SP-ATGM

[serg3d]

I have a feeling that modern APC based SP-ATGM too expensive in the game. FOr example:
BMP-3M, carry 9 men, have ATGM, 30mm autocannon, 100mm HE cannon, AGL and cost 258
tank T-90 cost 427
SP-ATGM Krizanema-S, armed only with ATGM, fire control 0, rangefinder 0, stabiliser 0.
cost 328,

I can buy BMP-3M with ATGM for about 30% less, or T-90 for 30% more. There is no insensetive to use SP-ATGM at all.
I think they should be made cheaper, or have some ability improved - like rangefinder/fire control/ability fire on move.

[PlasmaKrab]

The cost of these things is calculated mainly from their antitank lethality.
Launch the cost calculator tool and you'll see that some 90% of the cost of a SPATGM is made up of the weapon cost (weapon abilities * ammo loadout). For the same quantity and same anti-armor power, a missile weapon will be much more expensive than a gun weapon mainly because of the accuracy.

Compared to a missile-firing IFV or tank, SPATGMs tend to have more missiles, themselves deadlier (compare the data of a Krisantema and a Refleks).

I don't know about SPATGM/ATGM team RF and FC rating, that was a question I was going to ask too, so if Don or Andy or any game vet are around I also would like some info on why all these never seem to get decent electronics!
I think that basically these values are mostly needed for gun shots calculation, but then again I may be dead wrong!

But consider that if you add FC, stab or RF to a SPATGM or anything it will make it costlier, even if it doesn't immprove performance.

[serg3d]

Hmm, another way to improve SP-ATGM without cost increase would be reduce their size. For now they have size 3. Would it be realistic for them have size 2 ?

[Artur]

One of the problems with SPATGMs is that they cannot be deployed in decent hull-down positions IMHO. In Combat Mission series you can do that because the terrain elevations are modelled more accurately. If they would be in hull-down position it would be very hard if not impossible to destroy them unles with other ATGMs, but they would be vulnerable from the side and rear. A size of 2 may be a good compromise.Or at least the fortified hexes would count as hull-down positions.

Another problem is related to the throw-away cheap armor. Since SPATGMs have few ammo players tend to trigger OP fire with cheap vechicles. A very usable feature would be to set the unit class on whicg the unit would open fire at what range. This kind of feature is implemented in the Campaign series games and it would be very much welcome here as well.

Artur.

[PlasmaKrab]

As they say, size doesn't matter.
No, frankly, I just tried a BRDM2-Konkurs with size 1, 2, 3 and the price stayed the same.

On the other hand, the same with FC=25, RF=22 (LRF), stab=3 jumped from 241 to 322. Haven't have time to test ingame yet.

Size 2 will make them harder to see... Are you sure you want that? And remember that the size rating encompasses the launch flash, which explains that missile teams have a higher size rating than snipers.

You talk about size=3, for which unit precisely?
Look out for the relative scaling of vehicles, lest you end up with size=0 vehicles or worse!

[serg3d]

If I change weapon in MOBHACK editor cost doesn't chane, correct ? It seems to me cost is not calculated automatically, it can be edited in MOBHACK. About size and launch flash : Jeep ATGM have size 2, and APC ATGM should have the same flash, so it would be logical for the tho have the same size if they have same/lower profile.

[PlasmaKrab]

serg3d said:
If I change weapon in MOBHACK editor cost doesn't chane, correct ?

AFAIK that's right.

It seems to me cost is not calculated automatically, it can be edited in MOBHACK.

Right, but there is a CostCalculator.exe tool (in the OOB folder) to help standardize it all, which you have to run over your OOB after you have customized it. That is what I used as a comparison.

About size and launch flash : Jeep ATGM have size 2, and APC ATGM should have the same flash, so it would be logical for the tho have the same size if they have same/lower profile.

APCs tend to be bigger, taller, noisier than jeeps, hence a diference in size to begin with. ATGM flash adds to it in any case.

[serg3d]

PlasmaKrab said:
APCs tend to be bigger, taller, noisier than jeeps, hence a diference in size to begin with.

APC ATGM with retractable launchers seems have lower profile than ATGM Jeeps.

[PlasmaKrab]

serg3d said:
APC ATGM with retractable launchers seems have lower profile than ATGM Jeeps.

You can retract all that you want from a M-113 track, it will still be nearly 2m high, while your basic jeep is merely 1m on top of the trunk.
I admit that most ATGM launchers will add nothing to the target size of an AFV, particularly if retractable. Only the flash will account for the superior size, and the gameplay consideration of invisible tank hunters being absolute killers on a mechanized battlefield.

[serg3d]

I'll try to make some tests for size 2 SP-ATGM. Also for SP-ATGM with FAE missiles.