Formerly Babra

Muzz, just don't play people who can't see beyond the supertanks. Regular troops, regular tanks, make for a more interesting game. I don't mind seeing the odd beastie on the battlefield, but hordes of them are just silly. ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

How come everyone does tests with elite units? How about tests with regular units, which is what we use (or ought to use) 90% of the time. ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

I believe during the Battle of the Coral Sea at least one Japanese aircraft attempted a landing in the failing light on US carriers. ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

Gaffertape, That would be great, & I'd sure appreciate it. There's nothing like gettin' down and takin' some hard measurements when scratch-building. ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

I'm trying my hand at 1/12th scratch building right now. My first project will be a 75mm PaK 40. PS: If any Torontonians are planning a trip to the Worthington tank park at CFB Borden this summer, I'd sure like to tag along so I can take some measurements and detail photos of the PaK 40 there. I'll buy the gas ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

Well, I owned ASL, but rarely played against an opponent (most of whom had real lives). Still loved it though. ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

Mortar units are not exactly the glory boys of WW2. Small wonder they get little mention, though they inflicted most of the casualties. ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

I still say he needs to get help. (and I've been in exactly one more firefight than I would have preferred )

Get help.

There's a very good film, almost a comedie-noir, about the campaign in East Africa. Everyone manages to come out looking good with no obvious bad guys. Damned if I can remember the name of it though.... ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

My gut instinct tells me that a tank which does not sink as far into the muck as another tank will be capable of higher speeds, all other things being equal. Sadly, my Newtonian physics isn't up to par these days. ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

Good initiative, Jeff. That reminds me -- I recall (at least I think I do) that the penetration diagrams originally intended to be included in the game were left out due to the enormous size. Is BTS going to make these available for download at all? ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

Fionn, The problem (at least the one that I see) is that too often the tac A/I will not take evasive or defensive measures even when faced with a superior foe. Any tank without a main armament, no matter how thick its armour (or its reputation) is inferior to every other tank period, bar none. I won't make any comment on whether Panzer IVs should be more timid than they are -- I can see both sides of that argument and frankly can't make up my mind. The combination of great gun, poor (for '44) armour is a peculiar -- what's the word -- dichotomy? Anyway, I don't think the computer opponent cheats. I did a little experiment of my own in the VB Scenario and used Wittman the same way the A/I uses its tanks: Unpredictable changes of direction, complex movement orders, stopping for shots through narrow fields of fire with good cover. I did better than I usually do. Lesson learned. ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

Gotta admit, KH paid a lot more attention to detail for its era than one would normally expect. How many other movies have you seen an M3 halftrack with 75mm? Highly cool. Dressing up the T34s as Tigers was a stroke of genius, though the camo could have been better. ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

I don't think you can order troops to demo a bridge with satchel charges, but should a charge go off on one, I'm sure it would add to the cumulative damage to the structure. The bridges behave like other structures in every respect it seems. ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Trooper: A platoon doesn't have a reserve...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I haven't yet read any of the replies to your excellent question, so my apologies if this has been addressed, but I must point out that even platoons keep reserves. Standard Brit/Com Doctrine in late '44 was "two up - one back" or "one up - two back" depending on mission and frontage. This applied right down to platoon level and right up to Division (if not higher). As to what *I* do, well that would be telling, wouldn't it? ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

Wouldn't it be a simple matter just to tint the uniform textures to the desired shade of OKW Requisition Number 3867351/43 Feldgrau? ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

I should note that when playing as the allies, which I mostly do, my tanks invariably pop smoke and flee at the first scent of cat. I only wish German armour (when I'm playing them) had the same self-preservation instincts. There's a hell of a lot of big game hunters out there. I'm also annoyed that the Tac A/I, while executing a Hunt command, will not stop the vehicle to engage anything less than a tank or gun. It rolls blissfully on while trying to engage fast-moving halftracks &c., reducing its gun accuracy and usually time in view. On the other hand, when it spots something that can kill it, it stops to engage in a quick draw gunfight! ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

So how come when my Tiger takes a gun hit (damaged) from a clearly ID'd Firefly at 500 yds, it just sits there and waits for the killing shot like a lamb to the slaughter? The neighbours must think I'm insane as I can't help yelling "Smoke! Back up dammit! Reverse! Reverse!" Nope -- just sits there and gets splanged by the "inferior" Sherman and won't take an evasive maneuver to save its life, literally. EDIT: Hmm... Maybe I should yell in German. ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE. [This message has been edited by Formerly Babra (edited 07-24-2000).]

Is there gonna be a compatibility problem if I try and play someone who's got 1.02 and all i've got is my lowly 1.01? ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

I'm using two half squads, a platoon commander a sharpshooter and two LMGs. Seems to be working well enough. EDIT: Ya gotta watch real careful-like to catch the significance, but that rail yard incident is actually part of a river crossing. There were two rivers they had to cross and that was the first. Only the second one was shown in the film though. Be sure to throw a bridge in at the end of that one. ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE. [This message has been edited by Formerly Babra (edited 07-24-2000).]

I got beat in a few of 'em. Won't say which ones ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

Yer all mad, mad I say! ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

In the book "Enemy at the Gates" by Wm. Craig, wasn't the fellow's name Koenig? Just going on memory there. Doesn't mean his right or anything... ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.

So far, vehicle crew casualties seem to be much higher than the numbers I've read historically, but in all cases that I've seen it's due to being vaped after exiting the vehicle. Survival from the vehicle seems to be at about the right ratio, but survivability drops drastically after that, usually measured in seconds. I personally try and get them to cover immediately and then get them to the rear. I even keep a vehicle or two handy specifically to pick them up and shuttle them back, but most of them end up dead before they've stopped routing or panicking. They do seem to draw a large amount of fire. Also, I would think that most (though not all) crewmen would end up unarmed after a bail-out, due to the panic situation, or just the urgency to get out before it all goes up in flames. I'm not sure how their armament is modelled currently. I've read that crew casualties in armoured units tended to average around ten to fifteen percent (compared to about sixty or seventy percent for infantry). In CM, crew casualties are closer to fifty percent or more. ------------------ It's a mother-beautiful bridge and it's gonna be THERE.