Elmar Bijlsma

Same here in the Netherlands, nothing so far.

I can't keep myself from wondering how Ahmad Shah Massoud would have done, had he lived. He seems to have been ideal for the job of taking charge. Respected, powerful, and fairly modern, he'd have been the best of the candidates. No wonder AQ took him out just prior to 9/11. Now NATO is stuck with a **** like Karzai.

In this game, recce units really don't have much of an edge if any over regular units. The scenarios are typically focussed on combat, so there is only a marginal role for the true art of reconnaissance. At a scenario's start you roughly know where the enemy is and that you've got a fight on your hands. Not much more for recce vehicles to do once you get to that stage of imminent battle. They did their job prior to the scenario starting. Thus recce units are demoted to just another flavour of combat unit to use in battle. As it happens, pretty frail units.

I'm siding with Michael Emrys on the BoB thing. If the Brits were losing the aerial war, the Germans were out-losing them. Aircraft wise British production kept up with or exceeded losses if I recall correctly. Nor was German bombing amounting to much. Airfields and radar stations recovered quickly, so they weren't on the ropes in that aspect either. The loss of aircrew was the crux, with the Brits catching the break of fighting over home turf. Morale among German bomber crews was at rock bottom. And all that when the brunt of attacks fell on the coastal regions covered by 10 and 11 group. Even raids against the London area tended to get savaged by the RAF so I don't see how the Luftwaffe was supposed to get the better of Fighter Command operating from more inland bases. There was a good thread about a few years back this that included a link to an exceedingly informative Axis History thread where the case for British long term prospects in a protracted BoB was convincingly made. Can't find it now, sadly.

It's m/s, not f/s for the muzzle velocity. At roughly 1100m/s I'd say that anyone getting within a mile of a tracking Gepard is in serious trouble. Computers do the work and angles are less relevant to it then to us. It can calculate the path of rounds and aircraft easy enough. In the roughly 1.5 seconds from barrel to intercept point the aircraft isn't going to do any dodging worth mentioning. MANPADS may be cheaper and more convenient, but don't underestimate the capability of Ye Olde Cannon.

Well, the Dutch did use the GAU-8 for their shipborne Goalkeeper_CIWS

Uhm, it's always been that Strykers and such, for whom the RWS is the primary weapons station, auto reloaded. But Abrams were excepted from that behaviour because they had their 120mm and co-ax to provide firepower. Thus they didn't auto reload to prevent prolific deaths of TCs. I deem the later behaviour to be entirely desirable for the Challenger 2 too. Surely it's an oversight, not WAD? Discussed previously here: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=76390

The thing I find curious is that I can read it too. You'd think it being a foreign language to me would cause me trouble. But nope.

That is strange. The Abrams have a routine where the crew won't expose themselves to reload their weapons unless ordered by the player to open up, precisely to prevent them from getting killed whilst servicing a secondary weapons station. I'm surprised to learn the Challanger 2's are acting differently from Abrams. I'm assuming this is an oversight.

Note that the 7.62 is not machine gun ammo but 7.62x39 used in older AK-47 type weapons. The Syrian machineguns use 7.62x54R which isn't currently available in vehicles.

Because you said "Lucas is at it again" when it's one of James Cameron's pictures. I thought I'd quip about your hatred for Cameron on the basis of that failure to give credit where credit is due.

Why do you hate James Cameron? Never heard of it, but looks like one to catch at the cinema. Visual feast. Don't know much about the story, but sci-fi and fantasy blurbs rarely reflect well on the full story so I'll give it a shot anyway, I think. Thanks!

How old are you? I'll tell you how it works around here. You give a thoughtful critique and chances are good that you'll get a thoughtful reply. If you instead just use deliberately insulting language to merely slam the game without a case being made by you, you'll get a more hostile reception. Terms like used above just don't do your case any favours. And frankly, if you are entirely unable to win as Red, you are using them wrong! So what exactly is your complaint? Is there a weapon that you believe over or under performs to make it as bad as you think it is?

Dunno, MG seems perfectly reasonably to me for the MG4. You lot may want to call it a Squad Assault Weapon, but face it, that's only for the cool acronym. To me, 5.56 or not, it's a machinegun. Same mechanics and function. Sure, no doubt it is a lot more fun to burst in a room with an MG4 then an MG3 but in the end it's a weapon where volumne of fire is the significant factor in it's usefulness.

Wow, that's pretty good. I can barely make a passable footprint when walking on the beach! I also like that it was a more artsy effort. Really connected with the audience like no Britney Spears wannabe ever could.

Woohoo! ! !

But Steve, I don't think anyone calls it a G4. When the rest come back from their holidays, it is your turn, I hope? Lomir, A 5.56 co-ax weapon? Now I'm not one of those bigger is better crowd, but that's just odd. Co-ax seems 7.62 territory. Even paired with a 30mm auto cannon the extra range and punch of a MG3 seems rather desirable, especially since the weight of the thing and it's ammo is no issue for mounted weapons.

MG4, Steve, not G4. But that's the whole marketing idea, surely? There's still that MG42 mystique clinging to the MG3 so continuing the "heritage" is the smart move to make. Besides, they are German. It's a Machine Gun and the previous one was numbered 3 so Germans wouldn't really know what else to call it anyway but MG4. I don't think they even perceive different options. PS Still better then the American naming conventions. M1 this, M1 that. Let's not even begin to speak on such wonders as the M-1114 HMVVOMGWTF!

Still on track for 2009?

You realize I had to google just to find out what you were on about? Some clarity wouldn't go amiss, you know. Nor an actual point. What is your view on District 9?

Except the ammo for the 50mm was not developed yet last time I checked, so the option to switch to the larger 50mm cannon is theoretical only.

That would be the CV9035. Which, somewhat unsurprisingly, has a 35mmm cannon instead of a 40mm.

Well, on that criteria, I want AT-ATs!

I don't think it is in active service yet.

Damn you Moon! Beat me to it.