Elmar Bijlsma
-
Posts
3,883 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Elmar Bijlsma
-
-
Poke em hard!
-
Why not remove this sub-forum? Nothing useful can and has been said here.
-
If the AI bots could wait just a little longer before killing themselves, I might have a chance to rack up some decent scores. Or failing that, give credit for the kill to the one who dealt the first crippling shot.
Because the way it is now I'm disabling a LOT of AI vehicles with the Hurricane or 20mm vehicles without getting credit for it because the bot blows himself up. Humans tend to be less quick doing this giving a fair chance of a score.
And the resupply dropships are really annoying. Their effective defences interfere with battles overly much with some cheeky positioning. And they are impossible to kill once on the ground.
And please, please, please keep the slow turning of tanks in. It's what keeps light AFVs alive if they manage to get close. It's such a joy circling towards the rear of the tank at full speed, with the hull and turret rotation of the tank just a smidgen too late to save it. If a near impervious heavy hitter let's me get that close it deserves everything it gets!
-
Definitely not.
A Tommygun mount? You see something new everyday.
-
Exhibit AOriginally posted by Battlefront.com:We learned a long time ago to NOT show things until they are nearly ready. To paraphrase Jack... "The images? The images? You can't handle the images!!"
:eek:
-
I'd think Mr. Flamingpicky would be wrong.
The Brits referred to all kinds of ammunition as shot. Solid/spherical shot, grape shot, cannister shot, spherical case/shrapnel shot and indeed shell shot. If they could bung it down the barrel in front of a charge, they called it a shot. Because that's what you did, you shot it.
-
I would reckon this would be to save weight. It's one less magazine to armour and structurally strengthen.Originally posted by the_enigma:it would seem his guns are all up front.
Because the people who signed the treates also paid for these ships. And what with WW1 being the last war everyone downsizing their Navies in a way so as not to disadvantage established naval powers (or those that were l33t hAxxOrs in the Great War) made splendid sense.there soemthing i dont get about the treaties after ww1 ... why did anyone (well mainly us the UK) agree to them?
-
I would reckon this would be to save weight. It's one less magazine to armour and structurally strengthen.Originally posted by the_enigma:it would seem his guns are all up front.
Because the people who signed the treates also paid for these ships. And what with WW1 being the last war everyone downsizing their Navies in a way so as not to disadvantage established naval powers (or those that were l33t hAxxOrs in the Great War) made splendid sense.there soemthing i dont get about the treaties after ww1 ... why did anyone (well mainly us the UK) agree to them?
-
.
[ January 15, 2006, 04:36 AM: Message edited by: Elmar Bijlsma ]
-
The Groesbeek Heights operation is pretty entertaining though. Can't remember where I got it from but drop me a line if anyone wants it.
-
Not quite.Originally posted by cassh:The actual command levels of forces for each level are more ambiguous; but generally:-
Tactical is up to Corps level command
Operational, Corps to Theatre level command
Strategic, Army Group to the Chiefs of Defence Staff level command
Tactical=NCO level command.
Operational=NCO level command.
Strategic=NCO level command.
Go ask any sergeant.
-
Will thermobaric/enhanced-blast weapons have a visible blast wave in CM:SF?
Oh come on!! Someone had to ask.
-
I'm intrigued as to the new military grade wheel barrow they will commision in order for soldiers to carry all their gear.
I mean, nice capability and all but isn't this just a move by people in denial about the fact infantry men are placed in dangerous situations. Isn't there a point where you need to stop trying to completely R&D the danger out of combat? I'm not saying you throw the grunts out of the hatch naked and arm them with slingshots but I am beginning to feel the US army is begin to exagerrate and not getting the bang for their buck. Every amazing new device is a couple of boots on the ground less.
-
Drusus, what uninformed drivel! Honestly.
Why did that helicopter go down? Due to some children goofing around with an RPG they found?
No, from what we know the insurgents made a concentrated effort to bring it down. The insurgency then made an attempt to capture the Kiowa crew and ambush rescuers. Possibly both latter actions were preplanned but certainly all events are intertwined with each other. Excluding the shooting of the Kiowa is arbitrary and makes no sense at all. The battle starts with first shot fired. That happened to be the RPGs at the Kiowa. Just because the reporting focusses on the 5-20 men when they come to the rescue doesn't mean what goes on before it magically doesn't count.
To go with your CM:SF analogy, imagine a scenario in which the opponent has a Kiowa flying in support. You bring it down at the start of the game but after the battle the AAR screen informs you that the Kiowa didn't count. That would suck mightily, wouldn't it?
*dammit, two edits. Any other typo is here to stay*
[ January 05, 2006, 11:49 AM: Message edited by: Elmar Bijlsma ]
-
Okay, time to put my oar in.
Bodycounts are only relevant for US troops. That the US in this case received none is a victory/success. But that 100 odd resistance fighters are killed is completely and totally irrelevant to anyone but their mom.
Arabic people are fatalistic to a degree that most in the West are unable to comprehend. Insha Allah, Gods Will they will say, shrug and move on. They aren't casualties, they are martyrs. Yes, the 'units' they belong to are disrupted by the losses but given their usual organisation I doubt too many resistance learders were lying awake in their beds from it. Really, the main pressure is upon paradise as to where they are going to find the 7200+ virgins.
So in short as people more wordy and clever then I have stated their opinions on this.
For the US:
Helicopter and persons retreived:DRAW(no matter the skill and daring of the rescue, to be victorous one needs not to get helicopters shot down.
The firefights:WIN (no casualties, lots of kills, good use of assets: a bang up job)
The operation:DRAW (Despite the bang up job during the shooting, real winners are able to camp out on the battlefield should they choose to do it)
The post action PR: WIN (bodiescounts impress the FOX network and everybody loves a succesful rescue)
Financial:DRAW (hundreds of millions of dollars worth of kit in the firefight and you got what you paid for. How much was the Kiowa?)
For the insurgency:
Helicopter and persons retreived: DRAW (good job downing the helo but having their crew paraded on Al-Jazeera would've been better.
The firefights: LOSS (good job getting that many people in the fight but achieving little to nothing in the fight kinda sucks. Oh, well break out the family pack of Virgins)
The operation: DRAW (you knocked down a helo but lost the battle for it's wreckage in a serious way. But in the end the Infidel moved into town and moved out again)
The post action PR: WIN(The locals sure were very impressed you came out in force to protect the mosque and PO-ed at the Infidel bombing out the Abdullah family. The Infidel was last seen moving out of town propelled by a large dustcloud. Yes, Western media is praising 5-20s performance under fire but really, you can only trust good ol' Jazeera, eh?)
Financial: WIN (you had a couple of thousand dollars worth of gear and you got what you paid for. Praise be to Allah that AKs and RPGs are damn near free, eh? And it's not like you were paying the insurgents anyway. How much did they pay for that Kiowa?)
Victory is a moving target.
[ January 05, 2006, 10:53 AM: Message edited by: Elmar Bijlsma ]
-
Nah, the TacAI always fires one round at the target because you ordered it, guessing you know what you are doing. And then things better of it.
-
Melnibone has it right. The TacAI decided against it as a futile action. It doesn't mean mortars won't attack tanks, they just won't attack tanks where the hit will not affect the target. Should you have a mortar on hand that can penetrate top armour it will happily blast away. I have had some success KO-ing PzIVs with 3 inch mortars.
As stoat rightly puts, if you absolutely must you can use area fire but if the tank moves your fire will not shift accordingly. But really, why fire at a tank you can't hurt anyway? To button the tank? You would be better off tasking an MG or infantry with that job.
-
No, because we aren't as pathetic as you! :mad:Originally posted by Other Means:Is it just me that hears a whistling noise when setting up TRP's? Or kak-kak-kak sounds when at level 1 looking at an MG's possible LOS?
Anyone who wishes to be taken seriously goes RA-TA-TA-TA-TA-TA for Allied MGs and R-R-R-R-R-R for German MGs.
But yeah, on setup I can hear the WOOSH of a Sherman when I stick a 75HT in amongst the flag rushing 251s in a ME QB.
And I cackle out loud when setting a particulairly devious trap. Why? It has to be loud to drown out the imaginary gunfire ofcourse!
-
I am frankly amazed there still seems to be a question as to how to tell a vehicle is GD-ed.
Here's what just happened between Other Means and me. The Panther below has just been hit by a Piat from straight where the barrel was pointing, GD-ing it.
And here the Panther moved on, hoping to get a spectacular kill on an open topped TD with it's NaVerteitigungs Waffe. Yeah I know, long shot, but it was worth a shot just to see if it could be done. Sadly the TD was long gone and caught a distrated Hetzer in the flank. Notice how the turret remained stationary relative to the hull even though the Panther turned while moving. Really, this should be 101 material for CM.
A cover arc would see the turret slaved to a point on the compass relative to the hull. So the gun would always point ENE from the hull if the cover arc was set to the ENE, no matter the direction the hull was pointing at. I do hope this was a question of mis-communication as this is pretty basic stuff.
PS
Apologies for any bigness you may suffer. Side scrolling rules!!!
-
Had an eventful bogging against the AI no less.
I had a platoon of T34s dashing along a road (dry conditions. They only needed to cross a 20m section under enemy fire and I figured they would all cross that before the enemy could bring guns to bear. No problem.
Front vehicle bogs, the rest bumps into it and a Panther massacres them one by one as they fart about treying to get past the bogged vehicle.
-
Thanks heaps, Dieseltaylor.
I've tried running PBEMH again and now it's fine (in a 'it's half working, sortof' kind of way) again. I guess I'll never know why it refused to run entirely earlier. I'll set about seeing if I can get it to automate everything it should be automating and to get trusted mode working.
I'll take my tinkering with the settings in small doses though. I was >.< this close to battering my monitor with my keyboard.
-
Thanks for all the help guys but I'm afraid I give up.
I went to the M$ site to DL Microsoft Windows Script 5.6 and (re)installed it. And now it completely refuses to run. I removed and reinstalled PBEM Helper but it refuses to run after the initial setup. I've been f-ing about with PBEM Helper for a week now and while it sounded promising it is now just pissing me off.
Maybe I'll try again some time later but I would do well to continue using plain .txt and my mailer before I toss my POS PC out of the window entirely. Seriously, I am not getting enough sunlight exposure in winter to deal with this crap.
again thanks for your help everyone but for now it seems I'm beyond help.
-
Alas, it wasn't what I thought it was. I suspected that it might be the default CMAK install location whereas my game was elsewhere. Pointed that field to where I installed it to instead. This wasn't the problem, as indeed it shouldn't have been as PBEM helper does know where the CMAK .exe is when opening it via the top PBEMH window.
So this points to the absence of the "Run" folder probably being at the root of my trouble. Where should that folder go, what should be in it etc? I can't see any reference to it in the pbem.ini file.
Should my "Working Folder" be C:\Documents and Settings\Eigenaar\Mijn documenten\PBEM (as per where PBEMH) or should it point to my CMAK/PBEM directory?
I do have the version GJK mentions btw.
-
I second JasonC's observations. The bigger the round the bigger the chance it inflicts gun damage/immobilization.
Current status
in Modern Naval Battles - WWII At Sea
Posted
Just stumbled across this while looking if there are any wargamers near where I live. Didn't know you guys were already working together.