Neutral Party

When I was 16 we didn't have hard-ons. We weren't able to procreate at all - eventually we became extinct

John Pender Thanks for posting that url - the photographs are truly excellent. Joe

Do you think that it may be possible to sue BTS for the psychiatrist bills that several contributors to this thread will soon be forced to pay for? cogito ergo mum? dad? anybody?

I think CM should be a RPG that's a role playing game (not rocket propelled grenade - grognard dude). We should all have hit points and go up levels when we kill enough baddies. Then we could have the +5 bagpipes of ultimate heroism that I know BTS could program in a couple of days - if only they would get off their lazy fat butts. I want to be a Royal Marine Commando fighter/mage/thief coz they get the really cool fireball spell. We need smoke - not this silly 2D smoke but real 3D smoke that billows out of the back of the computer and causes us respiratory difficulties. CM also should include the ability for us to jump into the driving seat of a hellcat and have races where we can flatten infantry - extra points for POWs. Come on BTS get a bloody move on!! Joe P.S. I'm not a computer programmer but I used to play Galaxian in 1980. I think this makes me eminently qualified to point out BTS errors.

Follow that guy till he gets brewed up then em.. err... PANIC .. run away, run away. Joe

My approach to LD as Germans is to first decide whether the Schwerpunkt is to be on the right side or the left side. Either will work - at least against the AI. The purpose of the tiger is to provide anti-armor coverage of the only possible route for incoming reinforcements, so it stays close to where it begins - maybe even further back. At this range it is relatively safe from AP although I have occasionally seen a weak point kill. The purpose of the stugs is to shell the buildings - preferably those where the US troops are. I tend to load them with HMGs and advance them down the left side of the woods. Stop while still in cover, debark HMG teams into the woods and find them good firing positions. Meanwhile run the foot infantry (2 platoons) to approx half-way through the central woods or to the beginning of right side woods then sneak them forward until they have LOS. Once HMGs and/or infantry platoons can provide covering fire, bring the stugs round and start demolishing things. Depending on whether it is a right or left side attack, I try to isolate a small region of the battlefield with mortar smoke. This reduces the enemy ability to provide fire support. My aim is to have a massive numerical advantage in this region. One platoon of foot infantry provides fire support while the other uses fire and movement to get to the nearest objective. The HTs with pz grenadier platoon + arty FO remain hidden - either behind the trees close to the initial foot infantry set-up positions for a right side attack or in the dead ground behind the small rise for a left attack. These troops will be a rapid and fresh assault force that will be committed at an opportune moment. When these guys go they go fast. They will take either the two buildings on the other side of the wall on the left including the objective or the two buildings on the other side of the wall on the right including the church. Get everybody off the HTs quick. The arty FO should have LOS to the reinforcement route. HTs provide fire support. Once the rapid assualt team has been committed and have captured their objectives they (and HTs) may be able to provide flanking fire. However the details of their mission will vary depending on the enemy dispositions and the smoke position. Usually their very presence means that the enemy will attempt some sort of redeployment and generally will start getting bent out of shape. Depending on circumstances this may be the signal for a general advance. The hellcats are irrelevant - by the time they arrive the stugs should have done their job and if they get popped it's no big deal. Anyway the tiger will usually whack the hellcats with impunity if it has LOS. Sit back, drink beer, eat yankee chocolate Joe

Zamo. The concepts of absolute good or absolute evil are perhaps more appropriate in a discussion of theology than of war. I agree that there were a number of policies adopted by the western allies that fail the morality test (e.g., strategic bombing of population centers). However most sane persons would accept that the western allies had no state policy of genocide - unlike the Germans. If you are suggesting, as you appear to be, that the Anglo-Americans operated death-camps where German POWs were systematically starved to death, then I suggest you provide a bit more evidence than " I read somewhere that ...". Just because you read it doesn't make it true, but let's not discuss the bible here <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Same with Allied refusal to pick up floating German Naval Survivors, some ghastly stories there as well.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ghastly stories indeed. The whole war was a collection of ghastly stories. Many allied seaman were abandoned to die in the North Atlantic and Arctic Convoys by their own side. This was, in the main, due to fears of U-boat attacks. It was such a fear that prevented more of Bismark's crew being picked up, for example. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>As is all too common in war it's as though we had become that which we fought against.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Given the common cultural heritage of Western Europe and the US we were pretty similar to start with. This is perhaps the most worrying thing of all. Joe

Anybody know why the Germans named a little tankoid thingy after a Philistine Giant? I suppose they really should have called it David but that may have been unacceptable because of the Jewish connection. Joe

I don't have any family war stories but I have a friend whose dad was in the British Army (Highland Light Infantry) in ETO post-invasion. He was in a patrol that was ambushed by Germans and caught a bullet in his lower leg. The patrol was pretty much wiped out and he was left for dead. However he survived (to my friends relief) but lost the ability to move his foot. Subsequently he had to wear a spring-like contraption that held his foot up and enabled him to walk. Walk he did - to the pub mostly and he settled back into normal life, got married, had a family - you know the rest. In 1996 while crossing the road (on his way to the pub) the leg gave out, he staggered backwards onto the road and was hit by a car. He never regained conciousness and died a few days later. Fifty two years later that ambush eventually did him in. Joe

One of the points that was raised in this discussion struck a chord with me. Thomm said "But even when I am there I do not see what I see, because the woods/buildings are abstracted mathematically" Moon replied "That's what the LOS tool is for. You can check the exact LOS with it AFTER you walked over there. In other words - you eyeball, you estimate, you walk over there and are proven right or wrong, then you adjust. Pretty realistic, isn't it?" I've got to agree with Thomm on this one. Several times I have had a AFV or squad at a gap in the treeline or at the edge of woods and I think OK I've got to nudge it a bit this way in order to see out or through the gap. I issue the order, a minute passes and then I still can't see out or through. The problem is that because the woods are abstracted mathematically, it is difficult to know how to optimally adjust position - what you see isn't what is there. I think a "hunt"-type command for infantry would help, but this is not precisely what is required. Ideally I would like to order this unit to move cautiously until it can see out of this wood then stop. See what ? - I hear you ask. This is where the thing gets more complex and maybe becomes unworkable. Some enemy units may have already been spotted by other friendly units, some may be spotted by the "hunting" unit and some may remain hidden. The idea of calculating LOS to unseen units is a major no-no IMHO. Joe

Steve. He was area firing at his own half-track. TacAI won't switch to AP and direct fire for that - will it? Joe

Thanks Doug So the first point depends on the angle of attack relative to the ground. This determines the component of momentum that is parallel to the ground and may be retained following detonation - the component perpendicular to the ground being effectively lost. This implies that the effect will be more important for a low trajectory tank shell rather than high trajectory arty Was there less HE in the 88 than in the 75 ? Thicker casing = more schrapnel but less HE means schrapnel has less KE and is less penetrating right? OK I get the cone thing - impact crater funneling Joe

Fascinating discussion about HE blast and schrapnel effects. Can I ask the experts some dumb questions - I know little about artillery but a bit about physics. What is it that triggers the detonation of a HE shell fired from a tank - Is it impact with the ground? If so then isn't the shell stationary - I don't get Bulletheads point about the centroid of the blast remaining on the shells initial trajectory. An airburst would be different of course. 88mm vs. 75mm - The 88mm would be about 60% bigger in simple volume terms but what size are the cavities inside these shells that contain the HE - are the casings the same thickness ? The other thing is - can someone explain in simple terms what you mean about the cone as opposed to dome shape for the HE blast. Thanks Joe

Can I have some of what he's smoking. Joe

From previous postings I know that most of you guys hate TTRL. But just to stir things up (and because I'm bored waiting) here is what British movie mag "UNCUT" had to say about it. " With his return to film making after a twenty year absence, legendary director Terrence Malick created a unique and extraordinary masterpiece. Using the American efforts to retake the Pacific island of Guadalcanal from the Japanese during WWII as a backdrop, Malick's film was a haunting, hallucinatory meditation on the nature of death; lyrical, transcendental and deeply moving. At its centre were towering performances from Sean Penn, Nick Nolte, John Cusack and Elias Koteas, struggling to find honour, meaning and humanity in the chaos and random horror of war. Perhaps the finest study of men and dying ever made." Strong stuff. I hope you all now admit that while you may know the air speed of a european swallow and what a nahvertatishoosnotter is, you don't know **** about movies. Joe

Dear Mummy Me wants a dolly for my birthday. Me will look after it and feed it and put in to bed. Oh and me also wants my dolly to have some grenades, an SS dagger and a big gun. (signed) Little Monster Creep (aged 3 and a half) .... Dear Little Monster Creep Shut up and eat your gruel. (signed) Mummy

IMHO - On the whole younger generals will be better because only an exceptional individual becomes a general at a young age whereas an "old guy" eventually gets to be a general simply by not falling off his (horse/tank/mistress) for a longer time than his peers. Joe

...twitch!

BTS is located in a vast underground bunker complex deep under the Ural Mountains in Russia. I know this is true because one night I was abducted by strange beings and taken there. The beings then performed a series of hideous experiments on me and forced me to perform unnatural sexual acts with a mammal of my choice. I later discovered, by psychic means, that these beings were in fact Steve and Charles of BTS. Without their customary human-fooling disguises Steve and Charles are actually both quite short (about 3 feet in height), are completely hairless and have no external genitalia whatsoever. I have since come to the belief that I was but the latest in long list of abductions perpetrated by this so-called BTS - it may have happened to other posters on this board. However this time, in their complecency, they omitted to administer the drug of forgetfulness. So I know I tell you I know.

ok now I get it [This message has been edited by Neutral Party (edited 01-14-2000).]

Perhaps the joke has been assembled incorrectly. At the design stage it was found through bitter experience that having too much of the joke present in any one place could cause a dangerous build up of humor. There was a notorius case of three joke artificers, each of whom had been working on a small (non-lethal) segment of the joke. Over tea one afternoon these three men managed to piece together a "critical mass" of the joke and had to be hospitalized. They were prescribed the at-the-time radical therapy of being forced to listen to endless routines from a little-known English comedian called Arthur Askey. Eventually this resulted in a cure, but with the unfortunate side-effect that the men completely lost their sense of humor. However this eventually paid dividends when they were selected as the script-writing team for the David Letterman show. Joe

All righty then. Strictly speaking you're wrong but "in common usage" you're right. We can therefore interpret "in common usage" to mean "things people say who think they are right but are in fact wrong." Unless of course we redefine right to mean wrong in which case you're completely correct. Joe

Alright I'm forty goddamit. It's not fair. Missed the swinging sixties (well the swinging bit). Had the platform boots and 32" high waisted flares tho'. I just don't what all that bloody noise is they play on the radio these days. When I wer't lad we 'ad decent bloody music (Slade, Mud, Sweet). Tell that to the yung 'uns these days and they just don't believe ya. Joe

The level chosen for statistical significance (0.05, 0.01, 0.005 etc,.) is the likelihood that an observed relationship could have happened by random chance. For a p level of 0.05 there is a 5% chance that the relationship could have occured randomly. There is no causal relationship implied by these statistical associations. This requires an interpretation of the results that statistics alone cannot provide. Joe

yes