Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Panzer_Freak

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I will set up a test in the near future. I am also very interested how much damage engine takes. I counted 20+ hits to the engine compartment and the jeep kept retreating behind the knoll in the turn after. A engine would for sure be totally screwed after that much punishment. In a CMRT-game a while ago I noticed the same thing. One of my trucks tog alot of hits to the engine, no damage at all. Damage indicator was still green, not even yellow.
  2. Old topic, but here is another example when the hits seemingly do not affect the vehicle at all. In the turn after this one, the vehicle kept retreating and went behind a knoll. MG42 team firing from about 250 meters distance.
  3. Ok, well I have not used much aircraft my self to much. I have seen some blue on blue, but good info about that how they abort missions did not know that they do. I must have had some bad luck against aicrafts so far then, because they have ripped up my forces quite well alot of times even though I have had alot of AA. And even if they do not kill a tank, they can damage/destroy optics and such. I'll keep testing games with out house rules against aircraft and see if my experience with aircraft changes.
  4. I have played alot of games now. When it comes to AA-efficiency I am a bit disappointed, many AA-pieces are good to use against ground targets. But I have no good experience of AA vs aircrafts. They seem not to throw them of target and not a single aircraft has been shot down by my AA so far. I usually have a minimum of two AA-pieces per game (usually playing large, and a few time huge games). I usally use 20mm Flakvierling, 37mm Flak 36, 40mm Bofors, and the soviets 40mm as well. I have so far never used the 88 or the soviets 90mm AA piece. Do I have had bad luck or are AA useless vs aircraft? AA during WWII did not shot down everything, that I am aware of, but by this time when I have played alot of games they should have knocked out at least some of them. It does not even seem as they are able to disturb the planes when attacking and the aircrafts also seems to have a unrealistic good aim and detection ability (compared to battlereports from WWII). I really likes this game when it comes to realism, but in my experience the aircrafts vs ground targets and AA vs aircraft is that aircraft are unrealistic good at what they do. They seems to have better aim then modern CAS-aircraft and AA seems useless against aircraft. I actually would tell my AA not to shot at aicraft if I could, because it is a waste ammo, and when an aicraft attacks it also reveals how many AA-pieces I have invested in. I will from now on only play games with out Aircrafts, which is boring because I do not like to have to many house rules when playing. At least the aircrafts should be possible to knock out some planes and also have the possibility to disturb airplanes when they attacking. No more aircrafts in a game before this is fixed. Or have I only had bad luck?
  5. Well. I really hope it will be one, it will not only be popular in Finland but here in Sweden to. Alot of volunters went from Sweden to Finland, for natural reasons - our brothers to the east. Would be alot of interesting infantry units like the sissi and famous weapons like Suomi m/31.
  6. Will there be any modules for the finnish front in CMRT? Like they added Market Garden i CMBN.
  7. When i did a test with foxholes and placed 10 AT-crews in different kind of terrain and called for one fire mission (short) with 4x 10,5 cm howitsers. The first test with out foxholes next one with foxholes. I did not save the protocol I made unfortunatly, but it needs more testing then just 10 if do a proper examination. I did notice difference in casualty, abonded ATG and wounded. And when I have used foxholes in games it feels like it do make a slight different. Foxholes are not that expensive and if I have some extra after I am satisfied with my battle group I often purchase some for ATG, AA and other key weapons.
  8. Well, not much changes I would say. Good that they fixed the arty/cover-thing that was totally unlogical. I still can not understand why they do not fix the buidling protection, love the game but it is actually crappy that a thin wooden wall has the protection value of reinforced concrete for example. Totally unlogical how they handle the protection levels at this moment, just cant see why and how it would be a big thing to fix it.
  9. Is there a change log for all changes made in the patch?
  10. I am sure some body already asked this, but where to unpack and install the patch? Where I am not so much into computers, just the strategy games.
  11. I am trying to get my head around damaged tracks, how they get damaged and how that effects the tank/vehicle: 1. Are the damaged taken by a point system or by die rolls? It feels like the damage is gather by som kind of point system, no die roll involved. 2. Does the speed going over fence/minor walls affect the risk for damage and/or risk for damage? My opinon so far is a big ? 3. Is it easier to get bogged down? I suspect yes, everything else would be un-realistic. 4. Does AT-rifle only damage tracks/wheels or are they able to actually destroy them? So far when I have tested (and I have tested AT-rifle against different vehicles at different ranges and speed - have not done enough testings yso that I can have a strong opionin yet though) only minor damage has been sustained against tracks/wheeles. I do think AT-rifle are useful, so no criticism against them over all but when it comes to tracks it feels odd that they more often scores hits that make bail outs then destroying wheels/tracks. If I used AT-rifle i would primarly aim for tracks and optics at tanks (if the range gave the opportunity to bee able to choose), it seems that the AT-rifles do that when close to a tank - but the result is mediocre. 5. Does wheels get damage from going off-road? My feeling is yes, but have no evidence or have not done any testings.
  12. Thanks for the info, someone wrote almost the same in "The Few Good Men" forum, really strange way to determine penetration value - but it is what it is, they really need to change it. I'll copy/paste your list!
  13. I never said it is not wrong with critic, I only owned this game for half a year. If a problem has existed for 2 years and two months and it has been promised to be dealt with - well critic is of course reasonable. Still, this game is the best in its genre and I still believe it is because they are putting down big effort to do things rigid. That is my feeling and I compare it with Steel Division which eventually was eventually un-playable when it was updated with out thought.
  14. Love the game, the most accurate and realistic so far (it is of course impossible to get a computer game realistic with a big R). I am promoting this game to all strategic nerds I know and also to my NCO and officer colleagues. It is only one thing with this game that is really irritating. Why do paper thin wooden walls of a builidng have the protection value of concrete walls? Tanks has so realistic penetration values, why do not building has that too? Will this be fixed in the patch? I also have my hopes that all the issues with fortifications (trenches and fox holes) are fixed, making them worth the cost and of course that the units do not run away when arty hits them. One of the points of digging in is to resist arty better, then it is quite "fantastic" when the units running away from shelter - out in the open. Strange behavior if the unit are not paniced, then strange behavior are realistic. There is of course other little things with line of sight-tool and also line of fire vs line of sight (as you see it from ground camera view), but I have understood that it is quite hard to make this work with out a new engine or something (I am computer "handicaped" and are not interested with the technical disucussion what is the difference between engines, patches, DLC and all other fancy pancy names) and one learns the work arounds to the LOS-issues any way. Lastly, adding to the discussion of waiting for new patches/updates. Better wait for a patch that is good than them rushing it and it becomes ****. I have quit playing Steel Division, not realistic enough (when I found this game) and I would still quit playing it due to their crappy hurry up updates, making the game more and more un-playable. This game is good because I have noticed that the crew behind it puts down great effort to make it realistic and still playable, of course critic are always good but for my part I rather wait for a good patch then them throwing out crap.
  • Create New...