M Hofbauer

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>HAs anyone ever shot down one of those planes?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> since I already used this quite a while ago in another thread I might as well recycle it here: ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky)

If you mean the Fliegerbeschußgerät 41, well, it's not just a Pz IV thing. ALL german armor was supposed to be fitted with it by army order, and I have pictures of AA MGs on everything from Pz II, Pz III, PzIV, Pz V to Pz VI, yes, even Königstiger and Jagdtiger were supposed to have a FlaMG, like, the Jagdtiger on the Fliegerdrehstütze 36 mount. In theory, after June 1944 all tanks to leave production were to have the AA mount, and all field maintenance units were advised to refit the existing tanks that didn't have the AA mounts yet. So far for theory. How much the AA mounts on late-war tanks were actually the case I am not to judge. But, to keep in the context of CMBO and the original post, as an example reportedly ALL Pz IVH of the 12. SS PzDiv had been equpipped with the FlaMG already as early as March 1944. As far as I can see, in the game the AA MG is missing from all german tanks. In conclusion, your question is a good one and justified, although it has to be modified as to include all german tanks. Probably a design decision by BTS. IMO suboptimal since the FlaMG was of course also used against ground targets. In early war models, the AA mount accepted the vehicle's internal machine guns, but in the late FlaMG concepts we are talking here, the AA MG was yet another additional machine gun, besides the coax and the bow (if applicable). Current modeling of german tanks in CM effectively robs them of one machine gun. yours sincerely, M.Hofbauer ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky) [rectified re. minor typos] [This message has been edited by M Hofbauer (edited 09-10-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Tall bridges over land or water are indestructable.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

just bumping this up once more before it's time for this guest to take a break, too. I know this is about numbers and not about eyecandy, still... It is indeed a sad to see that people are more interested in the n-th graphics mod or speculation about the upcoming CM2 than in the game and it's underlying engine, the statistics etc. at hand. Goes to show that the CM community apparently isn't, at least by now, that much different a crowd than most of the other flashandbang gamers out there. The rest is FNG n-th iteration questions (well I guess they have to be there but they aren't exactly thrilling) and all the crap by people of the likes of JP, GAZ/Stransky, infohawk etc. Well I'll just hope that besides all the flashy graphics etc. in CM2 there will be an after battle debriefing, bugfree and worth it's name. Thanks BTS for what IMO is currently the best game around, yours sincerely, M.Hofbauer ------------------ "Please fix!!! or do somefink"

I don't think there's any practical way for the average gamer to do what Pillar relates. Of course, using HexEditors, deciphering tools, password run-through algorithms and the Polish team who cracked enigma, you can view any PBEM file. The best thing is of course to play someone you know. Like, one of my recent PBEM opponents told me his password. we were far into the game so we didn't bother to stop it. so I was there with his password, but I knew I would not reap any enjoyment out of the game if I made use of that info. being a PBEM that took rather long, I actually forgot the password. I won, but just barely. Only weeks after the game had been finished, when I was cleaning up my HD, I went to check and indeed the password was correct. ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky) [This message has been edited by M Hofbauer (edited 09-06-2000).]

I've looked at this, and I can attest to the fact that only this once it is NOT RMC's fault but indeed a bug in the game. A BUG!!! bug bug bug bug.... yes, a bug. A small statistical bug, and no wonder it was overlooked considering that the detailed after-battle debrief statistic I had always lobbied for was not really considered by the CM crowd nor BTS, there you have it, serves you all right. Now you not only have a debrief statistics screen that is, to phrase it carefully, somewhat on a diet (vehicle being anything from jeep to Königstiger), but its fugged, too. I proved this by playing an operation in which I as the german defender had three bunkers, two concrete and a wooden one. They were knocked out in the first battle. In the debiref of the second batle, the three bunkers again appeared as casualties. In the third battle, I surrendered to cut this short for the sake of science to enable me to make this post. End result after third battle: 9 destroyed bunkers. Only three were ever present on the map. I am disappointed. Since the after-battle statistics lost all their credibility, it doesn't really make any sense for me to play mutli-battle operations. In the words of the immortal CPT Stransky, "Please fix!!! or do somefink" yours sincerely, M.Hofbauer ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky) [This message has been edited by M Hofbauer (edited 09-06-2000).]

as to Madmatt's suggestion and the various replies to it re. its inapplicability to PBEM games: why not have this "Detailed Hits ON/OFF" as part of the QB setup choices? seems the simplest solution to me - makes everybody happy with the least amount of change necessary to the game. ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky)

well, see other thread (no, not THAT, not THE OTHER THREAD, I mean the other thread, where you got this from). shooting from the hip, I'ld say I think gun hits should be shown with a certain low probability, ie, to reflect the rare times when a knocked-out gun would be obvious to the enemy gunner, such as when a direct hit tore the barel off. So I'ld go with a probability of circa 90 % don't show 10 do show the gun hit. BUT...and this is a big BUTT.... but there is the problem of detailed hit info. obviously you need this, such as in "upper hull side hit", "turret rear hit", because sometimes you don't see the enemy shooting at you, but you can have a rough idea where it is coming from because you know from which general direction you are receiving fire. since the gun is part of the frontal armor model, a hit to the gun is a hit to the gun. problem is that if this hit information is shown the enemy knows immediately that that gun will probably not work anymore. three solutions to this: 1. let the gun hit simply show as "turret front hit" to the enemy 2. crap I forgot the second one (gotta go to bed), aaaanyways, the important one is: 3. come to think of it, why not simply switch off detailed armor hits. Because a tank crew that gets banged surely does take notice of that, but since it is nothing but a big CLANG they wouldn't really be able to tell where it hit, would they? ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky) [yes I know I had to edit it but only because I double-pasted it...this didn't really add to the convincing power of the post so I deleted the superflous part again, OK ?] [This message has been edited by M Hofbauer (edited 09-05-2000).]

grrr.... yes, hmmm..... ok you're a tough bargainer but ok I'll do it with a bleeding heart... ok, we have a deal, fair trade (shaking hands) ([visible only to audience] what Foobar does not know is that Hofbauer would give up detailed gun hit info any day and even pay for it) ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky) [edited to enhance the cheap joke and to include the signature, and because I "do want a post that works!!!"] [This message has been edited by M Hofbauer (edited 09-05-2000).]

Foobie, the example iggi showed may not be the best t illustratze the benefits of an ignore command. But the IGNORE command wouldn't be limited to employment in said sitzuation; like any command, it's usage envelope is practically unlimited, especially in combination with other orders. For example, it would help remedy the much whined-about dumb-wittmann-shoots-crews problem entirely - just put the IGNORE tag on identified crews that appear over the area, and voila less distraction = more destruction But there are many more benefits to it. Buy it now while supplies last, and you will not only receive a 2-year supply of IGNORE command, but we will also give you a target-prioritizing/ordering AND a BUTTON-UNBUTTON command to be used at waypoints not only at the beginning of the turn! grab your VISA, master the possibilities and call 1-800-BIG-TIME! Our friendly operators, Steve and Charles, are standing by to receive your order for an order! ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky)

very very wise theory jdmorse. so the CM Borg is sort of a body corporate. Hmm yes that is a nice way to put it, I like it Dalwhinnie, not sure if I believe or understand what you say. Maybe you should send her over here and we will see if I can reproduce the same result using Tequila ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky)

Pud, why didn't you save and end (surrender) the game right then and there to have the NO-FOW after-battle map with all units shown? maybe they surrendered/were captured, maybe the enemy had some unit there, etc. I am concerned if what you relate is true, because I do want a game that works! ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky)

Basebal, I am asking you, do want a game that works? LOL...seriously, I agree with iggi, there already IS a lot of micromanaging, actually micromanaging is what you do all the time during the orders phase. Of course there is the question of scale, ie, what "micromanaging" actually is. We are not choosing ammo type, yes. But the IGNORE command would be on the same micromanage-level as the orders UN-/HIDE, TARGET and UN-/BUTTON. ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky)

As a heavy assault tank the Jumbo was intentionally fited with the 75mm gun, because somehow the 76mm wouldn't do HE right (opinions differ on why this was so, some sources state that there was too little or no HE ammo for the 76 (?)). The official Army order to upgun the M4A3E2 Jumbos to the 76mm gun was issued in March 1945. I remember very well the discussion I had about this in re. to cc4. When I presented the above info, the other side's argument was that even before that time, as early as late 1944, 76mm Jumbos existed as field conversions, and that the order dating from March 1945 was just an ex post legalization of an already long practiced policy of upgunning the Jumbo. This does sound reasonable. However, I think it would slightly collide with DDS's post above (because they wouldn't give the official sanctioning of the 76mm Jumbo _after_ they ordered them, it would seem) with the early 45 production order of 76mm Jumbos, unless "early 1945" would mean March 45. Don't misunderstand me, I am not saying one info or the other is right, just stating what I see. yours sincerely, M.Hofbauer ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky)

Brer Pinkey, taking bunkers out from the rear in close combat, be it with flamethrowers or simple infantry with grenades, isn't a special occurrance (as your post might suggest) but is SOP in CM. The problem is top-hits with large caliber arty. otherwise, I agree with Jager7: excellent work Aaronb and Claymore! t seems you too follow the motto: "do want a game that works!" ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky)

Wild Bill, opinion is divided / the jury is out on the question whether the CM Borg can assimilate old time veteran CM-followers who have actually been here, and assimilated in a natural, self-assimilating way, way before the Borg entered the CM community erm hive. If anything, it is the old board members and CM devotees who should assimilate the Borg. Just my opinion of course. Any "assimilation" executed by the CM Borg onto old CMers would only have a declaratory, but not constitutive effect. ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky)

the "IGNORE" order has been discussed before. I have found myself wanting it many a times. The ability to give an order of targets to be serviced (first this, then this then this) would supplement this nicely. just my worthless 2 eurocents ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky)

Olle, Effect of 14" gun, IMO: 1st hit: Pillbox shaking, some external structural damage. 2nd hit: Internal flaking, more structural damage. 3rd hit: Total destruction. this is like saying: Greyhound's 37mm main gun vs Kingtiger front armor: 1st hit: no damage (...) 15th hit: internal armor flaking (...) 58th hit: total destruction. Maybe you have played too many RTS games like Sudden Strike and RedAlert or the like. CM is NOT like that. You can NOT kill a tank in CM with a rifle repeatedly hiting it. There is no adding-up effect of armor penetration or damage capability of single rounds. Sorry but I think your opinion above is very silly. Any round, be it artillery or not, has a certain penetration performance, and based on that a certain chance of defeating the target's armor. The first round has as much or as little chance to destroy the target, as does the last round. I agree with Claymore when he says, to coin it in the style of CPT S.: "please dont fix. do nofink!!!!" ------------------ "Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky)

hmm - it's an interesting concept, no doubt. I am not against it. # It could work along the lines of the way fanaticism is handled. Fanaticism in CM now means chance that troops will fight to their death when under atack without surrendering. Why not also let it mean that there is a certain chance of them going berzerk when they have "tasted blood" and pursue the enemy recklessly? Again, I find it interesting, but I am just a n insignificant short-time guest on this planet. DEF: yes I like it too but I think by now it's time for something new.... ------------------ "All i want is for decent games to be a good as they can be. Do want a game that works???" (CPT Stransky)

Stefan, you misinterpreted the cc1 AI. You simply forgot to put the general behavior command (Atack-Defend-Retreat) to "Defend". Many people never got this thing and claimed their troops were acting on themselves all the time. Squads acted on their own after quite a while if they didn't receive any orders. When no general order was given, as most people always forgot to, then this "acting on our own" this staretd to appear. If a general command of defend was given, squads would simply stay put whereever they were and wait for orders. ------------------ "Please fix!!! or do somefink" (CPT S.)

stop posting such insignificant, irrelevant little details whether you killed 73 or hundred-73 vehicles, get with the program RMC and send me the surrender file dammit! leave such insignificant details, 100 vehicles more or less, to people like CPT Stransky: ------------------ "Please fix!!! or do somefink" (CPT S.)

when the problems and questions with modeling this rather obscure equipment first surfaced here on the board, nobody really knew anything exact about it, as any real information was hard to come by. Mr Cunningham, member of the CM community, therefore made it his mission to explore this weapon. He did an excellent research work on the issue, and the Nahverteidigungswaffe is now covered in the most extensive work on that subject available, on the Nahverteidigungswaffe-Page. Would love to see the data and a pic or line drawing if you have any. you can be helped. The page includes all the data available and quite some pictures and line drawings, and will most likely answer the questions you have. It is located at: http://home.t-online.de/home/rcunningham/nahvert/nah.htm ------------------ "Please fix!!! or do somefink" (CPT S.)

the "hit"-asterisksnake wrote: Hehe, M Hofbauer, don't think that's some kind of victory over me. When I said 500 mms of concrete I was stating what I thought I'd read, and it had no effect on my opinion as to whether or not the pillboxes could be penetrated at the time. oh, that wait a minute was not meant directed as a "na-na nana-na you're wrong" at you, it was more like an outspoken lightbulb of astonishment, because I hadn't thought of that ymself before, and 50cm armor is quite a difference to 50cm concrete...so I had one of those rare spilt-seconds where you see all the beauty of life, the universe and everything, where you can see to infinity with total clarity....of course such moments pass faster than they appear so all you are left with is that astonishment over a small issue that was cleared up in that moment. (which to tell the truth was nonexistant; I had and still have no idea how much concrete, steel-reinforced or not, anything could penetrate) hmm not sure about HE, but there are rules of thumb for conversion of concrete into armor (btw when I say "armor" I always mean it as a terminus technicus for armor = treated steel) or vice versa. I seem to faintly remember a rule of thumb for the conversion of concrete into effective armor as regards the effectiveness of hollow charges, and it went something like 200cm of concrete transform into 80cm of armor...or something like that...might be totally of here though, I don't remember the exact figures (personally I find the figure to be too high). But if you feel the pillboxes should not be able to be knocked out by arty then, knowing it's 500 mms of armor max thickness, I'll go with that. now don't you start giving in, this is an argument here no, you really shouldn't "go with that" because I frankly I don't know either, it's just my personal opinion. Yes, IMO I think 500mm of armor should be pretty immune to artillery, but then I am not so sure about the 14".... However, such large arty as 14 inch cannon fire *would* kill or disable everyone in a pillbox were it to land on it or within feet of it, wouldn't it? well if you are asking for my personal opinion: no, it wouldn't IMO. If it doesn't penetrate or cave in or spall, a bunker is exactly what it was built for, a shelter. Depending on the bunker construction, even blast can be disregarded, but probably not for the type we are discusing here. Or am I overestimating these weapons? maybe. let me see, I'll look some artillery data up. (big hassle, rummaging through boxes with books) (returns with a wad of documents and things he usually refers to as "stuff") ok, seems we can totally forget all that smaller stuff...an arbitrary example, the german 17-K18 fired a projectile with an actual caliber of 172mm which weighed 62.8kg which included 6.1 kg of explosives. (Vo 925m/s, range 31km) this won't harm our baby. kinetic energy shouldn't be disregarded, oh no, but still it is after all a HE round. we need bigger stuff, something in the 14" range... ok, how about .... a rail gun...like, the Siegfried (E) with 38cm...yes that should be more than comparable to the 14"... ok it fired the S.Gr.L/4,5 which weighed 495kg which included 48 kg of explosives. hmmm...basically, Imight be totally off here but isn't it too far fetched to roughy compare this to a SC500, a 500kg (1000lb) heavy aircraft bomb? Now, even a StuKa throwing down a 500kg bomb has problems with heavy concrete bunkers... but we are not much further, anyway at least now you have a rough idea on some of the dimensions... now, here's an interesting tidbit which refers to my comment above that a HE round isn't exactly the best thing to attack concrete binkers... because of the ineffectivity of regular artillery ammunitions versus fortifications, theb germans developed special Betongranaten ((anti-concrete) rounds), later became known under the name "Röchling-Granaten"...hmm yes I read that before somewhere...ok they were basically long penetrator rods, much like in a sabot, made of chrome-vanadium (got some of that stuff in my toolbox, screwdrivers and such)...these long kinetic energy penetrators worked rather well, they were made in 15cm and 24cm caliber...trials at the Maginot line showed they could penetrate welll over 4m of concrete...however, since they were so spectacularly effective, Hitler prohibited the use of this ammunition (well he didnt prohibnit it but he had to be asked before every single round of them was to be employed, and he very rarely allowed it) as he feared the allies would find out about them and then use this concept against the german fortifications... (typing interrupted by 55min - phone call) uhmmm...where have we left off? yes, artillery ineffective versus strong fortifications. I say, regular arty, no dice, heavy arty would need direct hits IMO. And if noone were killed or wounded, wouldn't the blast and sheer noise be enough to warrant a *shocked* state? noise maybe, blast maybe. Not sure. Fortunately I never had to endure anything like that, I guerss I'ld be terrified by the thought alone that there is people around which are actively trying to kill me. And hey, the flamethrower prices are still extremely strange. you might very well be right there, but I can't tell, because I never use them, I find them pretty ineffective, and so far my PBEM opponents never achieved anything worthwile with handheld FTs either (they did with wasps and such nasty stuff, though). Historically, handheld FTs weren't regular equipment in the german army, but only issued out of the arsenal to assault engineers for certain tasks/missions, which happened more seldom than what most people seem to think (my grampa was an assault engineer NCO with the 290. ID near Leningrad). Bump. Hey, there are some issues yet to be laid to rest that remain in this thread! Me want cheaper Allied Flamethrowers! (or more expensive German ones I guess, tho I'd rather not see Flamethrowers get *even more* expensive) *grins* well if they have equal performance then I agree they should cost the same. are you sure they have the same range? didn't the allies have a longer range? David, I was just wondering, if "nothing" could survive a direct hit from a 14" shell, would five metres of concrete be classified as "nothing"? IMO 5 meters of concrete might be absolutely nothing by the above definition. I've been to the Atlantikwall bunkers, they have around 5m of concrete, and they do show signs of very large hits on them. But didn't suffer on the inside. Jarmo, some were. Though agreed pillbox might not be the right term then, more like casemate. Splinty, I have repeatedly seen Greyhounds or halftracks take out concrete bunkers through firing slit hits.

henri, not oper se, but basically I agree with you, that _some_ threads who got locked up should also be _deleted_ for the very same reason they were locked up. I think many people here feel that way, there's nothing to be gained from leaving those threads around. BTS/moderators, if it is possible to delete them, I personally would really like to see them removed.##yours sincerely, M.Hofbauer ------------------ "Please fix!!! or do somefink" (CPT S.)

hey GAZ, PIEPER chill out and leave it. As for the rest of u stop harressing people,ignore his post/leave it. I see.... FNG GAZ in control....please Master can you advise me as to what my next honorable duty for the big GAZ is? U only have yoursleves to blame for PIEPER getting booted. you mean "blame" as in "Audie Murphy only has himself to blame for getting the CMoH" ? reality check gaz, we are NOT sorry to see JP go, ok? As i have said too many of u are harressing others posts. hmm that's an interesting perspective. Because until now the way I saw it, was that there's simply too many unnerving idiot posters that need harassing. This is a duscussion site not an abuse post. yes it is. U can all sort ya views out and stop being so nasty and negative or we can all abuse each other and screw the site over needs rephrasing. how about, "we sort this thing out and abuse and screw over the nasty so that it stops"? U are all to blame. WE are all to blame. That is, everybody ecept his holiness GAZ from NZ. gaztransky, you are a funny man erm mate. you knwo what? maybe you should start a sect or something. you could call it the MATEing sect: "You are all to blame!" "Repent before it's too late!" "The world ends tomorrow!" Now back on topic read me basement post!!!!! no I won't. stop behaving like a badass drill sergeant, it just looks ridiculous on you, nothing else. ------------------ "Please fix!!! or do somefink" (CPT S.)