Thermal Imaging and Smoke Dischargers

[lansoar]

Originally Posted by Aeraaa

Basically, you have to move in bounds from covered position to another...and never hit the end turn button unless you're sure your tanks are not exposed to enemy LOS. Try to force them to pop smoke and be patient until their smoke ammo runs out, or you have a cldar shot
at them (preferably flank/rear one). Works very well vs. the AI but I also won a couple of PBEMs that way (me as WarPact vs. 80s high tier NATO)

True. a big improvement in the current MBT are greater scenario lengths for some scenarios. SP1 and 2 always kind of made me laugh when reading the manual where it would be stated. "the game rewards combined arms tactics" ; coupled with movements as you've described. Only problem is that with a scenario length of 15 to 30 turns on average, one often didn't have time to advance in a more textbook fashion and instead had to rush the objective hexes.

[lansoar]

Looking at it from another angle, can any Tank vets comment on TTS in different situations? The game basically portrays two. You can see thru smoke, you can't see thru smoke. Were there degrees of "seeing" (and thus targeting) for TTS in different settings and/or ranges?

Examples would be, thick smoke popped in near proximity to the AFV vs. distant. Is there any cumulative effect when distance and # of "hexes" filled with smoke between the targeted and the unit are considered?

Not referencing special smoke that might be designed to degrade vision devices. Just generic smoke.

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by Aeraaa

True. a big improvement in the current MBT are greater scenario lengths for some scenarios. SP1 and 2 always kind of made me laugh when reading the manual where it would be stated. "the game rewards combined arms tactics" ; coupled with movements as you've described. Only problem is that with a scenario length of 15 to 30 turns on average, one often didn't have time to advance in a more textbook fashion and instead had to rush the objective hexes.

This is one reason I've made it a point to make all the scenarios I create long. Give the player time to use tactics not zerg.

[zovs66]

Originally Posted by lansoar

Looking at it from another angle, can any Tank vets comment on TTS in different situations? The game basically portrays two. You can see thru smoke, you can't see thru smoke. Were there degrees of "seeing" (and thus targeting) for TTS in different settings and/or ranges?

Examples would be, thick smoke popped in near proximity to the AFV vs. distant. Is there any cumulative effect when distance and # of "hexes" filled with smoke between the targeted and the unit are considered?

Not referencing special smoke that might be designed to degrade vision devices. Just generic smoke.

I think your misunderstanding a few things, TI or thermal imaging allows you (a gunner or TC in this case) to see through smoke, even chemical smoke, since it registers heat images in the sight. So we'd look for heat signatures from engines or bodies, they light up in the sight and you fire at that, smoke does not block it if using thermals.

[Mobhack]

And fire hexes can be seen through as well, but unlike SP2/3 thermal vision is not unlimited through fire hexes, there is now a cumulative degradation and so enough fire hexes will eventually stop the LOS of thermals.

And larger fires will contribute more blocking factor, any smaller fire hexes less. So having fires dotted about the place, whether burning trees, wrecks and buildings or say a Buratino salvo of flame rockets going off, will tend to produce some thermal "shadow zones" when trying to spot through it with TI.

I cannot recall when we added that, It may have been back in the MS-DOS days, but its there now.

[Suhiir]

Also since the use of thermal sights has become fairly common many nations have developed (or are developing) new ammo for smoke discharges, similar to the way flares are used by aircraft to defeat heat-seaking missiles.

"High Performance Smoke/Obscurant Munitions

Red Phosphorus

Two types of expendable smoke/obscurant munitions that are widely available are those based on red phosphorus (RP), and brass flake. The use of zinc/hexachloroethane (HC, or HCE) based smokes was discontinued in Australia more than five years ago as a result of their potential to cause acute and chronic injury to Army personnel. White phosphorus (WP) munitions can also be used to produce copious smoke, however unlike RP, WP is highly toxic as a solid, and it spontaneously combusts in air. RP smoke compositions are by comparison pyrotechnics as the RP is mixed with oxidants and binders and therefore the burning rate can be varied."

[lansoar]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

And fire hexes can be seen through as well, but unlike SP2/3 thermal vision is not unlimited through fire hexes, there is now a cumulative degradation and so enough fire hexes will eventually stop the LOS of thermals.

And larger fires will contribute more blocking factor, any smaller fire hexes less. So having fires dotted about the place, whether burning trees, wrecks and buildings or say a Buratino salvo of flame rockets going off, will tend to produce some thermal "shadow zones" when trying to spot through it with TI.

I cannot recall when we added that, It may have been back in the MS-DOS days, but its there now.

Thanks. This is interesting.

[lansoar]

absolutely.

but whether Offensive or Defensive. Having units that can sit on ridges and X-ray smoke is a game changer of the highest order.

It makes for interesting wargaming. One of the aspects of SPMBT is the broad range of technology coverage due to the length of time. I recently played back to back two scenarios.....one in which the primary NATO defender was the US with 105mm equipped M1s vs. Soviet "A-Team" T-80 bn's. Second was a slightly later similar scenario only with 120mm M1's vs the same T-80s.

yikes.

On the issue of smoke.....regardless of how the Soviet side used it. TTS made it a non factor. I get that depending on era, INF and RECON units might not have the same benefit......but thats why I just wanted to start a discussion on the tech and what it can really do, outside the game.

a fascinating subject on a literal game changing tech.