Bullethead

ackack said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The AI will NOT use the spotter to lay smoke on the pillbox. It just keeps trying to move tanks over the bridge which get torched every time. Any way to make a tweak to the AI smoke usage logic??<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Seems to me your problem here is improper use of the AI. You have gien the AI the burden of the attack. Further, you have given it a rather complex situation, what with a bridge thrown in to complicate its "moving" thinking. Which can cloud, or even take priority over, its "shooting" thinking. No AI, not even CM's excellent AI, does as well on the attack, especially a complicated attack, as a human. CM's does very well as AI's go, but it definitely prefers more common situations such as attacks across fields as opposed to bridges. So if you want the best AI performance, either put it on the defensive or give it relatively simple offensive tasks. That said, on the subject of the AI's smoking habits, I don't see there being a problem with under-use--rather, the reverse. I find the AI firing or popping smoke all over whether I ask for it or not, greatly hindering the fire of other friendly units. As to it using massive arty smokescreens, it does that as well. But there are 2 factors to consider. First, the AI knows that arty's most potentially decisive use is killing things, and that each smoke round fired reduces the number of available HE for this primary mission. Thus, it seems the AI much prefers to use mortars for smokescreens, with which I concur. Second, there is the time required to get an arty smokescreen in place. In most cases, you must await arty smokescreens for 3-4 turns. What if the AI doesn't think it has the time to waste? ------------------ -Bullethead Visit the Raider Operations message board at www.delphi.com/raiderops

Tiger said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>What if...Japan had invaded Russia fromt the east in conjunction with operation Barbarossa in 1941? Would they have given Russia much trouble?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't think so. In 1938-39, the Japanese and Russians fought a number of times. On land, the Japanese got the worst of it, especially in the Kholkin Gol battles, in which Zhukov kicked mucho Japanese butt. Besides, right at this time, the Japanese learned that their supposed ally, Germany, had just signed the non-aggression pact with their current enemy, Russia. This pissed the Japanese off so much they renounced their alliance with Germany and, in early 41, signed a non-aggression treaty of their own with Russia, to let them and the Germans kill each other while Japan gobbled up the Pacific. ------------------ -Bullethead Visit the Raider Operations message board at www.delphi.com/raiderops

Jeff Heidmann said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>This is my point. We "assured" the UK that Europe was first. But excuse us while we lay the keels for a few dozen battleships and aircraft carriers. "Europe First" was a PR thing much more than it was a reality thing. Or, alternatively, Europe First meant that Europe might have gotten first dibs on resources, but they certainly did not get last dibs!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I disagree here. The US did not take any real strategic offensive action against the Japanese until 1943. Everything up to that point, including the Guadalcanal invasion, had been a strategic defense, designed to slow and/or contain Japanese expansion. Sure, immediately before and right after the start of the war, we laid down many warships intended primarily for use against Japan. But at the same time, we were starting to build tanks by the thousand, plus hundreds of cargo ships to carry them and everything else the Euros needed, plus building thousands of planes, plus training millions of men to use all this stuff. And of all this vast military expansion program, by far the most of it went to Europe. Hell, in 1942, when we scraped up what there was left of the pre-war active duty army, topped it off with new recruits, and equipped it with the first fruits of the production lines, where did it go? To fight the Germans. But all this is irrelevant. Every CM player knows that the "Germany First" policy actually is a term used by us non-artists to describe the apparent priorities of the mod texture makers ------------------ -Bullethead Visit the Raider Operations message board at www.delphi.com/raiderops

Michael emrys said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>People like Hasbro can play very, very dirty and I'd as soon they didn't hear about BTS for as long as possible. Let Charles and Steve devote themselves to turning out excellent games rather than having to deal with a hostile corporate giant.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yeah, my nightmare is that someday all wargames might be assimilated by the evil Has-borg and become nothing but kiddie fodder. ------------------ -Bullethead Visit the Raider Operations message board at www.delphi.com/raiderops [This message has been edited by Bullethead (edited 09-14-2000).]

mfred said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If you get the opportunity to view "Die Deutschen Panzer ", No.3, you will actually see real footage of 88's firing on the Western Front still HITCHED.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I doubt I'll get such an opportunity, so please describe the way it was done, with particular attention to what model of 88 is shooting, the presence of any prime mover, which legs were down and how they are stabilized, and the angle of fire relative to the longitudinal axis of the carriage ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I would try to make it, but hot plates aren't allowed in the dorms.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Rookie . Dorms allow irons for your clothes, right? And what's an iron but a hotplate that takes a bit of ingenuity to mount for cooking purposes? And if you have 2 irons, you can make toast between them without needing a mount Also, many dorms allow popcorn poppers. Hmmm, that's another expedient hotplate. BTW, a GI strawberry soda is what you get when you mix 120mm mortars and a US rifle company.... ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

I said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Accordingly, go soak your head<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Stuka asked: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Is this official law terminology?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No, but the official version would get me banned ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

Woohoo! Thanks for getting Pritzl's Allied winter stuff up ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

From the Law Offices of Dewey, Cheatum & Howe, LLP Re: Demand for Payment of Damages by Big Time Software, et al (hereinafter, "hogwash") To: Herman Bagbage, Esq. Dear Sir: This firm received with much amusement the abovementioned document of hogwash recently sent by you to our client, Big Time Software (hereinafter, "BTS"). You may inform your clients that while they have our deepest sympathies for their many problems, none of them are the fault of BTS or any of its products. Therefore, they shall get no recovery from BTS. Specifically: 1. Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord (hereinafter, "CMBO") is not addicting. Alternatively, even if it is, BTS had no foreknowledge of this, as shown by their gross and repeated under-estimation of the number of units that would sell. 2. Mr. Bleadum Wight, Esq., Mr. Ju Ju's direct superior at his place of employment, will testify that Mr. Ju Ju's standards of personal demeanor and hygiene, and the quantity and quality of his work, have always been of an abyssmal level, from the beginning of his employment and before any exposure to CMBO. 3. Dr. U. R. Nutz, PhD, Mr. Ju Ju's physician, will testify that any loss of consortium is the result of an embarassing pre-existing condition detected before Mr. Ju Ju's exposure to CMBO. We are further prepared to present the real reason why Mr. Ju Ju does not know that Mrs. Ju Ju is alive, should you press this issue. 4. Any alleged PTSD suffered by Mr. Ju Ju as a result of actions taken by Mr. Mark IV is irrelevant to the issues, if any, between BTS and your clients. Res inter alios acta alteri nocere non debet. Accordingly, go soak your head. Sincerely, Sookem Drai, Attorney for BTS ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

MacAuliffe said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>testing revealed that AI never used this tactic.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't blame it. I never use it either. Why deprive your tanks of mobility when the 3D map allows you to find hull down positions all over? Which is all digging in appears to do for you. I don't like how dug-in tanks can't ever leave the hole. That makes no sense. There has to be a ramp down into the hole for the tank to get into it in the first place. Therefore, it should be able to back out again whenever it wants to. True, the Germans did have special concrete blocks to which they could bolt a regular tank turret and thus create what's in CM--an immobile tank turret. But IMHO it would be better to model this as a type of fortification/pillbox, because Germans also dug holes their whole tanks could get in and out of, as did other nations. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

FWIW, medium quality does in fact mean you can get either regulars or veterans. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

You're right, the W does stand for wet stowage. And the + stands for extra field-added armor. But there's more to it than that.. The Sherman underwent many detail factor modifications during its production that did not seem to change the designation of the vehicle. Some such changes affected armor. The most notable was a mod that changed the front hull plate design. Originally it was 2" at a 56^ slope, which left the drivers' hatches sticking out in front like little turrets. Then in the "ultimate Sherman" mod, the front plate became 2.5" at 47^ with the drivers' hatches on the hull roof and the whole front plate flat across. Another mod changed the original 3-piece differential cover to a 1-piece, thicker casting. So, for example, some M4A3s had the original armor configuration and some had the later version. Both were M4A3s but had different armor. But because the W mod was also a later improvement, it was more likely to appear on an "ultimate" Sherman than an early version. So on some versions of the Sherman in CM, you'll see the old front armor on the non-Ws and the new armor on the Ws. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

IIRC from the intermindable discussions on this subject last winter there are 2 main reasons why on-board guns (as opposed to mortars) can't shoot indirect fire. 1. Minimum Range The minimum indirect fire range for a true artillery piece is longer than the map in most CM battles. 2. Doctrine Infantry guns, which are not true artillery pieces, were designed primarily for direct fire. They were the original assault guns. Sure, they could shoot indirectly, but this required a lot of preparation to set them up as arty, which is assumed not to happen on-map. And if it did, you'd have a minimum range problem with them as well. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

Warren Peace said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>What does a muzzle break due and why do some guns have'um and some don't?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> To be more specific than the previous answers, a muzzleBRAKE is a cheat for Newton's 3rd Law about equal and opposite reactions. Basically, besides the bullet, all the powder gas is going down the tube as well. While this doesn't weigh much, it's so fast that it still adds a lot to the recoil force. So what a muzzlebrake does is redirect some of that gas sideways, via holes or slots around the muzzle. Because this gas is no longer going forward, it doesn't push the barrel backwards, thus lessening the amount of recoil the gun tube transmits to its carriage or user. Of course, gas so vented tries to push the barrel sideways. But muzzlebrakes have symmetrical hole patterns so there is an equal amout of gas going both directions to the side; thus, their forces cancel out and there's no sideways movement. NOTE: There are similar devices called compensators that have holes only on top. This pushes the muzzle down with each shot, which helps keep an automatic weapon's sights on target. The reason some guns have them and not others is generally an engineering issue of some sort. Some guns like small howitzers aren't very powerful so don't have excessive recoil anyway. Some more powerful guns have such macho mounts that full recoil force isn't a problem, but need them on lighter mounts in other vehicles. Sometimes an existing gun gets more powerful ammo and needs a muzzlebrake to fire it on its existing mounting. And APDS ammo doesn't work well with some designs of muzzlebrake because the sabot chunks tend to hang up in the ports. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

There is also a friendly fire risk with MGs due to the grazing fire property. Grazing fire affects all units along the line between the MG and the selected target. This can kill friendly troops in the line of fire--ask me how I know NOTE: the area of effect of grazing fire is somewhat wider than just the tracer stream you see graphically. So not only don't cross the line of fire, but don't stand right next to it, either. BTW, I think the above is maybe how the triple-MG pillboxes work. I recently stumbled on one in the deep woods with a full platoon on line (once again paying the price for inadequate scouting...) Anyway, the pillbox only targeted the squad on the left end of the line. However, ALL units in the platoon took massive casualties each time the tracer flew at this 1 unit. So I figure the 3 MGs are handled as 1 with a very wide area of effect. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html [This message has been edited by Bullethead (edited 09-10-2000).]

From what I understand, the number in the designation of a panzerfaust is its approximate range in meters. For the other weapons, it's VERY short, about 30-40m max. Except rifle grenades, which seem to range out to about 100m. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

Duds are usually a problem with the fuze failing to work as advertised. I know this happens to some extent in CM because sometimes VT rounds explode on the ground, leaving craters, instead of all in the air. Thus, I'd assume failures are modeled for other types of fuze. Ever wonder why you land an HE shell on top of a running squad in the open and it doesn't even get "Alerted"? Maybe the shell was a dud, as in it had a blast strength of 0, but all shells use the same explosion graphics so you can't tell except from the lack of damage done. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

Tiger- You do great work . So tell me... Are there any winter skins for both early and late Panther Gs? And the Jagdpanther and Jagdtiger also, for that matter. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Here is some imformation on the subject. There is an actual picture of an 88 being fired while still mounted.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Only the 1st link has such a picture. The caption says, "A sudden tank attack must be fought off. Only in exceptional cases was the gun fired directly from its trailor. The side spars are folded down, but the gun has not been lowered." You can see why. The gun is resting totally on the 4 small jacks at the end of each cross leg. So these are getting a lot of sheer and bending stresses each shot. In fact, it looks like the gun has rocked back on the left rear wheel set--it looks bent already, although that may just be prior fender damage. I sure wouldn't want to fire the thing like this BTS has a tradition of not putting things in the game that were used "only in exceptional circumstances". IF by IGs and WP as an anti-tank round come to mind. So I wouldn't hold your breath for this. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

I want 1. Arty spotter units with an adjustable number of guns, so they could control from 1 tube to an entire battalion, instead of always 4 tubes like now. 2. The ability to delete 1/2 squads ONLY in the editor, without now deleting the whole squad when you delete 1/2 of it. 3. The ability to place squads on the map that have already taken casualties. 4. Revision of burning grass and crop tiles as per recent discussions. 5. Really huge friggin' buildings, complete with interior walls, wall/floor/ceiling breaching operations, and basements connected by sewers to basements of other buildings. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

I said something like: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The Flak 88 will roll over if fired sideways while on wheels<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> apex said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>No. Even when fired from the wheeled trailer, the two supporting legs were extended to the sides<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sorry, but I have to disagree. The Flak's side legs did not touch the ground while the wheels were still under the front and back legs. And they didn't have the special firing pedestals that that PAK 43 had for its side legs. So, with the Flak 18/36/37, if you fired the gun sideways on the wheels, the recoil force had a good lever arm due to the height of the gun barrel above the axis of rotation. Then it could get started rolling in that direction due to the leg feet being about 1' or so off the ground. And once you get that much mass moving, that leg isn't going to stop it. Over she goes. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

On this subject, are there any winter cammo pattens for Panther Gs (early and late), Jagdpathers, and Jagdtigers? I think I have all winter sets so far available but these vehicles are still in summer colors. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>King/Queen/whatever of the battlefield<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Us cannoncockers prefer the term "God of War" ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Use pauses to give all the squads the same delay.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This doesn't overcome the random factor. And when viz range is 50m or so at most, even 1 or 2 seconds difference can have these results. ------------------ -Bullethead Want a naval sim? Check out Raider Operations at www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html