aka_tom_w

"State of the art grahics is good for everybody,even the chart loving data freaks like myself(everyone likes eyecandy),it will increase the amount of dollars for BFC,with those dollars they can produce better games for all. ( I like this part: ) Remember, a finely tuned Mercedez will not sell without an excellent paint job." Good Point!! I totally agree! -tomw

"Visually, Afrika Korps ranges from the good to the hideous. Few gaming images are as satisfying as seeing a tank round find its mark and watching a Panzer break into flames. The graphics are still very blocky, however, with hills being a series of sharp angles and rough areas marked by the same jagged rocks wherever you are. Ironically, the blocky graphics look worst when applied to blocky things; the towns and cities are never really convincing." From the review link posted above. BUT the graphics ARE dated The game engine is what? 4 years old now? It would be an omission on the part of any reviewer not to mention that the graphics are blocky. Graphics are WHAT YOU SEE First. We all KNOW there is a totally KICK ASS amour penetration model and tac AI and Strat AI AND a great code that you can't really see or "feel" until you play the game "deeply". So 4.5 out 5 with a comment about blocky graphics sound REALLY positive then doesn't it ! Cheers -tom w

"Visually, Afrika Korps ranges from the good to the hideous. Few gaming images are as satisfying as seeing a tank round find its mark and watching a Panzer break into flames. The graphics are still very blocky, however, with hills being a series of sharp angles and rough areas marked by the same jagged rocks wherever you are. Ironically, the blocky graphics look worst when applied to blocky things; the towns and cities are never really convincing." From the review link posted above. BUT the graphics ARE dated The game engine is what? 4 years old now? It would be an omission on the part of any reviewer not to mention that the graphics are blocky. Graphics are WHAT YOU SEE First. We all KNOW there is a totally KICK ASS amour penetration model and tac AI and Strat AI AND a great code that you can't really see or "feel" until you play the game "deeply". So 4.5 out 5 with a comment about blocky graphics sound REALLY positive then doesn't it ! Cheers -tom w

we have been down this road a few times around here "The differing magnifications, light sensitivity, reflectivity, viewing angles, etc., are part of the equation, but it's more important to realize how the sighting system is tied into the weapons system and how they're used together. The advantage is clearly in favor of the approach used by the Germans. (In fact, every modern weapon system uses the same technique: the operator puts the pipper on the target. The weapon system adjusts for range and lead, not the operator.)" for more on this see this web page: http://www.panzerelite.com/zeiss/zeiss.html it has pics like this: and compares the two optics systems with descriptions and images! (it should be noted the game Panzer Elite was out before CMBO and it was made in Germany so it is not new or ground breaking and the designers may have spend more effort modeling German optics and targeting systems) I have played the game and it is fun for a little while (like a couple of weeks) It is like CMBO with Franko's Ironman rules in that you ARE the TC and you can only see the battle from view level one or level 2 BUT you get to see it through the gunner's sight (if you want) and you can BE the gunner and do all the gunner targeting your self and THAT is fun for ME! (for change) you have to be REAL good to get a hit on a moving tank. And you can FORGET firing while on the move because it is IMPOSSIBLE to hit ANYTHING with AP when attempting to target while moving!!!) While there is NOW actually an attempt by BFC to simulate and model higher quality German optics and targeting systems, in the game (its BETTER than CMBO which did not account for that factor), I would agree that perhaps a better chance to hit could be afforded the German optics systems in some tanks. (but that is only my uninformed opinion) "It is my opinion that BF.C has consistently under-modelled the effectiveness of the advantage of the German optics systems" I would have to agree. -tom w [ January 05, 2004, 12:29 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

oh yes within a 1 minute turn this is truly micro management at it is very finest ! But it is very clever and creative work around (if you practice and time it right otherwise you might be TOO late and that could be worse!) But I doubt I would ever use it , I guess I figure I can either wait ONE whole minute to target and open fire in the next minute or open fire now (in this minute and let them do their BEST!) but thats just me -tom w

no, don't worry I just HAD to play the Demo LoD until I could see the Tiger Take out ALL my Allied armour! I played it five times and ONCE the Tiger Killed ALL the armour in about 2 minutes including the 2 M10's in one minute. The 88mm is leathal there is no doubt about that. For Redwolf in all my postings I have been refering to the 75mm Sherms specific to the LoD Demo scenario. -tom w

interesting observation MikeyD that "sort of" makes sense. -tom w

Yup CMAK sure "feels" different than CMBO and CMBB thats for sure. :eek: Tanks seem to take WAY more hits and "nuisance" penetrations that have very little or no effect now... (except of course for the weakspot penetration from the Sherm 75 mm in the first post ) Maybe that is more realistic? I really don't know? :confused: -tom w [ December 29, 2003, 10:26 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

Where are the "Normandy Scenarios" for CMAK? is Barkmann's Corner on the CD? Are there any newly released ETO, Bulge related or Normanyd scenarios for CMAK available somewhere? sorry I have been "out of it" for a while For CMAK whats new and whats Good? (scenarios for the ETO and the Bulge and Normandy?) Thanks -tom w

well sure When I faced off against that Tiger the second time the odds were pretty good I think...... It looked like two to one to me Two M10's (76 mm) to One Tiger (88mm) the odds and probabilities at 620m looked like the M10's had a decent chance of frontal aspect penetration. (a better than %50/50 chance I am guessing, of a partial or full penetration of the upper or lower hull of the Tiger at that range if the round scored a hit no?) BUT in the first case, the 75 mm Sherm AP round had a REALY really low chance (it should be closer to Zero than %1 or %2 or %3 ) of penetrating the Tiger at 419m in as in my first encounter with the lucky shot and the weak spot penetration to the front Turret of the Tiger . right? -tom w [ December 26, 2003, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

OK so I played the LoD Demo scenario again, as the Allies for only the second time. This time I had a chance to duel it out with the Tiger with my two M10's From about 620 m (the crest of the BIG hill in the middle) the two M10's opened up on the Tiger. Poor kitty didn't have a chance. The Tiger being MORE experienced opened fire and got the FIRST shot off first! It missed one shot fired Again and got one M10, one hit, one kill, 88mm death ray strikes again! (no problem with that as it should be!) One M10 down! But the other one is busy pumping out the rounds in the first minute of the battle the Tiger took about three hits and one hit late in the minute was a front turret partial penetration. (Tiger says ouch!) So it looked like the Tiger was shocked. (I think) In the next minute it did NOT return fire and the M10 pumped a few more rounds into it and got a front upper hull penetration, at 620 m the 76mm AP of the M10 can and did penetrate the Tiger Frontally. Tiger KO'ed!! (NO problem with that!) Now that was a good duel. (no flukey weak spot penetrations!) I have found that in my experience I have had FAR more difficulty taking down Panthers than Tigers. My First post was ALL about the fact that at 419m the Sherm's regular 75 MM AP round went straight through the Frontal Turret Aspect of the Tiger killing it in ONE shot! Ka -Boom! It was MUCh more fun to duke it out with the two M10's at 620m's . I am going to try again and see if the Tiger acts a little bit More indestructable? he he -tom w [ December 26, 2003, 11:13 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

This an interesting comment from a veteran gamer. (re: Ligur's comments below) Thanks When I wrote the original post I was sort of wondering if anyone else found that Tiger 1 easy to deal with and kill while playing the Allies for the first time and NOT knowing what to expect or what you would be facing in the "end game" of the scenario. so far (at least in this thread) no one else has mentioned that the Tiger was too easy to kill or too easy to take out without armour. In fact it would seem in all the comments about this scenario it would appear I have been the only player to KO the Tiger with ONE frontal turret penetration from a Sherm. (NOT the M10's mind you just one regular 75 mm AP round to the front turret area of the Tiger and BOOM it was dead) So it would then be appropriate to conclude this was a VERY lucky shot and a complete FLUKE as no one else is reportlng that the Tiger died from one round fired from a Sherm. I think if it had of been a lower hull weak spot penetration or even a upper hull weak spot penetration I would have be less bewildered but the front turret aspect of the Tiger 1 was VERY heavily armoured and I would speculate it was designed to withstand hits from reg 75 mm ALLIED AP from anything but point blank range (the range in my case was 419 m) But in this case it looks like it was a REAL FLUKE shot and no one else is reporting anything like it so perhaps I should play that demo scenario again (I have only played it once so far) and see what happens when the Tiger shows up in the second or third trial run of the demo. Thanks to all who have posted here, I have really enjoyed reading about other player's experiences as the Allies with that demo scenario. It is A GOOD demo scenario to be sure! Merry Christmas -tom w

Replying to Redwolf: I understand the game mechanics and don't dispute your post. "But what I am still not sure about is the high penetration of pre-October 1944 U.S. 75mm AP ammunition in CMAK. At the time of Normandy the Tiger's back and sides are said to resist 75mm AP at point black range." That is what I had in mind when I posted my concern. I do not know of any documented REAL world WWII example or incident or battle or engagment where a Sherm firing a 75 mm AP round EVER penetrated the frontal aspect of the Tiger I turret? NOT one, not ever. I could be wrong but I don't think there is a "weak spot" not even %1 or % 2 0r %3 of the frontal aspect of the Tiger 1 turret NOT anywhere. The ONLY thing that makes sense is if the round penetrated through the gun sight or the 75 mm round miraculuously went STRAIGHT down the 88mm gun barrel (In that case the odds should be as low as one in 1000 or 1 in 10,000). BUT thats just me. I suppose the good thing is that "ANYTHING can happen" so it is not so predictable. I like that concept and I FULLY support the %1 weak spot chance to hit and I guess a %50 reduction in armour thickness at the weak spot is not unrealistic (BUT I really have no way to know that). So in my case in the scenario I posted regarding the KO'd Tiger in the demo scenario I guess I should just shut up and say "Hey ! I got lucky! and nailed the Tiger and KO'd it with one shot from a Sherm Way to Go! Medals all around!" (But I would rather dissect the engagement and pick the wings off it and analyze every little thing about it to death because I am just THAT way !! ) oh well -tom w In Combat Mission, on any armor hit there is a small constant chance that it is assumed to be at a weak spot. If a weak spot is hit the armor is assumed to have about 50% is what it usually has. Steve said it is 1%, I am pretty sure it is 2-3%. Both chances and the 50% reduction seem fair to me. If a tank has a "shot trap" in the CM unit definition this chance is raised to 10% which again seems like a fine model to me. It is unclear to me whether the shot trap only applies to front hits. </font>

well I did not mean it exactly that way But at 419m when a Sherm puts a regular 75mm AP round (NOT tungsten, NOT 76mm apc) clean throught the front turret (at weak spot) of a Tiger and KO's it with one lucky shot I think that is maybe beyond the realm of the realistically possible. Where is the "weak spot" on the front turret mantle of the Tiger? WHAT?? we squeazed off a 75mm round and it went straight down the larger 88mm barrel (I guess that is possible) to meet the next round in the breach and Ka BOOM! (I guess that actually happened ONCE in all of WWII yes? no?) OR maybe the round squeazed its way clean through the optical lens sighting aperture (hole) to hit to the rounds stored in the turret to KO it??? I dunno? :confused: I just figure the front turret mantle of the Tiger I was one of the most heavily armoured and well protected amoured aspects of ANY tank in ALL of WWII and getting a penentration at weak spot seemed just a little "unreal" to me . But thats just me...... -tom w (I just love that sentence) </font>

SPOILER BIG HAIRY Spoliler Warning now that you have all been warned I guess most eveyone has played the CMAK DEMO scenario Line of Defence. right? everybody knows it? I FINALLY played it for the first time today. I savioured it I enjoyed it I played the Allies and approached cautiously and well mostly just decided to level ALL the buildings I could as the those pesky sharp sooters wounded my TC's OK no big deal I did well and lost only one Stuart to the silly little AT guns hiding here and there. one 20 mm Flak gun immobolized a Sherm and caused it to bail out. OK so the rout is on the Krouts are fleeing like mice from a sinking ship. the STuH thing shows up and one Flank shot from a Sherm nails it before it is a problem. DEAD OK? I can move on. I looks like the mopping up is all that is left as the scenario winds down and I prepare to take the last flag on the other side of the bridge. so far I have only lost ONE Stuart and One bailed Sherm and this looks for all the world like a cake walk! BUT no (playing with EFOW of course) One sherm takes a one side penetration and is knocked out immediately Billowing smoke and flames KO'ed DEAD! It, and the Stuart near-by fire Smoke at the attacker! Both die in vain OK so now one Tiger shows up (no one here that is reading this is surprised!! Spoiler warning posted ) There are more than a few minutes left in the scenario (I am playing the AI) and I am now delightled I have a live one here!, and a good little tactical battle on my hands now. BOTH the M10's are primed for action and I have 3 sherms left and one Greyhound.. OK bait and hook I have done this before and I figure OK! the Tiger is unsupported and this should not be all that hard. (I was NOT wrong) So I start to set up the battle plan and the tactics. The tanks are jockying for position and I use one Sherm to distract the Tiger. yup Got his attention! in the 40-43 (?) minute of the the Tiger shoots first and Misses! both Tanks see each other aim! (no other Allied tanks are yet in a position for a juciy Flank shot, the tank trap has not been set up yet so its JUST the Tiger vs the Sherm and I KNOW who will get the better of that duel) The Sherm is in a nice Key hole position in the village waiting to nail the unsuspecting Tiger VERY narrow field of fire Range 419 m!! thats it, only 419m both are Frontal aspect to Frontal Aspect Face to Face! The Sherm returns Fire ONE Shot Its a Hit! Front Turret Then the dissapointment sets in!! :mad: :mad: Yes I was pissed Tiger KO'ed!! ONE SHOT Front turret penetration at weak spot! Tiger is flaming Its ALL over no tactics no bait and hook no juicy tank duel with the M10's No set up for the rear or flank shot NO!! Sherm Kills Tiger at 419m with a ONE Shot kill (FIrst shot! ONLY Shot!) and a front turret penetration at Weak Spot! :eek: I guess I got "lucky" (sure, Whatever!) but it did not seem right to me! Yes I looked up the odds and Stats and Yes it looked like the armour of the front turret of the Tiger maybe "could have" possibly been penetrated at that range by a lucky shot. Yup I got the lucky shot and that was it! Battle over Tiger dies after only killing two tanks. I was dissapointed but it was a good scenario and I hope the CMAK full game comes in the mail SOON! And that my story and I am sticking to it. -tom w [ December 22, 2003, 12:00 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

did he say it freezes when the mac Sleeps? This is a long KNOWN problem with all the CMx games from CMBO to CMBB and I will Bet for CMAK to if you let your Mac go to sleep the game is GONE! wake up the mac and the game screen is white only and then you have to reboot but the auto save in CMBB did catch the last thing that happened in the game. is this issue the Mac Sleeps and the Game Freezes and you need to reboot issue? (or not?) -tom w

great news Check your e-mail -tom w

yes its a HUGE $5.00 service fee RIP off for "recovering" the cost of collecting the GST for the feds. NOW thats a RIP OFF! But Mike have you got your CMAK game yet?? (I am still waiting for mine) -tom w

anyone have any other news or new tests with the new driver? anything new to report here? I still don't have an older Mac to test the new driver on. sorry -tom w

YES "I do hope that they put it into the next version of the engine though. The game could become an order of magnitude better for solo play." Lets GO with that I like this part: "The (NEXT) game could become an order of magnitude better for solo play."!!! Yes it could and it should include the option to play AI vs AI so two players could release their scripted units loose on each other and sit back and see what happens. Now THAT is not what CMx is now or has ever been BUT for the scenario designers that want to test various options and tactics and for the FUN of it a scripted AI vs. Scripted AI play option should be available when they debut the NEXT big thing 1-2 years from now (I can see it in the late summer of 2005) It should have a user friendly interface for scripting purposes. Yes it will be somewhat hard to master and yes it may be a ugly and tedious as the map editor is now but we are Talking about GROGS here you know! folks who played ASL and Tobruck FOR FUN! Tobruk the board game and Iron Ships and Wooden Men HAD to have been the MOST laborious book keeping nightmares of any those type of games but hardy Grogs and dedicated gamers mastered that bookkeeping and ALL those rules. So a labourious and even tedious scripted editor for the AI for scenario design will MORE than be welcomed and embraced by the hardy on this forum you can be SURE! BFC please, consider having the AI scripting editor User Interface PROFFESSIONALLY designed, developed and tested. (please ) -tom w Yes, I agree that scripting should be permitted to make interesting scenarios. It's the only way to get a realistic battle going with the AI. Does anybody know why this is not included in CMAK? </font>

I suspect that they are saving us the shock and grief of being blackmailed for a $25 brokerage fee which couriers such as UPS enjoy springing on Canadians after they have already paid for an order and shipping from the U.S.. I once ordered a game from Firaxis (Antietam) - it was about $30 dollars, plus shipping. UPS, who had already received their shipping fee, delivered it to my house when I wasn't there, and demanded a $25 customs brokerage fee PLUS a $4 COD charge for collecting the brokerage fee - and my innocent wife paid it, which, along with GST, meant that I paid more than double the sticker price to get the game in my hands. This happened again when I ordered a chess set from the States, so it wasn't an isolated incident. I now insist on my goods being shipped by post from the States. For anyone interested in the history of this bizarre situation - you may recall that years ago you would receive a bill in the mail from Canadian customs for duties assessed against goods delivered by courier or post. You were supposed to mail Customs Canada a check for the amount in the envelope provided. According to a friend of mine who works in Customs, 90% of these bills were never paid, so Customs said "screw this" and stopped sending bills out. Instead told couriers and the Post Office to collect the duties upon delivery. This annoyed the couriers who, in protest, charge a minimum $25 rate "brokerage fee" in the hope that we citizens will protest and force the government to make other arrangements for the collection of custom duties. It hasn't worked so far. </font>

Yeah, Something like that.. and, Then the USA said HEY everybody we have the A-Bomb! and by then it was over. -tom w

Did anybody mention the A-Bomb is that not the ultimate "gamey" move?? I know the ETO never got that far (it was over "too soon"). I don't disagree with ALL the other factors that folks here have mentioned. BUT did anyone say that Hilter was a DOLT as a military strategic leader?? Like how crazy and megalomanic do you have to be to voluntarily decide it would be a "good thing" to open a 2nd front against a nation as HUGE and resource rich and long and deep (as in about 500 million football fields long/deep) as Russia? So for me there are a few key factors 1) The Allies had the A-bomb first 2) The Ultra Secret let Allies read the Axis mail and secrets (How gamey is THAT!! ) 3) Hilter was a dolt and and chose to invade Russia for What good reason :confused: ??? Hell the question should be: "How could the Allies Lose??" (Not to mention the USA when they got into it brought with them overwhelming numerical superiority in every single logistical item/thing/person in the military that counts!) your comments? -tom w

OK Then let me just fantasize here a bit here.... Suppose the AI can play the AI.... Suppose it was possible for scenario designers to script attacking behaviors for scenarios.... Suppose Two players scripted actions and "what -ifs" and SOP's for two sides in the same scenario..... Catch my drift?????? Suppose in the NEXT BIG THING, CMX2 that two players could play head to head (virtually) and let their scripted AI for each side battle it out. Take a scenario and each player does his best to script the AI for that Side then hit GO NOW this is "sort" of Doable as it is now. Ever tried this: you need two computers hooked up via TCP/IP after each player sets up and clicks go Each player will give the orders for the ENTIRE length of the battle and then step away and watch. Both players give orders only for first turn and then set the timer to 1 Minute and it GO and just watch what they do. No you can't do any delays and you can't do any counter attacks, both sides just go straight at each other but if you can let them go for the whole scenario and sit back and watch what happens. Now what if you could script the AI and sit back and watch your AI battle it out with your opponent's AI?? I would think that would be FUN and as far as I know it might be a FIRST as a feature for a war game! Hey BFC.... Come on! break through to the NEXT level and let us play AI vs AI via scripted actions and SOPs. This would allow scenario designers to plan and script scenarios that would indeed be challenging if NOT impossible to win the first time if it were done well he he..... what do you think? -tom w [ December 16, 2003, 11:19 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

what is this???? What! CMAK on the shelf in Canada RETAIL? do the boys at BFC world headquarters know about this?? is this normal and correct? or some twilight zone version of the reality of their online only distribution and purchasing policy in North America? :eek: :eek: :confused: :confused: :confused: -tom w