aka_tom_w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bobo: Yo! 1. I think that the CM CD comes with both the Mac and PC version on it. Is that correct? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> THAT is Correct! <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> 2. Does anyone have a cheap laptop recommendation to run CM? I need to get a machine to play CM and a laptop makes the most sense. Any recommendations? Thanks, Bobo<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well that questions screams for me to recomend an iBook from Apple. They are Fast and thaey are always coming down in price. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-12-2000).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-12-2000).]

I'm not sure the two faces are two different women? I looked closely at both and I think that is the same face, of course the face wearing the black leather is a little more difficult to stay focused on -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by russellmz: i thought any knocked out afv's were able to be used as cover <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ONLY if they are burning and smoking! It is the Smoke that blocks the LOS, NOT the vehicle its self. Test it out and see for your self. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-12-2000).]

Well I would beg to dissagree with Doug If "each shell is tracked in real time physics, the engine can actually calculate where an incoming shell would hit." Then the round would not be able to travel THROUGH Live and dead AFV's that are not burning. It is my opinion that the game does not model physcis to the degree of accuracy you suggest. I think Some random number generator spits out a value that determines the location of the hit. how could it possibly model the accuracy to "track" where the round was actually aimed and where it subsquently hit, without the use of some form of a random chance variable being generated. In other games like ASL and Tobruk we used to roll dice and go through a series for combat result look up tables to determine first the result of the hit hit or Miss? if hit then where did it hit? (rool the dice) when the location of the hit was determined a llook up table was referenced to determine the result of the hit at that location. We have been told that in CMBO very complicated and state of the art algorythms replace these look up tables and can account for ANY percentage of chance or random varible between 0% and 100% including decimals and exact angles for determining penetration results. I am of the strong opinion that the location of exactly where the round hits, once a round has been determined to have hit, it does a random number calculation based on percentages of exposed areas' (measured with painstaking accruacy I'm sure ) meaning that if for given tank the exposed area of the lower hull is deemed to be 20% and the exposed area of the upper hull is deemed to be 50% and the exposed area of the turret is deemed to be 30% of the TOTAL exposed armour that the round could hit, then THOSE are the percentages that are used to determine the chances of a round striking any particular exposed armour surface on the tank. but that's ALL just opinion and conjecture on my part as most of the REALLY interestoing Math calculations and inner workings of the armour penetration algorythms are closed guarded trade secrets so Says BTS when we've asked about them in the past anyways. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-12-2000).]

More calculations: The round is fired.... First Calculation-> did the round hit the tank? If yes Where? If no Where did it impact the gound? NOW if hit = yes then where hit?) if the AVF presents it frontal aspect? Chance to hit track? (should be small ~5%) Chance to hit Lower Hull? ( what%? 20 - 25%?) Chance to hit upper Hull (40 - 50% ?) Chance to hit Gun to cause Gun Damage? (~5% ?) Chance to hit Turret (should be small 10- 20%) Chance to hit Turret Ring (does the game do that? 5%) Run the random number generator? Determine where the round hit with the NEW proposal Like ASL it should go somthing like this: Where did it hit? If the hit is a track hit or a lower hull hit Calacualtion should Ask "Is the Tank Hull down"? If yes then the round strikes the ground short immediatly in front of the tank. If he tank is not hull down then the round hits the tank int that area. This way keeps the chance to hit percentage on the turret (say 10- 20% in the example above) the SAME for hull down tanks and exposed tanks. I guess what we are asking is HOW does the game handle the location of the hit if the tank it hull down and how does it calculate the location if the tank is not hull down? -tom w P.S. Legal Disclaimer: I don't have a clue what I'm talking about. I invented, out of thin air, ALL the numbers and hit locations percentages noted above as a purely FICTIONAL example from my knowledge of how a similiar target chance to hit system works in Avalon Hill's old game Tobruk, and they have nothing to do with how the game really works and I have NO idea how these location calculations in CMBO actually work. I posted the numbers above just an example of how the previuosly proposed ASL model of determinig hit location might work. [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-12-2000).]

This is a VERY intertesting thread and topic. I would be interested to see it addressed or discussed by Steve or Charles. If weaknesses in turret design and armour thincknees indicate that a tank is worse off when it is hull down, (as the turret is more easily penetrated then the hull) then this should really be looked into. I do think you folks are really on to something here. I have personally found that yes indeed, especially when using tungsten a frontal hit on a turret could lead to one of two bad things, Gun Damaged, or penetration leading to a KO'd tank. If the odds favour a lower hul hit or a upper hull hit, which are both usually more heavily armoured than the turret it would clearly make sense to leave the tank NOT hull down and let the rounds (hopefully) bounce off the upper hull or lower hull as the odds of a round hitting those area's is greater than the chance of a front turret hit, I would assume. This is a very interesting observation. Anyone else? Comments? Steve? Charles? Matt? Dan? -tom w

I just ran 11 elite M8's against 10 green mrk IV's no real hard stats here, but about 60% of the rounds that hit, the shell broke up or ricochetted. 40 % were penetrations at about 450 meters I got two front turret penetrations with the 37mm KOing the MrkIv's playing against the AI I lost 3 M8's and KO'd all 10 Mrk IV's There were plenty of EASY flank and rear penetrations. in one heated dual at 826 meters 3 M8's clustered together pounded a Mrk IV until finally one M8 was lost but one of them popped the Mrk IV with a Front Upper Hull penetration at Weak Point and KO'd it! (at one for one trade like that would be great odds if you could count on it all the time) I did, however not earn even one single front Lower hull penetration. There was one Gun hit knocking out the gun and one Track hit, both lead to flanking shots to K-Kill the Mrk IV. It was fun Light fast Elite M8's against green Mrk IV's (no infantry!) Like Shooting Fish a barrel ! -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-12-2000).]

This one has me some what interested, and curious, if the frontal lower hull of the mrk IV is that thick that 37 mm round should not really have penetrated if it was not a "weak spot hit"? I think I'll play the AI as the Allies and use about 10 elite M8 Greyhounds against say about 7 Mrk IV's and see what happens. No infantry should be fun -tom w

just a bump to remind newer players what Deanco's Gunmetal interface looks like. ALSO if you are new to this game you WILL want to learn quickly what things in the game will provide cover and what won't. ONLY KO'd vechicles that are BURNING will block LOS, all other vehicles, live or dead or immobile will not block LOS or provide cover. Pillboxes and bunkers do not provide LOS block or cover for units that are NOT in them. Roadblocks do not bloock LOS or provide cover. Light houses can occasionally block LOS but somtimes they don't, so don't hide tanks behind light house as it may be spotted and targeted through the windows by enemy units. Live AFV's do NOT block LOS or LOF and can fire right through each other to their desired target so keep this in mind as you plan your tactics and plot your moves. Infantry gain no cover or benefit behind any vehicle that is not burning and smoking. Just a friendly word to the wise. -tom w

Just to keep things interesting there is ALWAYS the remote chance (1 or 2 % depending n the AFV in question IIRC) of an "armour weak spot" pentration. NOW, I know that the info on detailed hits reported usually tells you that you got lucky and fluked a weak spot hit and penetrated so in this case I would ask you if you are sure you did not see a "Lower Hull Weak spot penetration" ? Barring that I have no clue, as to how the 37 mm round fired by M8 penetrated the Front lower hull of a Mrk IV? Anyone else? interesting situation, I have never seen one like it. -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maximus: Huh? What? So a Mac is virus immune? I don't think so! Our local school system uses Macs, only because they struck a deal with Apple back in 1980 or something, and believe me, they are known to get system wide virus attacks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sorry....... I MUST speak up I have been a MAC system admin for over 5 years. In that time I have managed 100's of Mac's, AND yes there are virii that infect Mac's, but they are VERY few and far between, no Mac can open or run a .exe file, so right there ALL virii that are transimitted by these PC executable attachments or files will not and cannot infect a Mac. The worst virus problem most mac users face is the dreaded MS Word Macro virus that is transmitted by an infect Word .doc, which then insidiously infects the Word App that then infects ALL subsquent Word .docs that the uer generates, BUT it is not really destructive, only a big nuisance when attempting to save files. Other than that one I have only ever had to deal with two other significant Mac virus outbreaks on a institution wide level, one was the AutoStart Worm, which easily infects macs that have quick time and the Quicktime "Auto Play" check box is left checked. (Everyone one who has a mac who is reading this right now should go there quicktime control panel and unchecked the Enable Audio CD AutoPlay and Enable CD-ROM AutoPlay buttons in the Auto selectio of the Quicktime control panel). This one is EASY to prevent but harder to clean up. There was one other bad Mac virus that I have dealt with that was something like " Nr virB" (?) I can't remember, but it was the only other one I can think of and it was not destructive. Mac users represent a samll community, and we are largely not targeted by disgruntled ex-employees of the anti virus software makers or ex-employees of Microsoft. We represent less than 10% of all computer users, and within that group of Mac users there are problably only a handfull if individuals who actually know how to program and write virus code. Lack of problems with Virii is one of the MAJOR benefits of running a Mac. Not once on this forum have you heard of a Mac user complaining of a virus attack on their mac. AND we LAUGH at ALL virus files are transmitted by .exe files because we can't even open and run them never mind get our machines infected by some dumb new virus! It is not an over statement or an unsubstantiated claim or broad generaliztion to say "there are fewer Mac virii than Pc Virii and the Mac virii are for the most part, far less dangerous and destructive then there PC counterparts" hope that clears up ANY misunderstanding. (If I was honest I can say I wish I had a PC as well, and knew as much about fixing and maintianing it as I do about Mac's so I could play OTHER cool games Like Steel Beasts and Panzer Elite and Age of Empires II which are ONLY available on the STINKING PC!!! ) -tom w P.S. Apple has ACTIVLEY targeted the educational Market for years, it was one of there only relatively successful marketing efforts. [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-10-2000).]

I would like to add.... Mac mice have ONLY one button and Mac users prefer keyboard short cuts and are for the most part in the habbit of using and memorizing keyboard short cuts from other apps. I like the game and the interface the way it is. If we could configure the key board short cuts that would be nice too. if the ` key was NOT the chat key that would really nice others have recommended the number 0 on the number pad to intiate the chat. Again Mac 's have only one mouse button and the game was designed from the onset as being cross platform and there are some real die hard dedicated Mac zealots here, (I happen to be one of them ) who might not be able to accomondate the right click without the necessity of option clicking which is nuisance. -tom w

Very interesting replies..... I agree with Germanboy, when he says these things weren't "surgical strike weapons" and I think the game models the "fluke" nature of a hit or miss VERY well. I am still very curious to know if there is a difference between a unacquired chance to hit % and an acquired chance to hit %? I assnme that an Elite crew has a better chance to hit than green crew but I have not tested it? Does any one know if a 'zook, piat or 'shreck team have a greater chance to hit after a first or second shot miss as the target may be "deemed" to be acquired, as they attempt to adjust for the margin with which they their missed shot(s) or are these weapons so inaccurate that you could conceivably steady the weapon and fire at the exact spot 5 times and some shots would miss and stray wildly and some shots would hit makeing retargeting and attempting to adjust for the missed shot a complete waste of time? There are really fun weapons when they strike at long range and KO things like King Tigers . Great Discussion I'm completely unsure weather the game models there accuracy or chance to hit % realistically as I have NO idea of how accurate they were, or what the Real Life™ change to hit %'s actually were? Can anyone comment on how close they think this aspect of the game models the reality of their use in WWII post D-Day anti tank combat? As a personal comment I don't expect a great deal from them so I'm also pleasantly surprised if they do get a hit, and not really disappointed or surprised if they miss, I really like the wildly flukey way the odds seem to be coded, so that sometimes you get lucky and sometimes you don't and you can never really tell if you will be lucky or if you won't. I think its these kind of random elements that keep the game FUN !! comments? -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-09-2000).]

The use of Tunsten is now generous. I really like the fact that they will forego the First "spotting" round of reg AP. I have had Hellcats up against Panther's and KTs and JagTigers and they will load and fire tungsten straight off and they can get an uncanny amount of First Shot hits that will KO these big german tanks. Its a whole new ball game with Allied TDs and Tungsten Now, I have not yet had a TD run out of tungsten yet, when it may have needed it. By the time all the tungsten is expended there has been no german armour left to target every time I've played so far. I think tungsten works GREAT now. -tom w

I'm not sure about 'zooks piats and 'shrecks but other AFV main weapons have an increaseed chance to hit after a miss, and more increase aftera second miss. Maybe that 5% you see is the unmodified chance to hit an unacquired target. After the target is acquired and you fire a miss or two at it, them your third or forth shot chance to hit percentage should go up substanially. Again I'm not sure about anti tank teams but the main weapons of tank and anti tank field guns, get better odds to hit after every miss. Some please correct me if I'm wrong? Anti tank crew experience makes a Big difference too. A crack or Elite unit will do a great deal better than a green or conscript unit. When it comes to anti tank teams experience level makes a HUGE difference, because a Tank KILL in this game is such a BIG deal. Expecially when you can KO one with a lucky 'Zook, Piat or 'Shreck fluke shot at long distance. -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: However, this results in some unrealistic behavior. Stalking a tank (even one buttoned up) becomes almost impossible for a LATW team, since ANYONE spotting the team means that the tank has also spotted the team. Indeed, armor in general is greatly helped by this little issue, since it takes away one of their major weaknesses (poor ability to see much, especially when buttoned). Jeff Heidman<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> well I agree (sort of) What we have now in the game is "borg like intel spotting" or absolute spotting, one units spots something and all other friendly units know about it. That's Absolute spotting. Relative spotting as has been discussed will be VERY challenging to model correctly, but sure YES it would be cool. With regard to stalking tanks with anti tank teams, I had a Panther NAILED by a zook that remained hidden from ALL my units as it sneaked (snuck?) up across 50 - 70 meters of OPEN grass, to within 30 meters of my Panther to score the HIT. How is that possible? , try playing with armour units at night in the FOG!, thats where you get the BEST, closest aproximation of relative spotting. Nobody can see anything and there is the potential for friendly fire. NO unit can see more than 30 or 40 meters, plenty of grey unidentified tanks shapes and sound contacts running around. Want to play with the closest thing to relative spotting? Set up an attack or a defense in the dark in the Fog at Night. Now you have relative spotting, relativly speaking no body can see anything! (yes, true, once one unit actually does spot an enemy unit ALL friendly units still know about it) It was fun and I highly recommend the combination. FOG at Night with Armour and anti tanks units he hehe Good luck -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-08-2000).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-08-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sgt Stryker: I just received my full game Tuesday and hooked up for a couple of PBEM games. Last night I was on the receiving end of a German 300mm rocket barrage and WHOA! That was impressive! The largest artillery in the demo was 105's so when the first rocket hit it about knocked me outta my chair To think that used to be simulated by a roll of the dice. Thanks BTS, this is a great game! P.S. I don't think my troops liked it as much as I did <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Welcome Aboard! Get the v1.1b patch right away and try live head to head with the timer via TCP/IP Don't forget to Check out MadMatt's CMHQ for all the cool new mods and updates. and don't forget..... HAVE FUN! -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by coralsaw: OT, Tom W, gorgeous screens. What mods are you using? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thanks I do pride myself in mod selection (tom pats self on back ) I was a HUGE fan of Gunslinger's "toned down" look. First Off Gunslinger Changed EVERYTHING, he toned down and subdued and modified EVERY .bmp file in the game. Then other's followed suit and modified certain elements. I am still using some of Gunslinger's buildings, (because he is the only one so far to provide something that looks like a shed or a barn) some of Magua's buidlings are in there and some of Panzertruppen's buildings. I have used the latest tree's from DD and his tree bases. I think the grass is Gunslinger's? ALL mods have a "subdued" or "toned Down" feel to them. the .jpg files you can see posted in this thread are a screen grabs off a Mac G3 (screen grab makes at .pict file) then the .pict file is opened in Adobe Image Ready and it is optimized and saved as a web ready .jpg file and a web .html file is created at the same time. The scenario is called King of the Hill and I designed it myself. Its a late war, tank battle of Heavy hitters and BIG tanks, plenty of tungsten around to KO BIG german tanks -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-08-2000).]

In the "one bloody tough Sherman M3A1(76)" thread I (perhaps foolishly) speculated: " quote: Originally posted by Maximus: Tiger fired and got *another* track hit. Sherman fired and got a ricochet hit. Tiger fired again, getting a penetration hit (don't remember where) but not a KO. ! To be fair to the game the Tiger fired its forth shot and Hit AND penetrated and was then cursed with the extreme poor luck (I guess that was akin to rolling snake eyes twice) of the "penetration without result" I know these very are rare but that's probably where the really bad luck part came in. that penetration without result is rare, hopefully 1 or 2% rare like the weak spot frontal armour penetration, STILL a little BAD luck goes a LONG way in this game." This was based on my GUESS that if weak spot frontal armour penetrations are in the 1% to 2% range then MAYBE a "penetration without result" chance or percentage may also be in the 1% to 2% odds range. ALL of this is JUST a guess and wild speculation on my part. I do recall one of the readme's on one of the updates 1.02? 1.03 or 1.04? included a reference to make the chance of a "penetration without result" even lower than it was originally. ALL guess work on my part. -tom w

Me too I'm on a Mac using Netscape 4.76 it used to work FINE all the time I figured when I upgraded to communicator 4.76 that browser didn't actuallyy work correctly sometime it knows me and sometimes it does not ususlly I have to fill it out its a pain come to think of it , doesn't work right in I.E. either? not sure where the problem is? -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Croda: As the man said, Dec. 7th is a day that has lived in infamy, and serves as a reminder that eternal vigilance is needed in a hostile world. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thanks Croda, Thats sort of what I was getting at. I couldn't have said it better myself, but that's what I meant. -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Olle Petersson: When to use it? Ambush with limited LOS, I guess. When I've tried it in situations with better LOS, the enemy seems to spot my ambusher anyway. When the enemy start shooting the hiding vehicle won't respond very fast. I suppose it will work better with darkness and fog, where sounds are more dominant than vision. Cheers Olle<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If you have never played a QB double blind at night in the FOG you should try it. It is VERY nerve wracking and you WILL want to hide your vehicles to keep them from given away sound contact info... you WILL also want to MOVE all of them all at the same time to confuse the enemy Try it..... seriously a tank or mechanized encounter in the dark in the FOG is is a real treat, radically different tactics are required to both attack and defend. I played a TCP/IP QB last night with Jarhead and it was in the fog at night and visibility was about 25 - 35 meters and that was IT! tanks and vehicles show up as unidentified grey shapes until they practically run you over. It was wild. Anyway when it comes to hiding vehicles it make sense at night or in the fog or in the fog at night. -tom w P.S. AAR I lost again I was the Germans and on the attack and the U.S. defender earned a VERY minor vitory. bah! (in the dark he snuck up on a hiding Panther with a zook team and wasted it at close range. I never saw them coming and I had NO idea what whacked my Panther until after the game.) [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-07-2000).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-07-2000).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-07-2000).]

I guess as a Canadian this perhaps should not be the first thing I think of when I wake on Dec 7, but it was still a dreadful and sneaky surprise attack and we should all not forget the lessons learned from those who were not prepared. I will remember all the killed and wounded from that attack for their courage and bravery. Lest we not forget. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-07-2000).]

OK I tested Pershings and Super Pershings Against JagTigers and King Tigers Last night. The Pershings started with 5,6 or 7 tungsten rounds. All Pershings and Super Pershings fired their tungsten rounds FIRST against their King Tiger and Jagtiger targets. All tank crews were Veteran Crack or Elite. It was day time in Clear weather. They engaged them at about 200 m and all tungsten rounds that hit penetrated frontally. I would say, in this one test scenario, the Pershings did NOT hestitate at all to load the "good stuff" and fire off the tungsten straight away. It think they have fixed the tungsten problem very well and it feels just right now. Thanks again. -tom w

Any other comments or observations? Am I the only arm chair General on this board that did not read the readme for v1.05 to know the tanks and other units (? I think ) can now spot and shoot straight thru light buildings? Is this news to any one else? -tom w