Is "Light Armor" intended to include sheet metal?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Is "Light Armor" intended to include sheet metal?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Tech Support >> Is "Light Armor" intended to include sheet metal?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Is "Light Armor" intended to include sheet me... - 1/5/2022 1:11:08 PM

boogabooga

Posts: 457
Joined: 7/18/2018
Status: offline

I recently had to modify my Rolling Thunder scenarios because CBU loadouts were ineffective in the DEAD role. It seems that many ground unit mounts in either DB are given "Light Armor", and this resists all CBUs that don't have specific A-P capability. In reality, units like TELs, SAM launchers, mobile radars, AAA guns, etc. have many exposed components that would be highly vulnerable to even baseball-sized submunitions, even if the chassis itself has some armor, but some cases I suspect that the unit would have no more "armor" than sheet metal. One example is generic trucks, which have "Light Armor" in the CWDB 492 but "None" in DB3000. If you wish, I could demonstrate that trucks are thus vulnerable to CBU-52s (specifically) in DB3000 but invulnerable to the same weapon in the CWDB. (I just choose CBU-52 because I know it to be available in both DBs, similar types give same result...)

Post #: 1

RE: Is "Light Armor" intended to include shee... - 1/8/2022 8:04:43 AM

Dimitris

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

That's an interesting heads-up, thank you.

When we introduced several new "lighter than Light" armor levels as part of the aircraft damage model, we did perform an overhaul of the existing DB values for vehicles, but it is possible we've missed some entries. I'll summon the DB gods and point them to this and similar examples.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to boogabooga)

Post #: 2

RE: Is "Light Armor" intended to include shee... - 1/8/2022 2:11:43 PM

BDukes

Posts: 1695
Joined: 12/27/2017
Status: offline

Need to test their work more. There is a pattern developing.

This is an example, the Russian SSGN with the booster phase warhead as the missile as well as the Russian optical bombs not working.

Mike

< Message edited by BDukes -- 1/8/2022 2:17:33 PM >

_____________________________

Don't call it a comeback...

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 3

RE: Is "Light Armor" intended to include shee... - 1/8/2022 3:38:33 PM

stww2

Posts: 219
Joined: 5/23/2017
Status: offline

Is this a recent development? Because my general recollection is that I've used cluster bombs on SAM batteries in the past and they seemed to be quite effective. But it has been a while so perhaps I'm misremembering something.

< Message edited by stww2 -- 1/8/2022 3:40:50 PM >

(in reply to BDukes)

Post #: 4

RE: Is "Light Armor" intended to include shee... - 1/8/2022 9:56:22 PM

boogabooga

Posts: 457
Joined: 7/18/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: stww2

Is this a recent development? Because my general recollection is that I've used cluster bombs on SAM batteries in the past and they seemed to be quite effective. But it has been a while so perhaps I'm misremembering something.

It don't think so. Some or many CBUs are effective, especially those with at least some armor-piercing ability. On the US side, this includes Mk20 Rockeyes, CBU-87 CEMs, CBU-97 SFWs, the wind corrected updates of those, GATORs (I think), APAMs (I think), etc. You might not have run into an ineffective one.

It's the simpler and older ones that are not, like CBU-24, 52, 58, 71, etc.

(in reply to stww2)

Post #: 5

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Tech Support >> Is "Light Armor" intended to include sheet metal?

Page: [1]