Mattias

Steve This means we will be able to play E-mail/Hotseat/TCP/IP DYO just like in SP, right? I buy, send, he buys and sets up… etc. on a random or pregenerated map. Now, will we be able to see the map before/while we buy, a feature not present in the original SP release but subsequently added? M.

As a european I've always found the pacific fascinating .

Suddenly the world seems a whole lot smaller War In Russia on Amiga (Or was it called War in the East then?), then amazingly fast turns on the PC… Played my first PBEM games when SP1 came out, autumn/winter of ´95 wasn’t it? Had been waiting for that one. Even bought a copy in my local shop (“direct import”, 70$ back then) as the mail order took too long time to arrive and hence ended up with two copies, well, the way I was wearing it down it was just as well. Played and played and played, I and II and III… Never really much against the AI (or whatever you should call it here) after the PBEM´s got rolling… It’ll probably be 2100 before we’ll be able to discuss politics, women and music with the AI in between turns anyhow. SP2WW2 Showed what SP I should/could have been, vast improvement, a new lease of life indeed. Alas… Enter CM… Exit SP The King is dead! Long live the King! Can’t wait for all the laughs, banter, seriousness and silliness get into a new high in my E-mail box, oh and CM playing too M. P.S. Bill, the Wild one that is, Hard Corps was a joy to read, will it be available on line in the future?

Captain, Hmmm... Never really thought about it but it seems you need MS Access 97 or some other program able to read Access files. Ill have a looksee, maybe there is a solution around somewhere. M.

Things really do get knotty on the net don’t they The US never really succeeded in using medium and heavy bombers as a tool for direct tactical air support. These were the ones used by the 8th Air Force. On the other hand, what I referred to as the "ordinary TAC" was, for example, the fighter-bombers of the IX Tactical Air Command. Those units matured into a potent and flexible weapon during the course of the campaign in western Europe. What got me wondering was the name of the topic, "8th Army Luftwaffe" and the fact that Moon´s answer, while covering what has been mentioned before about CAS, did not make clear weather or not bombers are in the game. Nor did he, I guess, intend to. M

I just read chapter three in Michael D. Doubler´s "Closing with the Enemy" where he describes the development of US tactical air support during the war in general and during the campaign in western Europe in particular. Though "high" and "very high" are relative terms of course it seems quite clear from what he writes about the use of "ordinary TAC" (i.e. fighter-bombers plus FAC´s), that they were indeed deployed with dramatically increasing skill and success from the beaches of Normandy and onwards. In the end reaching what, to me, looks like a high level of proficiency. Now, heavy and medium bombers, hence my initial question, was another matter entirely. I assumed you were referring to the ones used by the 8th Air Force, perhaps I was mistaken M.

Captain, List for German and US vehicles. Go to this site: http://fge.if.usp.br/~loos/ASLIND.htm Download the file "ChapH.zip". It’s the first download mentioned on the page. There you will find the complete ASL vehicle listing for several countries, also including the dates of availability. M. [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 12-11-99).]

Are we talking about 8th Air Force here or ordinary TAC? The former would mean heavy and medium bombers. Never heard them mentioned on chat before. The latter would mean close air support ability progressively improving to a very high standard in the later parts of the campaign (sure, still risky at times though). M.

”Heavy”(here: 10mm or more) machine guns actually used in German service as far as I can see from Gander and Chamberlain (Enzyklopädie Deutscher Waffen): 13mm MG 131: Used in ground support and AA role from 1944 (originally an aircraft gun). There is a picture of it mounted with a bipod and shoulder stock for use as in direct ground support. Also used in AA roles, mounted in singles, doubles or triplets. Weight: 16,6 kg 15mm MG 151/15: Same as above (available from 44 onward) but with a weight of 42 kg the ground support single mount used a small wheeled carriage (described as an contingency solution). Weight: 42 kg Most weapons of these two types where used by Luftwaffe units but a few found their way into the hands of the army as well. Prior to 1944 these weapons had been mounted in the fighters and bombers of the Luftwaffe. These two models were the only German MG´s put into production in this range of calibre, though several other models where designed and tested. Captured weapons: MG M38 (t) / FlakMG 39 / FlakMG 490 (j): 15mm MG of Check design also found in Yugoslavia (produced in the UK as Besa Mk 1). Only used as AAMG in German service. Weight: 55 kg (mounted in wheeled carriage 203 kg) 12,7mm MG 268 ® Captured Soviet DShK obr. 1938 g. German use limited by supply of ammunition. Weight: 34 kg (mounted in wheeled carriage 134 kg) 13,2mm MG 271 (f) Captured French Mitrailleuse Hotchkiss mle 1930. Used primarily as an AAMG but is depicted mounted on what appears to be a ground support tripod. Weight: 37,5 kg 15mm Kampfwagen MG 376 (e) The British Besa Mk 1 MG. Only limited used in German hands. Weight: 56,5 kg M. [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 12-10-99).] [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 12-10-99).]

Anyone who has followed this chat for more than two weeks and has half a brain knows that loosing Fionn would be a severe blow, no less. He is judged more often by his mistakes and outbursts, that are numerous simply because he posts such a massive amount of answers. While, on the other hand, the vastly more common, level headed, polite and informed answers from him are seemingly measured differently. This curious anomaly in some of the posters perception makes for plenty small minded posts indeed… Not one of you can match him in dedication to CM, thoroughness, quality and quantity of answers and readiness to stand up when it comes to facing the most inane of questions and responses. Not one of you. You would be sorely lost by many, Fionn, should you decide to leave… but then again, had I been you I would have been out of here weeks ago… M.

On the AT-Brens: In "Die Deutsche Panzerjägertruppe 1935-1945" (Fleisher&Eiermann) the "Gepanzerten Mashinengewehrträger Br. 732 (e)" is mentioned. A picture taken in Italy shows eight Brens mounting the three barrel thingey (launcher or holding rack yet to be shown) lined up as part of a "Panzerzerstörer-kompanie". Now the text makes quite clear that these were not self propelled weapon carrier (i.e. the Panzerschrecks were not fired from the three barrel mounting/rack), but rather that they were intended as transports for the weapons, ammunition and crews. That’s that from that source at least. M. [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 12-09-99).]

Ship without TCP/IP please. M.

Rough and tough infantry fighting like in the Huertgen forest and Vogese mountains. Impassable terrain and downright disgusting weather... Mmmmm.... Snow, darkness... M. [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 12-02-99).]

The Panzerfaust grenade was not rocket propelled. It was launched using the same simple recoilless principle used in today’s disposable anti tank weapons like the AT-4. M

Morte, I suggest you take a look in the "comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical" newsgroup. Panzer Elite is being discussed there. And, friend, there is no such place as Grognard hell. Things can only go from uninteresting to really, really CM. Eh, good, I mean M.

For your reference: (Gefechtsgewicht) 7.5 cm PaK 40: 1425 kg 7.5 cm Gebirgsgeschütz 36: 750 kg 7.5 cm leIG 18: 570 kg (Mot. version) M. [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 11-28-99).] [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 11-28-99).]

- [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 11-26-99).]

Hawk, LOL Tell me about it, we Swedes like our northern brothers know about taxation, taxation through our bleedin noses I think I was referring to the end price over here though. Any quality product that lands on our snow swept coasts is simply going to be bloody expensive, for reasons that are legio. And you are looking at the very epitome of a quality product here Id pay 200$ with a smile on my face to get my hands CM, really. And in the end, you pay the same taxes for every product you buy, don’t you? M. [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 11-25-99).]

As this issue has been raised before… Why is it that people feel that the price of CM can be questioned? Considering nobody would ever question a difference in price of a bottle of wine or whiskey, a cheese, a painting, a graphics card, a pot plant, a car or any other product?? You buy what you like, or you don´t. M. [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 11-25-99).]

The fog is soooooo good looking! Now, will it be possible to make larger surfaces of water, i.e. lakes? M.

CrapGame, Being on a first name basis with Oddball and the guys myself I understand share your frustration completely! No offence take and none intended on my part One thing that definitely goes for me is the fact that I am not very skilled at interpreting CM´s version of reality yet. Not that I find the system inaccessible but I still have a very long way to go before I´ll be able to "see" the terrain and how too advance, a very real problem in "reality" as well. Therefore, so far, I have written off my losses so far as lack of training rather than weaknesses in the vehicles themselves Tout´s book is a, eh, documentary. Basically you follow Ken in his Sherman fighting with the 1st Northamptonshire Yeomanry. For 40 hours you take part in the opening moves of, if I recall correctly, operation Totalize. Very well written in all aspects, interesting, engaging and revealing with respect to the Sherman in particular and tank combat in general. All around a first rate book. M.

On the subject of relative perceptions of tanks, in this case Russian tanks. http://www.history.enjoy.ru/index.html After visiting this excellent Russian armour site I came out with a new look on Russian armour, and one I now believe to be more correct. For example, regarding the T-34... When comparing the newly designed T-34 with a Pz-III the Russians finds the former to be so clearly inferior technically that they actually contemplate withdrawing it from production to redo the design. The US gets a chance to run a T-34 through its paces in 1941/42 and comes up with a range of very revealing facts that goes a long way in giving a little more "down to earth" representation of the tank. Great page! Anyone who doesn’t already know the story of the T-34-57 tank killer tank has a lot to learn there M.

Well, CrapGame my post was mostly an humorous side as I interpreted your question to be likewise. My experience, you see, is that I am having a very hard time outmanoeuvring the Shermans in pretty tight spot as this 1x1 km map. And when they spot me, which they do with seemingly ubermen... speed, they rotate and fire very quickly... And yes, they hit and hit again. I´m definitely not in the Sherman hating club after having played with them in CM. For a very good real world reference try Ken Tout´s "TANKS!" There is a lot of healthy (in what must be the ultimate meaning of the word) respect for the Germans but the Shermans do not seem to be such crappy rides that they are often made out to be. It is a reality after all that no matter how good your tank is you will get shot up by a inferior but better led tank almost any day of the week. But when your life is at stake in every engagement you no doubt are extremely sensitive to weaknesses of your own equipment. Still I havn´t read any accounts of the Pz IV being bashed to any comparable extent for not being able to engage a JS-II frontally. Something that pretty much amount to same as the Sherman vs. German heavy´s situation. M. [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 11-23-99).]

Real life situation: The newly arrived conscript tries to get his shooting straight. Series after series of three shots land all over the target. Adjusting the sights after each series doesn’t do much as there are no real concentration to adjust. The NCO in charge of the shooting tries his best to help out, adjusting, suggesting changes etc. But to no avail, there is not much of an improvement. "What is this crap!?" The conscript exclaims in frustration. Now the NCO look seriously at our little conscript, then at the target, then back, slowly stroking his chin. With a thoughtful look in his eyes he says: "You know it might be that the problem lies with the triggerpuller..." Our conscript slowly nods his head, wondering what the bloody hell a triggerpuller is. Don’t know why, just came to think of that story... My Shermans work just as they should by the way, StuG´s all ablaze. At least those of the AI M.

Leland. Your problem could very well be one that I have spotted too, but not heard mentioned on the chat. Infantry that have evaded a tank seems to lose their movement orders now and then. Have not tested this extensively but it definitely happens. M.