Engel

Hassel is utterly inaccurate, but quite amusing. He's entertaining is much of the same vein as the pulp authors were. Accuracy be damned.

WW1 wasn't always just static warfare, not even on the Western Front (Eastern Front was much more fluid). CM-like small unit actions and oddball events (such as a few Whippet tanks raiding the enemy rear echelons) could be interesting, although they don't really represent the whole picture, and weren't that common in reality.

The incentive exists in operations, but the same rules apply to more involved players as for gamey scenario players. If only there were two different rule sets, one for single-shot scenarios which would prevent gamists from abusing the system by artificial restraints, and another set of rules for more involved game, where the restraints were only imposed by programming.

I don't think anyone is suggesting this. Having a tank crew equipped with SMG's with reduced firepower and effectiveness (like being permanently low on ammo) won't certainly lead to gamey usage, but would allow them to be withdrawn with better chances of survival, and also to be used as inferior fighting units in a desperate pinch; hardly gamey.

If the tank was abandoned under enemy fire, they'd probably take their SMG's if they thought they had the time (ie. were not actually on fire), since they'd probably expect to fight off some enemy infantry, and would probably like to do it with something more useful than just a pistol. Given the way no quarter was generally given in those situations, a SMG would slightly increase your chances of survival after bailing out.

The public television channel YLE2 here in Finland aired two last parts of a German documentary about Stalingrad yeasterday. I must say it was absolutely haunting, seeing the interviews of the veterans who survived it. The tales of those who were airlifted out were haunting enough, never mind the stories of those who survived captivity after the German troops surrendered. Disease, cannibalism, the works... even though the movie Stalingrad is about the best Eastern Front movie ever made, I don't think even it fully captures what the place was like.

http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/quarters/4635/tanks/semoventi/semoventi.htm I guess one reason for not using the tanks were that their overall armor was weak, they were slow and the narrow tracks seriously impaired their mobility; generally it looks like that they weren't competetive with the other tanks on the Eastern Front. The 105 Semoventi was also a late-comer, with only a few produced before Italy signed the armistice. http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/Italy/ItalianTruckMountedArtillery.html This has a couple of pictures of the Autocanone da 90, mounted on a Lancia truck.

The Germans (and the Finns, for that matter; don't know about the Soviets) had somewhat better assault boats that were quite a lot more manouverable than described in that quote.

I think the boat listed simply as "assault boat" in the link I provided above is Sturmboot 39. The page gives it a weight of 475 pounds.

If the info on this page is accurate, they should weigh a lot less, unless the CMBB assault boat is made of steel. They also should have crews, since assault boats were usually operated by engineers. [ July 02, 2003, 01:38 AM: Message edited by: Engel ]

I've found that the scenario can turn either way through sheer luck (given at least rudimentary tactics). I've both lost it heavily and won easily, depending whether I got the ATG before it got me, or not.

A few times, although only against routed or panicked enemy squads; one of my panzer crews who had abandoned their tank killed off the remnants of two routed Soviet SMG squads that they run into in the woods in close combat (about 7 casualties caused) on their way back to safety.

What about the common situation where abandoned tanks were blown up by their own crews to prevent them from falling into enemy hands? Of course totally useless in battles, but operations might be different; using captured tanks to replace your own lost equipment. Not sure if this actually happened, as the use and distribution of captured equipment was probably handled higher up than within the division. BTW, FlyPusher, your sigline reminds me of a picture I saw in a book about the Finnish battalion in 5. SS Wiking Division; taken shortly after they had repelled a Soviet attack which had started while most of them were in the sauna or bathing, it showed a Finnish machine gunner with ammo belts strapped all over himself and the MG slung in front of him, wearing a slight smile and a helmet (might have had underpants and boots too, I didn't study the picture that closely).

Apart from CMBB, I usually play Tribes 2. I also have SPWAW and the Fallout series on my computer, but I don't play them all that much. I also played Operation Flashpoint and RtCW quite a lot at one point; the former really needs a good team to play with and the physics are silly (rubberball UAZ's are cute, though) and the latter is annoyingly unrealistic especially in the MP mode (people should not be able to jump through a flamethrower blast as if nothing had happened, apart from losing a few hit points). [ June 16, 2003, 02:35 AM: Message edited by: Engel ]

Actually, I did read it, but that phrase is a bit incoherent and I took it to mean that the article was speaking about the PzIF and the tank it referred to as separate entities (English not being my native language; f*ing word order thingy). [ June 03, 2003, 02:05 AM: Message edited by: Engel ]