Jump to content

DasMorbo

Members
  • Posts

    227
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by DasMorbo

  1. Nice! :)

    Yeah, the graphics could be better. But Battlefront did by far the best artwork for this title!

     

    On 18.5.2016 at 3:11 PM, hank24 said:

    +1 to that, especially the snow scenarios remind me to the good old hunting days. Best whishes from Süderwalsede, by the way (40 km from Bremen).

    LOL you gotta be kidding me! My sister plus her family lives in Groß Sehlingen, and pass I through your village regularly when I do road bike training. ;)

  2. This forum tends to accumulate critisism, and I am an active contributor to this. ;)

     

    But in all fairness and to appreciate the work Battlefront has done on CMFB I have to give them some cudos:

    The visual appeal of CMFB is just outstanding! To me CMFB is a real beauty. My FRAPS-file is overflowing with pictures of serene rolling low-mountain-range landscapes dotted with burning tanks, majestetic woods of wide-standing, tall pine trees with M3 halftracks passing through them, and Machinegun-teams taking cover from mortar-fire behind the elegant curving snow banks of small copses.

    The beatuiful, calm landscapes, contrasting with the starkly violent action, give CMFB a very distinct atmosphere which I totally like! :)

     

    Good Job Battlefront!

    Morbo

  3. Ah okay!

     

    From what I've seen it looked like this never happened. Haven't seen it in a substantial period of time. By now I am fearful of using area fire for more than 30 seconds as I had numerous occasions where my units left first-rate (in the open and running infantry) targets unscathed and took casualties themselves. :(

    All in CMFB, I have no such problems in CMBN. I will take some time with this to see, if it was more bad luck and subjectivity than fact.

     

    Cheers

    Morbo

  4. Hey Rinaldi!

     

    Me and a fellow from 'The Blitz' gaming Club just finished your Scenario - and we had a lot of fun! It is very seldom in CMBN that you play such a huge Tank force. It asked for very different tactics to employ.

    It seems like we still downloaded the original version from TSDIII, though.

    I like to give you some feedback via PM (to avoid spoilers), as this was a kind of 'life-fire-playtesting'. We think there are still some issues with the balancing, as the Germans have a very hard time to stop the Americans.

    It still was huge fun, that is why I would love to help!

     

    Best regards

    Morbo

     

  5. On 14.5.2016 at 4:04 PM, Sublime said:

    ...

    Also for say the Abrams or say the Churchill with 9k rounds of ammo I dont care what it is the tanks are on target light the entire time machine gunnong something unless theyre tryinf to be sneaky or there far enough back they cant see any part of anywhere the enemy could be.

    Of course this is ahistorical - irl you cant spray bullets around so much when u may really need them 6 hrs later or tomorrow. More so with high caliber shells.

    It's not ahistorical at all - in Lt.Col. Abrams 37th Tank Battalion this was SOP! It was common behaviour to spray every suspicious looking copse or brush with MG ammo when in enemy-held area IIRC.

     

    About my griefings: I normally use 'Target Briefly', too. But in this case it is the American ardennes campaign (Lt.Col. Abrams again...B)) in which I have to conserve HE-ammo as good as I can! 'Target Briefly' wastes HE shells, and target light which would be the perfect suppression-solution is dangerous. I would love to see BF include an 'override area-fire for direct contacts'-routine in the AI.

    Depends on the effort necessary, of course.

  6. On 12.5.2016 at 0:28 AM, womble said:

    No. The game only allows you to Target Area at the icon (if the icon is over an AS that you could ordinarily have Area Targetted). It's a pure convenience. Sometimes you want to shoot at an enemy you know has ducked, or which one of your elements has spotted, but with a unit which only has a "?" icon. Instead of zooming about and into the map to get the target line placed where you want it, the icon is an easy way of getting the order issued. 

    Yeah, you are right! I tested it and found it to be quite comfortable, especially on those large CMFB maps. Thank you for the heads up I wouldn't have noticed myself, I guess. :)

  7. On 7.5.2016 at 11:34 PM, womble said:

    So I spotted something this evening I didn't know you could do. If there is a "tentative contact" icon at a location where a unit that can "see" (?sense?) that contact, can draw LOS to, you can click a Target order on that icon, and give an Area Target (or Briefly or Light) to the AS where that icon has been identified as being. It's definitely the icon that lets you because it's possible to pick a POV which puts the icon way above the ground, or in front of terrain that's definitely in defilade. Hovering the mouse over the icon will give you the targeting status for "where you noticed the tentative contact", such as "Reverse slope - No aim point", the range, and hull-down status relative to that point. Somehow, the icon also can be partially targetable; I've got one now where the left side (from the POV of the unit that has the contact) is "Reverse Slope" but the right side is targetable...

    Hmmm.

    I am not quite sure if I got your point - do you say that you can directly click the 'tentative contact icon'? I have tested in my copy of CMFB and I can't target these icons. I can area fire the AS if my dudes have LOS but that is all. Maybe it is a (nice) bug? The game calculating the tentative contact like a direct contact?

  8. Maybe I have noticed another case of 'old bug reapearing'...

    I just had an instance whith two Shermans. One Sherman was area firíng a hill 500 meters away with his wingman, a second Sherman, in overwatch. Suddenly the firing Sherman spotted some German Infys just 180 meters away from him in a copse. Instead of switching targets automatically to the direct contact and threat, the Sherman kept area firing. This gave the Germans ample time to aim with a Panzerschreck and destroy his wingman which hadn't spotted them.

    I had two or three instances so far, where units stubbornly kept area firing even though they had spotted direct threats to them. I didn't notice this behaviour in the late CMBN.

    What do you guys say to this, have you noticed similar things? Does Battlefront know this and do they want to do something about it? Or should I write a ticket on the matter?

     

    Comments appreciated. :)

  9. Hey Bill, that Comic is aesome!

    I totally like the perspectives and picture detail you chose!

    I have one point of constrictive criticism, though. I might be wrong but I recognize terms like 'Team Babbitt', 'Destroyer 1-3', 'coordinate with infantry' as modern day US Army language. Just as an example back in the days, what is today a Company Combat Team was simply an (reinforced) Infantry Company. Didn't sound that flashy, so Army Marketing changed that. ;)

    Anyway I hope you give us more of these nice artworks!

     

    Best regards

    Morbo

     

  10. Oh man I am ashamed a bit... The one Derp has an MG3 - I guess he looted it from the Peshmerga, to witch my government delivered it. It was a big discussion here if the German government should pump more weapons in an already weapon-overloaded region.

    But nonetheless very interesting video! I was astonished to see how casual they deal with their own deaths - sure makes them effective fighters, offsets their messed up organization a bit. :)

     

  11. Okay, obviously no one here seems to understand what yfighter wants: an explanation on how to play Real-Time via Internet connection. <_<

    Just looked it up (don't do it myself): One player chooses a Scenario, chooses his side and then the play-mode - there you can select 'Real-Time via Internet' or something along these lines. If the player selects it, he is given an IP-Adress and Port. He then transmits these numbers to his buddy who hits 'Join Network Game' in the main menu and types in the numbers accordingly.

    From there everything should go its ways.

    Figuring this out took me less time than to write those lines here. Honestly, have you looked into the manual at all? B)

     

     

  12. Engineers with Stachelcharges are fun in close combat, I discovered this for the first time just recently and couldn't stop giggeling for about five minutes. :D

     

    About the Gap-question: identifying passable gaps in medium hight hedgrows is difficult.

    Thos that can be passed look quite similar to those 'cosmetic' ones which are not.

     

    Someone in the mentioned discussion had a very good tip how to identify those that can be used - just zoom the camera out!

    At a certain distance the detail level goes down and you can only make out the passable gaps. :)

     

     

    Regards,

    Olf

  13. Thank you for all the effort invested!

    I just snatched some fresh scenarios and will be back to check for more. :)

     

    Definitely easier and nicer to use than the repository (sorry BF).

     

    Hope more Scenario designers upload to your site!

     

     

     

    Olf

     

    P.S.: Little heads-up: you got a typo - Battle For Normandy is without an 's' ;)

  14. About the Panthers -  All were buttoned up when hit.

    Shots were fired at less than 400m/yards, mostly on side at sides with thin armor.

     

     

    A little physical examination of whats going on when a tank is hit.

    Yes, the different warheads have differing physical values, but I am using the Fermi-principle here, showing in which magnitudes the physical processes take place.

     

    So lets take a hit from a PIAT: it penetrates with an jet of molten metal, travelling at about 7-10 km/s and a pressure of no less than 100 bar (up to 200 bar or 200 GPa) and a temperature of at least 350°C and up to 480°C.

    Unless the tank has it's hatches open, so the immense overpressure can dissipate, the crew will take seriuos injuries to all presure sensitive organs - lungs rupture, hearing and balanceing organs will take serious damage and so forth.

    If that is not enough, the super fast jet creates a cloud of molten and shattered steel which tends to create severe injuries and fires upon impact. And don't forget the very hot gases.

     

    Look at AP shot penetration: if a solid 57mm (6pd) AP shot penetrates the armour, it still has considerable kinetic energy. I have no numbers aviable, but considering the AT guns of the time had muzzle velocities of 600-1000 m/s (meters are roughly yards). Lets consider the amount of energy lost through flight and penetration, I would expect an AP slug fired at less than 300m to bounce around inside the tank at 100-200 m/s. The 75mm round had an explosive filler, so it created even more damage if it went off.

     

     

    Looking at the punishment the Panthers took, I seriuosly doubt everything is okay here. My first impression was that for some reason ammo and fuel are not correctly simulated. I derived this conclusion from the fact that out of seven PzVs only one burned and only after recieving fice solid penetrations. No ammo explosions at all. But I could be wrong.

     

    Maybe it is not a bug, but then I would have to say this is unrealistic.

    Not even an veteran tank crew would be able to keep fighting after receiving more than two hollow charge penetrations into an closed fighting compartment, most likely the first would have wounded or killed everyone.

    Same goes for the amount of AP penetrations received, it showed pecuilar few effects, considering the physical forces at work and the amount of flammable and explosive materials inside a Panther. Just look at the inside model in-game.

  15. Now for the Panthers

     

    UberPanther%20001_zpskveyjfja.jpg

     

    weird%20Panther%20005_zpsxo3fo5y6.jpg

    Of the seven Panthers I had knocked out in the last two games, only this succumbed to less than three solid penetrations.

     

    weird%20Panther%20015_zpsm2nxfyjg.jpg

    Took three PIAT hits to go KIA, while just two show. The solid penetration on the turret side didn't show any effect, I looked it up in-game.

     

    weird%20Panther%20010_zps0glgqphw.jpg

    Three solid, one partial AT penetrations, two solid PIAT penetrations, just 1 crew fatality.

     

    weird%20Panther%20030_zps15y1lwic.jpg

    This one took all this hits at 150m to catch fire.

     

    weird%20Panther%20035_zpsagplauq4.jpg

    This one took half the hits while still operational. The other half after it was abandoned with the engine still running.

     

    I have been a scale modeller for 20 years, and the Panther was my favourite subject. So I spend many hours studying original pictures, and all I can say is they are very vulnerable to side shots. One to three penetrations were sufficent to set the vehicle afire or disable the crew in the pictures I have seen and the accounts I have read.

     

    Again, just wanted to make clear I am not making this up to troll.

     

    I will do some testing if I have the time left. In the moment I am at home with an illness, why I started to write about this the first place.

     

     

    Regards,

    Olf

  16. Here are some pictures which are intended to highlight why I came up with the idea there might be something odd with the hit-reg/damage model.

     

    weird%20Wespe%20001_zps3gafxkjs.jpg

    Situation: three Churchills with 57mm and 75mm guns versus this Wespe. It took some time to score hits due to obstacles. First hit was on the muzzle brake - it kept firing for another two minutes.

     

    weird%20Wespe%20005_zpsy5nn3gdg.jpg

    The hit on the gun assemply did not impair its ability to fire.

     

    weird%20Wespe%20010_zpsjuncnvir.jpg

    These three 'deflection' hit decals come from AP rounds which actually deflected off the gun shield.

  17. Hey guys!

     

    Okay, I guess I was wrong with the pathing behaviour.

    I think about some testing though.

     

    But to give you an impression how I came up with the idea, here are some more screenshots.

     

    Botched%20Movement%20003_zpsp1ddpuv7.jpg

    Green line - intended way, set with two 'quick' waypoints, one half way across the field, roughly on the green arrow the other one at the end of the field.

    Red line - the way they took, there was an hMG 42 down the road, which I knew is there but not the AI (no contact icon)

     

    Botched%20Movement%20004_zpsqjk1xbgf.jpg

    What I don't understand is why the AI didn't choose the passage in the Bocage, which obviously was the shorter and easier way (no gate to jump over).

     

    Botched%20Movement%20008_zps9yiupvwb.jpg

    Result. The guys at the passageway are about to start their dash (20 seconds delay).

     

    Botched%20Movement%20015_zpslbrvtodu.jpg

    Waypiont of the second team. Looks like the AI sticks to roads tenaciously.

     

    This is not to press my piont, but just to show you how I came to the conclusion there is something odd with the pathing.

    Hope this shows you that my intention was not to troll.

  18. May I present to you - the very young Chuck Norris at his holiday job:

     

    When young Chuck was attending the University of Applied Badassnes he sought, like every other colledge student, after a job to improve his financial situation.

     

    Chuck%20Norris%20Holiday%20Job%20001_zps

     

    Luckily there was a war going on over in Europe.

     

    Chuck%20Norris%20Holiday%20Job%20002_zps

     

     As he didn't want to work too much (lazy college student) he only volunteered for the US Paras, not any serious assignment like the SAS or such.

     

    Chuck%20Norris%20Holiday%20Job%20004_zps

     

    Still the regulation armament was a bit too flimsy for his tastes so he did some little improvements.

     

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...