Long lost tactical manual
 

Hi :)

Years ago before WINSPMBT there was a very detailed tactical manual to be found out there with details how to use different units and how to put a army together. I am now looking for that manual where they described everything from different units and the usage of them to the built up of an army with reserves and everything. I now need help to find this document and all help is very much appreciated.

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Is this a Steel Panthers tac manual or a general warfare tac manual?

If it's Steel Panthers I'd be willing to bet its a SPWAW manual. SPWAW is sort of it's own little world. And to me it's still an incomplete game because Steel Panthers:Modern Warfare was NEVER completed.

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

What if someone made one for winSPMBT?
OFFTOPIC:
TO&Es is really the place for looking for docs?

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Well in the first post he said years ago BEFORE WinSPMBT.
Sure one for winSPMBT would be great. I never heard of /saw one though.

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

This manual was downloadable for Steel Panthers Main Battle Tank it had just not gone WIN at the time. The manual gave suggestions how to use different Unit types and everything. A very useful tool when playing PBMs, it described different units as well and their purpose. Gave suggestions how to put up a basic formation of troops for different scenarios it was great.

I found the SPWAW manual it was like that one but only it was for SPMBT :)

I guess if no bells goes off I just have to manage without it, I am a bit rusty.

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Is the one you are looking for called 'Maxters SPMBT Tips'?

I attached it.

Along with a couple of other guides, it can be found here:

http://www.theblitz.org/message_boar....php?tid=41293

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Guide, cool lemme check this

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Wow this was even better then the one I was looking for :clap:

Thank you Cross you are a life saver! :D

It's worth noteing that this guide was written for version 3.5

I have to totally disagree with the authors perception of helocopters.
If used in quantity helo attacks are devestating. I played one opponent in particular that used a huge quantity of airmobile troops backed up with gunships. Basically they just bleed out the air defense and then overwelmed the ground troops.
Then in the next game we played I knew he was going to play the same way, I spent like 40% purchase on those Russian tunguska anti air units,the ones with guns and sam's. The air defense completely slaughtered his advance. He kept attacking ,expecting the air to eventualy get bled out, but there were so many anti air units that never happened.

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Yes I have noticed the crushing effects of Apache gunship’s I play a lot of "bad-guys" nations in what IF scenarios and I tried to be Saddam Hussein there and attack the Gulf States, Saudi Arabia and as Pre-emptive Turkey (Sep 2001- March 2003)but hell those gunship’s even with 30% anti-air they took out tank after tank and this was against the AI in a Generated Campaign. I do not want to know what would have happened if a Player had replaced the AI. That would be slaughter. The computer picks for the AI a lot of Gunships if they have any and massive amounts of ATGMs and IF you get an air strike it is like trying to fly in over Baghdad again with an A-10 during 1991 war only with a twist as it is Tactical and not Strategic warfare.

The gunships duck everything but as I read earlier in some thread AAA is the best to use against helicopters and air units, they are the best, as SAM's can't be simulated efficient enough with this game engine. I know what a well-established AAA and SAM network does in real life I was playing with it when I was in the armed forces. The 30% I had invested would never Irl been as ineffective as it was in WINSPMBT.

I got frustrated again when the maximum units for Generated Campaigns was still only 201 at its tops. Hard to get every element in there without loosing something and the prices for equipment outside the west that had something that could affect its supreme units was horrifying. I tried to play the Russians and even if they had stuff that could do some harm it was dead end expensive so I gave up almost immediately with playing the Russians the same goes for all the other Eastern stuff. Anything to have was super expensive and didn’t have a chance if put up against the West. This version is not a version where you want to be on the wrong side of “good vs bad” as the game clearly is not made to be played as bad-boys. I also noticed that the shilka system had gotten a new name and all only that its not only the name and the sights that was improved, the old steel chassi and body has also gotten improvments to the happiness of its crew they do not have to worry about 12,7mm rounds anymore.

I noticed, not many nations in this new version have anything to put up against the big three. US, UK, France. The MBT's main guns in other smaller nations are completely left in the cold-war era it seems. As most nations after 1991 Gulf War 1 started to see the importance with Day and Night/Sights and replaced steel propelled warheads as madmen with more recent BK-27 HEAT rounds that have a triple-shaped charge warhead and increased penetration against conventional reactive armor and Explosive Reactive Armor (ERA) this included the the BK-29 round a hard penetrator in the nose designed for use against reactive armor, and as a multi-purpose (MP) round has fragmentation effects.

I was shocked when I saw that nothing at 1000 meters should be able to penetrate the basic M1 Abrams in this new version. Not much left for a bad-guy player to do in this game it seems, as even RPG-7Vs had been taken out of the inventory for the Iraqi Republican Guard in this new version, one can only hope that consideration to the post-gulf-war re-armament is taken into consideration the next time WINSPMBT is released in a new version cause it makes no challenge to play west side now days. I guess I could play with the OBBs but then I would not be able to play PBM’s with my lill brother and that would suck. Lol

All in all from being an 8 of 10 possible WINSPMBT V.4.0 is down on a steady 5 pointer.

Thanks for finding the manual :)

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

WOW MEGA LONG POST, also, There MUST be something that can penetrate The M1, i'll try to get some guns on it, have you tried using the challenger?

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Just played around, T72G CAN Pierce the M1's armor, BUT, the damage is minimal, Sometimes just a disabled gun or imobillization

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

shilka77,
Yes, I agree with you on East block nations being behind the power curve on weaponry compared against West block nations. If you want a balanced game you have to match up nations similar in weaponry to have a "fair" game. Good guy nations against Bad guy nations sound like they make for a good game but don't actually play well in the game. The West end up having the upper hand. Any chance we can play a game?:D

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

What you could do is even out the points. Players playing the "Bad" side would have 50% more points then the "Good" guys.

Infantry with Light AT/Heavy ATGMs should be able to "kill" most post-cold war western MBTs.

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

In a lot of instances the points generally go further playing the "bad" side as well. Regardless they usually have the option of making them go further too. Taking advantage of this generally requires relaxing your sense of historical accuracy, and I'm sure in many PBEM games it wouldn't necessarily be an issue. Against the AI its definitely not.

I played a game a while back, Saudi Arabia v Israel in 2006 and wailed on the Israeli force by buying one battery of off-map MLRS and then not buying any on map units except SPATGMs (French APCs with TOW missiles, the name of which is escaping me) and Camel Patrols. Even in using up all the points, the Israeli force was dramatically smaller than mine and easily succumbed to the barrage of missiles and rocket artillery. Camel patrols drew fire and picked off straggling scout infantry.

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

I seriously hope you guys are kidding with the whole "bad guys" thing.

And on the topic of playing a techonologically inferior army against a superior one, I'm gonna have to say that the cost of units easily balances out the equation. Buy a Merkava 4 tank, sure that'll be 550+ points please. Buy an infantry company with some 16 RPG rounds and three TI equipped ATGM teams, each equipped with 4, 100 penetration each, that'll be 525 please.

Seriously, don't try to do something your units are not equipped or meant for. Stop trying to engage a top-notch armored formation in the desert in a meeting engagement with an infantry battalion supported by WWII vintage tanks. Engage them in a defensive fight in a built up or broken terrain and turn their million dollar equipment into scrap metal with your 200 dollar RPG rounds.

Or let the AI do the defending and try to attack them with your modern armored force rather, since that'll be a lot more challenging. I mean seriously, to me it seems that the most people who are complaining about the game being imbalanced towards certain armies or feeling that older technology leaves an army completely impotent turn out to be playing only meeting engagements. I'm not saying that all you are, but so far this has been the case more often than not.

What I'm trying to say is that hey, if you find that one army or another is completely incabable of stopping you, try engaging them in a different type of battle or terrain and see if that applies there as well. Only after that should you deem them unworthy of your attention.

And I'm sorry if I've read out as offensive, I can assure you that it is not my intention here. I'm just trying to encourage people to experiment with different battle types to increase their gaming experience.

- Koh

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Low tech Nations Usually Will outnumber High tech nations, since they use cheap weapons and cheap/obsolete tanks, this might be enough to ambush and knock out M1's, Challengers...

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

What is up with the moaning what happened to tactics if you cant penetrate his tank from the front dont try ambush him for flank shots. same goes for poor fire control don't try engaging at range close the distance. You can even afford to take loses on the way as have superiority in numbers. Tactics should match your force if your tanks impregnable from front (inc ATGM) can lead with otherwise its up to the foot sloggers to find them so you can ambush or overwhelm with numbers. If they can get in close can even join in the attack. Its what makes the game every time you need a diffrent strategy. That being said to get more than a draw against an opponent whose tanks are impenatrable from front is hard unless field silly forces like loads of ATGM teams & sneak em round the back. Verses a superior force patience is a virtue try to avoid combat till in a position to do some damage

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Draw is about the best I can get out of an eastern unit now days against the AI. I would not survive 5 turns in this new game against a PC in a PVP this is an entirely new game I need to train, train and train to get in shape with these new units. Sure manoeuvre is the answer only now I will have to get 500 meters from my target vs 1000 in older versions.

Now that may not seem like a big difference for any western oriented player that fights in desert terrain against some Iraqi modifications from An Najaf armour shop but you can be very sure I will notice the difference. I think this is not an issue about east and west, I think those whom promotes this kind of positive special treatment seldom puts themselves in a T55 and roams out in suicide attacks against the green giant and his Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles. I think they seldom read anything but Janes Defence Magazine (a great magazine) and I think in general not many knows much about the post Gulf War re-armament that continues all the way to our days as new warheads for rocket-propelled launchers reached the market years ago, someone mention Israel vs Saudi Arabia that is a great what IF scenario.

The last armed conflict with Hezbollah (2006) however proved the new RPG rounds deadliness against the Merkava Mk 4 really was at short ranges. They cracked them opened like rotten sardine canisters, it didn’t help the IDF that Hezbollah also had gotten their hands on the Kornet ATGM system either. A lot of things is probably very hard to simulate even with a game engine such as this one I understand that fully, but you do not have to cut the head of the rooster and watch him run around headless bleeding up to make a game balanced. Now that is whining and takes me to the third part of my very long answer.

The prices –

Now Abram Tanks cost a lot and so does an Assad Babyl in comparison the Assad Babyl is inferior to the Abram Tank for more reasons then one. Someone said use the terrain, kick your enemy in the sides and from the behind. I would do that if an Assad Babyl came with a mole attachment to its nose and I could dig myself around or to the side of an Abram tank.

This is the worst example of the above so I picked it. Within urban terrain I can make that Assad Babyl roam and do terrible damage to Abrams no question about that, heck I could even take one out with an old T-55 Enigma with a rear attack from 100 meters (x2 hexes) not kill it but cripple it enough to send in my Infantry to hunt down the fleeing crew.

Problem with the game is that when you meet the AI it is often meeting engagements (Generated Campaigns) and the terrain originally offered is not nice to the player as the AI always get high grounds or other good defensive positions it seems, (vision advantages) now comes this great option Redraw new default map (change visibility) and you can also move around V-hexes to your own advantage that is great, only if doing so the game often turns into a shooting contest with me trying to re-arm while enemy APCs often wheeled APCs in massive flods draws my tanks fire.

I noticed something else when I started this new game. More bonus points here – You can fix the tanks and APCs so they do not engage these light targets but concentrates their vital AP killing rounds against those whom really needs them for you to win as in modified Pattons or M84K or heavily upgraded cold-war medium tanks that always comes with a thermal sight! God I hate that when it happens but now. This function was great. Good work!

What I really could come down to wine about is the RPGs yes you can have hundreds of RPGs but it wont help you a bit if they just bounce off a tank or APC. Now RPG engagements are not supposed to be from the front ever. It is considered suicide in most armies I believe.

They have been tuned down or taken out of commission from crucial units that irl was equipped with the new warheads. If I could have one wish for filled give the RPG-7V back to units that had them in version 3.0 as that made them so much more realistic in urban warfare as the tiny RPG-16s is not much to put up against a western APC at all and even less a western tank, North Korea is the worst nation OOB in the entire WINSPMBT I believe.

They still run around with vintage 60s RPG-7s That is madness. If so we would be in Pyongyang now celebrating our overwhelming victory over Kim Jong Ill. If you want challenge play against AI with North Korea then you will have to fight for every bit of dirt your larva’s enters I can assure you that. A bit more balance and this game will be fine.

http://www.jedsite.info/tanks-charli...ho-series.html

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Oh I'm such a sucker for challenges. Here's how it went


North Korea defend against US Army assault
June 2010

Terrain features:

For the purpose of this battle report, up is north, down is south.

A secondary road in south
A paved road in north
Lots of hills
A stream running north-south near the V-hexes
A small village in the north
Long firing ranges in the south
Shorter ones in the north

I pick a reinforced infantry battalion as my defending force. I have two light infantry companies and one red guards company at my disposal. They are all lightly armed with no squad level AT weapons. Only a few RPG-7 teams provide the companies with any form of AT weaponry. The light infantry companies have organic infantry SAM support in the form of three igla launchers. The companies are supported by heavy machine guns.

I also have a mortar company formed of two 120mm mortar platoons, each with three tubes. My indirect fire capabilitie are further bolstered by a 180mm artillery battery meant primarily for counterbattery fires. I have three artillery observer teams at my disposal.

My AA capabilities are reinforced by two Igla SAM platoons, each with 3 launchers, as well as 2 radar-equipped Type 88K self propelled AA guns.

I have been reinforced with two engineer platoons for entrenching and bridge demolishing purposes. My anti tank forces have been bolstered by two platoons of B-11 recoilles rifles and one platoon of Fagot anti tank guided missiles. There are also three concrete bunkers with AT guns as well as three entenched anti tank guns at my disposal. Finally, a lone T-2002 tank has been sent to act in anti-tank roles.

The local air force unit has been kind enough to allocate two Mig-29s for close air support missions.


I deploy my forces behind slopes and hills to enable shorter firing ranges. I deploy AT teams into firing positions that will allow them to fire at the sides and the rears of enemy tanks. The Fagot teams have instructions to not engage the enemy unless given the order to do so. I build several trench lines but leave them unoccupied. Their main purpose is to operate as anti tank ditches as well as secondary positions for my units retreating from their first positions. I also build a few minefields in areas with little AT coverage to stop any possible flanking attempts. My pre-planned artillery targets are in areas where I first expect to see enemy units and in places where I expect them to stop to engage my units.

Turn 3
2 M1A2 Abrams tanks stopped by a bunker firing at them in the south. The tanks are destroyed by PGM launches by the Mig-29s.

Turn 4
2x A-10s pefrorming bombing runs. Both destroyed by Igla SAMs. 2x F-16s bomb one of my bunkers. Minor casualties amongs the infantry. Enemy Abrams tanks tries to engage the bunker bombed by the F-16s but fails to destroy it.

Turn 5
I bail out the crew from the bunker as the main gun was destroyed by the Abrams. Enemy infantry spotted in the north. Their advance is halted by my infantry fortified in houses. I plot a mortar fire mission against them. Enemy M2A3 Bradleys detected in the south along with more M1A2 Abrams. A PGM launch from a Mig-29 destroys one M1A2 SEP Abrams.

Turn 6
M2A3 Bradley is engaged by a Fagot team but the missile does not hit. The same Bradley is destroyed by a bunker. I remember that I have sappers meant to destroy the two bridges crossing the streams and start pounding them with satchels. Enemy bombards my positions with HIMARS and artillery. No casualties. Two F-16s perform air strikes. One of them is downed by Igla SAMs. One Igla team is lost in the air strikes. M1A2 Abrams engages the Fagot team and the bunker that destroyed the Bradley. Two enemy M1A2s are stopped in front of a sapper squad due to a bunker firing at them.

Turn 7
Sappers destroy one of the M1A2s with flamethrower. The other is sent into retreat. I retreat the sapper squad into the trenches waiting behind them. The bridges are still standing despite continuous satchel bombardment. Enemy infantry in the north pinned down by HMG fire. Bunker firing at M2A3 Bradley, Bradley destroyed. Mortar company fire disperses the enemy attack in the north.

Turn 8

I'm moving up some 107mm B11 RCLs to take rear shots against an M1A2 Abrams that has stopped to fire at my bunkers. One F-16 air strike, the plane is destroyed by Igla SAMs. A bunker is destroyed by an M1A2. The Fagot team is taking heavy fire. More enemy infantry killed in the north.

Turn 9

I order the Fagot team to retreat to safety. More enemy infantry repelled in the north. B11s take shots at M1A2. More enemies killed by mortar fire in the north.

Turn 10

HMG fire is pinning down the enemy in the north. B11s are driven away by M1A2. Enemy infantry spotted advancing along the southern road. Two enemy squads destroyed by mortar fire in the north.

Turn 11

Enemy infantry spotted in the center. It is driven away by my own infantry stationed there. Enemy infantry advancing in the south is repelled by HMG fire. No more living enemies visible in the north. Our own forces there suffered no casualties.

Turn 12

More enemy units pouring into the center. They are repelled by HMG fire. I'm calling down mortar fire to aid my troops there. One enemy M1A2 turns its rear against a Fagot team to engagy my infantry. The Fagot team scores a catastrophic kill on the tank.

Turn 13

Due to the failure of our CB assets to locate enemy artillery units, I plan a bombardment with the 180mm battery against two enemy M1A2s that are engaging my infantry. The enemy infantry in the center is driven away by my mortar fire.

Turn 14

I engage the two M1A2s in the south with infantry to keep them still until the 180s hit them. One infantry squad is destroyed by a M1A2. Enemy infantry in the center is suffering heavy casualties. Enemy infantry is again spotted in the north and they are repelled by HMG fire. The enemy forces in the center are forced into retreat by a mortar barrage.

Turn 15

The enemy tanks in the south are hit by the 180s and are buttoned. One of them has it's rear turned against a Fagot team, but the missile does not hit. A B11 team destroys one of the tanks with a hit in the rear. I send my T-2002 to hunt for the other while I also engage it with infantry units nearby.

Turn 16

The enemy M1A2 is hit by a Svir launched by the T-2002, but its armor holds. The T-2002 is destroyed by the enemy tank. I plot more 180mm fire against it. Enemy MMG team engages my infantry in the north. My troops return fire.

Turn 17

I'm ordering some mortar fire against enemy infantry in the south. There's a platoon sized element moving along the road but it is heavily raked by HMG fire. Enemy infantry in the north attacks but they are repelled by HMG and rifle fire. Mortar fire disperses enemy troops in the south.

Turn 18
The pinned down M1A2 is assaulted and destroyed by a light infantry team. No operational enemy vehicles in sight. I'm concentrating all the artillery fire on the remaining enemy infantry. I'm diverting half of the mortar fire against enemy troops in the north.

Turn 19

Enemy infantry in the centre destroyed by my infantry. Northenr enemy infantry is disrupted by HMG fire. One of my light infantry teams there is in the risk of being overran by the enemy. Mortar fire causes serious casualties upon the enemies in the north, while the 180s destroy enemies in the centre.

Turn 20

My infantry platoon launches a counterattack in the north following the mortar barrage and leaves the enemy infantry destroyed.

Turn 21

A Javelin team that had snuck near my defenders in the south manages to kill a few soldiers before being destroyed by rifle fire.

Turn 22

One enemy squad spotted in the centre.

Turn 23

My infantry exchanges shots with the enemy squad in the center.

Turn 24

Enemy squad in the center is destroyed by HMG and rifle fire.

Turn 25

Battle ends early due to nearly complete destruction of the opposing force.

Casualties:
North Korea
52 men
1 T-2002 tank
2 Bunkers

United States
192 men
2 M2A3 Bradleys
7 M1A2 tanks
2 A-10s
2 F-16s

Score
N. Korea 11256
U.S.Army 652

Decisive Victory



Slightly off-topic, but I just wanted to demonstrate that no, the game is in my opinion not at all imbalanced. You just need to know how to use your forces. 90 % of my units were untouched by the enemy and none of them reached my minefields or anti-tank ditches. Three enemy tanks were destroyed by PGMs while the rest of them were destroyed by the hopelessly outdated B11s, Fagots, flamethrowers, seriously underpowered bunker main guns or hand grenades. If you place all your AT assets in front of the enemy, you can pretty much be sure that they'll do you no good. You need to place them in front of him and on both of his sides. That way no matter where he faces, he'll still be getting it up the rear.

- Koh

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Just a quick question, how many Merk IV's were destroyed and by what means? How many were penetrated? To my knowledge most of casaulties were commanders and loaders hit by shrapnel from exploding warheads while out of the hatches and there were very few penetrations, let alone total kills - for all Merkava variants, not just IV's.

But they mostly do. Many armies do. I bet even Russians themselves still have hefty loads of PG-7VM grenades and use them. Czech army uses 60's level RPG's (technology, not actual date of manufacture) for sure and many countries still use 60's-level M72LAW. Given the state North Korea is in, I seriously doubt they have too much funds for massive rearming with new RPG's and run around with old but proven PG-7VM equivalents.

As for hardness of fighting against Abrams in desert, well, real world sucks. Advancing with inferior tanks against enemy with superior targeting, spotting and most likely crew experience is never cheap - it can be costly even with superior equipment if your enemy knows what is he doing, have a look at Israeli defense on Golans in 1973, they were able to pull out a night battle with only old passive IR binoculars for tank commanders, against tanks with "full" active IR night vision.
So... If you are to assault US Army in 1991 with T-72 in desert, you¨re screwed. That¨s the way it is, all you can do is reduce losses - by any means neccessary. If you smoke densely enough, ti would be severely limited. If you shell long enough, enemy is gonna be in bad shape.
and outside flat desert, use cover. I was able to pull off balanced (numerically) running skirmishes between T-34/85's and T-55's, and between baseline T-72's and T-55A's vs. Leopard 2A4. It was not cheap but enemy lost more than me.

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

There are no official tank losses reported from the 2006 clashes but one can only speculate that it was enough to get IDF to turn back home. I have here a movie that speaks a bit about the 2006 conflict. As back in 1982 conflict no official records about lost Merkava tanks are to be found as Israelis has kept this secret, as the mighty Merkava has been a great deterrent on the modern battlefield.

I noticed new things with WIN SPMBT that defends the RPG-7 theory of still being effective as a anti-tank weapon. There is of course not many official sources for the RPG-7 development but I have a Soldiers of Fortune magazine from 2000 or 2001 that explains this development is southeast asia in particular.

I will try to scan the pages and upload it for your display.

The 125mm gun that is used on the T-72s is due to ballistic reports capable to penetrate all our armoured vehicles and main battle tanks with the right round issued. A lot of 125mm equipped tanks fielded by today’s armies in the game still use steelhead propellant ammunition in the game. This is not true on the modern battlefield today.

The 125mm gun used by countries not under the embargo that Iraq was under for 15 years did a lot to re-armament as clearly the old ammunition was amongst the smallest adjustments you could do to make even a basic T-72A deadly in ambushes.

North Korea got one of the worlds best ATGMs and is competing with several European systems such as the Eurospike and the French MILAN that failed to penetrate Russian T-72s in the Chechen conflict a few years back. The MILAN was also drawn back by several nations after this had been made public and as such above questions is hard to handle over solid facts and documents and sources from otherwise restricted areas of the arms trade. No one wants to loose his or her face. The public may easily panic.

To quote former Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld:
"As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time."

The Georgian crisis I think reflects the most worrying development up to this date, the Russians effectively smashed a NATO and US trained and backed army within a matter of days. The Georgians had about the same equipment as the Russian border forces that went in from South Ossetia so this with training is I think history by now.

The 1991 Gulf War was won because there was so much new technology involved that it completely crushed the battle harden Iraqi soldiers it encountered. Though the best forces was still found in close proximity of Baghdad and only special units of the Republican Guard saw any real battle with the US forces head to head. The most vicious battle in that war took place a few days after that Bush Senior had declared that the war was over and aggression defeated.

I will try to dig up some stuff for you guys if it will change anything is not my department but it might get all up to date for what has happened after the 1991 Gulf War at least.

Video about the 2006 war :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7s5l...eature=related

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

RPGs Combat& Survival Vol 14 Issue 09 Dec 2002

I knew I had read about it somewhere it was not in Soldiers of Fortune as I first thought.

Anyway here the entire article for you lads to go through.

http://img366.imageshack.us/my.php?i...rticle1mz5.jpg
Article part 1

http://img151.imageshack.us/my.php?i...rticle2hx4.jpg
Article part 2

http://img376.imageshack.us/my.php?i...rticle3ee9.jpg
Article part 3

http://img397.imageshack.us/my.php?i...rticle4wq7.jpg
Article part 4

Break a legg :D

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

shilka 77,

Nice posting of information updating everyone on improved antitank shoulder fired weapons. It may be time for the oobs with these weapons get updated??:cool:

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

I can at least help out and not only whine all the time. *Chuckles* Hezbollah in Syrian OBB got RPGs worth the name it was a detail that didn't slip my attention as that OBB have gotten a great work over since I roamed around in SPMBT.

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Somewhere on Tank-Net the official figures for tank and crew losses from 2006 war floated, I will try to dig them up. Anyway, most of Merkavas hit were older types and most casaulties seemed to be Commander or Loader, and hit while unbuttoned.
Here is an article by Defense Update: http://www.defense-update.com/analys...anon_war_3.htm
Another article:
http://www.combat-diaries.co.uk/diar...non%202006.htm
AFAIK only two Merk 4's were total losses (and with all hands) but those fell victim to extremely large IED's - there is no tank that can survive a 250kg of explosives going off right under its belly.

I am pretty well aware of RPG development. However even Russian troops are still being issued large quantities of the "classic" PG-7M and similar older warheads. Stockpiles and costs have a lot to do with that. Just that a new warhead is available does not mean it gets into widespread use or that it gets exported just into the correct country. And despite few "silver bullets" in Lebanon 2006, most weapons were old Malutkas for ATGM's and PG-7/PG-7M/Type 69 for RPG-7.And even these "silver bullets" generally failed to penetrate the front armor.

Perhaps you missed all the 2A46 with improved ammo in-game? Anyway, export of modern munitions is pretty recent thing and pretty limited as well. Despite being in WarPac, Czechoslovakia got BM-15 rounds at best from USSR, and had to develop own 125mm APFSDS after the end of the cold war, based on Israeli designs. BM-15 was also the best Iraq had access to. Dunno about other countries but if you'd check OOBs you'd find that most of them have much better than basic ammo for 125mm weapons. As for ambushes, you can in-game pretty well ambush Abrams SEP with T-34/85.
Most mentions I caught appear to report that BM-42 is usually exported for 125mm weapons (atleast to those users shopping in Russia or Ukraine), that is in-game roughly "125mm Gun 88".

Me thinks that pulling Milan out of service has more to do with newer alternatives being available. As for North Korea, what missile that would be?

Buit that's just the matter. You may have option to buy tons of gold-plated super RPG's or BM-44 APFSDSDU, but if you didn't, you cannot expect to use them in-game.

US trained just the light infantry going to Iraq, not much use in mech warfae esp. if most of the force is away, but reportedly it was those guys who managed local counterattacks even pretty late in the war.

58th army being "border force"? And even Russian observers noted that the performance of Russian troops was quite sloppy - only the Georgians were even sloppier, but I heard quite a lot of voices saying that discipline, OPSEC etc. shown in Georgia was significantly lower compared to 1980's.

Battle-hardened troops do not always equal competent troops. Iraq was engaged in a war that consisted mostly of trench warfare with tanks serving as mobile pillboxes - for that neither great skill or proper maintenance are critical.

What battle would that be? Given that ground ops lasted for 100 hours. 73rd Easting happened during those 100 hours.

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

I have no answer to this as I apparently was not on the ground to confirm what was taken out and of what or by what, remember all official reports are to be considered sugared, as it would not be healthy to display actual numbers. From what I have seen the IEDs was no major factor in the 2006 war what so ever as it was a highly mobile war with ambushing Hezbollah Commando units and Hamas units firing their RPGs and Kornet ATGMs with great skill and from short distances (hills) down on the tanks in the valleys and the few roads available to the IDF.The movie shows attacks on Merkava tanks using this tactics. Getting up close and fire away.

I have noticed this good work. :up:

Now this was not the reaction I was looking for, as if you have a game what would be most likely to use if you went to war, would you take out the training PG-7M or would you equip your forces with a more effective warhead? The issue stockpiles vs the need when going to war I think all silver bullets available would be pulled out to be honest. Defense budgets all over the globe is tight but the cost to actually go out and build a brand new T-90 vs equipping your soldiers with the inexpensive improved rocket-propelled grenades is by all means the most likely a nation would do if it was pulled into a war.

Han Ho Suk at Director Center for Korean affairs mentions it in his paper 4-23-3 I send the link exact designation of ATGM not in my vocabulary.

http://www.rense.com/general37/nkorr.htm

Hahaha yes well I wish I could agree with you here mate but I can't of obvious reasons this is Geopolitics and we (the west) had a clear picture of exactly what happened the moment the Russian Federation went in to stop the killings of South Ossetians in this particular conflict. The friendly Georgian fairy tale is all but inept at its best.

A smashing victory a complete defeat of Georgian forces tells another story as if we the west would not had intervened (political) Georgia would had looked a bit different today.

True I have not stated anything about the skills of the Iraqi soldiers in the game either, what could be fixed is perhaps that Iraq in 2003 had T-62s within the ranks of their Republican Guard. Wikipedia says something about that.

Wikipedia Iraqi Republican Guard
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_Republican_Guard

Feb 27 1991 Bush Senior declares aggression have been defeated it didn’t include the rest of the war that didn’t end until 1995. March 1991 a Republican Guard unit got smashed when on retreat by American forces. The battle has no name as it become a controversy due to the violence used in the attack on the retreating forces.

I am still looking when I have time for more of above stuff but as a responsible father I write at lended time. ;)

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

There is a problem, just as the US in Iraq, it would be pretty difficult for the Israelis to mask up the casaulties and number of destroyed equipment, esp. as they left no destroyed or damaged tank behind. And the same goes for cause of loss.

Sorry, I would not call it highly mobile. It got highly mobile in last two days when IDF was given the order it should have been given right at the beginning - to advance to the Litani river, crushing any resistance on the way. THAT was mobile war and that was also a war where Hamas was unable to do a thing.
Up until then, it was rather statical war with IDF operating in relatively small area with predictable routes, IE ideal for IED operations. Sort of like with those few large IED's that got Merkavas in Gaza and West Bank.
As for the movie, of course Hezbollah likes more to present its fighters running around with RPGs and ATGMs than with shovels and wheelbarrows ;)

They were not for sure in Georgia, most pics I saw (and where I bothered to ID)showed Russian troops sporting excessive amounts of old RPG-18's. The same went for example for Chechnya, AFAIR in the region of LAW's/RPG's Chechen fighters got often better stuff than the line troops opposing them. The question whether you pull out your silver bullets is also a question whether you need them and whether you do not have to ship them across half the country - after all (again Georgia) the VDV units deployed there (which had to be moved in-theatre) got older variants of BMD's while there already are units with BMD-3/3M/4's. Not to mention that almost half of 58th army's BMP fleet consisted of BMP-1, the other half of BMP-2 and it operated T-72B tanks of both 1986 and 1989 patterns. And 42nd army that sent in some units after the end of major operations operated T-62's without even BDD armour. Definitely no "silver bullets" there. This is what that Rumsfeld's quote with "army as you have" was about. You can take luxury of handing out new toys to the troops if you have enough time to teach them how to use them (the different RPG warheads would have atleast different ranges and ballistics which the operator must take into account). You do not have that luxury when actually fighting in a higher-intensity op.

Sorry, but things as "70 KH-11 satellites hovering over Korea" or "American tanks are made for open terrain" or "T-62 have 155mm guns" do not lend the author much credibility and lead not to trust him too much at the very least on technical matters. And claiming superiority of MiG-21 over F-15?


Sorry, where did I write anything about friendly Georgia there? I was just commenting on the "US trained" by showing which parts of the Georgian army were US trained.

Well, Japanese and German armies also had many shortcomings that didn't show up in rapid battles again disorganised and inept enemy but which surfaced when being opposed by atleast half-competent foe. Point I saw often cited was for example bunching up of Russian columns and other sins against basic air raid precautions - if only the Georgian Su--25 pilots were able to hit their target, such basic faults would prove very costly, as the Georgian AF managed to mount few (if inaccurate) strikes aven pretty late in the war.


Except that the "highway of death" happened between 26th and 27th February, 1991, ie before "end of major military operations" and it definitely was not a ground battle and it was intensive just for one side. It would be as if I claimed proficiency of Wehrmacht based on intesive fights in Dresden in February 1945. ;)

Best health to your kids and strong nerves to you, have no kids myself but done enough babysitting for my brothers :D

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Yes it is a time consuming operation indeed kids that is. :) 17 years ago and my memory failed me on top of that. I'm getting old. Forgive my slight senility. March 2nd 1991.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...56C0A9669C8B63

I think Mr. Suk was refering to the tactics used by the North Koreans. If not he got to sniffed a lot of jet fuel I give him that. lol

Back to the Game:

I been playing against the AI Aug 1990-1991 March with Iraqis and in my hands they seems to do pretty well, at least against the AI. I've been fighting against Saudi Arabia, Gulf States and the French. The only thing that is a bit annoying is that Saudi and Gulf States both got Apache Gunships in Aug 1990. This was something both nations acquired 1992 after the main war the pilots using them in Aug 1990 would had been Americans so here I am fighting a mixture of American pilots and Saudi National Guard Units along with Gulf State Tiger II’s, it isn’t a walk in the park and it is desert and there is few places to hide.I manoeuvre a lot.

This seems to keep me alive, leaving some APCs and Tanks from time to time to dig in and cover my advances. I love to play with the Iraqi Republican Guard and I absolutely love that WINSPMBT finally got them with armour, artillery, and ground forces. I will try to evolve with the Iraqi OBB and figure some new stuff out, (there got to be someone that can play these “stinky OBBs”) I wonder is there any way to make AA batteries or AAA vehicles not open up on APCs and tanks in the game?

Even my French built (Rep Guard) AUF-1 GCT Artillery has opened up on advancing units! :o

They blow my cover all the time and that is annoying! All help is appreciated.

I pop a lot of smoke to lower the chances of the TOWs and the Milans and the other fun things that is fired at me. And is using my mortars and artillery whenever I can (Rep Guard Art Obs) to supress their fire. I am blinded most of the time but it makes the AI to run into me or they turn it against me with their modified M60A3TTS Patton tanks = my Assad Babyl nemesis!.

I put most of my ranges to 1½ to assure first hits and switches off the heavy machineguns on my tanks so that those does not blow my cover and that works most of the time. I could wish there was some kind of option to make them still work but only when approached by Helicopters or Air Sorties. The MAN Roland system is a great saviour of my armour and a great addition to the OBB.

Another well done job! :up:

I would love to see more Iraqi maps in the future with more terrain added for what IF scenarios (Left Hook failed) and perhaps a bigger Kafji map for what IF the air superiority failed with Iraq having a functional ground-to-air network. Maybe even a function added to refuse the AI Air Sorties and Attack Helicopters, Transport Helicopters in Generated Campaign Modes?

Maybe it is too much work with the original code but one can only hope.

Ps: If ever possible more Units to play with then the 201 would be awesome as there is so BIG maps now days.

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

Small anti-TI hint: If you drop really LOTS of smoke, you will effectively limit TI units as well.
As for the machineguns, you may turn them on, limit any opfire to just "danger close" and shoot at enemy tanks just in your turn and just using "W" and "1" to fire only the main gun. That way you have a close-in defense against helicopters and reserve your shots. And I believe in the enhanced op-fire filter in the CD variant of the game it is possible to even limit opfire to aerial threats.
If you want to deny the enemy his air support in campaign, jus go to "Preferences" and set Air Sorties to 0 for his side, or you may input any number to force a limit on him.
As for playing against hi-tech foes, especially well trained ones, as I said, you are pretty screwed, esp. in open terrain. Try to get cities or mountains or whatever. Or try to get worse opponent ;)
(and if you want a real challenge, try pulling off the Golan night battles from 1973, with Shermans or Centurions without any night vision equipment against T-54/55's with NVG ;))

Re: Long lost tactical manual
 

That works I tried to play night missions with the Israelis it was a miracle that they survived Yom Kippur War 1973 I give them that. I read a book called Yom Kippur War this summer a short summery - the Arabs didn’t care to use their NVG capacity to its full extent so they lost. Well they almost lost, as they did accomplish their set objectives at least the Egyptians did.

I am one of those impossible people that like impossible odds why I always play with backwater nations. Tactics is the only thing that can win my battles. Technology is not my triumph card. This being said my lill bro is always playing technological advanced nations where their tech do more then half the job for him. I have a average brawler to try my tactics on or I think this game would become very one sided and boring to play.

I can only wish that the RG Tank units until the next update is updated with T-62M’s they are less expensive but their 115mm gun can deliver a punch that still feels on the modern battlefield if they can get close enough to an enemy unit in their region. Terrain is really A-B when playing with the Iraqis I tried to play open desert warfare and as stated you are a sitting duck when meeting another Gulf War foe. I tried the option to turn off Air Sorties then the battle became almost instantly interesting as the AI had to do more then fly over with its Apache Gunship’s and kill all main battle tanks to get Infantry swarming in on my troops.

I tried more terrain added to the battlefield and the tactics was once more a winning factor. I probably never score a decisive victory with the Iraqis Aug 1990 March 1991 but minor is good enough as the troops evolves with generated campaigns they are more likely to score better the more battles I manage to survive. The buying of the CD is perhaps the only way to enjoy the full extent of the game but then I got to find opponents that also have the CD to have any use of it. I am in the look out to get myself G.P.S or Geo-Political Simulator a new game so I will have to put WINSPMBT on halt until at least next month.

If I can find WINSPMBT in Europe I can buy it, if not the tolls and extras added to a merchandize makes even the cheapest item dead wrong expensive due to our European Union laws. Free trade my arse why I hate the EU. I like the new style the game has with more terrain futures as well; there are plenty of interesting environments to play.