.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

Salvo! - Save $6.00
winSPMBT: Main Battle Tank - Save $5.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > The Camo Workshop > WinSPMBT
Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old April 18th, 2018, 03:58 AM
Aeraaa's Avatar

Aeraaa Aeraaa is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 327
Thanks: 72
Thanked 115 Times in 84 Posts
Aeraaa is on a distinguished road
Default Re: thermal imaging...

Quote:
Originally Posted by jivemi View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by PAnz3r View Post
Well, I'm playing a campaign, with cccp, I took a sort of Guard tank battalion, with T64b and etc...

After a couple of battle, to be honest simple battle, against canadian, us army pop up with a swarm of M60 TTI rise...meeting engagement battle...I have lost every win possibility around turn 20...then it come the slaughter house, the TI superiority it's overwhelming,

How do you manage these situations?
--Spoiler Alert--

Really. If you want a challenging scenario in which the enemy have TI and you don't try #179, The Bear Strikes (WP), a Soviet assault battle. Tried it several times; even after destroying most of (apparently) a company of TI-equipped Abrams and Bradleys on the first ridge objective there are still enough left to tear huge gaps in my assault columns. Plus they and the West Germans have cluster munitions which are devastating.

Since T-80s can't see them through the fire and smoke generated by arty (they're dug in on tree hexes mostly) I can't finish them off. Airstrikes either can't find them or fail to hit and most aircraft, including SEAD, are damaged on their first sorties from "bristling" air defenses. Any advanced infantry get pinned down by hard-to-spot MGs. What's an armchair general to do? Thanks.

Its a long time since I've played the scenario (I got a marginal victory), but IIRC what I did was use my dismounts to draw fire and provide an overwhelming amount of targets. The Abrams would reveal themselves eventually, at which point they were easy prey for my T80s. Any MGs and dismounted infantry will be dealt with T80s popping out of cover, firing some shots and going back. In addition to that, I managed to sneak one T80 company through the woods to the north and come in front in Abrams at point blank range, just as they finished firing their round for the turn. It was messy and I had casualties in both infantry and tanks, but I managed to break through the ridge and after that the scenario becomes much easier.

Tbh, nowadays what I would do is use the Hinds that you have IIRC and draw fire from these. They are hard to kill and the moment the Abrams reveal themselves they are dead meat. T80s can kill them then. If they pop smoke, wait until it clears and attack again. Hinds themselves can kill the enemy tanks too if they hit the turret side armor.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Aeraaa For This Useful Post:
  #22  
Old April 18th, 2018, 06:50 AM
Suhiir's Avatar

Suhiir Suhiir is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 2,179
Thanks: 205
Thanked 460 Times in 356 Posts
Suhiir is on a distinguished road
Default Re: thermal imaging...

As pointed out by others combined arms is the key to WinSPMBT. I don't play vs a "Tank Heavy" AI thus tend to face more man portable ATGMs and MPADs then most folks. I rarely see the AI use less then 9 MPADs, 12+ is not uncommon. While I don't often run into TI equipped AI forces it's merely a matter of not trying to go head-to-head with them in open terrain. If then enemy is hiding behind smoke delay or withdraw slightly till it clears. Advance some infantry scouts (any infantry unit will do) with their weapons set to fire at very short ranges in the best covered and concealed areas you can find.

You aren't going to "zerg rush" your way to victory in WinSPMBT like you do in many (most?) other games. Numbers count, but don't begin to insure victory.

My biggest "complaint" about the automatically generated battles in the game is that they rarely allow time for anything but a "banzai" charge. This is why I tend to go out of my way in the scenarios I create to make them long enough to permit scouting and flanking maneuvers should the player elect to do so.
__________________
Suhiir - Wargame Junkie

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old April 18th, 2018, 07:06 AM

jivemi jivemi is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Philippines
Posts: 384
Thanks: 239
Thanked 83 Times in 68 Posts
jivemi is on a distinguished road
Default Re: thermal imaging...

Thanks folks. Your solutions sound pretty sensible, although easier said than done. What may have thrown me off is that in this scenario pounding the ridge with arty can be counterproductive. While it does suppress enemy units it can obscure my side's vision. Maybe better to use it on targets my deep-penetration scouts spot in the rear. There are 40 turns in this which is a fair amount of time to do some careful recon.

Anyway thanks again and happy gaming!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old April 18th, 2018, 07:19 AM
DRG's Avatar

DRG DRG is offline
National Security Advisor
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: GWN
Posts: 9,232
Thanks: 1,561
Thanked 2,338 Times in 1,217 Posts
DRG will become famous soon enough
Default Re: thermal imaging...

So how much longer do you think they should be and which generated battles? Singles or campaigns?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old April 18th, 2018, 09:16 AM
Suhiir's Avatar

Suhiir Suhiir is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 2,179
Thanks: 205
Thanked 460 Times in 356 Posts
Suhiir is on a distinguished road
Default Re: thermal imaging...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DRG View Post
So how much longer do you think they should be and which generated battles? Singles or campaigns?
Usually 3 more turns would be enough to allow some recon/flanking.

Obviously you don't want battles too long, but a little extra time will give the player time to do something besides a frontal assault should the elect to do so.

I'm probably a more "cautious" player then most, I don't see trading casualties for a quick victory as reasonable. Even in a single battle scenario in the back of my mind I'm thinking "I need to keep my forces capable of fighting the next battle."
__________________
Suhiir - Wargame Junkie

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Suhiir For This Useful Post:
  #26  
Old April 18th, 2018, 11:06 AM
Aeraaa's Avatar

Aeraaa Aeraaa is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 327
Thanks: 72
Thanked 115 Times in 84 Posts
Aeraaa is on a distinguished road
Default Re: thermal imaging...

I don't find the scenario time in generated battles that short tbh, especially in recent patches. The battles I've played were more than 40 turns on average, even in meeting engagements, which is more than enough to beat the AI and good enough for PBEM as well.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Aeraaa For This Useful Post:
  #27  
Old April 18th, 2018, 04:53 PM
Suhiir's Avatar

Suhiir Suhiir is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 2,179
Thanks: 205
Thanked 460 Times in 356 Posts
Suhiir is on a distinguished road
Default Re: thermal imaging...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeraaa View Post
I don't find the scenario time in generated battles that short tbh, especially in recent patches. The battles I've played were more than 40 turns on average, even in meeting engagements, which is more than enough to beat the AI and good enough for PBEM as well.
I'm guessing ... GUESSING ... you don't play infantry heavy battles. Sometimes I get a generated battle short enough you don't even have time to move infantry from the starting zone to the battle. If there had been APCs etc. it wouldn't have been an issue.
__________________
Suhiir - Wargame Junkie

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old April 18th, 2018, 06:22 PM
Aeraaa's Avatar

Aeraaa Aeraaa is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 327
Thanks: 72
Thanked 115 Times in 84 Posts
Aeraaa is on a distinguished road
Default Re: thermal imaging...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suhiir View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeraaa View Post
I don't find the scenario time in generated battles that short tbh, especially in recent patches. The battles I've played were more than 40 turns on average, even in meeting engagements, which is more than enough to beat the AI and good enough for PBEM as well.
I'm guessing ... GUESSING ... you don't play infantry heavy battles. Sometimes I get a generated battle short enough you don't even have time to move infantry from the starting zone to the battle. If there had been APCs etc. it wouldn't have been an issue.
Well you are right in that my favorite kind of force is the "balanced" mechanized force, mostly mechanized infantry with a healthy dose of tanks. Tank heavy or infantry heavy forces are not that interesting IMO (and RL biases may come into play here ). But on to the topic.

Last random generated battles I've played were something like 40 something for meeting engagements and close to 50-60 turns for advances/assaults. That is IMHO enough for even an infantry force to come close to the objectives and fight the battle, but you need to always deploy as much forward as the game permits. But if I'm wrong or you thing this is not enough, I believe you can go to the map when on the deployment screen and change the time limit for the game, so the solution is quite simple.

Or you can play in smaller maps when fighting an infantry heavy battle, that also does the trick.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old April 18th, 2018, 06:49 PM
DRG's Avatar

DRG DRG is offline
National Security Advisor
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: GWN
Posts: 9,232
Thanks: 1,561
Thanked 2,338 Times in 1,217 Posts
DRG will become famous soon enough
Default Re: thermal imaging...

Playing on tall narrow maps 160x40 can be interesting as long as it's not 500 units per side ( but somebody would love that )
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old April 18th, 2018, 07:57 PM
Suhiir's Avatar

Suhiir Suhiir is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 2,179
Thanks: 205
Thanked 460 Times in 356 Posts
Suhiir is on a distinguished road
Default Re: thermal imaging...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DRG View Post
Playing on tall narrow maps 160x40 can be interesting as long as it's not 500 units per side ( but somebody would love that )
My China vs Russia scenario isn't that extreme but it's a fairly narrow map with a lot of units coming in waves on the Chinese side.
__________________
Suhiir - Wargame Junkie

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2018, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.