Mark IV

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Seanachai: do we have a Peng Challenge Thread Confessor?... I'd say our best bet is someone slightly fatherly, but deeply disturbed, filled with a kind of folksy wisdom while lusting after teenage girls sort of figure<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Shaw, my a$$. I've been waiting a long time for that job description. Send picture of "teenage girls sort of figure". Willing to relocate from California, will waive girls for electricity. jd: Long have I been sickened by your writings. I have whomped your jurisprudential kin in a fair fight, and used him for a crash test dummy in one of my experimental setups, which I nearly won as well, except for dying somewhat near the end. However, if you think you're going to get a game on the mere basis of being sickening, and a parenthetical drive-by lumped with elvis detriticus and a distempered expatriate martian, you are hallucinating. Make me hate you (posting your picture was a heckuva good start). Remember, I am Marketing, one of the few classes who cannot automatically look down on the legal profession. Though I'm pretty sure that I can. Respectfully, Mark IV

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Username: Another fact is that high velocity weapons set off a shock wave through flesh that is devastating. It will "knock someone down" by this effect (actually snuff someone out if its a body hit, a limb hit can be an amputation)... Many troops used AP (like the BAR guy states) because of this effect. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> High velocity rounds do create a "shock wave" better known as a temporary wound cavity. It doesn't literally knock anyone down. It may or may not cause them to go down, but the force is actually lateral around the path of the bullet, and is one of the downsides of being composed of compressible tissue and incompressible fluids. Bullets can cause tissue damage well beyond their own diameter due to hydrostatic shock. I don't know about "actually snuffing someone out" because my snuffology is a bit rusty. If controlled studies have been performed with snuffometers I would be interested in the data. I will let the BAR guy, Old 29er, speak for himself, but he didn't actually say the BAR was loaded with AP to take advantage of its human knock-down power. I hope he posts some more. It might just as well have been to deal with HTs or poke holes in covering trees. AP rounds wouldn't yield any more stopping power on a human target than regular ball ammo; it might actually be less, since the tip is unlikely to expand in a soft target, imparting less energy to the target.

Where has Herr OSFG been off to? The Pendulum of Disaster had begun to swing in his direction (finally) and perhaps it's knocked him on his head? God knows MINE's still ringing. When Elvis shows up to post "wankers", let's all jump up and shout "boo!". Perhaps he'll die of fright. If not, I think I would like a rematch with the gamey, anti-sequentialist chump. I foolishly misread the scenario briefing of our last but manfully lived with my mistake until the grisly end. I will probably also kill Pawbroon again, as I like that roasted garlic smell. Modesty and decorum forbid a description of what I am doing to Hiram/Phan, but it is early in the game. Hopefully Elvis and Peng are coaching him... I see the invisible hand of a Gray Eminence already at work. I try to hate equally, but I really hate Goanna. Don't you?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BloodyBucket: Small arms, with very few exceptions, do not "knock 'em down" without regard to shot placement... (snip) The rap against the carbine comes from: 1. People trying to use it like a Garand at long ranges 2. Failure of the round to stop heavily clothed North Koreans in sub-zero conditions, where the carbine froze up and the firing pin frequently snapped. ... As to small arms fire penetrating jungle or brush, it just ain't done with aimed fire. Very small branches send bullets careening off course. If you want to penetrate a log, than by all means a Garand of BAR is better than a carbine. If you want to aim at a point target you can barely see 50 yards away through the jungle undergrowth, no rifle issued will do that reliably.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Mr. Bucket, you sound like a guy who does some shooting and some thinking about shooting. So my first observation is not so much for you. But... NO kinetic energy small arms "knock people down", as I know you (but not everybody) are aware. Unless we count 40mm HE devices, etc., and we don't. "Knock-down" and "stopping power" are some of the most misunderstood terms in gunning. This is where Newton rears his ugly head: the simple truth is that if a bullet could literally knock a man down, the weapon that fired it would also have to knock down the guy shooting it. Only in Hollywood do people literally get thrown backwards by the impact of any handheld weapon. What we are really interested in, in self-defense shooting, is incapacitation. Real quick incapacitation. And we can NEVER count on a head shot, which is the only guaranteed instant incapacitation there is. Period. Wounds to the (other guy's) central body cavity are what the tactical shooter strives for. These wounds incapacitate by destruction of tissue and blood loss. Period. The most devastating hit on a person, say a 12-ga. muzzle blast directly over the heart, which utterly destroys the organ, guarantees incapacitation... in about 15 seconds. This is the position of the FBI, the International Wound Ballistics Association, and most other serious students of tactical shooting who aren't trying to sell something... big bullets work best. Fast bullets work well. Big, fast bullets work the best of all, but there is a point of diminishing returns, since as recoil goes up, shooter efficiency goes down. In any case, you ain't knocking anybody down unless his body decides to go down out of shock, fear of death, or extreme pain (it has been argued that the most painful wounds are rarely the most terminal, but involve the extremities). I think that under 50m, the carbine round is nearly as incapacitating as the .30-06. This is a difficult thing to quantify, due to the difficulty in retaining test subjects. However, it presupposes a soldier in the open and the goal of incapacitation, as opposed to suppression. Your point about rounds deflecting is right on. Shooters often say they need a bigger, faster round to "hammer through the brush", and this is nonsense. It only means that you will send a more expensive and punishing round careening off in the wrong direction. This has been proven time and again by authorities and amateurs at all levels, including me (definitely amateur, but the results were free). Of course, we don't have to hit a guy to gain tactical supremacy, because suppression is half the battle. It's the easy half, but who wants to lose either one? Keep lead whistling in his ears and at least he won't be shooting at YOU, or not very well. It's a numbers thing. From this point of view, the carbine round may actually be superior at close range and in heavy foliage, and this (as I understand it) is part of the logic for the high FP of SMGs in CM at close range. It would not result in more kills for the .30 carbine, only better suppression. Maybe. But combat troops are required to engage all manner of unfair targets, including distant troops, vehicles, buildings, or wooden bunkers. My experience with CM wooden bunkers is that they couldn't stop a hungry mosquito, but that is irrelevant. The .30 carbine is useless for any of these tasks. Most of them were well-made and accurate at 100m, but they have very little retained energy at that range. Neither does the .357 Mag, to which it was somewhat aptly compared, not counting sectional density. Which finally brings me around to the bone I meant to pick (and people who want this to stop could send me turns, and I wouldn't have so much time on my hands):

I guess it's because I like statistics, but... has anyone else noticed that threads about atrocities ALWAYS get locked? 100% of the time? It's enough to hypothesize a causal relationship, it is. I wonder if that's Anyone's way of telling us that such discussions are unwelcome on their free, privately-owned board?

The HMG and the LMG are exactly the same weapon in CM, except that the HMG has the tripod mount and a bigger crew. The bigger crew carries more ammo, so the main difference we see in the game is the higher ammo load. One of the chief innovations of the MG42 was the quick-change barrel. A heavier barrel option would have improved long-range accuracy, but facilitating cooling was unnecessary, since part of what the larger crew carried was more spare barrels, which is a darned good idea with an air-cooled weapon firing 1200 rpm.

There IS a MrPeng. He did not start this thread. Seanachai did. He challenged Peng, then Took Their Challenge Public. The rest is history. Peng is not human. He is a Pod. Pods fear sunlight, smiley-faces, and Elvis. They enjoy recreational pharmaceuticals. Their roots are in obscure Pythonology, where they have no armor school. Their spawning grounds are in the Philadelphia area. MrPeng was noted for world-class invective and taunting long before there was a Peng thread. He is an unwilling celebrity, but profits handsomely from the lucrative apparel and souvenier concessions associated with the thread. Hope this helps.

Hatcher actually received the rank of Major General. His "Notebook" is one of the classics of military gun lore, and a top-ten grade military ballistic reference work which is still valid today. Hatcher is to the M1 Garand, what Jentz is to German armor.

Lorak! The armed IVces have scored their latest triumph at the conclusion of a long night/fog battle against Americans under French command (thus, the conclusion was foregone). MarkIV: 67 solid points of Victory, albeit tactical, Pawbroon: 29 ill-gotten points mainly from sneaking around in the dark with his customary but lemming-like elan. This is now the longest-lasting game in the history of CMBO, even surpassing the epic struggle with the now-defunct Hakko Ichiu. The battle waged as 2 separate mini-engagements, where on my left matters were settled shortly after the opening turns, but on the right ebbed and waned as this blatant maneuverist attempted encirclements, enslitherations, and a triple lutz in the impenetrable gloom (vis. 52m). This resulted in a couple of tank battles at handgun ranges, the results of which provided illumination for my brave volks. Sadly, a pair of PzIVH frog blenders contributed to the night fires, but not without exacting a fearful price, etc. Incredibly, M. P'broon had forgotten about an 81mm FO who finished the game with 199 rounds of ammunition still in pocket, so to speak. He noticed this fellow standing around with his thumb up his fred on turn 29 or 30. I actually did that myself, once, though not quite to the same extreme... does anyone think the game needs a roster? Perhaps we should put it to the outer Board.... A good show, all in all, with a happy ending.

We have learned to our distress that Peng Thread posters are not among the elite of CM fans. Further, we are informed that <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>true-blue grogs do not taunt, they play... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, something's been bothering me for a long time, and to redeem this lowly pool of cess I have decided to speak out, here. I speak to you of the M25 Tracer Round modeling fiasco, and the cover-up around it. I'm sure that even non-elite CMers are aware that the M25 tracer was the Ami .30-06 round with the red tip. It causes the trace thingies that represents bullets flying around. A true blue grog would surely know that the tracer does not ignite until about 50m down range, and burns out around 1000m. Yet CMBO shows tracers at ALL ranges. The next time you're in a firefight at 25m and tracers come hurtling your way, you are witnessing an ERROR and a BUG and your immersion will be DESTROYED. Ditto when those little points of light come sailing in from 1000m+ (don't get me started on Jabos). Yet grogdom sits idly by and says nothing. It doesn't stop there. As every schoolchild knows, the tracer round has a somewhat lower muzzle velocity than the ball and AP rounds, so the main stream of MG bullets is actually striking above the visible tracers; the greater the range, the greater the disparity. Further, there has been no attempt to distinguish between the M25 and the M14 Armor Piercing Incendiary round; they are lumped together under another "abstraction". WE ALL KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN IGNORED. But true blue grogs turn their backs. This is only the tip of the iceberg. We are blithely informed that German pistols are abstracted, so no distinction has been made between the Luger P-08 and the Walther P-38. Thus, the tendency of the P-08 to jam in foul weather conditions (due to high tolerance critical bearing surfaces and the exposed nature of the toggle-action design) has been swept under the carpet, with the tacit approval of our groggy mentors. Remember this, the next time your sturmcrews swarm those concrete pillboxes, and you never get a "Jam" message. It's all based on a lie. There's plenty more... the magazine capacity issue between the Enfields and the Mausers... the transistion from clockwise to counterclockwise azimuth indicator dials in the Shermans... the inclusion of night illumination devices in late war Allied tank periscopes... the Peng Thread rips the cloak of silence aside, one by one. Peng Thread Death Sentence: Fred. This has been one of my more elaborate bumps, but it needed to be said. Thank you for your attention. This has been a public service message from the Save the Bandwidth Foundation. [ 05-06-2001: Message edited by: Mark IV ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Poolers are def not the 'elite' of CM fans, and they should live with it; when it all started (you saw my number?), there was no PENG pool, there were just 'boring' grogs that commented on the game...and it worked. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You are unnaturally obsessed with your member number, sirrah. This is the second time, in as many anti-Pengathons, that you have cited it. It confers legitimacy on neither your arguments, nor on gerontocracy as a concept, especially since the science of member-numbering has been shown to be inexact, as a good grog should know. Would you defend your "extra inch of armor" opinion, based on your member number? No. Anti-pengers, take heart. You are required to overlook one line of text per visit, no more. But click not, lest ye also shall be clicked. If you gaze too long into the Peng Thread, it shall also gaze... into thee.

You mad frenchman, we are one turn away from The End of a game that was started a year ago, and you are posting here??!!! Light 'em up, monsieur!

Nonsense, in the Peng Thread! We cannot have that. Nor can, nor should, we have tri-tip roasts, nor topplements, nor kaniggetts, nor thingies and sheep. Instead we should be at the forefront of the movement to re-equip the US Army with all BARs, M1911 .45 pistols, and every man in a shiny new Pershing tank. Helicopters, phooey. We didn't need no stinkin' choppers at Normandy. The minute we got into helicopters, we started losing wars. Anyone else notice that? Regards to Prince Patel, btw.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gyrene: Where's a hand-loader when you need one? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> At the range, it's Saturday. Start here: .30-06 historical data There's another great site on WWII-era issue load data and it's driving me crazy trying to find it... the search goes on... Ahh, here it is: .30-06 military loads [ 05-05-2001: Message edited by: Mark IV ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PawBroon: it's never what was quoted which is lacking in veracity but what you said that wasn't up to what others wanted to quote in the first place...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This cannot be duplicated. It contains its own parody. Satire is at once profane, and redundant. Initially it rattled against my monitor like a handful of marbles, hurled by a spiteful toddler. Yet I was drawn inexorably into its considerable depths, and I'm not sure I have fully emerged yet. To those who take language seriously, this is a major paradigm shift, on the order of falling out of the Time Tunnel into the middle of the Terror. It is linguistic guerilla theater, and an unfair tactic while we still have an extant game on the books. This is how England felt when first viewing the work of Turner- queasy, challenged, disoriented, undone. I had to have some sherry and go for a walk. Perhaps he should cut off his ear?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Warren Peace: The reason the BAR was so well liked by troops is that it was essentially the first American assault rifle.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Then it's no wonder they didn't revisit the concept for half a century. "Assault rifle" as generally understood (it is a nebulous term) goes hand-in-hand with the intermediate cartridge concept, and most date its origin to the G43/StG44/MP44 family. Assault rifles are made for general issue to all infantry, and give each man suppressive capability with intermediate rounds. BAR was a squad support weapon, with great honking bullets. Even in the original design concept, which included walking fire (which is not what assault rifles are for), it was a squad support weapon. It was a poor choice for that role in WWII, except that it was the only choice the troops had. The reason the troops liked it was because it was all they had, and it was a reliable weapon, whatever it was. I don't think many would have chosen it over an MG42, given a choice, but if it saved their ass once, it was great. MG42s do not take much time (seconds) to "set up", and could be fired by a single soldier if necessary, with reduced efficacy. BARs were also meant to be crew served, with another guy loading to keep up the fire from the pathetically small box mag. One man could indeed handle it like a big rifle... and used in that fashion, it becomes simply one more big, fat rifle. The BAR was a little more mobile than MG42, but at the expense of all that nifty suppressive ability. You already had 10 guys with M1s in a squad, so the BAR didn't represent much of a force multiplier anyway.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Username: I would rather have a grease gun than this pea shooter... Its a daisy rifle.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That's where I would draw the line. It is kind of a Daisy rifle, and a curious thing to give a soldier (does make a heck of a pistol cartridge with the right loads, the Ruger Single Action Army used to be available in .30 carbine). But you'd rather have a grease gun? To each his own... I'd rather have a prayer of hitting something with the lightest of loads, than the virtual guarantee of harmlessness that the grease gun represents over 20m. At anything over crack-house distances, I'd rather have my revolver... and after that, maybe the M1 Carbine.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Military and machinegun ammo is also packed with more powder than some civvie hunting ammo, which will also make a difference.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Many hunting loads are actually more powerful than their military cousins, for the reason stated by lcm. It is more humane, meaning quicker kill, to hit an animal as hard as possible; it is also a better practice to shoot as flat a trajectory as possible (so higher velocities, thus more power), and the emphasis on rapid fire is much less (or ought to be) in hunting. These are incremental differences to maximize performance under specific conditions, though. This is partly achieved through more powder, and also through different types of powder with faster or slower burn rates, the idea being to consume all the powder within the barrel before the bullet exits. .303 British was designed for a full-length rifle barrel, and use of the same cartridge in the Mk V jungle carbine version of the Lee-Enfield caused the large muzzle blast, which in turn led to the conical flash dispersor. The muzzle blast is from unexpended powder igniting outside the muzzle, which is wasted energy, resulting in slightly lower velocities and unoptimized bullet performance. Fortunately, the flash hider and the muzzle blast look cool, which is ample justification. Since you have nearly the same energy pushing back on a lighter weapon, you have more felt recoil than with a full-sized Enfield. One nice thing about the M1 is that the gas operation has a dampening effect on the recoil. It is noticeably more shoulder-friendly than the same round out of a bolt action. It still kicks more than a jungle carbine because it is a very mean load. One-foot trees are easily penetrated with the 7.92mm and .30-06 (I don't remember trying it with my jungle carbine; while technically the lightest load of the lot, it is still an incremental difference and it would probably do it). I don't think 3 feet (1m) would be possible due to bullet deformation and fragmentation. I could try it, but in California I would probably be brought up on assault charges. What WWII taught us, some of us more slowly than others, is that the heavy loads mentioned above were overkill for infantry rifles, though it could be argued that they work well for MGs, except you have interchangeability issues then. To me, the perfect infantry cartridge is the 7.62 x 39 Soviet. The 5.56mm is too light for my taste, though a better sniper cartridge. I have killed several deer with the Soviet cartridge and now consider it inadequate as a hunting cartridge; I wouldn't even try the 5.56/.223 on deer-sized game, though I'll include the obligatory "shot placement is everything" disclaimer and I'm sure some idiot has killed a moose with one. Personally, I went back to the .270 Win... :cool:

You forgot the Nozdruls. And the description of the boggie village as the leavings of a dragon which had suffered a series of disappointing and untidy bowel movements (from memory, but the gist of the thing). The veritable spoor of your posts, Mr. Shaw.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Moriarty: PushBroom... you have the unmitigated gall to deny my fearless feldgraus the pride of the German tank fleet : the invincible PzIIL.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> He is nothing, if not an unmitigated Gaul. Mr. Shandorf: Anyone who could possibly look at my picture, framed as it is by Peng, Shaw, & (shudder) Foobar, and conclude that I am dressed funny, clearly has tri-tip for brains. Being goofy-looking, I normally wear rather nice suits to compensate. This intimidates the programmer-lice that I am forced to deal with, as they assume I'm a lawyer, and are even more frightened of me than other human contacts. The fish in the picture, upon whom you can only gaze in genetic envy, was slimy. I believe you are familiar with the condition. So were the other thousand or so other fish I caught that day. That's why I didn't dress up for the photo, that, and because I despise you, and feared that someday your yellowed corneas might attempt to focus on it. Thanks for your concern. And, please watch who follows you in here in the future, you guttersnipe. We're trying to run a Cesspool here.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Uncus: It could also have different shades of color depending on the unit´s range and effectiveness (great for ambushes!!!). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Steel Panthers had something like that, and it worked fine for 2D. In 3D, you'd have to calculate and display the shadows, etc., for each unit on the fly, and I can see where that would slow things down. It would be a nice option, and would speed up the pace of issuing orders, assuming the micro could handle it. I do like the handy measurement tool that the current LOS line provides, and I use it for that all the time. Counting hexes sucked.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by M. Bates: Haha the one time I check the Peng Thread this week and I see a wholly unwarranted attack on my good self! Even you fools in the Peng Thread should realise that the invasion of cretins like Eurowarrior (prompted and baited by Maximus) is a good stick to poke Maximess with! Right I'll piss off now then.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Splendid idea. Though why you think the attack was unwarranted, is a mystery. Poking lamely and belatedly at a well-known oaf is hardly redemption for a village idiot. Anyway, unwarranted attacks are what the Peng Thread is for... you idiot. Therefore, being an idiot, and the attack (which didn't really meet Peng Thread standards for an "attack" anyway, being a rather lame denunciation of the obvious) consisting of rightfully noting you as an idiot, you have provoked a warranted attack, upsetting our charter in a predictably small way. Piss off. Have a slice of tri-tip on the way out, you deserve it. See the perdidiot by the door.

WHAT is this doing at the bottom of page 1? The theme for this bump shall be, let's see, my hatred for Goanna, whose elite Polskis are tightening the garotte. Thank you Mr. AI for the village of wooden bunkers you issued me, the plethora of useless IGs (well, except for one of them) I got for a night battle, and the single Hetzer that made it to, oh, about turn 3. Not over yet, but it won't be pretty. I will take it out on Hiram out of sheer spite.

A point-blank, up-the-tailpipe shot from my Stuart destroyed not only Meeks' Stug, but his CM career as well. He has fled the board but is probably posting under various aliases. It was the most useful moment of my life. I love this game.

Peng vs. Pawbroon: this should be good, folks. Obviously both are banned, since their names start with "P". We (rexfordian first person) hereby waive this ban, in order to enjoy AARs from two masters of alternative expression. Decoder rings available for $9.95, include a self-addressed, stamped mace with your request. Since they are the two slowest turn-returners in the history of gaming, since Cain first sent a .txt file to Abel via homing pterodactyl, this will be like Dickensian installments arriving on American shores, every couple months or so, but worth the wait. An epic clash of the resistable force and the movable object. The stealthy manooooverist vs. the scheming attritionista. A cultural tour-de-farce. A Phillie phromage-stek, avec zwiebeln. Synthetic versus natural hallucinogens. Frog vs. Pod. Where is Howard Cosell when we need him? This, my friends, is what CM is all about... the clash of diametrically opposed value systems in an unrelenting, no-quarter quest for adequacy. To those about to die, remember: Kill Them All!