Ron

I played a QB a short time ago where a Veteran hulldown Hetzer engaged 3 stationary Shermans at around 1300m. It took 11 shots before the Hetzer got a hit/kill then it's remaining 8 shots all missed rendering it almost useless for the remainder of the battle. The Shermans bounced 6 ot 7 shots off of the Hetzer IIRC. Now being a vet crew, I would have thought the Hetzer's **** would have been in the '**** together' camp instead of the '**** happens' one. Be that as it may, the computer wasn't very sympathetic to my protestations so I ran a few tests to get a better understanding of how CM handles this. I setup some tests of Veteran AT guns in woods versus Regular stationary tanks at 1500m. I ran them 50 times, the tanks never returned fire as they didn't spot the AT guns, with the following results: 88Flak vs M4A3(75) Hitchance - 15% 278shots/87hits avg. shots 1st hit - 4.14 avg. shots per kill - 5.56 1st shot hits - 16% worst case for 1st hit - 11shots 5 or more shots for 1st hit - 38% Pak43 vs M4A3(75) Hitchance - 20% 190shots/53hits avg. shots 1st hit - 3.56 avg. shots per kill - 3.80 1st shot hits - 18% worst case for 1st hit - 10shots 5 or more shots for 1st hit - 28% 17pdr vs PzIVJ Hitchance - 18% 177shots/51hits avg. shots 1st hit - 3.52 avg. shots per kill - 3.54 1st shot hits - 24% worst case for 1st hit - 16shots 5 or more shots for 1st hit - 24% US76mm vs PzIVJ Hitchance - 16% 203shots/53hits avg. shots 1st hit - 3.90 avg. shots per kill - 4.06 1st shot hits - 12% worst case for 1st hit - 10shots 5 or more shots for 1st hit - 38% Next I setup some tests using the Nashorn and Tiger, again ran them 50 times, all tanks were stationary and the range was 1500m. HD is hulldown. Elite Nashorn(HD) vs RegularM4A3(75) Hitchance - 27% 141shots/52hits avg. shots 1st hit - 2.63 avg. shots per kill - 2.78 1st shot hits - 34% worst case for 1st hit - 6shots 5 or more shots for 1st hit - 14% The Sherman spotted the Nashorn in about 20s and KO'd it once. Two times there was mutual destruction. Reg.Nashorn(HD) vs Reg.M4A3(75) Hitchance - 19% 177shots/44hits avg. shots 1st hit - 3.17 avg. shots per kill - 3.26 1st shot hits - 24% worst case for 1st hit - 7shots 5 or more shots for 1st hit - 31% Again the Sherman spotted the Nashorn in about 20s and KO'd it 8 times. Once there was a mutual destruction. Vet.Tiger vs Vet.M4A3(76) Tiger Hitchance - 16% 255shots/73hits avg. shots 1st hit - 4.15 avg. shots per kill - 5.21 1st shot hits - 14% worst case for 1st hit - 11shots 5 or more shots for 1st hit - 38% Sherman(76) Hitchance - 18% 305shots/116hits avg. shots 1st hit - 2.85 1st shot hits - 21% worst case for 1st hit - 8shots The Sherman(76) KO'd the Tiger twice with weak point penetrations and damaged it's gun once. Something I noticed while running these tests: the hitchance never went past a certain point no matter how many shots were fired, ie the Sherman(76)'s hitchance went from 18% to 45% firing 8 shots, and stayed at 45% even after 16 shots. Another question raised was how does the unit experience affect the hitchance for subsequent shots? From what I saw it seemed to rise uniformly regardless of experience. Taken as a whole the gunnery accuracy seems ok, especially in light of comments I have read on this forum from people who are well versed on the subject, yet the variability is extreme and I wonder if that is historically true. From the little reading I have done, it was SOP for German armour to engage targets at long range. With the diversified results I witnessed, I would question the wisdom of adopting that practice in CM as you may not have enough shells! I would like to hear any comments or questions. Regards, Ron

First, this is all IMO so as not to ruffle any delicate feathers. Stop for a moment and forget whether an implemented roster list is realistic, gamey, will give you info already there, or make you a better, quicker player etc. These are moot points and more a reflection of a person's bias and personal preference. The crux is BTS made a design choice for a style of play they imagined in the game, ie intuitive versus a more 'God like' control. If searched(!), anyone can discover for themselves BTS's rationale on the matter. So the question is why isn't that accepted? For me, the feel of the game is improved being 'on the ground', everything is accessible in an instinctive manner and is a large part of the game's elegance. That said, I wouldn't enjoy the game less if an OOB list was implemented but since this is a vote I think time could be better spent on other things. Ron

Wow. ASL, Jeff, Teach, Talenn: Being serious here for a moment, please reread the posts by Goanna, Sten and Los. I think that's it. Or in the immortal words of a former girlfriend "Don't tell me what I mean!" Ron PS My apologies Doug, I rightfully cannot claim credit for 'Slackass Posterboy'

Comments most often overheard while travelling the byways of the internet... 1-Where's the 1.03 patch? I really can't enjoy the game until I get it, and it had better have *****. What type of customer support is this anyway? 2-When is CM2 coming out? How come the whole war wasn't included? 3-I can't believe the ***** isn't in the game! 4-The ***** feature is 'broke' . No, I'm not doing anything wrong. 5-How come the SS aren't the supermen like I see from watching... 6-This is ludicrous, it really needs to be fixed. Sources? Huh?? 7-There's no way this should happen. I just know... 8-No I haven't read the manual yet. 9-I searched already but didn't find anything. Why can't you just answer my question? 10-***** is an arrogant jerk(dick). What does he know anyway? Ron FINE PRINT Comments like these are fictitious, any resemblance to person(s) past, present or future is entirely coincidental.

1-Yes 2-Building, ground floor. 3-Yes, from what I observed only when a US squad was stationary did the HMGs become spotted. 4-Yes, but in disorder, average 2 in a panicked state. 5-The broken/routed didn't recover in the 2 minutes. Turned back is returning to the starting line, those I left alone. They ended up spotting the HMGs and firing, but that didn't happen as near as often as following through with the movement orders. It seems the continued fire from the HMGs for 2 minutes is what did them in morale wise, then the defenders at the objective racked up the casualties. 6-Yes there was a squad, HQ and 3 HMGs in the third test. In this one the US forces that made it to the objective were really combat ineffective. I don't recall any squads were in 'good order'. The HQs almost always made it through in reasonable shape. I ended after 2 minutes, I could safely say that any US troops that made it would have been wiped out if it continued. Ron [This message has been edited by Ron (edited 07-09-2000).]

After reading the other thread I was curious, because from Demo play I felt the MGs were pretty deadly but couldn't recall ever observing their performance on their own. I decided to set up 3 separate tests to check for myself then thought I would post the results here. The situation was setup as follows: ATT | 300m | MG --400m-- MG | | OBJ The attacking force was 2 US platoons(44 Rifle) with random HQs though I gave them a +1 Morale bonus. The tests only lasted 2 minutes as the platoons covered the 300m and were at the objective in that time. The flanking MGs, halfway between the objective and the attackers, were MG42s with a random leader, I let the TacAI handle the targets. All troops were regular, B-broken, R-routed, TB-turned back. Test#1-No Defenders in OBJ US B/R/TB US Cas 1- none - 14 2- 1 sqd - 9 3- 1 sqd - 4 4- 1 sqd - 11 5- 2 sqds - 13 6- 3 sqds - 7 1 HMG jam 7- 3 sqds - 10 8- 3 sqds - 14 9- 2 sqds - 4 1 HMG jam 10- 2 sqds - 10 Test#2-1 HMG in OBJ US B/R/TB US cas Ge Cas 1- 3 sqds - 31- 1 2- 4 sqds - 18- 2 3- 1 Plt - 27- 2 4- 4 sqds - 18- 3 5- 2 sqds - 24- 4 6- 5 sqds - 33- 1 1 HMG jam 7- 4 sqds - 25- 1 1 HMG jam 8- 4 sqds - 20- 3 9- 2 sqds - 19- 5 10- 4 sqds - 17- 4 1 HMG jam Test#3-1 HMG/1 Rif Sqd in OBJ US B/R/TB US Cas Ge Cas 1- 3 sqds - 42- 5 1 HMG jam 2- 1 Plt - 39- 3 3- 4 sqds - 37- 3 1 HMG jam 4- 1 Plt - 37- 1 5- 4 sqds - 49- 1 1 HMG jam 6- 5 sqds - 35- 1 7- 4 sqds - 39- 1 8- 3 sqds - 58- 1 9- 4 sqds - 36- 1 10- 2 sqds - 45- 4 Some observations: the flanking HMGs were NEVER spotted while the US troops were running, only when a squad was stationary were the MGs pinpointed, usually the US player only saw a sound contact. The defenders in the Objective were usually spotted in the last ~75m by the US. Most of the broken and routed squads, as well as casualties, happened just before or in the objective. After 2 minutes of being fired on the US platoons were usually in a poor state, ie panic and shaken, upon reaching the Objective. Several occasions the squads never even left the start line though the HQs almost always made it through. Perhaps being able to run 300m in the open and not suffer more from HMG fire isn't realistic, I don't know, but after running that gauntlet, the US platoons were in no shape to do anything for awhile. They were easy picking even for a German Rifle squad which racked up some high kills in the 3rd test. And for the curious, it took longer to type this than actually run the tests. Ron Edit: can't seem to get the spaces right or the spelling, oh well [This message has been edited by Ron (edited 07-09-2000).] [This message has been edited by Ron (edited 07-09-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Rooftop wrote: Why? Well, it seems (at least for me) that from the earlier messages in this thread that the game gives the human player playing as the attacker or the one on the offence an advantage over the computer-played defender. And my test shows that too I think.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> In my opinion that's not the correct assumption. The AI sees a target at 500m and perhaps realizes it's fire will be ineffectual so it keeps the MGs position hidden by not firing. Remember the computer opponent has another 2 levels of AI (strat and op from the manual) in addition to the TacAI we the players see during the turn resolution. It probably has priorities at odds with the test you were running. Ron

Will 1.01 PBEM games be compatible with the 1.03 patch? Ron

You guys are hilarious and totally devoid of humour. Look again at the 'elitist wargamer' (Maximus) who first said the comment in question. Ron

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Tzeench wrote: Ok were speaking on somewhat the same level, So whats the deal? Whats the offical answer. Ron,vetch - Thanks for the try unless you are coding for the game... "Have a glass"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Obviously you assume I have the same beverage preferences as you. I don't drink 'shut the hell up', never have and never will. Chill, just trying to help. Ron

BTS has responded to this question already, saying it'll be at least another 2 months down the road. Ron

You have to realize there are limitations on the AI, a target overload environment only heightens this. BTS has tweaked 'target stickiness' in the patch but it is a balance I think and there is a danger of going too far resulting in a unit becoming fixated on one target. Not being confrontational, but perhaps a change of tactics is in order. An elite Tiger is a badass but it still can only eat the pie one bite at a time, not all at once. Putting it in a situation where it is surrounded by the enemy is begging for disaster. If you limit the area of engagement you may get better results. Ron

Thanks for the heads up Wild Bill, I'll be sure to check the scenario out once I get my copy.... Ron

Change your desktop resolution size to what you want, delete the CM preferences file then start CM. It should reinitialize then to your desktop settings. Hope that helps. Ron

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Chrisl wrote: My other favorite was Lt. Stahler, a 9-2 who seemed to be in every scenario, and when you were rolling for his fire you had a much better chance of snake eyes.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Lol, you too? Man, I had so much luck with the Stahler leader it was uncanny, almost like it was 'fixed', or so my friends said anyway Ron

I have pondered long and hard as well and am usually brought back to a saying by the Persian poet Omar Khayyam which goes 'Wine, women and song'. It expresses the spirit and elan superbly for a demanding game of CM against a worthy opponent, and win or lose, you are a worthy opponent Joe, I accept your challenge. Ron

Jeff Nationalistic traits ala SL are not modelled in CM, just the organization and equipment as you noted. However as the designer of a scenario, you can reflect characteristics to a certian degree with the differing bonuses for the HQs. There is also a fanatic toggle making troops less susceptible to break/rout I believe. Ron

After playing many pbem games, certain issues continue to arise which I wonder about. I have the following examples in mind: 1 - Setting up ambushes at the enemy's reinforcement entry point and waiting for them to arrive. 2 - Calling in artillery to bombard enemy reinforcements the moment they arrive. 3 - Hugging the map edge with your forces in a 'flanking' maneuver. I realize this might simply be indicative of playing the same scenario countless times and a non issue once we get the full version with new scenarios, but with ladders up now I think scenarios will be replayed. My own feeling regarding these examples is they're gamey as hell. I'm not seeking justification or confirmation but am curious what other people's take on this is. Namely what constitutes good, fair play versus gamey play? Thanks, Ron

Another point here, the player has no control over when a squad fires it's 'faust. That is handled by the TacAI, so any additional information, apart from the - 30, 60, 100, is pointless. As the player you must simply maneuver your squads as the situation dictates and leave the rest to the game. What's the effective range for a 'shreck team? Well that varies considerably as has been stated already. I have had conscript teams miss all their shots at less than 40m. In a current pbem game a 'shreck team took out 3 of my Shermans at around 150m with 3 consecutive shots. There are no hard numbers to go by as the best range. Playing the game will give you the most useful information. Ron

I'm having the same trouble Gary, it is still getting returned saying your email has 'permanent fatal errors'. Do you have an alternate email? Ron

Another good book detailing the complexities and personalties of the Normandy Campaign, with added emphasis on the Commonwealth operations, is 'Decision in Normandy' by Carlo D'Este. The author's perspective is focused on the whole rather than the part and makes for a thoughtful read. The best $14(Cdn) I spent on a book to date. Ron My head in on loose but my shoes are tight

MG This is from 'Handbook on German Military Forces' by the US War Dept. The information sources come from intelligence gathered during the war, including Ultra, captured weapons, after-action reports and prisoners. While not 100% accurate as has been noted before, it does give a reasonable account. The following is abbreviated: Infantry Company, Volksgrenadier Division Co HQ 6 men 1st SMG Plat 33 men 5 Rifles 26 SMGs 3 LMGs 2nd SMG Plat ditto 3rd Rif Plat 33 men 20 Rifles 9 SMGs 3 LMGs SMG Platoon, Volksgrenadier Division Plat HQ 6 men SMG squad 9 men 9 SMGs SMG squad 9 men 9 SMGs Rif squad 9 men 3 Rifles 5 SMGs 1 LMG There's also a Heavy weapons company in the Battalion which includes HMG platoons, a mortar platoon and an IG platoon. HMG Plat 29 men 4 HMGs So clearly SMG squads existed and the role of the MG42 is delinated between light and heavy as has been explained in this thread earlier. I see this reflected in CM and wonder what you see blatantly 'wrong' as expressed in your posts? Or do you dismiss the US War Dept. book as being in error? Regards, Ron

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>rwcanuck wrote: I was born in Toronto but now live in Vancouver on the West Coast where the best Canadian CM players live....right Ron? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hey Rob, must be the fresh ocean air eh? Ron

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Simon wrote: Regular schrek teams I am starting to like very much, I just had one kill 3 Shermans with 3 shots all at 100m+<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yeah that suprised the hell out of me, if it keeps up I'll be convinced they're too accurate, hehe. Ron

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>From BTS: Pillboxs and Bunkers have roughly a 120 degree firing arc. Are you sure that you were well outside of that?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes, it is a current pbem game and I still have the file. I reran it to make sure. The Sherman was outside the covered arc and instead of moving forward like I ordered, it popped smoke and reversed once the pillbox was exposed. There were no other threats. I loaded up a German game of VT to check the pillbox's LOF and it is red at that position so can't fire. Are you interested in looking at it? Ron On second look perhaps it is on the edge though the pillbox's LOF is red at that point. I will experiment a little and see if it happens again. [This message has been edited by Ron (edited 05-16-2000).]