Pak40

These are still essentially High Explosive Anti Tank weapons. The "High Explosive" part is still very dangerous to any soft target. Anything that can burn its way through 3" of armor can burn a man to a crisp or blow through a wood or brick building. It seems like they would be more effective in an urban setting - blowing out walls which would send a shower of projectiles that would injure infantry.

Wasn't this originally a Computer Squad Leader game? ... or am I thinking of several other games that AH renigged on? Jeff

I can't figure out how to call in my offboard artillery. Can someone help me? thanks

the 300 MB Steel Panthers download that I got the other day seems totally obsolete - Good thing I have a cable modem - It doesn't seem like such a waste of time. I feel for you guys that still have those analog modems.

Seven Roads to Hell by Donald Burgett - private in the 101st Airborne Div. in Bastogne. It's very detailed and very graphic, very well written.

I think what you're looking at is a flamethrower tank. One barrel for the flamethrower and one for the 75mm.

thanks Rob, OK, so Trotter has mentioned CM in previous issues, although not much it seems. I guess my main beef was that he wrote a good article about small independent wargame companies and their upcoming releases but failed to say a word about CM. It just seems a bit odd to me. It now seems more odd since I found this quote by Steve: "Don't worry about Trotter not covering CM. He will His support for BTS goes back many years." maybe I'm making a big stink about nothing but I just had to know.

After reading a wargaming article in the latest PC Gamer, I just couldn't take it any more - I had to know... So I wrote a letter to the editor in hopes of a response. I thought you guys might be interested in the article and my concerns. Here's my letter: Hi, It was nice to see an article in your recent issue of PC Gamer about the computer wargame industry's move toward small independent companies producing and marketing their own wargames. I too have noticed this trend and hope that it will bring a new crop of games and simulations to the market that don't have $$corporate influence$$, such as the unfortunate turn that Close Combat has taken. But, I have one small bone to pick with Mr Trotter. In the article he mentions several small independent companies that are producing ambitious (and most promising) upcoming wargames, but why, on God's green earth, did he not mention Battlefront.com's Combat Mission. This has to be the most ambitious and promising wargame ever produced, especially by an independent wargame company. The amount of Grognard detail in this game...errr... combat simulation is staggering. I'm quite sure that Mr Trotter is aware of this game's existence and that it is soon (May 2000) to be released. So why not give credit where credit is due? Sincerely, Jeff Roland - aka Pak40

"U.S. Army Weapons capability against rolled homogeneous steel armor at 30 degrees obliquity" posted under Armor Penetration." yes, but this was a British gun - was the test British or American?

Hey Ethan, What's the armor angle on those ballistic tests?

the main point I was trying to get across is that Shogun has a very good "view control" interface. It takes a little getting used to but once mastered it's quick and easy to find the view that you want. It would be nice, although not totally necessary, if Combat Mission's view control were this fluid and smooth. I'm not complaing, mind you, just wishing.

Has anyone had a chance to try the demo yet? This 3D game has a very good interface for view control. Very impressive.

I remember that the older version of Windows (3.11) used to have an AVI capture tool. For some reason Microsoft took this feature out of Windows 95/98 but I think that if you copy the executable from an old version of Windows, then you might be able to use it in Win 95/98. Worth a shot. Microsoft might actually have it for download on their site, but I wouldn't hold your breath.

Spider, thanks for the info. I'm starting to take Irish dance lessons, it helps to know a bit of the history and makes for great conversation at O'Flarity's, the best Irish pub in New Orleans. I can't figure out which is worse - an Irishman drinking Bud or the Scottish fellow I saw the other night drinking White Russians

What about the Irish Gaurd tank batallion that spearheaded XXX Corps in the Market Garden Campaign? Were they truly Irish, Norther Irish or just tradionally named the Irish Gaurd?

The manual for the Operational Art of War has a very good legend of map units.

two good books: "It never snows in September" - can't remember the author but it a good book of the German side of Market Garden "Seven Roads to Hell" Donald Burgett (I think) Great first person narrative of the Noville/Bastonge fighting. This book rivals MacDonald's "Company Commander", aslo an excellent book.

Arn't the new gforce cards using the AGP 4x slot? not the old regular AGP slot

They recommend a pentium 200 to play the demo, however, my P133 can run it. It's choppy and slow but it runs, I havn't had a problem with crashes. Dell P133, 48 megs Ram, 4meg Viper 330 Video

I'm on a P133, 48 megs of RAM. Viper v330 4 meg. Although they recomend at least a P200 to play the demo, the P133 will work. I've only played a few turns and nothing too intensive has happened yet but the turn resolution doesn't take but a few seconds. The playback is choppy but I can live with it at this point. I'm happy to be able to run it.

"C'mon, admit it - don't you have at least one dopey wargame that you like but are embarrassed to admit to? " Brian, I love risk and I also own Axis and Allies, they are fun games, but they don't pretend to be wargames such as Panzer General does. They are marketed as board games with war as the theme. They are more of a conquering game than a wargame and they are marketed as such. PG tries to cater to the serious wargame crowd (as well as the general public) but abstracts war to such a level that it's just a joke of a wargame. This 3D BS is the latest proof that PG is trying to cater to mainstream gaming. The scale of PG is such that the 3D is totally useless and only put there as a catch phrase so that little johnny plops his $45 of hard earned cash on the sales counter.

I can't believe you liked PG II. That game, although playable, tried so hard to be a war game but it's really a child's board game with infantry, tank, and artillery board pieces. Somewhere a cross between Risk - Axis and Allies - and Chutes and Ladders. It's not for the serious war gamer. People bash Close Combat for trying to go mainstream but Panzer General deserves first place in this category.

Funny thing... Steel Panthers, although a very different game, had roughly the same scale battles. Maybe it had a little bigger maps with a few more units, but the unit command was the same scale (individual squads and tanks). Yet, I've never heard anyone bitch about the fact that little dead bodies arn't littered all over the ballefield. It's just clutter at that scale and at Combat Mission's scale. It was perfect for CC but that's a much smaller scale battle. It's a waste of programming time and processor power at this stage in the game. Maybe little crosses could be used in CM2 but I'm ready for CM1, SO EVERYONE SHUT UP ABOUT THIS SILLY FREEKIN' SUBJECT AND LET STEVE & CO. DELIVER THIS GAME ON TIME!!!! Enough said.

"Regardless, if you who have been playtesting are able to compare the feel of playing with the Americans, British, and Germans, do the rules included (maybe reaction times for artillery, quality and quantity of armor support, typical morale for your infantry units (green, average, experienced, elite, etc),reaction times to orders, etc) do the different armies yield a different feeling when playing them (as SL most definitely did), or do you end up feeling like you are just playing a different colored set of icons (as EF/WF often do)?" I'm sure the British feel very different from the Americans. Bigtime software actually modeled 'tea time' in it's battles. For instance, instead of assaulting a German stronghold, British units may instantly set up a pot of boiling water, unfold a small table, and have tea and biscuits

Martin or Steve, Isn't there a 'recon' order that is givin to units? In other words, a command that tells a unit to proceed until 'dangerous' enemy contact is made. When the unit comes into contact with an ememy that is capable of killing it, it will withdraw to a safer place. I remember Martin and Fionn talking about the 'hunt' command which tells a unit to proceed until a target is found, then kill it. But this wouldn't be suitable for recon. I'm sure all of this has been covered before in a thread, do you know which words to search the forum for this topic?