nevermind

You really should look into getting your email problems fixed.I have many PBEM opponents and you are the only one who never gets any of the turns I send.I have sent you another email.It will be the last one.

Ah,ok.Thanks guys. JasonC, Sorry,I was trying to get out PBEM turns and didnt see you had responded.I thought only Bone_Vulture had responded.Otherwise I wouldnt have posted exactly what i did.Also,I am in a situation where,atleast in this battle of the operation,the likelyhood of there being any flanking manuevers,is slim.Unless my opponent wants to come out of his entrenchments?In which case I would be...

Uhh... I wager you confused the terminology: Tiger is an exception, since it's turret is theoretically more durable than the hull. Also, Tiger is one of the few tanks that has a nearly impregnable turret armor in it's prime time (another example would be the KV-1 models before '42). So, unlike with most of the other fine German tanks, the Tiger should be kept hull down (behind the crest of a hill so only its turret is visible). Another reason to avoid advancing towards the enemy is Tiger's poor mobility in comparison to Russian T-34 models: with high ground pressure, below average speed and a slow turret, you'll risk exposing your precious tank to flank shots. Shot to the side at extremely close ranges, even the vanilla Russian AP round may breach the Tiger armor - or cause spalling. </font>

Ok, since Jason decided to follow the Battlefront forum guideline of "sickeningly lousy humor", I'll give you the straight answer: If the Tiger turret front suffers a hit, the penetration is calculated with a random armor thickness from 102mm to somewhere around 130, to simulate the reinforced turret mantle (which didn't cover the entire face of the turret). </font>

:confused:

The Pz VIEs' turret front is 102mm/8,but it is reinforced.So what exactly does this mean?Does it add like 10 degrees of angle to the turret front?Making it 102mm/18(?),or something along those lines.Or is the effect of the reinforced turret front more subdued? Also,in regard to some recent disscussion on the forum about Pz IV tactics and usage,I noticed that the Pz VIEs' lower front hull was 102mm/24.Since it was agreed by most(?)that it would be beneficial for the Pz IV to stay hull up,to lessen the exposure of the weaker turret front,would'nt it also help the Pz VIEs' weaker front upper hull(102mm/10)? Thanks in advance. [ February 20, 2004, 08:39 PM: Message edited by: nevermind ]

25 what? </font>

No, I am talking about an enemy tank that your tanks cannot see, but they can see a point few meters from it. So you fire at that point with HE ammo, hoping that the blasts will damage the gun or tracks. Not very effective though, out of 20-25 tanks I destroyed only 2 have been damaged that way. </font>

Glider, You're talking about selecting your tank and then hitting shift-V and then area targeting under the enemy tank,with your tanks main gun,right?

Of course it is ! Whose CM player can live without it ?? Thanks guys for your posts about this WIP, but I keep thinking that this camo scheme is not soOOOo good ! Why not releasing a complete plain yellow serie ? I'm too lazy sometimes LOL ! </font>

I had no idea punishing you,by punishing your armies,would have such an effect! Oh wait,yes I did > ......Muahahahahahahahaahahah :mad: :mad: And im talkin 'bout BBQ'd GRGGAHAHHRGGHAHAHHRGHAHAGRG :mad:

Hey Boo , If they dont have enough to eat,perhaps Pseudo-Pod will be nice enough to send over some.He has plenty from the bleeding wound of an operation we are playing,and most of them are already BBQ'd :mad: :mad: L-axe-ative regardless if he likes it or not,has just become my Arch Maggot :mad: I have never seen anyone always get the first shot off.He is making me trade tank for tank,in what will always be thought of as a heart pounding night attack scenario.It is looking bleak in this one,though im not sure about the play balance,but we shall see. Kitty is begining to feel the weight of the massive grey wall that is desending upon her.... FIRE!!! :mad: :mad: DaveH has finally sent me another turn :eek: I'll be looking forward to next weeks installment :mad: Make with the turns Maggots!!! :mad: [ February 09, 2004, 09:50 PM: Message edited by: nevermind ]

No worries All that i have said was with the best intentions in mind.It seems my terminal condition of "not being on speaking terms" with the written word,has got the best of me again. Sorry for the confusion.Wishing you guys the best of luck in your future endeavors,and continued success with your awesome scenarios and operations. Are you guys still looking for playtesters?

Dont tell me that your going to take what i said and turn it around on me.I didnt know that you all, There is nothing wrong with the current site,as is,but something can always be made better.And frankly,i was just trying to give you guys your "just dessert"(or however you say it),for giving us such great sceanarios and operations over the past years. Sorry for having a "good" idea,and for trying to "help".Wont happen again!

redwolfs' post brings up a good question.Has there been any progress on any of this? One of the main reasons i ask,i thought of a well deserving site that should be given a shot at this.The site i am speaking of is: Boots and Tracks Who can argue,that some of the best scenarios and operations out there came from the great folks at B&T? I dont know how it would work,or even IF it would work,but the site it is on now is always kinnda slow and just doesnt seem up to the standards of excellence that the great scenario designers deliver us.If nothing else,and this is all dependant on the owners/operators of B&T,could the pages for B&T be stored with whatever other kind of site gets this offer?Primarily if it will benefit B&T in some way(speed,storage..etc). Just a thought......