Jump to content

JoMc67

Members
  • Content Count

    1,948
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About JoMc67

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location:
    Wash, DC area
  • Interests
    WWII, ACW Miniature & Computer Games...

Converted

  • Location
    Virginia
  • Interests
    WW2 & American Civil War Computer & Miniature gaming

Recent Profile Visitors

2,704 profile views
  1. Ok, and at the moment, I know have all the PBEM Opponents that I need...
  2. Hello Guys, Looking for a couple PBEM Opponents for any of the WWII Titles (all modules)...Small Meeting Engagements Mixed Random Maps & Units, etc...I Use Dropbox for Communication & Game Files along with House Rules...PM or respond back below. Joe
  3. NOOOooo, RH & HT...Well, at least you both got to enjoy the Game while using the 'Realism Mod' :-)
  4. Yeah, and think it might be a problem...I figure 1 in 3/4 rounds would hit the Turret Mantle and cause little or no Penetration Damage...If it hits the Turret Face (50-60mm Armor), then Partial Penetrations and some damage...If it hits the Gun Sleeve Box, which is probably only 50mm Armor (Box where the Gun meets Turret Mantle), then I also think Partial Penetrations and some damage.
  5. I have been playing around with some QB's and in numerous occasions that the Stuarts 37mm is penetrating/partial penetrating the front of the PzIVH Mantle (which should have around 80-88mm armor) anywhere from 500-1000 meters, and causing it to either destroy the Optics/Gun or causing a Crew Casualty. I could understand hitting close to the Optics and taking it out, but actual penetration and taking out the Gun ?...I assume CM simulates the difference between the Turret Face (which the Stuart can partial or fully penetrate), and the Turret Mantle (which I'm not sure if Stuart can penetrate). Thoughts..?
  6. Well, in-game troops in detrimental weather will eventually get tired & fatigued (unfortunately, it doesn't effect weapon capability) more quickly (compared to good weather). Your best bet to represent this in-game is to have troops in bad weather in an already "Weakened" state or give all troops an additional -1 rating.
  7. Oh, What one Freaking Minute...It's RockinMord...Both are Brothers living far apart from one another (Or, are they both one in the same...NOOOoooooo).
  8. Mord...Is that your new look...Cool ! Never mind, the other Forumites beat me to it...
  9. Interesting...You would think by Game Default a 1 or 2 Man Team would be difficult (regardless), Fire Teams a little easier, and Squads much more easier to spot.
  10. Now, what I want to know...Are Units Running away in due time depending if Green, Vet and in what types of Cover....I think I remember someone saying that 'Green' troops in buildings are too resilient and most of the troops die in place before finally moving out of cover. This could also mean Vet troops will most likely die in place to the last man before leaving said cover ? I would figure 'Fortifications' in general would give most quality troops a higher resilience factor (fortification bonus if you will), but troops in lesser cover (woods, buildings, etc) would still have them run from cover in short time (a bit longer if Vet, etc).
  11. Hello,

    How about either CMFI  or CMFB, Small QB Meetings, using some basic House Rules. I also use Dropbox for Game File & Text Communications. If interested then give me your Dropbox address, and will send you over an invite.

    Joe

    1. MistakeNot

      MistakeNot

      Sounds great! my address is axel.palmen@gmail.com. I wouldn't mind playing a bit of CMFI!

  12. Yeah, hopefully that Bug gets Fixed...However, not to despair as I will send you an actual Scenario in Dropbox shortly (thou, I will miss playing QB's against opponents for now).
  13. the M8 AC situation was interesting for sure....Actually, you did mention of sending the Game File up the Chain-of-Command back then to be looked at (that's all I remember).
×
×
  • Create New...