaps JDR and Ostland better settle this with a quick game ? ;)

At the moment I am involved in a multiplayer playtest of one of those "Every last units of WW3 in glorious technicolor including the Hawaii National Guard" scenarios, which is sucking up most of my gaming time. So I would likely have to decline ;)

P.Ako · (This post was last modified: 10-04-2009, 04:33 AM by P.Ako.)

JDR Dragoon Wrote:But when did the austrian army start using the NATO Tri-Color scheme? Those vehicles might have been painted that way in the 1990s

Yes it could be. I don't speak German, but i remember that you copy/pasted some text from an Austrian site dedicated to the M-60, could you please make some investigation about it?
Because according to the photos that i saw in that website some M-60 are using the tricolor camouflage scheme (with leafs all over the tank) but others don't...

JDR Dragoon · (This post was last modified: 10-04-2009, 06:07 AM by JDR Dragoon.)

That same webpage has some some pages w. photos of austrian M60s

http://www.m60panzer.org/html/erinnerung...m60a3.html

James Ward · 10-14-2009, 12:24 AM,

I have a question. The special forces/SAS units are listed as demolition capable but I can't seem to get them to blow bridges. I have been going into the Engineering menu to do this. Am I in the wrong menu or are they not capable of blowing bridges?
GREAT MOD!

JDR Dragoon · (This post was last modified: 10-14-2009, 01:21 AM by JDR Dragoon.)

Units that are Demolition capable can remove minefields and obstacles, albeit at a reduction in their own strenght. Only units classed as "Special Forces" or "Engineers" can blow bridges. This is quite a common misconception.

The SAS units in BootB are classed as "Partisans" and that type of unit class can´t blow bridges.

JDR Dragoon · 10-14-2009, 01:20 AM,

Another observation:

The polish MI-2URP Helicopter, armed w. the AT3 SAGGER ATGM has a HA of 45/2. Isn´t this rather generous compared w. the fact that the Mi 24, supposedly armed with the much more capable AT6 SPIRAL has a HA of 48/2?

James Ward · 10-14-2009, 01:33 AM,

JDR Dragoon Wrote:Units that are Demolition capable can remove minefields and obstacles, albeit at a reduction in their own strenght. Only units classed as "Special Forces" or "Engineers" can blow bridges. This is quite a common misconception.

The SAS units in BootB are classed as "Partisans" and that type of unit class can´t blow bridges.

Thanks.

Aaron · (This post was last modified: 10-14-2009, 05:43 AM by Aaron.)

James Ward Wrote:
JDR Dragoon Wrote:Units that are Demolition capable can remove minefields and obstacles, albeit at a reduction in their own strenght. Only units classed as "Special Forces" or "Engineers" can blow bridges. This is quite a common misconception.

The SAS units in BootB are classed as "Partisans" and that type of unit class can´t blow bridges.

Thanks.

That was one of the negatives of switching SF to Partisans, i didnt want to take it completely away but i also thought having them blow to many bridges wasnt to realistic. Its not an easy task to blow a bridge to begin with especially during a war in enemy territory when u know there would be some sort of guard on most bridges but we cant put a platoon/squad of men on every bridge and having a unit run around blowing up 4 bridges i though was to much anyways so i dont see losing the feature a loss.

On the Mi-2URP, the AT-3C had about 520 penetration, on the AT-6 ur looking at 600-750mm, my chart goes by 3 points every 100mm plus ive read the Polish supposedly scored more hits than the Soviet Hinds in training exercises but this doesn't really matter.

Aaron

JDR Dragoon · (This post was last modified: 10-14-2009, 06:30 AM by JDR Dragoon.)

tazaaron Wrote:On the Mi-2URP, the AT-3C had about 520 penetration, on the AT-6 ur looking at 600-750mm, my chart goes by 3 points every 100mm plus ive read the Polish supposedly scored more hits than the Soviet Hinds in training exercises but this doesn't really matter.

Aaron

Okay. So your HA value estimate is based mostly on penetration. Allow me a little "curve ball": If the improved AT3C Sagger was so good, why would anybody ever have thought about changing the armament of most WAPA AT system to the AT4/5/6? The improved SACLOS AT3C should have been sufficient, no? ;)

Aaron · 10-15-2009, 01:15 AM,

The AT-3C was never meant to replace anything, it was just a stop gap upgrade intill enough AT-5s could be put into service when it came to vehicle launch systems, for the most part only the ATGMs on BRDMs were upgraded. A big reason for replacing the AT-3 is for one the BMP-1 had a blind spot at the 10-11 oclock position where u had to elevate the gun to clear the light, another good reason is in order to fire it a operator had to hang half way out of the hatch to fire the damn thing. The The whole value system isnt just based on penetration either or the Bradley and BMP-1s infantry units would have a HA value of 54 and 48. According to the way i figure things out the MI-2 could be either a 42 or 45.

Aaron