Richard III

Seanachai, it is written in VB and therefore will not run on a Mac. Moreover I haven't even laid eyes on a Mac since the days of the Mac Classic with the teensy B&W screen...

FWIW the US 57mm and German 75mm recoilless rifles do not embark properly. Embark one on a halftrack and the crewman crouches on the hood facing the rear of the vehicle. Put one on a tank and the crewman sits in thin air again facing aft.

Thanks, Charles! Hopefully that will go a ways towards solving this problem... I do think that tanks need to realize that turning their turrets beyond 90 degrees to either side is dangerous -- I lost several Tigers in this scenario that insisted on turning their turrets fully aft to engage far off infantry. Needless to say, an enemy vehicle quickly took them out with a rear turret penetration. Training the turret fully aft should only happen in exceptional circumstances. Thus I think vehicles should not engage targets without AT weapons in its rear hemisphere unles they are very close indeed. Thanks for listening!

Well, here is what I think needs to be done: 1) Tanks should have a small "radius of engagement" in the rear 180 degrees. That is, they will not engage distant non-threatening targets in the rear hemisphere. 2) If a threat should appear in the rear hemisphere worthy of the vehicle's attention, the hull will also rotate to face the threat, bringing the target to bear more quickly. 3) Tanks will not rotate their turret in the direction opposite to that in which the hull is turning. 4) Turret speed will be factored into the tank's targeting priority. That is, a tank will prefer targets closer to the vehicle's front. 5) Some memory of a known threat that moves out of LOS should stay with the tank. I played a silly game of "ring-around the rosie" with a Stuart in this scenario. The Stuart hid behind a burning halftrack literally 1 yard behind my Tiger. I backed the Tiger up to unmask the Stuart. Meanwhile, the turret rotes 180 degrees away from the Stuart to shoot at a squad cowing in some trees 200 yards away. The tiger backs up, pushing the halftrack aside, and revealing the Stuart. The turret starts to swing back again to face the Stuart. The Stuart speeds around, hiding again behind the halftrack. My turret instantly swings away back toward the squad. Repeat for two turns until I finally pushed the wreck far enough back so that the Stuart couldn't hide there anymore. At no time was the Stuart more than two or three yards from my Tiger, but the gun would not stay pointed in its general direction. I would have expected the Tiger to ‘know” the Stuart was behind the halftrack and not swing its turret away. Once again, let me state that I think CM is an outstanding game – I just think we have an issue here which needs attention. I played this scenario half a dozen times before giving up in frustration.

Yep, version 1.01. I know tanks can lay ambushes, but it is hard to make that work when they are moving...

Just came from playing, a certain scenario with a certain Elite Tiger commander in it. Everyone knows about the German strategy to make up for slow turrets -- rotate the hull in the same direction the turret is rotating. Well I watched my elite Tiger crew repeatedly rotate the hull in the direction OPPOSITE to that in which the turret was turning, so that it took twice as long to lay the main armament on target! Moreover, my tigers were taken out right and left by side/rear turret penetrations as they turned their turrets away from known enemy tanks hidden by smoke to fire at a routed 2in mortar 150m away. I think some tweaking is in order here -- I once passed through a column of halftracks and bren carriers with a tiger scoring NO kills. The commander would spot a far off light tank, rotate the turret 90 degrees. The light tank hides, so the commander rotates the turret 180 degrees to fire at something else, spots the light tank again, swings the turret back through 180 degrees, etc. etc. never firing a shot. Lest I sound like a big grumbler or such like, let me point out that I still think CM is the best wargame I have ever played. I just think something needs to be addressed here.

Well, the first scenario I played was Riesberg.... With a few small changes... Such as giving the US some 155mm and 8 in howitzer spotters... And would I forget our British friends? Certainly not! They brought several Crocodiles and AVREs to the party! Looks as if the citizens of Riesberg will be needing all new buildings!

Now now! Credit where credit is due! According to the postmark I got mine overnight. I am sure that was true for Jeff also... Besides, don't make fun of post office guys unless you are better armed than they are....

Thanks, Schrullenhaft. Unfortunately those drivers don't cure the blocky smoke problem.... Looks like new PC time is getting closer...

Just got mine today! Postmarked 6/20/2000.... So I got it overnight but despite the Nov. preorder it only went out on Tuesday.... So you guys further out may have a couple of days yet to wait...

Is there an equivalent driver for the Banshee? I have the latest Guillemot branded driver -- from last year -- and DX7. I get transparent buildings but the blocky smoke.

If you dial 1-800-BITE-ME you get Madmatt....

OK, At least I see my card was charged on 6/15/2000!! So it is indeed the Post Office responsible for this outrage!!!! (rant, rant, rant, etc...)

Still nothing today!! It's a conspiracy I tell ya!!!

I live in downtown Boston. I also preordered in November 1999. I also don't have CM... S&C must hate Massachusetts!!

John- I really don't think CM's engine itself is all that well tailored for ironclads -- but then if you were fortunate enough to see the leaked demo of Age of Sail II I think you might agree that that engine could very easily be made into a nifty ironclad game. The number of ideas for using CM's engine for all sorts of things does show how complete S&C's triumph really is -- no one wants to turn the clock back anymore...

D'OH!!! Stupid me. Tries to go toe to toe with Madmatt and loses..... I'll know better next time...

Well, you can always count on OB&G to weigh in with positive and helpful comments.... Anyway, I always liked NEW IRONSIDES. Cool name and cool ship both. This time period has a lot to offer with rapid evolution in ship types, etc... Perhaps the Age of Sail II folks can be persuaded to produce an ironclads game... The original Jane of "Janes Fighting Ships" produced one of the first wargames I know of featuring ships such as these. It used cardboard silhouettes of and a cue stick like thing with a pin embedded on a disk at the end. The idea was to poke the target with the cue stick and the pin would indicate where the shell hit. It would be interesting to uncover this game today due to the wealth of info it had on these obscure vessels… [This message has been edited by Richard III (edited 06-07-2000).]

Hey Bullethead, I live about 200 yds. from a GIANT monument on Boston Common to those who died in "The War of Southern Aggression." So take my comments bearing that in mind... Should never have gone off on this OT tangent....

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Madmatt: I cringe when I hear it said and written that the Monitor and Merrimack fought... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Most people even in the Confederacy referred to the vessel as MERRIMACK even after it was rebuilt as a ram. Moreover, the ship remained property of the US government despite its capture. To credit the ship with the name "Virginia" would be to legitimize the Confederate government and its activities. If I were to steal your boat and paint some other name on it, would you suddenly insist on using the thieves' new name? Thus, I for one would argue that the only correct name for the vessel, both before and after conversion, is MERRIMACK.

Jon, you are EVIL!!!!

Hi guys, here is an elaborate discussion of the merits of the V5500 FSAA and the GeForce 2's FSAA: http://www.hardwarezone.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/022747.html

Or, go to http://proxomitron.tripod.com/ and download the FREE Proxomitron proxy server! Never again see ads, pop-up windows (including those Geocities ones)or other annoying crap.

Hey, I was traumatized by turning on the TV in Italy: "The Jeffersons" dubbed into Italian. Another channel featured the exciting game show Il Prezzo E Giusto. Yes, that's correct. The Price Is Right... Seriously though, Durutti is surely correct. What you saw was probably an M47, the "King Tiger" in the film Battle of the Bulge. The only M47 pictures on the Web I could find was this knocked out Somali example: [This message has been edited by Richard III (edited 04-02-2000).]

Hi everyone, Came across this great site loaded with Quicktime videos of panzers. It even includes a video of a Strumtiger firing! Check it out: http://www.geocities.com/wittmann63/