aka_tom_w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: Hi all, Well, I decided to do some tests instead of rellying upon people's strong, but relatively unsupported, opinions. I conducted a simple test to at least see some statistical relationship between various different aspects of gunnery using Halt and Fast. Steve [ 07-25-2001: Message edited by: Big Time Software ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hi Steve Thanks for the Reply Now where is that "Great Big Cup of Shut-up!" I was looking for The "strong, but relatively unsupported, opinions" reference sounded like it may have been directed at some of my more highly opinionated posts. To be honest, I was posting about my CMBO experience with the Hellcat in the 250-500 meter range while driving fast. I don't disagree with your numbers or your test or the test methodolgy at all. I did not suggest the Hellcat benifited from the Gyrostabilizer, I was just VERY impressed that the range between 13% and 33% accuracy while on the fast move would be realistically acheivable, Perhaps it was. I hope I did not suggest (in my zeal, I may have) that tanks (the Hellcat Specifically) fire as well on the fast move as they do when not moving. It is clear that tanks that are moving have a lower chance to hit percentage, I would never dispute that. I am just plain amazed that the Hellcat, while moving fast over open ground, can achieve an accuracy rating at 250 meters as high as 1 hit in every three shots fired (33%) !!. :eek: Perhaps this is historically accurate and realistic. I suspect that the posts from real life modern day tank gunners who state the today's modern tanks would only attempt to fire on the move while traveling on a straight flat road at a about 15 mph, directly toward the target calls into question the notion that Allied Hellcat crews attempted to fire their main weapon (with a 33% accuracy rating at 250 m) while moving at top speed across open terrain. If this is in fact actually historically accurate then I will need to go and find that "great big cup of SHUT-UP!" and down it ASAP. As always, thanks for the post and especially thanks for the test results and the Stats and chance-to-hit accuracy data on the Hellcat. -tom w [ 07-25-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: The book I quoted that interviews Evans is an excellent Oral history on the Hellcat. Evans was one of the team of TD commanders who helped design that tank, and was also a front line tank commander through out the war. His unit, the 704th TD, was a high scoring TD unit. The Hellcat could also fire on the move with practice. It had very light turret controls, and the driver had to be prepared for the recoil of the heavy gun on the small chasis, but a Hellcat gunner loader team would open up on a target at speed and rely on firing as fast as they could to get a hit, while the driver kept them from getting hit by the slower German turrets until they could reach cover again. Hellcats would use their speed to do this several times, until they had flanked two sides of a German tank unit, and forced them to withdraw or take it from the sides. This was extremely successful, with some Hellcat units racking up 10 and 20 to 1 kill ratios. Combined with rush, hide, hit, run tactics, it allowed the mobility rather than the armor of the M18 to protect it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> if that is all true..... and if they REALLY did fire on the fast move, at top speed, AND score hits then I would say this is modeled VERY well indeed in the game, because the Hellcat is joy to command as you can send them darting quickly into ideal flanking positions while they continue to fire. ANd if they load AP or Tungsten they can penetrate the flank and/or rear aspect of almost any german tank at any distance. -tom w

OK I've read both the replies by Slapdragon and Germanboy. I do believe the game, (Both CMBO and CMBB) should be as historically accurate as possible, based on the best available research. If Russian tankers did indeed fire on the fast move and that is well documented then my plea for "no firing on the fast move" is clearly misplaced and in error. HOWEVER, I strongly believe the high degree of accuracy that some Allied tanks in CMBO display with their uncanny ability to fire AP and HVAP while on the FAST move and IMHO the number of times that they get hits on other tanks just seems to be to be unrealistically high. If tanks in CMBB fire on the fast move the chance of a hit against another AFV should be remote, How remote? what are the odds? Perhaps we can discuss that further. Thanks for the replies. -tom w [ 07-25-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

thanks for the comments! Steve? How about it for CMBB? No firing for ANY vehicle on the FAST move. -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Treeburst155: Anybody alive out there?!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> yup I'm into it in a BIG way with Kiwi Joe and have another game going with bappel and Staling's organ I think that needs to be finished up. still battling -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy: I think this whole discussion comes down to to-hit chances, and I have not seen anything like that in this thread. I also don't have time to do a test, but since I don't feel it needs addressing, I won't do one myself. So Scipio, first of all I think that your assertion that 'WW2 tankers knew they could not hit on the move' is a bit general. The armies of two countries (US, UK I think) had tanks that were provided with a device that should have enabled that. Whether they used it a lot/somewhat/not at all is open to discussion though, and has been discussed here at length. So theoretically at least these tankers should have known the opposite of what you claim. Different for the Germans, since they had stop-to-shoot as SOP. Not sure about the Soviets, but neither of the two had gyros. Neither did the UK have them pre-Sherman days, but they still had (I believe) a move&shoot SOP. So there goes your claim, without any lawyer BS. Now regarding the accuracy. I think we can all agree that this is indeed only a problem if a moving tank has the same to-hit chance as a stationary tank? If it is lower, it could be debated how much lower it should be. For German tanks somewhere near zero, for gyro-tanks somewhere near X? I don't know. I am certain it should never be zero though, since you always can have the luck of the draw. I read a story by some 88 gunners who did a first-shot kill on a T-34 at 7,000m in the Caucasus. Pretty unlikely, but an indication of what luck can do, if the story is indeed true. So if someone who wants this changed would go out and run a few tests (nothing major, just a few, to get a ballpark figure) showing what the to-hit percentage differential is between the same tanks, at almost the same distance, depending on whether they move or a stationary, then we would have something to work from. Until then, it will remain a gut feeling, and I am not even convinced at this stage that we have a problem here, regardless of assertions about what tankers in WW2 knew. I am open to be convinced, but I am not going to disprove anyones assertion here. Here is mine - the game is fine, because the US had gyros, and therefore all US tankers knew they could shoot and hit while on the move. German tankers if pressed did it, and sometimes scored a hit against expectation. If you don't like it, disprove me. Not very productive, eh? Now if someone could tell me what Soviet SOP was??? Where is John when I need him...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hi I admit I prefer to play the Allies and the Hellcat has to be one of my favourite tanks, because it seems so "gamey" to have it fire on the fast move and hit and knock out BIG German tanks with HVAP Tungsten. I use Greyhounds and Hellcats ALOT, niether unit has a gyro stabiliser and they both do very well firing and moving. The Allied Hellcat can fire on the FAST move (top speed 55 MPH!!!) (in the game of course) while flying across open ground and it is IMHO unsually accurate on the fast move for a tank moving and firing in CMBO. I know they won't fix this for CMBO but I hope that Steve and Charles will at least look at this "fire on the FAST" issue for CMBB. -tom w And again I will add to this thread with this insightful post from another similiar thread: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=019743&p=1 Stephen Smith Member Member # 567 posted 06-20-2001 10:54 AM As a real-world comparison- modern M1A1 tanks have essentially 'gyrostabilizers' on them. In training, we fired 'on the move', but 'on the move' meant 'driving approximately 15 mph along a straight gravel road. It did NOT mean driving cross country (even in a field!) or driving in any environment where there is much up and down motion, nor driving very fast. I don't believe it would be possible to fire modern M1A1s while 'on the move' in any but these very limited circumstances (i.e. relatively flat terrain, relatively low speed), for two reasons 1) it would be hard to keep the cross hairs on the target, and 2) it would be hard for the crew to keep themselves still enough to even look through the optics well enough to aim (the gunner would be thrown around the inside of the vehicle too much). And unless 1940's technology was much better than 1990's technology, I suspect the ability to fire on the move under any but very rare circumstances, even with a highly trained crew and a gyrostabilizer, is grossly overrated. And- I just read a book on Kursk which quoted a german gunner as saying the ideal range for engagements was about 800 meters. So what ranges should we expect in CM2? I would think about the same as in CMBO. While the optics and penetration of main guns may have allowed extremely high ranges (2000, 3000 meters in incredibly rare, extreme cases), I suspect that due to real-world terrain, actual engagements were probably conducted, 95% of the time, 0-1000 meters or so. Steve

this is what I have read about it: " Currently a virus named W32.Sircam.Worm@mm is circulating. This virus is transmitted via email. Please do NOT open email, if you are unsure of the source or have not updated your Antivirus checker. Windows 95 users: Launch Command Antivirus by clicking on the yellow C on the bottom right-hand corner of your screen Select Preferences/Advanced Your UNC path should be h:\css\update (if not please, enter manually) and select “Update Now”. You should reboot your machine to complete the update. Windows 2000 users: Launch Command Antivirus by clicking the yellow C on the bottom right-hand corner of your screen Connect to your H: drive Run Command Antivirus Select Preferences/Advanced Your UNC path should be h:\css\update (if not please, enter manually) (***See below for the path for the win2k/laptop users) Select “Update Now” You should reboot your machine to complete the update. Name: W95/Sircam.worm@mm Aliases: Sircam, W32/SirCam@MM, W32.Sircam.Worm@mm, Troj_Sircam.A, W32/SirCam-A Type: Internet Worm Description: W95/Sircam.worm@mm is a mass-mailing worm with the ability to spread itself as an attachment or through Windows Network shares. If it arrives as an attachment, you will receive a message similar to the one below: Subject: (random filename) Message: Hi! How are you? I send you this file in order to have your advice (this line may vary) See you later! Thanks Attachment: varies, but will have a double extension (i.e. file.jpg.exe) The worm also collects email addresses from the Windows Address Book, as well as files meeting certain criteria that it finds in the "My Documents" folder. It stores this information in two separate files on the system directory. The worm then sends out messages using its own SMTP engine, arbitrarily attaching one of the "My Document" files to a random email address." [ 07-24-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

The Allied Hellcat can fire on the FAST move (top speed 55 MPH!!!) (in the game of course) while flying across open ground and it is IMHO unsually accurate on the fast move for a tank moving and firing in CMBO. I know they won't fix this for CMBO but I hope that Steve and Charles will at least look at this "fire on the FAST" issue for CMBB. -tom w And again I will add to this thread with this insightful post from another similiar thread: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=019743&p=1 Stephen Smith Member Member # 567 posted 06-20-2001 10:54 AM As a real-world comparison- modern M1A1 tanks have essentially 'gyrostabilizers' on them. In training, we fired 'on the move', but 'on the move' meant 'driving approximately 15 mph along a straight gravel road. It did NOT mean driving cross country (even in a field!) or driving in any environment where there is much up and down motion, nor driving very fast. I don't believe it would be possible to fire modern M1A1s while 'on the move' in any but these very limited circumstances (i.e. relatively flat terrain, relatively low speed), for two reasons 1) it would be hard to keep the cross hairs on the target, and 2) it would be hard for the crew to keep themselves still enough to even look through the optics well enough to aim (the gunner would be thrown around the inside of the vehicle too much). And unless 1940's technology was much better than 1990's technology, I suspect the ability to fire on the move under any but very rare circumstances, even with a highly trained crew and a gyrostabilizer, is grossly overrated. And- I just read a book on Kursk which quoted a german gunner as saying the ideal range for engagements was about 800 meters. So what ranges should we expect in CM2? I would think about the same as in CMBO. While the optics and penetration of main guns may have allowed extremely high ranges (2000, 3000 meters in incredibly rare, extreme cases), I suspect that due to real-world terrain, actual engagements were probably conducted, 95% of the time, 0-1000 meters or so. Steve [ 07-24-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scipio: I had a threat about it just last week. The general opion was : no. Another question is - I'm not an expert about it, but I'm sure someone here is - I see most tanks move & fire (and hit). But I could swear I have read that the WWII tanks wasn't able to shot accuratly when moving. They usually must stop to aim and fire. Only the few models with gyrostabilizer had a realistic chance to hit on the move. Can someone enlighten me with his wisdom?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> try this: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=019743&p=1 AND check out this post: "Stephen Smith Member Member # 567 posted 06-20-2001 10:54 AM As a real-world comparison- modern M1A1 tanks have essentially 'gyrostabilizers' on them. In training, we fired 'on the move', but 'on the move' meant 'driving approximately 15 mph along a straight gravel road. It did NOT mean driving cross country (even in a field!) or driving in any environment where there is much up and down motion, nor driving very fast. I don't believe it would be possible to fire modern M1A1s while 'on the move' in any but these very limited circumstances (i.e. relatively flat terrain, relatively low speed), for two reasons 1) it would be hard to keep the cross hairs on the target, and 2) it would be hard for the crew to keep themselves still enough to even look through the optics well enough to aim (the gunner would be thrown around the inside of the vehicle too much). And unless 1940's technology was much better than 1990's technology, I suspect the ability to fire on the move under any but very rare circumstances, even with a highly trained crew and a gyrostabilizer, is grossly overrated. And- I just read a book on Kursk which quoted a german gunner as saying the ideal range for engagements was about 800 meters. So what ranges should we expect in CM2? I would think about the same as in CMBO. While the optics and penetration of main guns may have allowed extremely high ranges (2000, 3000 meters in incredibly rare, extreme cases), I suspect that due to real-world terrain, actual engagements were probably conducted, 95% of the time, 0-1000 meters or so. Steve " [ 07-23-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

bump

bump

um..... The first thing the comes to mind... "Egg Shells with Hammers" Not all first shots hit the target Not all hits cause penetration Not all penetrations are catastrophic. that aspect of the game "feels" about right to me, but that is only my clueless sense of the reality of WW II tank combat suggesting "it feels about right". carry on.... -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by karch: I have a 7 month old and my CM playing has gone from juggling about 4-8 PBMs and the odd IP game, to .... Zero games. I'm trying to finish a few games that got dropped right after he was born, but those little munchkins take so much time. I can't believe it. Scott<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Help Help.... This sounds like the CMBO "OH my God there goes my life I have a Baby coming" thread.. Well gues What? OH no What did I do? we have one on the way and its ETA is Sept 15 What???! no more CMBO addiction/fix after junior arrives? I'm goind into withdrawl just thinking about it. How did/do you guys manage to cope with the withdrawl symptoms? -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Frenchy: Newest article in PC gamer (september issue) states that this feature (variable turn ending) has been implemented.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That sounds GREAT! And and can you believe this EXTREME fog of war WOW, I wish they could bring all these GREAT new features to CMBO! -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Frenchy: New issue of PC Gamer has sneak peek of CM2. Variable turn ending to be implemented!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> YES !!!! Thats a BIG one!!! Good On Ya, BTS And a BIG thanks AGAIN, to Steve and Charles!! -tom w

funny... Does this thread have an Echo? -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kestrl: I know the PC folks have a Variable turn ending option program for CM but there are no plans for a Mac version. How does this variable turn ending program work? if the battle is set for 20 turns are you at least guranteed 20 turns or will it maybe end before 20? This thing about people rushing the flag at the last minute with crews and FO is really dishonorable and nothing i hate more is when after i knock there halftrack or armor and they bring up the crew to the frontline to fight. I normally spend some extra time after knocking out armor and continue firing to disable the crew.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hi In the Winecape tourneys the setting is 25 turns -/+ 4 turns this means the game could end after the 21st turn or on any turn up until the after the 29th turn. The random game end turn thing is a setting in game turns and a -/+ number that is the varible. so you could say 30 turns -/+ 10% (3 turns) then the game could end after turn 27 or any turn after that up to turn 33. for competitive tournements this is the ONLY way, it really just means the flag rush starts early but you still never know when the game will end. ITS great and it should be an optional feature in CMBB -tom w

Hi I'm sorry I still unclear about this new mountain troop optional rule. Does the German player have to select Combined Arms and then gets to spend NOTHING on tanks or vechicles? OR does pick unrestricted and then pick German mountian troops and max out on infantry and TWO towed guns? I'm sorry I'm just unclear as to how this rule is supposed to work? -tom w

Hi Treeburst from this page: http://tournamenthouse.com/CM/CAL/Opt.shtml These are CAL optional rules: CAL has been built upon ideas and suggestions from players of CMBO and members of Tournamenthouse. If you have suggestions we would like to hear them. CAL’s mailing list will host discussions for further guideline additions and opponents wanted. All CAL members are welcome to participate in these discussions. Many additions to this section are planned for the future. Let us here your ideas. Sign-ups for CAL’s mailing list is located on the main CAL page Here 1) Infantry Battles (No vehicles) Select Infantry force in CMBO. "Towed guns will be limited to no more then 3 per side up to 1000 points spent. 1 gun per 1000 points spent thereafter. (Example 2,000-point game up to 4 guns allowed per side, 5,000-point game up to 7 guns per side). This includes all guns from the “support” category of CMBO. (Artillery caliber limitations may be imposed by player agreement prior to game setup). 2) Mechanized Battles (No Tanks) Select Mechanized force in CMBO. Towed guns will be limited to no more then 3 per side up to 1000 points spent. 1 gun per 1000 points spent thereafter. (Example 2,000-point game up to 4 guns allowed per side, 5,000-point game up to 7 guns per side). This includes all guns from the "support" category of CMBO. The Attacking player and both players in Meeting Engagements will purchase halftracks or trucks capable of towing each gun purchased. (This makes the increased costs of guns something to consider and sometimes will add the missing Halftracks back into the force mix). Jeeps and Kulbewagon type vehicles will not count towards this total. (Artillery caliber limitations may be imposed by player agreement prior to game setup). British Wasps some players have noticed them being used to set terrain on fire intentionally, as a sort of mobile minefield projector. They could be agreed to be excluded as any flame projector vehicles could be. It would be much better to just avoid this type of play. German soft skinned AA vehicles. There is some debate as to CMBO's game engine correctly modeling damage to these vehicles. Small arms fire seems to attack them ok but longer range heavy weapons fire is said to be modeled incorrectly. http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=018686 Last Updated 05/15/01 Copyright © TournamentHouse.com, 2000.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Juju: The problem mentioned above was that (on-map) AI troops made a move for a flag prematurely (a historical thingy-problem). The how's and why's aren't paricularly important right now. What I was thinking of was some sort of 'release command,' to be implemented by the scenario designer. This should enable him/her to lock certain units/formations in place (on-map, in the editor) to be released for player (or AI) control after a specific number of turns, or maybe even a specific 'trigger-event' (the loss of a flag, for instance, or the spotting of heavy armor. You name it). Any additional ideas? Changes? BTS? Anyone?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> YES! Great idea complicated?, maybe Real Hard to code up?, probably BUT none the less still a GREAT idea for a new dimension in Scenario design! Thanks -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Treeburst155: Judge Treeburst155 shall now rule on the question of Gebirgsjaegers and towed guns. The following addition (improvement) to the CAL Rules is now in effect for this tournament: Gebirgjaegers may buy towed guns that are available to them without providing transportation for said guns. Because this makes guns cheaper to acquire for the mountain troops they are only allowed to purchase TWO guns max for our 1,500 point tourney battles. The Honorable Judge Treeburst155 out.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Umm..... Again I would like to point out that there is wine and MONEY involved here and that changing the RULES, Again, half way thruogh the tourney, is in my opinion, "questionable". I say this because of the potential effect of this new rule on the Allied opponent. Will the Opponent know that he is about to face German Mountain Troops? What Cal Rule would this battle be fought under? Why not say that these German Mountian troops can only be used on the CAL optional rule that allows for "infantry only" game? If Kiwi Joe Asked be to play Short 75 Rules (his favourite by the way) and then showed up on the battle field with German Mountain troops, two guns and NO AFVs or transport for his two guns I personally would be TICKED! Can you tell me that this new rule is now actually an option to the infantry only CAL rule and will the Allies also be allowed to buy TWO towed guns with out transport? You have opened a BIG can of worms here and I am VERY curious as to the effect and consquense of this new rule on game play. I am not at all interested in the prospect of being surprised as the Allies by German Mountain Troops with two towed guns and NO transport or AFV's. RANT Off -tom w

still curious about this one anyone else interested in lobbying for this possible option? -tom w

Allied Tanks and anti tank guns with Tungsten (t) HVAP rounds AFTER Jan 45 are in fact better than Allied tanks with only limited availability of HVAP before Dec 44. -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Khanqueror: I ordered CM last saturday, it arrived yesterday. Swift and prompt service plus a PLAYABLE game is sweet! After suffering the frustrations of WW2OL and AO i think ill be playing this for quite awhile.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Practice up on the AI and play a real person via TCP/IP as soon as you can. Some live opponents can be VERY challenging. -tom w

self serving gratuitous BUMP Since there is another current thread about gun damage. -tom w