Mark IV
-
Posts
1,993 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Mark IV
-
-
If you are playing with full Fog of War on, then Engineer units are more adept at spotting mines. Perhaps they're the guys spotting them?
If you can see all of them from the git-go, you are not using FOW. Naughty, naughty.
-
The former Soviet Union did, and China does, refer to themselves as "communist". So there is really no debate here.
When it comes to incentives, human nature is pretty predictable. It seems that Marxist dogma attempts to either ignore, misinterpret, or change human nature.
Whatever the case, incentives are like a trail of crumbs for the ants, and humans follow them where they are found, and that's why states with Marxist roots seem to always end up the same.
Flourishing black markets, premiums on foreign currency, abuse of power by those with access to goods, periodic crackdown on economic crimes, and low productivity, are all kind of engineered into the system. Some are more benign to their neighbors than others.
The fact that they are doctrinally committed to exporting the dictatorship of the proletariat is one reason they are always perceived as a threat to us imperialists. Our counter-policy of global "containment" polarized the debate and our relationship with communist countries... but that's OK with me. We were both smart enough not to go to WWIII over it and all's well that ends well.
We were going to sell them the rope from which we would eventually hang, remember? And now most of our rope is plastic, and imported from China...
-
109Gustav: At the bottom of this linked page are two pictures of MkIVs used by Syria, including the one now on Long Island.
-
Well, I signed up for it. Hopefully I will conduct myself as an honorable peckerhead.
At the very least I can provide cannon fodder for the accomplished, and if people get weird I can bail.
What's confusing, is this surrender business. One crew thinks I should surrender when it looks hopeless, rather than drag out the game and foul up the points. Another thinks that will deprive them of the satisfaction of bayonetting my medics, and will foul up their points.
And are you better off to retreat off the board, or just Haende Hoch and get a hot shower and some coffee? I don't understand the ramifications of the two (I think I do in Operations, but not in individual games).
I don't know why watching me drag my beaten ass to the map edge would be any more sporting than accepting a surrender, or fighting to the last cartridge?
-
The units that placed the mines often did keep maps, and deliberately left zig-zag lanes for future advances through them.
Of course there's no guarantee that the unit that placed the mines was YOUR unit. The individual mines were there at the beginning of the game.
The issue is similar to the one of "friendly fire" from friendly MGs. Some insight from BTS on the game's implementation is the only way to resolve this one.
-
I speak in defense of the proper tactical deployment and use of smileys.
The original M1A1 smiley-face
is indeed objectionable to all reasonable men. It is a pathetic attempt to connote jollity, potpourri in little craft baskets, and cuddly kittens, things from which all normal men flee in disgust. It is best dealt with in the manner illustrated so graphically, above, by Formerly Babra.Mr. Winky
is the worst offender, and the main source of the esteemed MrPeng's ire. Why? Because it is a substitute for eloquence, a replacement for language, and an overly generous nod to the conceptually stunted, including those too stupid to realize that they themselves are the target of serious invective. For an author, its use is either an admission that he lacks the courage of his convictions and wishes to remove some of the "sting" of his words (ah, how the best words take some skin with them!), or a supreme insult to his audience's powers of comprehension.Consider above. It was unnecessary to add Mr. Winky after writing "the esteemed MrPeng", since everyone is aware that there is no reason for anyone to hold him in any particular esteem. He is inanimate. The use was obviously sarcastic, and those left feeling that I hold MrPeng in special esteem are precisely the sort of riff-raff for whom the "bad" smileys were created in the first place.
This said, I believe that some of the other members of this sadly misunderstood clan serve to augment even the best verbal barrages. Simply stated, they are an additional device provided by this brave new digital medium to increase the pain and discomfiture of one's enemies. If one keeps this simple rule in mind, one finds many acceptable uses, provided they are never used in place of verbal clarity.
Of these, the most useful is the Grin of the Fecal Diner
. This delightful weapon in any taunter's arsenal adds visual insult to verbal injury. In many ways it is a counter-smiley; following a blistering riposte, it is a means of conveying to a smiley-conditioned audience "Yes, and I really mean it, and I want you to feel a little worse for having read this". It is a virtual pie-in-the-face, a picture for all to see that the poster is laughing and spraying saliva directly in the postee's face.Consider: "Peng fears to PBEM me because he is used to playing girly-men in flower print dresses and is only half a stupid flightless bird missing the 'win' and uses tactics he learned from the Martha Stewart show".
Can't you just feel the nicotine-scented aerosol of contempt?
The Scowl
can add a threatening demeanor to the most harmless exchanges. In a recent post regarding an opponent I made a reference to the fact that I was unhappy with "his little schreck", followed by a Scowl. I had already expressed my unhappiness, including the coy entendre that his "schreck" might be undersized, and that I myself have a stout, wrinkle-free, MANLY schreck. The Scowl lent a terrifying aspect to this and he is probably even now standing naked before a mirror in shame with a giant comedo extractor in his trembling fingers.The
is a non-prosecutable icon for the author's wish to actually do physical injury to the recipient (or the general public), and provides a legal firewall for one's feelings. Razz and roll-eyes may also be used to convey contempt, without putting into words that which constitutes probable cause for thread death. Cool can be exceptionally irritating after a vicious and successful flame, since it shows how satisfied the poster is with himself and the psychological damage he has wrought. 
I do not understand what embarrassed and confused are for, but both smack of apology, which is obviously inappropriate. I recommend that these suspect smileys get the Babra treatment to prevent accidental misunderstandings.
To summarize, the sparing use of the right smiley in the right place is a powerful meta-verbal communications tool, if one remembers the simple rule: to increase the pain and discomfiture of one's enemies, but never used in place of wit or clarity.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Your posts require actual thought to respond to, and this takes time.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
If he used more smileys, could you get back more quickly?
-
I worry about the effects ladders seem to have on game play (witness discussion on surrendering).
You already ARE playing a non-ladder game and I am very unhappy with your little schreck.
-
Pool was a Spearheader. 3AD had a way of staying out front (some Texans were among them).
Great posts.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Moon:
it appears (and perfectly makes sense) that a slow moving big bullet is able to transmit more of its knietic energy to its target (i.e. human body) than a small fast moving bullet - UNLESS the slower one hits a bone<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This is at least half true; bigger is usually better, in handgun ammunition. But if a slow-moving big bullet is good, a fast-moving big bullet is better, 'cause energy is the name of the game.
The fact is that all handguns are weak. The .45 ACP military load (Europeans call it the 11.43x23mm in their quaint system)
is a 230 grain, round nose, full metal jacket, which is always called "ball" ammunition (probably because guns used to shoot literal round balls; also why bullets are called "rounds"). The .45 creates about 351 foot/pounds of energy at the muzzle.
If the .45 was a rifle you would throw it away. Rifles have energy to spare. All the debate and effort and study over stopping power in handguns is necessary, because handguns are a compromise. The #1 handgun man-stopper is .357 Magnum, not a military load, because it offers the "right" combination of bullet weight and velocity (and exceeds .44 mag according to many). It still sucks compared to almost all rifles (I've killed 2 deer with .357 mag, many with military rifles, and take a ghoulish interest in post-mortem wound ballistics. I always eat my subjects).
The 9mm is pretty lame in the "stopping power" category, but has less recoil than the biggies. The philosophy again: all a military round has to do, in addition to feeding properly and flying straight, is get a solid hit on a guy, and he is basically done for. The 9 will do that out to the 40m dividing line that CM uses, and would retain some effectiveness out to 90+m. For these purposes, 9 and .45 are quite equal. As man-stopping handguns go (police-style), .45 would be much better.
I thought the G11 was on hold due to corrosion problems with the caseless ammo?
-
Welcome! Some here have been blown away, up, out, and sideways with 3 little scenarios for quite a while and are still just as excited as you are (probably more so, to be honest). So I don't think you'll be disappointed.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Can anyone hear remind me about what they actually determined to be the best weapon and round/bullet/projectile to take down enemy soldiers with?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Interest rates?
-
I really enjoyed the movie "Three Kings".
One of its contributions to cinematography was an internal (I mean, inside the organ cavity) shot of a round entering a person, with a wound channel like you see in gelatin block tests. Wow. Peckinpah would have loved it.
Forgotmypassword: I keep forgetting to add http://www.lssah.com/LAH%20WEAPONS.html for a quick look at various toys.
[This message has been edited by Mark IV (edited 06-09-2000).]
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DanE:
Sure, the crew would probably know what direction the shell came from, but if the crew bails out of the tank, or are all killed, they are not able to "radio" this info to you<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I wonder. In a buttoned tank, it would be pretty hard to tell much more than one of the 4 major compass positions, anyway.
Bang! Hole in side. The driver is concentrating on his tiny FOV forward, gunner can only see where the main gun is pointing, and the TC not much more (the loader can't see a damn thing, if he's still alive).
Flank and rear shots would be shocking and puzzling. I did just read about an LT in Korea who figured the location of some distant Commie guns by lining up the holes through the lead tank. The crew survivors didn't know what had hit them.
-
No US military ammo that I know of, and certainly not our standard issue 5.56mm ammo, has a metal ball in the tip or anything remotely like it.
Flechettes aren't slugs and aren't normally fired from rifles (they do have flechette loads for 12 ga., however). Flechettes are "little arrows" (hence the name) and their purpose is to fly in a big cone, after a big explosion sets them off.
The rifle flechette you described was specialized for piercing body armor (measure, counter-measure). The purpose of the flechette was to penetrate the body armor and incapacitate the enemy. There it would make sense, since you need a LOT of foot/pounds behind a tiny point to get through the Kevlar, or whatever. Most infantry don't wear body armor, so most troops aren't issued flechette rounds.
Flechette rounds are common in modern tank ammo racks, often known as "beehives". They turn Mr. Tank Cannon into a giant shotgun, and a twist adjustment sets how far downrange you'd like it to detonate.
The little fins make the flechettes fly forward seeking human flesh. Flechette rounds are useless for anything other than troops in the open, or maybe von Lucke's goats.
The point is that this is a "specialty" weapon designed to discourage human-wave style assaults, and flechettes are far more effective in incapacitating humans than little BBs scattering about after a tank round explodes. They cover more ground more efficiently, and directionally. They are not necessarily designed to twist and turn inside people but they probably will (too bad, shoulda charged someone else's tank).
They are less devastating wound-causers than a rifle bullet. They have a completely different application.
Military weapons are designed to kill/incapacitate enemies as effectively as possible and economies are paramount. NObody is going to waste a nickel making something which is already incapacitating, a little more painful or damaging to the wounded.
The fact that projectiles designed to kinetically penetrate and damage human bodies are often gruesomely harmful is an unfortunate by-product of winning battles, which is why they are best kept on a PC.
[This message has been edited by Mark IV (edited 06-09-2000).]
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RMC:
The m16 bullet may not have been designed to tumble but everything I have seen indicates that it does.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Right, they can, but they don't necessarily. It's a very light, elongated bullet travelling at very high velocity, so any deformation after impact will cause the wound cavity to veer, and tumbling is possible.
But the only practical way to design it to tumble would be to destroy it's in-flight accuracy.
-
Originally posted by PawBroon:
The issue here is named the "neck".
With soft bullets or hunting ammo, the length of the neck (the distance between the entry wound and the point where the bullet will either splinter or tumble on it's axis)is very short because they had been designed that way.
It's to cause major STOPPING POWER.
Not to be crabby, but can you support this with documentation? Soft bullets and hunting ammo are very specifically designed to "mushroom". Controlling expansion is vital and much R&D has gone into it. Splintering is a very Bad Thing for a hunting bullet to do; tumbling happens, but is not a design goal. Accuracy first, controlled expansion second: goals of the hunting bullet. The more weight retained by a bullet in the expansion process, the better.
The regular steel metal jacket ammo is made so that (as you put it) it could go unhindered through multiple obstacles and still retain some of it lethality.
Most military rifle ammo is copper jacketed. There most definitely were steel-jacketed rifle bullets, but they were a wartime expedient. They do not work as well as copper jackets and are VERY hard on barrels, especially machine-gun barrels. Armor Piercing MG ammunition is steel-tipped, or cored, or both, but steel jackets are not very desirable or useful. Unjacketed lead bullets are not used, by rifle hunters or soldiers, for many very good reasons.
Problem with those ammos are that the wounds they produce are more often than not called "transfixient".
Meaning they go strait from entry point to exit wound.
If they encounter no bones or else, they do a clean wound.
Which is all the military wants them to do. Hunting's demands of wound ballistics are the opposite of the military's (both in the name of humanity, curiously enough): the hunter gets the most humane (quick) kill by maximizing tissue damage, best achieved with controlled mushrooming, hence the "soft" (exposed lead) or hollow points. The soldier causes the most humane (clean) wound by simply downing the enemy- no need to tear up vitals unnecessarily- so full metal jackets (which also feed better in automatic weapons).
That's why many soldiers tend to refuse to wear the flak jacket while being fired at because it would just stop small shrapnel and 9mm rounds and if they took a 5.56 slug the "neck" is there as soon as the bullet exit the jacket and hit you while tumbling out of it axis.
Exactly. The pre-deformation of the slug caused by the jacket causes the military bullet to assume some of the characteristics of a hunting bullet.
In a game like the one we WORSHIP it's suppose to be modelled by a huge stopping power when fired on at close range by those MP and by an all out lethality for rifle slugs and MP44.
Yes, I am just splitting some hairs here. I am definitely not urging any mods to the game, and I really don't have any problem at all with the way the MPs are modeled. Given a choice, I would take MP44 every time.
-
I check in 2-4 times a day from work, plus evening and morning from home.
I have come to realize that not being able to get CM to run on my NT laptop may be a Good Thing, as it's bad enough getting busted on the forum by co-workers. It's killing me when I travel, though.
I usually check CMHQ once a day, following MadMatts update link!!!!!!!!!
-
Overpenetration is a big problem with high velocity bullets, especially on dangerous game. Ideally you want the slug to expend all of its energy in the target.
EXCEPT...
This may raise an eyebrow, but most enemy infantry in CM does not qualify as "dangerous game" in a ballistics sense, except in a bayonet charge. They are usually not charging you with horns lowered, where time-to-destruction of the central nervous system in milliseconds is vital to survival. Any solid hit puts the man out of action and gets a little red cross on his squad stats.
Police officers face "dangerous game" with handguns at close range, so much study has been devoted to shutting a druggie down in minimum time with handgun ammo.
But tactical military rifles need to penetrate a wide variety of materials if they are to achieve their goal of "any solid hit". In the Huertgen, or the woods in CE, the far greater penetration power of the StG44 round over 9mm means the difference between penetrating an 8" fir tree and earning the guy behind it his wound badge.
Rifle bullets will go through light vehicles, helmets, and any impromptu obstacles far better than pistol bullets, and retain enough energy to take a guy out.
I'm not sure what a "round, designed to mushroom on impact (like the .45)" means, because the military ball ammo is solid, round-nosed lead in a plain copper jacket. No "legal" military ammo is designed to mushroom (and M16 ammo is NOT designed to tumble in the human body, either. I know you didn't say that but someone usually does).
9mms and .45s are dangerous things and have their place, but there's a reason the world's militaries are mainly armed with rifle cartridges (the intermediate-sized rounds also reduce recoil over the old "big" bullets in full auto apps, creating tighter burst patterns and more effective suppression).
The Germans just had a jillion MP40s laying around, so they used them because they were there. The MP/StG44 was much more expensive to build and came along a little too late. It is kind of amazing, how long the world's most-feared military was arming the infantry with bolt-action rifles, though.
-
As the 7.92 Kurz round goes right through at 1000 fps faster than an equivalent weight 9mm, it is deforming to an extent, causing a greater temporary wound cavity and imparting way more momentum to the subject.
These are highly controversial statistics, in that the relative efficacies of temporary vs. permanent wound cavities, imparted energy, and penetration vs. diameter, are hotly debated by ballistics geeks way past anything I want to get involved in.
But they are debates about handgun ammo vs. other handgun ammo. The comparison between 7.92 Kurz and 9mm Parabellum is a pretty big jump. One real measure of bullet damage is foot/pounds.
7.92x33 = 1224
9mm = 370
... based on muzzle velocities.
You could quite realistically take your StG44 deer hunting (minimum acceptable for humane sporting purposes on a whitetail is about 900 ft/lbs), but not your 9mm.
The FBI study on wounding ballistics data is available at http://www.geocities.com/~captain_s/terminal/woundingfactors.html and some of it falls into the same category of reading material we had here for the effects of gas. In other words, it's pretty cool if you're into that sort of thing, but a trifle sanguine.
Then there are the steer and pig studies...
If you think about it, most humans go down right away when they are hit, unless they are taking things that weren't widely available on the front in WWII. "Stopping power" is more the concern of the police officer at 3m than infantry at 40m.
Hitting ability is more important to infantry and the StG44 is a big winner here- it hits as much up close, and it hits more way further away. But what it hits, it hits harder.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scott Clinton:
It is my understanding that 'loss of radio contact', ect. is already in the game...When you start a turn and your FO says "2 min" until fire for effect...then when the turn is over (ie 60 seconds later) it says 1min 55sec...haven't you wondered why?...I have always figured that this 'unforseen delay' was do to loss of contact, ect. It is just abstracted<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well yes, I have wondered, and that answers it pretty well. I usually assume the delay is the result of the effects of counter-battery fire, or the off-board equivalent of Jam. This is a very good point.
Historically radios sucked, until arty or bad guys cut your field wire. Then radios sucked less. I guess it's in there!
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:
So why are the SMGs slightly more powerfull at close (50m or less) range? Because the bullet packs a lot more punch and the accuracy aspect is somewhat irrelevant.[This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 06-08-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
With all due respect (which is substantial, I assure you):
MP44 shoots the 7.92X33mm, a 125 grain slug (most common were steel-core types) at a nominal muzzle velocity of 2100+ feet per second. In rock 'n' roll, 500 rpm.
MP40 shoots standard 9mm 124-5 grain slugs (lead, copper jacket) at 1150+, ROF 500 rpm.
These are nominal military "standard" loads and there are jillions of variations, documented and not.
There are hairs aplenty to split here, including sectional density, foot/lbs., etc., not to mention Krummlaufs...
BUT: MP/StG 44 round (7.9 Pistolen Patronen 43 S.m.K) packs a much bigger punch from 0 to infinity than any 9mm Parabellum family member, by any standard I can think of. It would also have less muzzle climb in bursts due to longer barrel and overall weight, plus some buffering due to gas operation (OK, that's another hair) but generally tighter patterns.
I welcome informed opinion to the contrary. There actually is a case to be made for larger diameter rounds expending more energy in the target, err, subject, due to increased resistance, but no way does it offset something in the neighborhood of a 1000 fps difference for the same weight bullet.
I will grudgingly grant some reduced emphasis on accuracy under 40 meters, but "more punch" is a little tougher...
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by armorbuff:
I already asked about medals. guess you cant get them. Would have been a nice touch.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You want them air-dropped on the FEBA within 30 minutes of the action? What good would that do, assuming Fed Ex were willing to fly tactical? I'd rather have another belt of .30 cal or an extra 'faust in these timeframes.
Actually, the 'puter should track and award the player/commander the medals, if applicable, after the engagement. I would have a Good Conduct Medal with Oak Leaves by now, I'm sure.
-
They are vastly different.
MP44 fires the 8mm Kurz (7.92 short), a real rifle bullet of intermediate power, similar (and supposedly inspirational to) the 7.62x39 Soviet. It was much more powerful than the 9mm pistol bullet used by the MP40.
MP44 is long and heavy, gas-operated, and handles and aims like a rifle. MP40 is short and light, with a folding buttstock (normally used in the extended position) and more like a pistol with a flimsy stock by comparison.
MP44 was inherently more accurate and more expensive. It was a late war development, so the MP40 was much more prevalent, and due to its fold-up nature much better suited as a utility weapon for people whose primary job was something other than front line service.
Both were trendsetters in their respective classes; MP40 is one the truly great sub-machine guns, and MP44 was the first "assault rifle". MP44 was far more effective as a weapon for infantry general issue, but there were a heckuva lot more MP40s around, and they were good enough for gubmint work.
They had about the same cyclic rate and there would certainly be situations (forests, crews) where an MP40 would be desirable. Shorter and lighter meant more quick handling, the blowback design was a little more dirt tolerant, and the ammo was interchangeable with other common weapons. Mainly it was cheaper and had been around longer.
CD Demo V5 5500 4x FSAA WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)
Posted
Wolfe: If you're plugged-in over at 3dfx (sounds like it), maybe you could get them to blurb CM a little bit?
I sent in a review and several follow-ups, and never got a response of any kind, even from the "contact us" links. I know they aren't obligated and maybe the review sucked, but the point is that we got a 3D game thing going on here and they don't seem to be aware of it.
Maybe you have a contact, or you could do one?