ATGM

[Magnus_Incognito]

The game is broken by ATGM. Discuss.

[ChargingSnail]

For game in Cold War settings, when ATGMs were a new way to fight, they are an obligatory thigs to be included.

[eliandi]

This comment is awaiting analysis by our automated content check system. It will be temporarily hidden until we verify that it does not contain harmful content (e.g. links to websites that attempt to steal information).

[DasaKamov]

ATGM vehicles need a price buff / overhaul, but ATGMs themselves are fine.

[Rommelstiltskin]

yeah haha tanks are pretty much a waste of points to buy. like real life i guess. i dont even bother deploying tanks in warno.

[int main() {_salt = 1;};]

They really should be an ever-present threat on the field. As mr Snail above pointed out, in 1989 when the game takes place the future of the main battle tank had been called into question for quite some time already. That being said, I too feel they are too much.

One of the main offenders of vastly overstating the prevalence of big ATGMs are the soviet tanks. They were a pretty rare and expensive piece of kit, not a dime a dozen with full loadouts for every tank on the field.

Most if not all of the soviet tanks should have alternate cards with higher availabiliy, a slight discount and their missile removed. When we had pretty much the same discussion for W:ALB I remember reading in some either declassified report or dusty old tome that roughly 1 in 3 or 4, the platoon command tank, would be carrying missiles and the rest carry regular gun ammo only. Anyone have proper numbers or an actual source for that? The same would go for their IFVs probably.

TL;DR: Most sov tank cards should be cheaper but have no missiles. Especially the outdated models.

[int main() {_salt = 1;};]

Adding to that, how common were really the missile carrying versions of western IFVs?

[Zeno]

In this game ATGM feel cheap and weak. They are too slow and usually get knocked out before their missile even reaches the tank, something needs to change.

[Magnus_Incognito]

Probably not everyone has yet realized that it has become very difficult to advance after the introduction of mass ATGM. As soon as the tanks go on the attack, they get rockets into the sides and burn. The infantry does not see the ATGM and it is hard to provide an acceptable amount of recons ahead of the tanks. The game is moving away from dynamism and moving towards a slow defensive game of attrition. The ATGM should certainly be there to strengthen the infantry divisions, but not in such numbers as now.

[AlBoulcan]

maybe you people need to start using smoke more often

[Zeno]

Originally posted by Magnus_Incognito:

Probably not everyone has yet realized that it has become very difficult to advance after the introduction of mass ATGM. As soon as the tanks go on the attack, they get rockets into the sides and burn. The infantry does not see the ATGM and it is hard to provide an acceptable amount of recons ahead of the tanks. The game is moving away from dynamism and moving towards a slow defensive game of attrition. The ATGM should certainly be there to strengthen the infantry divisions, but not in such numbers as now.

The ATGM is garbage as of now.

In regards to numbers, it's perfectly realistic. Ukraine has taught us how this looks like on the battlefield if it escalates. This would not be any different in a cold war gone hot scenario.

ATGM and air strikes are the biggest threats to MBTs.

[Aegmar]

ATGM's seem fine tbh. They also miss pretty often and are slow (which they are, thats realistic). Also 1980s Guidance systems being pretty crude accuracy especially over longer distances means acc should probably be even lower, but maybe all accuracies in the game should be a little lower i guess.

[Zeno]

Originally posted by Aegmar:

ATGM's seem fine tbh. They also miss pretty often and are slow (which they are, thats realistic). Also 1980s Guidance systems being pretty crude accuracy especially over longer distances means acc should probably be even lower, but maybe all accuracies in the game should be a little lower i guess.

ATGMs do not miss often, nothing realistic about that.

About slow, yes true, but for the sake of the game, would be nice to speed them up a bit OR make ATGM units more stealh after they fired.

[Aegmar]

Originally posted by WarDaddy92:

Originally posted by Aegmar:

ATGM's seem fine tbh. They also miss pretty often and are slow (which they are, thats realistic). Also 1980s Guidance systems being pretty crude accuracy especially over longer distances means acc should probably be even lower, but maybe all accuracies in the game should be a little lower i guess.

ATGMs do not miss often, nothing realistic about that.

About slow, yes true, but for the sake of the game, would be nice to speed them up a bit OR make ATGM units more stealh after they fired.

Modern ATGM's don't miss often anymore, sure. But this game is 1980s with mostly second and first generation ATGM's: Meaning radio or wire guided SACLOS or MCLOS ATGM's. Optronic Systems also been much less refined than today.

The wire can easily get hung up somewhere on an obstacle or jamming and counterjamming in the area may disrupt the radio signal and so on.

Baseline Accuracy for ATGM's should be around 40 % i guess..., or have veterany of units have a much larger effect on accuracy, hitting with those old ATGM's required a lot more training and skill. Its not a Javelin you can give to an ukrainian teacher, explain him 5 minutes how it works and he goes blowing up russian tanks by the dozen...

Regarding stealth of ATGM units: yes, maybe have them pop up for a few seconds after shooting (without identification of the unit) to simulate the visible smoke plume of the launch, then after 5 seconds or so they dissapear again.

Edit: Its also pretty hard to simulate properly i suppose. A wire guide ATGM fired down a clear road with no wreckage or obstacles would have a very high chance to hit a target moving towards it. An ATGM fireing across a field with some hedgerows and trees along the way on a target moving sideways realtive to the ATGM would have a much lower chance to hit. Simulating that properly might be too much.

[Zeno]

Originally posted by Aegmar:

Originally posted by WarDaddy92:

ATGMs do not miss often, nothing realistic about that.

About slow, yes true, but for the sake of the game, would be nice to speed them up a bit OR make ATGM units more stealh after they fired.

Modern ATGM's don't miss often anymore, sure. But this game is 1980s with mostly second and first generation ATGM's: Meaning radio or wire guided SACLOS or MCLOS ATGM's. Optronic Systems also been much less refined than today.

The wire can easily get hung up somewhere on an obstacle or jamming and counterjamming in the area may disrupt the radio signal and so on.

Baseline Accuracy for ATGM's should be around 40 % i guess..., or have veterany of units have a much larger effect on accuracy, hitting with those old ATGM's required a lot more training and skill. Its not a Javelin you can give to an ukrainian teacher, explain him 5 minutes how it works and he goes blowing up russian tanks by the dozen...

Regarding stealth of ATGM units: yes, maybe have them pop up for a few seconds after shooting (without identification of the unit) to simulate the visible smoke plume of the launch, then after 5 seconds or so they dissapear again.

Edit: Its also pretty hard to simulate properly i suppose. A wire guide ATGM fired down a clear road with no wreckage or obstacles would have a very high chance to hit a target moving towards it. An ATGM fireing across a field with some hedgerows and trees along the way on a target moving sideways realtive to the ATGM would have a much lower chance to hit. Simulating that properly might be too much.

I don't care about your numbers, whrever you got this from. I know from real facts.

My father was an Anti-Tank specialist in the East-Germany military, later on also an Anti-Air specialist. He used all kinds of weapons, reaching from RPG over 9K115 Metis up to ZSU and Strela. He was trained on pretty much all Anti-Air weapons and Anti-Tank weapons, even worked in a Shilka for a while.

Believe me or not, but he said their training was very extensive and he only once failed a moving target, all other targets he destroyed. He also received various national award and even won large scale competitions in Anti-Air and Anti-Tank shooting competing against teams from the USSR, CSSR, Poland, Bulgaria and Vietnam. I got his medals here and I met soldiers from the NVA long after the fall of the Berlin wall, who almost all happen to know my father. Which was quite baffling to me.

Now, he is surely an exception, but they all had a very extensive training and " missing " with an ATGM was not only something that was punished due to the costs but also a huge issue in a real war scenario due to usually only having one try.

ATGM should be more accurate in this game and more stealth implemented. By all means, we play Cold War military, all trained soldiers, not some random rebels who just picked up their ATGM a few days ago.

PS: I am also hell of a good marksman, whatever weapon you give me, I hit. They even wanted me as a sniper, I refused.

[Cryptic]

I think atgms should have better stealth. Currently imo they are useless the moment they get spotted. Most of the time they don't even hit their target when they fire and I'm fine with them missing, but it got to the point I got rid of all of them in my battlegroups. Beyond that, they feel fine to me.