M Hofbauer

It's a fault in the system. To give them a movement order, even sneak, you have to cancel the "hide" state. Once they execute the sneak order, they *will* sneak. However, there is a considerable time delay between issuing the order (and thereby unhiding them) and the execution thereof. This results in the annoying situations you describe. I agree with your frustration and experienced it myself. A solution would be to have hiding units hide until the *execution* of an order commences. Makes sense to me.

Hey Riechmann, you're a spoilsport. Pvt. Ryan / GAZ_NZ, re. the immortal "Please fix!!! or do somefink": not only on the CM board but across the wargaming community this has become a favorite phrase, almost like the famous "All your base are belong to us."

ROTFL @ Hedges

And it doesn't work for quick battle maps, either.

Slapdragon: Any tank can be killed by any other tank if the right combination of events occur. one has to note though that relatively few Shermans were lost to Bergepanther in 1944/45, even under most favorable conditions. Andrew Hedges: So, anyway, that's the simple answer to how it works. Keep in mind, when you watch the blue bar slowly resolve the turn, that CM also has to keep track of deflection at the exact moment that the shell hits the tank. not true. CM calculates the hit at the moment the shot is being *fired*, not the moment the projectile hits the target. Kingfish: Was the Sherman manned by a Finnish crew? LOL

These mods look cool no doubt... there already is a very good (comparable to thios excellent one IMHO) winterized M3 HT mod out there, and some winterized M8/M20 mods (which admittedly don't live up to the excellent ones here)... What I am desperately looking for is a winterized M3 White Scout Car to go with the winterized halftracks. Also, I am missing a winterized Chaffee and a decent Hellcat (of the quality displayed above). Is noone else in desperate need of those, or am I just unable to find them?

excellent! very commendable, all of your works! the gloomy sky, the Munch sky, and finally the nuke! terrific!

interesting.... russelmz, have you thought about Munhc's scream? imagine a fire exchange between tank companies with heavy artillery coming down on a burning village in the background all this under a Munch's scream - sky! apocalyptic!

Mr Dorosh (if I may call you that), 1)it's not my fault that I'm off-duty because I have a cold (well maybe a little bit) 2)I'm not having a big-time fight with Germanboy, nothing to see here, please move on. I was just pointing out the problems I perceived w/r/t consistency between his statement and position on the issue; that has been cleared now; 3) I am not editing a previous post because actually I think people should stand by what they have previously said; besides, I cannot edit a former post after someone quozes me wrongly because that would give the impression that I had really written that before my editing...or something...like I told you, please all move along... 4) I have not done anything with/on the PzF site for one and a half years now or something. I think I have already forgotten both the URL to the Landser and my limited knowledge of HTML. Or something. But I'll see what I can do, maybe I can insert that link...or something.

Andreas, didn't mean to come off harsh (hogwashish was the closest approximation of what I wanted to say that I could come up with). Btw, I have nothing but praise for Der Kessel, and plaese note my post was not directed at the Kessel. anyways, why are you quoting me with something I never said? That is very bad nettiquette. It's like me quoting you with something like <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy: yeah, BTS originally wanted represent individual soldiers, but I bribed Steve and Charles into having the soldiers modeled the way they are now because I am still on an 486SX and am unwilling to upgrade<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> btw, gute Besserung. Sommererkältung auch hier.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy: While I don't want my scenarios linked directly on your site, since they are in their own and unique environment at Der Kessel, I think it is a great service you are providing, and it is much appreciated. A site like yours pulls together all the work that has been done and makes it easily accessible. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> sorry (really), but that sounds quite a bit hogwashish to me. Are your scenarios oh so exclusive that they should only be retailed via special authorized dealers? You should at least let Keith's site link to where they are, otherwise you are sabotaging the very idea behind Mr Miller's site which you yourself are praising so much in your post.

Cauldron, your ridicule is inappropriate. The reason for the problems you encountered and described above AFAIK is that Mr Keith had the decency to email all the authors of said scenarios to get permission to host them. Until that permission is given, the files of the respective author are not DLed or even linked yet. This is also the reason why all files of a given author would not work! Mr Millers behavior of asking before hosting is a very decent one. Why you would turn such an honorable policy into badmouthing his site as having no actual content is beyond me. Besides, it is obvious that the site is just being built up. The architecture and idea behind Mr Millers depot shows *great* potential and looks rather promising to me. (just for the record, I do not know Mr Miller beyond the fact that he is the author of said site.)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SuperTed: My bad. I should have been more specific. I was referring to the "Only One Returned" article.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> oh, I suspected the article first but since the article was posted Sat and your post on the board is from today (Sun), you must be referring to something else. The article is ... uhm...I'll use the word "interesting", since "enjoyable" is probably an inappropriate word. But definitely interesting.

I usually don't "bump"...but this is definitely worth it. So here goes... a bump to the Keith's scenario & operation depot!

Are you talking about the CM2 sneakshots? Awesome. It seems the KV2 will be the first vehicle in the history of CM to have a four-digit silhoutte value

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by olandt: Is this better than simply 2 AT minefields that cover the road and to the side?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> oh - do hidden minefields overlap into the road tile? Weare talking paved road, right? Interesting...

What about a Deer Hunter adaptation for CM3 ?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by John Kettler: Let's say we're British paratroopers. (...) Meanwhile Sgt. Simpkins has sent the ubiquitous Pvt. Smith to find him a wire or a rope long enough to not only reach across the road twice but well into the nearby ditch. The mines, being antivehicular, can stand rough handling and are armed after being tied to the rope at intervals close enough to block vehicular passage. The mines are now placed on the far side of the road hidden from the LOS of approaching vehicles. The wire extends from the mine area across the road to the drainage ditch in which you, Pvt. Kingfish have been put by your sergeant. (...) In scant seconds the mines have been whipped out of their concealment and now lie across the road. Wisely you put your head down as a 251 loaded with Panzergrenadiers comes sailing around the corner and hits a mine. (...) And what might the Germans have seen right up until you actually pulled the mines onto the road? A wire, no doubt dirtied or greased to make it blend in. Even after they're deployed they're still very hard to spot, especially while under fire. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Two notes about above example: 1) - the two Hawkins mines will be at considerable interval. How do you know the HT's track isn't going through the unmined rope part? (it would be hard to pull them exactly before the track, given your dusk situation and the fact that the rope-puller must be hidden in the ditch so that he won't be blown to bits by the mine blast). 2) - when hastily pulling that rope with the two mines attached across the road from the ditch, there is a considerable chance that they might bump and bounce and end up lying on their side when run over, which means they will only get squashed but won't detonate. btw, IIRC the germans' daisy chain construction usually had the mines fixed onto a wood panel instead of strung on a rope. Like others already stated, that's okay since they usually weren't really meant for concealment anyhow. [ 07-27-2001: Message edited by: M Hofbauer ]

First of all, regarding the authenticity (or not) of Sajer's works, go see this site made by board member RMC which discusses it in depth: http://www.custermen.net/sajer/sajer1.htm Second, the only thing I can think of which is remotely anywhere near what you are looking for might be the austrian vehicle manufacturer "Steyr", which produced all sorts of vehicles including cars and trucks. Seeing how Sajer got a lot of things wrong he might as well have confused the spelling of Steyr with Steiner. Steyr IIRC was also a producer of the RSO, the Raupenschlepper Ost, a vehicle very similar to the M28/M29 Weasel thingie which the BTS guys are driving around. I.e., it was a very small tracked transport vehicle designed for the rugged and snowy terrain of the east. Obviously anybody could mount a machine gun or similar onto it; there was also a dedicated AT version which had a 7.5cm AT gun mounted onto the vehicle, which eventually showed as being a bit too much of a burden for the RSO.

well, according to Maximus, they were not marked, so if you subtract the time for marking them then you should even increase the ROML (rate of mine-laying) above.

"advent of chainsaws" must be referring to their widespread civilian use. Otherwise, chalk it up to that illness called "journalism".

If it was a PC I'ld say typical symptoms of memory leak. But I am not familiar with Macs.

I admit that it would be too hard to have the TacAI make these decisions...BUT.... The two problems could be nicely addressed by two simple user-operated features: add an "ARMOR/VEHICLE" and a "AMBUSH ZONE" criteria: if ARMOR/VEHICLE is selected on, then the unhiding gun will only engage armor or vehicles after it has thrown it's cloak. if not then just like now it'll keep firing at any targets it sees after uncloaking. if AMBUSH ZONE is selected ON then the gun after unhiding and destroying the first target to cross the ambush zone will engage only targets that wander through the AMBUSH ZONE. If it is set to OFF then any targets anywhere which are visible will be engaged. think about the possibilities these two added features would add in combination. for example, if you want that gun to cover that road from any tanks passing by, put an ambush marker there, select ARMOR/VEHICLE and AMBUSH ZONE both ON, and the gun will only engage tanks passing that spot; the gun will revert to hidden status after it destroyed these targets, etc. since these are user-operated options, there's no need for any extensive TacAI programming. [ 07-10-2001: Message edited by: M Hofbauer ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Could I be any more irrelevant?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> *g* Mike, yes your contribution might be even more useless then my suggestion to "look at pictures" semi-wadcutter is more common than pure WC; pure wad cutters have such a poor aerodynamic performance that they are avoided; but they are still quite numerous here among shotgun ammunitions, because solid-projectile shooting at targets from shotguns isn't exactly sniping anyhow, if you know what I mean... I think there might be more money on my theory, because I think the term wadcutter is quite a bit older than the use of metal-skinned aircraft.

I thought wad-cutter is a term that comes from civilian shooting and refers to the fact that a wad-cutter flat-nose projectile will stance a nice clean round hole out of a wad (or paper) as opposed to a regular projectile which will simply penetrate the target and make fuzzy holes (harder to determine exact score). As for the 40mm Bofors ammo you might want to try old WW2 pictures of american AA emplacements. I remember I had borrowed a book once which showed a Bofors emplacement near the Remagen bridge and IIRC it showed ammo lying around for the AA gun. So historic pictures of Bofors guns, of which there should be plenty, might be of help. btw, what's the status on your book?