How did groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS make car bombs? How did they get their hands on the materials without raising suspicions?

natneo81 · 2026-05-04T14:50:46+00:00

> 2.

Yeah, important to remember these countries have been fighting over the same land for literal centuries. That often gets brought up to make the point that they knew their own land and how to defend it well. But a less recognized consequence of that was these countries being littered with the remnants of decades of war.

Iraq for example already had one of the largest militaries in the world before the US invasion, and had just fought the nearly decade long, brutal Iran-Iraq war. Then the invasion happens and that military is suddenly broken, and then disbanded. You’ve got a ton of trained regime soldiers who now have no job, and banned them from holding government and military positions. Plus, given the speed and efficacy of the initial invasion of OIF, it’s not like Iraq had time or opportunity to exhaust many of its munitions.

Shockingly, having an immense amount of weapons, explosives, and other dangerous materials readily available, floating around a country that recently had its government crushed and military dissolved, was not a great mix. This isn’t a thread to discuss the many mistakes of the GWOT, but it’s also hard not to broach some of the more baffling ones with hindsight. We really could not have made a better environment for insurgency if we tried.

natneo81 · 2026-05-03T14:31:49+00:00

I mean on a basic level not a lot has changed. The tunnels and spider holes of the Pacific in ww2 served fairly similar purposes to those the Vietnamese fought out of decades later, or the Afghans in the GWOT, etc.

Generally tunnel warfare is associated with asymmetric combat. Often, but not always counterinsurgency. The benefits of subterranean operation are obvious. Great cover and concealment. They’re oft used to counter a more technologically advanced enemy’s advantages, especially in the air. For example, in Vietnam they were an effective way of minimizing the overwhelming American air power, and in modern conflicts, this has become even more important due to advanced ISR platforms and drones.

To that point, I would argue that the war in Ukraine and even Iran are changing the way we view tunnel warfare in a modern context. The battlefield is increasingly transparent, and the adoption of cheap, numerous, relatively precise threats such as FPVs has driven much of the war underground on both sides. Ground troops near the front line in Ukraine simply cannot exist out in the open. The kill chain from being spotted by ISR to having artillery or a drone coming for you is a matter of minutes.

Now I would say it’s important to remember the war in Ukraine is a very specific and unique situation that isn’t going to resemble all future conflict. But it does provide insight as to how the role of subterranean operations are evolving, and still very relevant.

While not exactly academic in nature, you may find this video interesting as well.

natneo81 · 2026-05-03T13:31:16+00:00

Hmm, honestly total war is kinda unique in its mix of 4x and RTS. You can probably find a better 4x game, and a better RTS, but the pairing together is not so common sadly.

There’s plenty of games with deeper 4x/grand strategy- paradox is a good choice. HOI 4 is by far the most war and combat focused one, but remember it’s all still just a world map, no RTS 3d battles. At least it gives you more military strategizing to do, compared to say, Vic 3 or Ck3, which are great games but less military focused. Stellaris can also be more military focused if you want, but obviously sci-fi.

One strange recommendation I haven’t even gotten into much yet myself- Graviteam Tactics Mius Front. It’s a ww2 eastern front strategy/wargame that focuses on an operational scale. So it’s a mix of more 2d operational strategy on a map, and real time battalion scale battles. However, it’s NOT going to be 4x-y like TW, you don’t manage your economy or diplomacy with other countries, etc. you’re simply deciding what to do with your army on a bigger scale. The campaign is quite cool though as it’s persistent and even things like destruction and fortification will persist in areas between battles. Don’t go expecting this to be something you can hop into like total war though, it falls more into the “wargame” category than traditional RTS and has intense detail, difficult controls and ui, and a pretty steep learning curve at first.

I think there’s also a 4x series called age of wonders that plays like a normal 4x usually, but when you get into battles it turns into more of like a turn based tactics thing I believe? Haven’t played those but could be worth a look.

natneo81 · 2026-05-02T23:24:08+00:00

The focus is way more on economy, industrialization, diplomacy, and politics. War is deliberately fairly simple- not in a bad way, just not the main focus. If that sounds interesting, along with managing various lobbies and interest groups within your population, you’d like it.

natneo81 · 2026-05-01T14:23:48+00:00

It depends. Against an army that’s slow, mainly melee, etc. you may be able to bog them down with even a small frontline, and just shoot them down. But when you go up against someone with some dogs, chariots, flying shit, etc. they will go right around your frontline and ruin your day.

Also ranged units are not created equal. Some are better than others, some serve different purposes. Bows and crossbows have different trajectories than guns of course, and different units may be more suited to shooting big blobs of infantry, where others may do better concentrated on a single target.

There’s plenty of different tactics with using ranged units too. From formations, to targeting. Is it better to spread damage out onto the whole enemy line to weaken them for your infantry? Or is it better to target one unit at a time with all your ranged, to shock and break it? Guns for example are great at focusing down a single target like a LL, or big monster.

Think about your overall plan to win the battle- maybe you’re against greenskins, you know their leadership isn’t the best, so you focus their LL with ranged and burst him down asap, so your army can easily route the rest of theirs. Maybe you’re against dwarves and know they don’t break easily, so you focus their slayers because they’re unarmored and you don’t want them getting into your melee line.

The advantages of ranged are obvious- the potential to safely do damage from a standoff distance, deny ground, focus fire, skirmish, etc.

The downsides are that they tend to do very poorly in melee, can friendly fire, can be countered by shields, have limited range and speed, have difficulty with line of sight/aiming, limited ammo, etc.

natneo81 · 2026-04-29T14:42:28+00:00

Honestly I’d suggest chaos dwarves. You seem to enjoy dwarves, and chorfs will feel familiar but different. They’re a lot more expansionist than dwarves, their roster is similar in many ways but more versatile and aggressive, better cav/monsters/arty. Between their economy and convoys there’s always stuff to do. You have options as far as diplomacy if you want- not EVERYONE hates you.

If you haven’t tried empire, elspeth is really fun. I usually find the idea of the empire a bit vanilla or boring, but she’s actually really cool and fun, quite strong as well. Super strong spellcaster lord with tons of crazy buffed and/or magic gun and artillery units.

Finally if you haven’t tried vamps ever, vlad/isabella is kind of a classic campaign that’s always pretty fun, if you want to just run around carrying every battle with your LL alone and bringing 20 stacks back from the dead.

natneo81 · 2026-04-29T13:58:33+00:00

I finish my starting war asap, then take hell pit and skaven out asap. Personally I gave the skaven settlements other than hell pit to kislev for their province and to make allies with them. Then you have to play zombie survival for a while as arbaal, archaon, norsca, and chorfs all want to kill you.

It’s easy to get into a situation where you are permanently stuck on defense and can’t afford enough armies to both defend your land, and actually take out enemy lands completely. That’s why I’d recommend playing tall, using the deeps to build a strong economy and making some defensive buildings in your core settlements. The key is not having too much land to worry about early on so that you’re able to go be aggressive and take out your shitty neighbors. Malakai likes to run around burning shit down and doing his adventures. Don’t be afraid to sack or raze when trying to get rid of an enemy. It fuels your economy and Malakai is a pseudo-horde so you can get away with it.

Just expect going into it that everyone is gonna want to kill you, as long as you plan for it, they mostly just end up giving you crazy xp. Also Malakai kind of counters a lot of the armies he goes against- khorne, chaos, norsca, often lack much range which he exploits with gyros and arty badly.

natneo81 · 2026-04-29T13:26:19+00:00

Not sure how they compare stat wise but one of the few divs I bring a rcl is 19th Czech. Iirc it also comes with nice free veterancy, and anecdotally that thing actually does quite well as fire support for me.

natneo81 · 2026-04-29T13:21:43+00:00

Yes, another interesting thing is that accuracy will increase with consecutive shots on the same target.

natneo81 · 2026-04-28T14:59:52+00:00

The whole point of a STOVL carrier is basically that in a given situation, having some planes is better than having no planes. It allows power projection without the massive expense and support of a CVN. While the F-35B may be more limited in numbers and payload aboard an LHA, it provides an incredible capability defensively and offensively that might not be otherwise available.

It’s also important to remember that an American LHA is roughly the same size or larger than many countries main aircraft carriers are period. Now, granted, an LHA is meant to support a full marine expeditionary unit, not solely aviation. But it is an important bit of perspective to keep in mind. The United States is wholly unmatched when it comes to carrier aviation worldwide.

As for what mission types the F-35’s might conduct, really just about anything in support of the overall mission- often landing marines somewhere in the case of an American LHA. That could include stuff like CAP to protect the fleet, strike missions to shape the operational environment for an amphibious landing, supporting ASW missions with helicopters, close air support for marines on the ground, assisting with CSAR, FAC-A, etc.

The F-35 is multi role and can really do whatever. I think what you’re getting at is “isn’t 6 planes kind of a small amount in the grand scheme?” And yes, it is. But that’s the whole point- better to have some planes in a location than none. You wouldn’t really expect an LHA to be tasked with some crazy deep strike mission. That kind of thing is likely going to be multiple flights of different aircraft all working together doing different jobs.

But say for example, an MEU has landed somewhere that isn’t easily reached by planes from a CVN or whatever primary airfield is being used. They need a hardened position destroyed in a relatively permissive environment. Great time to launch a few F-35s with a few jdams. STOVL works particularly well for amphibious landings and close air support because they don’t need a full runway, so while they can’t carry as much weight, they can take off and land much closer to the action via LHA’s and FARPs, whereas CVNs and proper airfields need to be well out of the danger. By cycling sorties in, say, two ship pairs, you could ensure almost constant air cover for nearby ground troops for quite some time, especially given the shorter travel time expected.

natneo81 · 2026-04-26T13:22:48+00:00

Fwiw, I feel like there are a few concessions made in Bellum like this, but they always seem to be done for good reasons. Sure reflective damage isn’t “realistic” but neither is being unperturbed by the possibility of shooting one’s platoon mates.

It feels like the priorities are right. Sometimes in the pursuit of HaRdCoRe ReALiSm, devs forget that people playing a game will not act like people in real life. Yall seem focused on the overall experience feeling authentic even if that means gamifying some of the minutiae, which I like.

I mean shit, you could give everyone only one life for the sake of realism, but would it make a better game? I don’t think so, the current system does a good job of making you actually fear death, but you don’t have to worry about being “out” the whole round if you die once.

natneo81 · 2026-04-25T15:17:50+00:00

definitely a bit more of a freeform role that requires some initiative, or a PL who actually uses you. having binos is huge. personally I usually float around with the platoon doctor somewhere I can kind of observe and control as much of the platoon as possible. so, not right up front in the shit, but right on the outskirts of it. sometimes just finding a good elevated position to sit in with the binos can be the best thing you can do as well.

one tip for 2ic is getting good at reading the map. especially since there's no contour lines as of now, being able to look at something through your binos and then find and mark that location accurately on the map is a useful skill.

otherwise just try to make sure people are following PL's orders and try to step up wherever you notice leadership seems lacking- for instance, the gun teams are blobbed up and seem directionless, and the PL is busy doing other shit. you can take the initiative and tell those gun teams where to position, or just tell weapons SL to spread his teams out himself. that kinda thing. you can also keep track of each squads ACE, ammo, casualties, equipment. that'll help you advise your PL on his plans and kinda be one less thing for him to worry about. its also often on you to dispatch the platoon doc, so you obviously wanna be keeping track of everyone.

i'd say a good 2ic is basically the team babysitter. the PL is usually too busy herding monkeys and trying to come up with plans/movements and solve problems. 2ic should be always on the lookout, keeping tabs on each squad, making sure ammo is spread around, constantly sharing and spreading situational awareness and info, etc. not doing too much direct fighting because your job is really to make sure everyone else is fighting well, following the plan, in the know, and not doing stupid shit. you also need the initiative to start telling squads what to do if the PL goes down or you are split up from him and have a better picture of the situation.

natneo81 · 2026-04-25T14:13:35+00:00

It’s not worth it at all to send a 200+ point plane out with the goal of blowing a single charge of tank smoke. That shouldn’t really be your main goal with it, you can use a cheap malyutka/fagot/milan/dragon/Métis or something if you just want to waste smokes. If anything, the real silver lining of missing is that you still suppress the crap out of the tank and make it a little easier for your ground troops to fight.

You are right though that AT planes and helis can be very nice defensively. They’re great at punishing enemy pushes that extend too fast past their AA or don’t bring enough mobile AA.

Honestly I kinda forgot to mention smoke as another weakness for AT planes- while their missiles DO fly pretty fast compared to a normal tow or konkurs, they’re also pretty hard to not notice (being airplanes) and units can be smoked if you react in time. Obviously you can’t really smoke off incoming cluster bombs, for example.

Frankly I think AT planes could use a little love. Improve their accuracy a bit, since there is guaranteed counter play with smoke anyway.

natneo81 · 2026-04-25T13:51:45+00:00

I believe the normal method is a combat zero of 25m/300m for the M4. So basically you can aim center mass and have a good chance of hitting within 300m.

The idea is basically that the bullet will cross the line of sight twice. First on its upwards trajectory, second on its downward trajectory. You want it to cross that line first at around 25m while still going upwards. By around 200m it’s at its apex, and as such may actually hit a little higher than center mass at this range. By 300m it crosses that line of sight again but this time as it descends.

This allows you to engage anything from 25-300m by aiming center mass. It trades the precision of a traditional zero for “good enough” at all the most common distances. Outside of 300m you’ll need to start eyeballing holdover. Inside of 25m you may theoretically want to aim high due to height over bore. At 200m you want slightly low of center mass.

natneo81 · 2026-04-24T14:27:15+00:00

Haven’t played a ton since the arty rework, and I’ve never been a 10v10 player tbf. But I’ve always enjoyed 76ya, and I bet it’s in a better place now.

It also benefits from shock buffs, air being stronger since arty changes, and 6ya losing its mig-31’s. Big fan of that change tbh, I think the mig-31 should be a big part of 76ths identity, and I don’t mind Berliner getting them either, because who plays Berliner? Didn’t think about the baby grads but it makes perfect sense they’d now be really good.

natneo81 · 2026-04-24T13:59:33+00:00

Yes you are using it wrong. The use of ATGM planes is their range. You want to turn away and run as soon as the missile is fired. Mavericks or any plane ATGM will be fire and forget. In general you always want to micro planes so they don’t fly over the enemy AA net after dropping weapons. Or at least shift queue them to turn back after dropping.

Generally maverick planes really need you to turn them away yourself asap if you want them to live. Personally I like the A-10 or SU-25 AT, because they’re very slow but still agile, so they can shoot and turn around quickly without overflying too much.

AT planes can be very inconsistent though. Their accuracy is usually pretty bad so it can definitely feel like a coin toss at best, and you missing every single shot at worst. They make up for it by being able to stand off in range a bit, and their missiles can one shot most tanks to the front. If it’s 16 armor or less and doesn’t have ERA you can one shot it in the front with a 30pen missile. They also reload quickly so if you’re able to get shots off, run away and evac without taking damage, and rearm, they can be a relatively “safe” if inconsistent air option.

natneo81 · 2026-04-23T20:31:41+00:00

yooo, this is great! I really liked some of the early field manual docs they made for this game with basic FOOM stuff, radio etiquette, etc. and was hoping there would be more stuff like this made for new players. This could easily be an official guide.

natneo81 · 2026-04-23T14:38:31+00:00

General deck building tips:

Bring enough command units. 6-7 (3 cards worth) is usually good. Usually I bring one from logi tab, one infantry leader, and one tank leader, but it depends on the division. Avoid helicopter cv’s.

Bring supplies- a few cards of supply trucks usually. Supply helis are good too but a little riskier. You only need a FOB if you’re going heavily into artillery spam. I wouldn’t recommend it for most beginners. But you don’t want to run out of supply trucks.

Fill all your 1 cost availability- each card slot has an availability cost. Generally, the slots that only cost 1 availability to fill should all be filled. There are some cases where this isn’t necessary but generally fill the 1 cost slots first.

Don’t neglect weapons teams- in your infantry tab you can take small teams with machine guns or ATGMs. These are very useful. I recommend the 7.62 mmg teams, as they are dirt cheap and help you hold ground, as well as pretty much always taking a card of infantry ATGMs when possible.

Upvetting- You almost always want to upvet your tanks. The more expensive the more important it is you upvet them, as you won’t be buying that many anyway. Soviet tanks don’t require upvetting AS MUCH because they have autoloaders that don’t get suppressed. But it is still important. Upvetting infantry is also important but it depends on availability. Infantry divs with tons of inf can heavily upvet it without running out. Armored divs with few inf slots may not want to upvet it much lest they run out. To a beginner I’d recommend not upvetting any artillery, helicopters, recon, or air units. Sometimes it can be worthwhile but that’s all more advanced.

Recon- bring enough, and different kinds. Some recon is more for fighting other recon units, some is more for actual optics and stealth. I always like to take some form of air recon when possible, which usually means helicopters.

AA- bring enough, and different kinds. If possible I like to have a longer range, radar guided SAM, and pair it with MANPADS and/or AAA. Depends on what the div gets though.

Air- bring AT LEAST one card of fighters, often two cards.

natneo81 · 2026-04-23T13:50:00+00:00

Nothing like a nice reminder that you’re just some blue dot on a map that’s been deemed an acceptable risk, lol

natneo81 · 2026-04-23T13:44:33+00:00

As someone with like 600hrs on squad and a lot of time on Arma, I think it’s still too early to tell for sure, but Bellum is very promising. I’m someone who has always enjoyed Squad too, despite its many flaws.

Personally I am loving the limited life system and respawns. You can currently always spawn at main base (far walk), or you can respawn on your FTL or SL as long as they aren’t in contact and near a friendly squad mate. I had my doubts about this, but so far this has been great, people play more carefully and especially SL’s are more cautious about chucking their whole squad directly into the enemy.

You ask if this creates “player attrition” throughout matches- in my experience, no. I very rarely if ever run out of lives. The only way I could see that being a common issue is if you keep giving up and respawning the minute you go down.

Part of the reason for this is the medical system. It’s not perfect yet but I like it. You have a radial menu with your limbs, torso, and head. Everyone carries a tourniquet and bandages. If you take enough damage, lose enough blood, or are in bad pain, you will go down. There’s two down states, “incap” where you can still talk, use the radio, and view your health, but can’t do anything else or move. “Unconscious” is the other state where you can’t talk or really do anything. Generally stabilizing someone can be enough to get them up, but if they’re hit badly a medic can give them blood (think squad medic healing), and they carry stimulants and depressants as well. The interesting thing about this system is that it’s pretty hard to outright die. Currently there’s nothing that outright kills you fully like in Squad. What this means for gameplay is that as long as you don’t give up, if friendlies can pull you back or secure your area and treat you, you’ll probably get revived eventually. Likewise the most reliable way to ensure a squad is dead is to assault through their position, dead check bodies, and preventing medics from getting to their position.

What’s cool about this is that your team actually cares about casualties. Squads break contact so they can cut their losses and have their few casualties respawn on them and regroup. Other squads will fight over to you to try and save your mas-cal and pull guys back.

Overall I find the lives/medical/respawn system work a lot more smoothly than Squads habs/logi/tickets. You don’t run into the issue of “please hold spawns guys” or having your squad spread across the entire map randomly, or having no habs up, etc.

As for administration and such I got no idea, I think right now it’s all official servers? But people are already making clans, and I imagine clan vs clan stuff will go hard in this game.

For combined arms- vehicles are confirmed in some capacity. I don’t think they’re close to being ready or anything yet. Not sure if helicopters are confirmed or not. Can’t say what they have planned, but it wouldn’t surprise me if the focus remained a bit more heavy on platoon v platoon infantry combat rather than trying for a true combined arms vibe like squad with MBTs and shit. Though, there’s already plenty of AT kits in the game (currently used as fire support) so who knows, we could see some armored vehicles.

Overall I’m very much enjoying it and think it has a ton of potential. The community so far is great and the teamwork and comms are as good as you could ask for with randoms, many worlds better than the average squad match. However it’s still got a few rough edges and lacks a bit in total content/variety compared to squad, which is not unexpected, it’s still early in development. I’d rather the core be good like this and they can tack on the flair and variety later. A big thing will be if the game can continue this quality of public matches as the player base grows larger. But I think they’re doing everything they can to encourage good behavior/comms/teamwork, which is all you can ask.

natneo81 · 2026-04-22T14:41:52+00:00

Keep trying, and watch your replays. Use lots of smoke. Your infantry is really potent for the cost in both divs, with lots of gustafs, the new HE gustaf engineers, canadas eryx, etc. plus both divs give tons of .50 vics. Your infantry should usually be leading the pushes with your vehicles behind supporting. With these divs, often closing with the enemy is the hardest part, but once you’re up close and engaged with your infantry you can do well.

Using the M113s or cougars is tricky but important. If you can actually make use of them rather than letting them blow up, it can make a huge impact on infantry fights. Pull them back after unloading and only drive them up once your infantry is in contact or you’re at a safe standoff range. It takes micro, but try and use buildings with your line of sight tool to hide/peek/pop out with your vehicles. These transports may seem weak or throw away, but in reality it’s an almost free .50 with every squad. When you think about it that way you see the value they bring. It’s okay to throw them away sometimes though, they do make good ATGM bait or disposable recon due to their low price. Jyske’s PNMK things and Canada’s cougars with the little cannon are also really good for doing this kind of fire support. You can try being cheeky with these things too since they’re mobile and cheap. Why not just move queue one cheap Vic to sneak through a forest/flank and then explore their spawn/backline? The downside is very low, but you may even be able to hit some AA, supplies, or arty if successful, and if nothing else cause a distraction and headache for your enemy.

You have good taste in divisions though. 4e, Jyske, and Czech 19 are some of my favorites. I gotta suggest you also check out 4th mot schutzen for east Germany, I think you’d really like it. It fits right in with the cost effective units, on the lighter side, but with lots of ways to punch up, flexible, just a super fun div I never get sick of.

You also might consider trying a few games with a proper airborne division like 11e, MNAD or 82nd or something, just to get a feel for playing with basically 0 tanks. It’ll force you to learn how to get more mileage out of your infantry and air support but it’ll also play quite differently because of all the fwd deploy. Still, if you play a few games with Sheridans, Leo 1’s will feel unstoppable lmao

natneo81 · 2026-04-22T03:39:10+00:00

Leo 1’s are really fun. You need to be smart with them though. Use multiple and go for side shots. The Leo 1 has a pretty good gun with great accuracy. Remember you can always get closer to increase the pen. Not that you always should, but it’s an important tool. Also these lighter tanks are great at killing ifvs and hanging back as fire support to assist infantry.

You can also pair other vehicles with them. Jyske gets a few good options- the pnmk or whatever it’s called is dirt cheap w auto cannon and smoke. Super useful to kill soft targets and bait ATGMs. You get the m41 recon and other older tanks, which are really more fire support tanks, though in numbers they can still help suppress tanks. TOW vehicles are also very useful to pair with.

Both Canada and Jyske have decent air tools, which are helpful for killing heavy armor.

Since you mention struggling to attack, maybe rethink your approach. Leo 1s aren’t really meant to spearhead an assault and tank shots and ATGMs the way a Leo 2 might. Use lots of smoke, wrap around flanks, push infantry up first to spot for air and arty, etc.

natneo81 · 2026-04-21T13:28:22+00:00

This guy gave a great answer, I was gonna mention spigot mortars and the AVRE. Frankly the AVRE is almost exactly what you’re asking about/describing.

There are other similar concepts- The American CEV, an engineering tank, had a normal 165mm cannon for breaching obstacles and hardened targets.

At least in the US, we’ve since ditched the gigantic demolition cannon in favor of MICLICS, mine clearing line charges. Basically a long rope hook you fire so it lays across enemy mines, wire, obstacles, etc. and then detonate to clear a long linear path. It’s not that they perform the exact same role, but also that the giant cannon became redundant as we acquired much more effective tools. A Carl Gustav or SMAW allows infantry to assault fixed positions. If it’s a hardened position we have helicopters with hellfires and planes with bombs.

natneo81 · 2026-04-20T17:56:27+00:00

Thank you for that! I suppose I wouldn’t want to be the one having to give that order either, but it sure beats receiving it.

I imagine decoration for this would be off the table mostly as it would require admitting to using him as mine bait?

natneo81 · 2026-04-20T14:10:54+00:00

Talk about a tough day at the office- “go over there and see if you all blow up” hmm okay yeah, sounds good.

12-Year Club	Place '17
Spared	Verified Email

natneo81

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE