Mattias

This is the "Geschossgewicht", which I interpret as the projectile (only) weight. I´m not a native German speaker but I´m usually good enough M.

FWIW HE: 8cm Granatwerfer: 3.5 Kg 8.8cm Flak 41: 9.4 Kg 7.5cm StuK40: 5.74 [Gander & Chamberlain] M.

In the case of CM, NO. M.

BOOOOM

Is that 02.00 hours? Always get confused by them outlandish clocks That would mean 03.00 in the morning, brrr. But i´ll try.

Thank you guys but no and no. I know what the W stands for and the wet stowage is found both the "+" and "standard" mods in the scenario. And no, this is not a Jumbo, the turret armour would be significantly thicker. So the question remains, what is the "+" tank supposed to be? M.

What exactly is the M4A3(75)W+ supposed to be? In my meagre collection of books covering the American tanks I can’t see any mention of any special M4A3(75)W model. Is it a tank with field fitted appliqué armour mayhap? In any case upper hull armour at 111/47 and lower at 146/15 goes quite some way to explain a lot of the bouncing 88 rounds spotted by seemingly surprised gunners. M.

Please read my post John. It is not a matter of hiding anything, it is a matter of sorting out this problem with a minimum or repercussions for all the happy PBEM players out there. The bug was reported late last week and is already fixed. The only level ground we are on now is that every person with an inclination to cheat can do so and every person with an inclination to worry about cheaters will worry. Anyway, problem solved, exit problem. M.

Yak, Did it ever occur to you that it might have been a good idea to just report this bug to BTS and then shut up about it? Instead of spilling this rather smelly bean in front of every and single one of the, perhaps, thousands of PBEM´ers out there? Id say the number of people worrying about being cheated is greater than the number actually cheating, thus the sensible approach is to quickly and quietly fix this and let people walk on in blissful ignorance of this horrible, horrible BETA demo danger. John´s reaction is very much a symptom of this problem. Worried, irrational and illogical in it´s conclusion. For sure, how to react in situations like this is problematic subject with very important implications in real life (think crime control issues) and, as in turns out, here... M.

Opinion: Online or CD manuals are vastly inferior to printed ones. Fact: Printed manual and CD-ROM is what is being delivered according to the pre-order page. M.

Subjective by necessity: The enemy advances rapidly, in dispersed formation, he hits the dirt, gets back up, using the terrain to mask his advance, rushing from cover to cover never giving you much of a clear shot. When firing a MG in field conditions you realise that the WWI type move down situations are only going to happen during very special circumstances, like a Russian, eh, WWI style attack. I must say I don’t think the MG´s are way out of line either in CC or CM. It is all a matter of not catching that MG fire and how you move when you do. I´v not given CC much thought lately but I don´t recall feeling they were the solution to end all problems, nor are they in CM. The work just as I would expect them in CM. Rapidly projecting suppressive fire against several targets at ranges beyond most effective rifle squad fire. M.

Ok, mostly more of the same. Generally speaking I would really like to see to see some hard evidence when people makes statements like Saukopf shield with coax MG being more common than those without MG, AT guns not being very important on the western front and artificial light being more in use in the Mediterranean theatre etc etc. Big or small they just add confusion... The two sources mentioned below have a lot of pictures showing StuG III G´s with the Saukopfblende and most of them do not have the coax, so please.. Now, another few pieces of wood for the fire: 1. Spielberger: Militärfahrzeuge Band 13, Sturmgeshütze (pages 105-115) Nahverteidigungswaffe: Irregularly (most vehicles not having it) installed in StuG´s beginning in May 1944. Standard from October 1944. Coax: Installed in StuG´s with the welded shield from June 1944 (in the line drawing on the previous page the text states June 1943). From October 1944 also installed in Saukopf versions. Remote MG: In troop trials April 1944 Saukopf: Beginning November 1943 but StuG´s with welded shields were delivered till the end of the war 2. Fleisher: Die deutschen Sturmgeshütze 1935-1945 (Page 98) Supports Spielberger on the Remote MG and the Nahverteidgungswaffe. Indicates that the coaxial MG was introduced in 1944, though was requested by the troops much earlier. And now the subjective bit: The only real reason I would like to see a manned flexible MG on the early StuG mod is to feel the tactical impact that I has on the vehicle in combat (as have been mentioned previously in this thread). I was thrilled by way the exposed mounting of the MG on the Hellcat forced me to carefully consider it’s deployment. Theses considerations, as it turned out, made me use the vehicle in a more “historically correct” manner. And this, in my opinion, is where CM really shows it’s strength. When real tactics turn out to be the natural solution in the simulation as well. M.

Reality check: Age of Kingdoms (Chips and Bits) 45 (44.99) + 10 for shipping = 55 Combat mission 45 + 18 for shipping = 63 difference 8$ = a decent lunch here in Stockholm, Sweden Now, after considering this. Read and understand the Battlefront manifest. Now you know why it is not sold through retailers. Just like any product uniquely produced in any specific place all over the world it is more costly on the other side of the globe. For your reference: I pay 399 – 499 kronor for a new game here, that translates into 48-60$$ Questions?

Mmm.. Yes John.. Looking at it now I think it was a gut reaction to the preview that I felt lacked somehow. Sure Tim Chown did a good job considering how little time he must have spent playing CM. But, and this is probably the reason for my winding up, by spending so little time with the demo he got caught up in and never got out of what I genuinely believe is something most CM players will have to face, bewilderment when faced with a rather unique environment. My feeling when you posted the quotes however, mainly that that from the preview, was that you were presenting them as being some kind of authoritative statement with regards to the issues that have been debated so very heatedly in this chat. Something I would have objected strongly to, had it been the case. In the end I think we just want the same thing, fair and thorough reviews. No offence intended John. M.

Ok, here we have another two people, one of whom obviously have only very limited experience with the game and another whom expresses a mild concern, saying something about CM. When expressing their personal views they follow in the footsteps of tens, dozens, even hundreds of individuals expressing their views before them. So, why have you posted these quotes John?

I do. This could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship.

My tiger stands in the middle of the town firing its 88 at point blank range into a nearby building. Suddenly I hear a grenade launcher "pop" sound, a black object flies with a very steep trajectory towards the house and explodes on the roof. Playing it again the projectile seems to have been launched from the turret roof of the Tiger. Was that, which I sincerely hope, a grenade from a Nahverteidigungswaffe? M.

Ian Question number 3: Right click (or, is that? Option click on the Mac). Lets you continue the placement of movement orders. Works like a charm. What forced rotation is that in question nr. 1?? Never been forced to rotate anything during setup myself. M.

Double [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 10-31-99).]

The interface: 1. Could the terrain under the cursor be displayed in text somewhere while just browsing (well, scouting that is) the map. I get the information by using the L key now but would like to be able to just "touch" a spot on the map and see what type of terrain it is. Perhaps a hotkey to have it displayed next to the cursor like when using LOS or giving a command? 2. Could the on screen movement buttons be mapped on the keyboard too? I have no trouble with the interface as such, just that on screen buttons are inherently slower to use and cancels any command you might have active. If yes, fine. If no, no problem. M.

Its beautiful. To me the true divider when it comes to wargames is whether or not the game engine allows itself to be moulded into the shape of my own tactical thinking. Do I have the freedom to implement what I consider the best solution to the current situation? To what level am I able to give my thoughts shape in the simulation? Am I in command or are the game mechanics? If I by applying real tactics am able to produce realistic and “predictable” results then it is a good game. From there on only the level of freedom granted to me in choosing my path to successfully completing the task at hand dictates just how good the game is. To me the level of feedback in CM is spot on (as usual... in this moment in time, in this context, in this scale etc.). The graphics and sound deliver all that is necessary in the way of environmental input and more on top. The flow of the battle makes itself felt directly, be it a small exchange of fire or the whole battle field. The moment to sprint across that field, storm that building or launching the breaking attack can be sensed... Just by carefully listening, looking and feeling the, well, mood... While this “mood” thing might sound like a loose foundation for decision making it is in fact the sum of all your impressions of the current situation, filtered and processed through your own knowledge, training, experience and individual aptitude. If you are good... you will have read the situation correctly. If you lack in some aspect you will find yourself frequently making the wrong assumptions. The beauty of CM is that it seems (and feels) like it will actually be able to deliver a new level of realism when it comes to applying real knowledge, real training, real experience and real individual aptitude to a simulated reality. Of course all things are relative, always has been, always will be... But no other game has to this date delivered anything like CM when it comes to the things that makes a good wargame good in my book, period. So no wonder there is a special smile on my face as my assault works out as planned, it was all my doing... Battlefront, who is that? Mattias

Fionn Hitler and Himmler Please, please, please get rid of them. They have no place here, not even as a joke. And though there was others bearing these name, the names themselves are nevertheless to tainted by their more infamous representatives. And... Herr Oblt. Schweinhund? Would be like having Capt. Bastard and Sgt. ****head fighting for the allied side. Please, please, please.. again.. Otherwise all fine to me, of course my Polish and French are not what they should be M. [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 10-09-99).]

Pixman, Reading your last post it suddenly became clear to me what I had liked about your previous ones. At least I got the feeling you were voicing the opinion that there, despite all, still are values that could be considered absolute. Now, the beauty of it, as I saw it, was that you didn’t seem to attribute these values to any specific religion, race, ideology or whatever. They just are there, for one and all. Now, I might have misinterpreted you totally there... but... Suddenly you take pot shots on Roman Law. Why?? All of continental Europe has developed and still develops under national adaptations of this legal tradition. You don’t seriously think we are some kind of moles blind to the obvious questions that can be raised against the validity of our system of law or government, do you? For sure, these generalisations of yours contains pieces of important issues. But we confront these very issues daily. They are part of the evolution of our legislation, parts of our system of government, our principles for division of power and our concept of justice. We deal with them having the same ultimate goal in mind as you have, a just and free society. As much truth as your words may hold, they nevertheless become pretty much pointless as you, intentionally or not, disregard just about everything that governs these matters in actual real life over here. What happened in Germany in the 30s was probably the greatest collapse ever of a legal system in terms of loss of basic justification. The reasons for this catastrophy, however, is not to be found in the legal system as such but in Nazi power politics that in short order completely removed the legal foundations, but kept the outer semblance of law in order to justify their essentially unjust actions. Any legal system is vulnerable to this kind of assault, any and all. M

Bil, Thank you for a most refreshing reply. Dead on target, no pun intended M.

From what I have seen: Side armour of the Elefant was 80mm, roughly the same as on the Pz. VIE and VIB (plate thickness, not considering slope). Any other figures elsewhere? Rear armour? M.