Andreas

But that is easy! One is trained to jump out of a plane wearing ridiculous trousers and Chilean army helmets, while the other one chews Edelweiss while doing things with mules. Which is why he won't jump out of planes. The mules don't like it. Both of them eat iron, wee napalm, and are part of the Fantasmagorical Iconography of Wehrmacht Worshippers™ everywhere.

Bitching. You could maybe try the Zetterling work on Normandy on the casualty figures. AIUI he has gone down wading kneedeep in primary German sources. Websitee You can also try the Dupuy Institute Forum herepage asking the question. As long as you don't challenge the orthodoxy that the Germans rocked, and the Soviets sucked *ss and only won by accident (I am exaggerating), instead restricting yourself to topical questions, you'll be fine there. Seriously though, they are great for statistical analysis of this kind.

How? By asking for facts instead of accepting and unsupported spewing forth of stream of consciousness posts emanating from little more than an unshakeable belief in the superiority of all things American? Is that response by you the equivalent of running for mummy telling her that the bad man asked you to support statements by sources and that she should please do something about it? Well, tough. Maybe you need to find yourself a forum where an opinion supported by nothing more than an attitude is somewhat valued. If you can't even support what you post, what is the point of sharing it. This is not the local pub where your mates hang on every one of your words. So, to reiterate - where does the opinion that 'The U.S. was still fairly fresh, and I personally believe we could have/should have beat the piss outta the damn red horde.' come from? Could it come from an analysis of that superb asset of the US Army that was the Repple-Depple system? From reading first person histories such as 'Roll Me Over' and 'Company Commander'? From an analysis of the force requirements estimated for the invasion of Japan? From looking at the contribution that UK/Canadian forces could have made to attacking the Soviet forces in eastern Europe? From estimating the role of air-power in such a conflict? From looking at the proficiency levels of armoured units on the Soviet and US sides, respectively, and passing judgement on the likelyhood of who would have persevered in battle? From looking at the logistical capabilities of the US and Soviet armies? From studying the battles of the Red Army in Poland and Romania? Inquiring minds want to know.

I don't work for BFC. Just to get that clear. In the meantime, feel free to put up or not. At the moment I assume you are not capable of that, which makes your 'at least I have something to say' just so much hot air, just like your statement about me being anti-US. You can take that crap and bring it to the General Forum, there are enough idiots lapping it up there, there is no need for that in the CMBB forum. So, ANY proof or supporting facts for the statements you made, first about the 14-15 year olds, and then for the opinion that the US Army could have 'beat the piss outa the Red Horde'. Go on, if you are so smart and knowledgable, it can't be that difficult. Otherwise, you will have to live with the fact that some people will " " at the idocies you spout out.

Jarmo, thanks a lot. The main issue for me is how it performs with CMBB. I know from Makjager that the AGP32MB 7000 performs well, but unless he sells me his, there seems to be no way to get one. Actually, just checked, and since I need ADC connectivity, the only option is the 9000. Hmm, more thinking required.

Does anyone here have experience with the PCI 32MB card over the stock 16MB ATI Rage 128 that came with the early AGP G4/400?

What's wrong with Bure?

Good point.

About as insiteful (sic) as yours. Construct a non-rambling argument and you get a decent response. In the non-rambling argument, address matters such as US and UK commitments in the far east, the impact of the Soviet Manchurian operations, the infantry shortage of Commonwealth forces, and the question of whether Soviet operational art was superior to anything the western allies understood about modern combined arms warfare. Then you can have a response. Until you have done that, I assume you are just rambling cluelessly, and a " " is a response commensurate to the thought that went into your original post. [ May 13, 2003, 05:22 AM: Message edited by: Andreas ]

Or a row between Clarke and Alexander?

That would be a bit small The minimum CMBB map is 57,600 meters square (240x240m). Maximum total sidelength (Kantenlänge) is 4,000m, that is probably the best way to express it. Within that any combination. If in doubt, make it smaller. The other limits I think you have the gist of it. I think these limits should really be seen as the absolute upper end. The spirit of Byte Battles™ is when you try to design the smallest possible force on the smallest possible map with the lowest possible turn number delivering the suspense and interest for the players you desire to achieve. Maybe the point limit could be accompanied by a limit on total unit numbers? That would take care of early war low-quality units. (in guess you did not know, I am German, and bureaucratic solutions I drew when being breastfed as a baby).

Vesuvius had a big eruption in 1944, I demand it be modelled!

I agree that it is not straightforward, and the nomenclature did not bother soldiers too much. The whole passage just 'sounds' like he is describing a KV, not a T34. Not just that he calls it heavy, but all the other narrative as well. Just my impression though.

Definitely 3,7cm, he mentions the calibre. Almost certainly Tungsten, from the narrative He mentions 'special armour-piercing', and previously AP had failed. He also says the loader slammed the breech shut, which he presumably would not have to do with the Stielgranate? Difficult to say about the tank. He says 'heavy', and the official nomenclature for the heavy was KV1, the T34 was medium. I would probably go with that. The whole narrative just sounds like KV, not T34, to me.

v. Senger & Etterlin says that both the A3 in the 35(t) and the A7 variant in the 38(t) are 40 calibre length. Lexikon der Wehrmacht agrees with you. Interesting.

Are they the same guns? I think the Panzer III 37mm gun is the same, but that did not hang around in numbers for long following the start of Barbarossa. 327 on 1st July 1941, and 131 on 1st April 1942. Compared to 1,174 and 1,893 with 5cm guns. The Czech 37mm gun is different (caliber length 40, instead of 45, for instance), and my limited knowledge would lead me to believe that they would not be able to interchange ammunition between them. Although a few of the late 38(t) apparently got the 37L45 German gun.

Been a while that I read it, but ISTR he was talking about the 5cm PAK38 (if it is the Sevastopol quote) and KV1 tanks?

I had something like this yesterday. My opponent kept T34s (effing @£&^$£&^$£ T34s) behind crestlines. Although none of my troopers did have LOS to one of them, as soon as it started moving, it would appear as a T34 model, not as a generic grey 'Tank?', although before it had disappeared completely for a while (maybe a case fol Moulder and Scully?). I thought that was quite realistic, since I did know that there was only one T34 behind that crest-line in the game. Well, at least I think this was the same sort of situation, but what do I know. No wire/mines, no LOS, extreme FOW.

Personally, I blame my loss on the Voodoo doll that MTJS used. Exhibits: 1. Four CRACK Panzerschreck teams between them managed zero kills and one hit a5. A Valentine took a frontal penetration from a Schreck and laughed it off. 24a. Two T34s survived 75L48 hits from my Stugs at distances below 800m, ricochet off the turret side. MCLXV. German mech forces suck rocks, because you have to waste valuable points on buying spam-can HTs that die faster than you can shake a pointy stick at them. 389. There was no fecking cover. I am therefore exonerated of any guilt, and in the best tradition of the British Army demand an immediate promotion and an OBE. Thank you my liege.

That is the natural progression of Communism Comrade. Adding a rocket launcher shows the dialectic dynamism of the vibrant nature of Marxist military technology development over the decrepit backwardness of capitalist stooge engineers dabbling in developing weaponry to safeguard the spoils of oppression received from their unbarred exploitation of the workers and peasants of this world.

Cough. Anyone knows of a mod of the ISU-122 and ISU-152 with those stripey things? Erm.

After a hard-fought battle, my valiant Stugs succumbed to the enemy. It appears that quantity (8 Soviet tanks) beats quality (two crack German stugs) anytime. Well done MTJS - very nicely executed pincer move that squashed my stugs. I am happy though that my infantry neither ceased nor faltered killing his infantry, and did not tire in doing so. Chalk another one up for the soviets. Voelker hoert die Signale!

Erm - I have heard that the Soviets had standing orders to break off an attack when facing Stugs, and move the axis of attack to another point, i.e. off the CMBB battlefield. Can't give you a source, because I never asked for it myself. If Kip reads this, he maybe able to dig it out. We are talking about the 75L43/8 armed, 80mm frontal armour type variety here. Also have a look at the special orders published by Konev in December 1942 following the Mars desaster - John Waters has posted them in another thread a few days ago. Those dealt with the 50mm frontal armour 75L24 armed variety.

I really want to get this book. I love 1st person accounts Dreadful Din on the Eastern Front, Erich Maria Remarque Jr.; Podzun Verlag; 1951