Kingfish

What you see is not necessarily who actually controls the VL, only that your forces believe they do. Unless you have overwhelming strength or the enemy is no where near are you assured of control. I could be wrong here but I believe that there are other factors that determine VL control besides location and enemy strength. IIRC, I read where routed and broken units cannot control a VL, so morale might be a factor. Possibly ammo levels as well, but again I could be wrong on this. Perhaps your single German squad didn't see all the Americans around the VL, but enough to know that control was in dispute. This might have given you the wrong impression on who actually controlled it. Only after the game ended did the true strengths of the nearby units became known, and a full platoon + Tank destroyer will win every time against a single squad. Hope this helps

Perhaps his losses were so severe that even the capture of the VLs and 40 remaining Germans didn't help his score.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Why do opponents ask for ceasefires, instead of just surrendering or playing the game out to the end? Real life ceasefires are sometimes proposed and accepted for "humanitarian" reasons eg. to clear away the dead, dying and wounded, to celebrate a religious event, or to put the war on hold to allow diplomatic negotiation etc.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> There is one other reason that I can think of which warrants a ceasefire, and that is when both opponents are locked into an unwinnable situation and the game is a long way from completetion. I've been in many such 'Lock-ups" where both sides have grinded each other down to almost nothing, unable to continue but not defeated. What do you do? Stare at each other for the remaining 10 turns? Think of a CM ceasefire as not only the formal agreement to end hostilities for the reasons you've described, but also the representation of the grunts on the ground saying "We can't do this with what we have left, lets regroup and try again later"

I use my crews to find minefields, set off ambushes or force my opponent to expend his ammo reserves, but I've never used them to rush the flags at the end of the game. Thats gamey!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by M Hofbauer: Wild Bill, just a question out of interest, since as a matter of personal taste I personally like longer scenarios better: why do you always make your scenarios so short? (absolutely no offense or anything meant)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Why make a scenario 35 turns long when there's no one left standing by turn 25? The one thing you can count on from a Wild Bill scenario is a map filled with carnage.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: P.S. Yes, we have added tons of cool stuff like this <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hey, is all that cool stuff included in the demo you promised to send me?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Madmatt: In CMBB with the new Extreme FOW option it's VERY hard to even get the exact Model of vehicles until you are very close to them. There are all sorts of neat things that Extreme FOW will do, but I aint saying! Madmatt [ 09-21-2001: Message edited by: Madmatt ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> OK, how about a visual explanation, like when you explained how the ambush command worked in that neat little scenario with screenshots. C'mon Matt, you got nothing better to do.

G'morning gents, Recently I've been reading 'Guadacanal, The first offensive' by John Miller. In it he repeatedly uses the term "unit of fire" when referring to ammo supply, either from a battalion level ("Every battalion initially hauled two units of fire from the ammo dump") or for a whole invasion force (.."by 16 April the invasion force had on hand 10 units of fire for field and seacoast artillery, and 15 units for anti-aircraft artillery"..) So what is a unit of fire? Is it equal to the default number of rounds you get with a CM Spotter? Thanks in advance

You can zoom in and probably see the mortar tube still standing.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Massattack: ..or are Halftrack capacities measured by number of men rather than per squad?...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> They have a max capacity based on the number of men (14), but also number of units (2). For instance, take an American M3 HT. It can fit a rifle squad (12 men) and a bazooka team (2 men) for a total of 14 men. Yet it won't take 3 sharpshooters (3 men). Also, some carriers can only embark a team. The German 250/1 and the commonwealth universal carrier are two examples.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chupacabra: ..Unless you're the mortal incarnation of some sort of thousand-vagina'd Hindu goddess..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Wow, time for me to switch religons!

Most tanks turrets are angled in such a way that any AP shot striking it will deflect away rather than penetrate. However, some tanks have a flaw in their turret design which, when hit by an AP shot at a certain angle, will actually causes the AP shot to deflect downward into the hull, pentrating the thinner top armor of the hull.

Let's not forget the ultimate airborne killers on the Eastern front: Finns w/ Hand gliders. I've read an account where one guy with a bolt action rifle bagged 30+ tanks. Another guy flew from Helsinki to Vladivostok, dropped 4 500lb bombs on an ammo dump, then made it back in one piece.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FFE: I find it comical whenever a Sherman takes a hit, the crew bails, then the crew melees a Shrek team.... Maybe every Finnish tanker was trained in this manner, however I do no recall a single instance on the Western Front when this happened. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Finnish crews never bail, not even if they're tank is on fire. In fact, there are still Finnish crews out there today, manning their rusting hulks, defiantly awaiting the next Russian invasion.

Nijmegan

Somewhere some MF is sitting back and laughing at the carnage he's created, while we stare into space and wonder how this could happen. That is today... Soon we will be the one's laughing. And we laugh the loudest.

I just heard a report of a third plane hitting the WTC. Any truth to that?

The second plane was filmed crashing into the World trade center by News helos. MSNBC.com has the video but the site is logjammed.

Didn't the Canadians use flails during the initial assault of Totalize?

Check out the stats of each vehicle (click on unit, hit enter). Compare armor pentration of the 37mm at 500 meters (using AP rounds) with the armor thickness of the Pz-IV.

I get messages from a superior officer all the time. Usually it's either verbal ("It's 3am, aren't you coming to bed?") or ("Can I have the computer? You've been on it all day playing that damn game"). Sometimes it's hand written notes, in code no less (sniff, sniff..smell that? something needs to be taken out) or (08/19/69...what does this date mean to you?).

John, Are you playing with bases turned off? Any units with orange bases during setup are padlocked in place.

Was the Sherman manned by a Finnish crew?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ParaBellum: The naval battery at Marcouf, near Utah beach, on June 7th got shelled by several BB's (Nevada, Arkansas, Texas), CAs and DDs. It took them from 5 AM untill 9 Am, that's 4 hours (!) to knock out the three 21 cm guns. And the firing slits of these bunkers were about 6m x 8m ... And the battery wasn't completely destroyed. During the night of 7th/8th they managed to repair one of their 21cm guns and were able to shell Utah beach again the next morning. Although the guns were out of action, most of the men survived the bombardement and even repelled a US infantry attack during the evening. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I bet a Finn armed with a wrist rocket would have shut that place down in 20 minutes flat.

j oH N, Y oU r Po S Ts loOK F In E tO m E.