Sergei

I believe Steve and Charles have enough many times praised the deal they got with Battlefront. And they are selling so well that they don't NEED that big firm to support them. They already have a good enough distribution channel, and above all, they are getting the profits themselves to go to Honolul... I mean, to make the next sequel of CM soooooo much better, which otherwise would have been swallowed by that Big Company and retailers.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Formerly Babra: Interesting. Lebanon is not a desert country though -- it is forested, with narrow, twisting roads, not unlike Europe. And I saw all sorts of Syrian T-72s and T-62s burning brightly there.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yeah, well it happens. Could have something to do with the training differences between the Israeli and Syrian tankers?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JOCHEN PEIPER: Trouble is, the Allies made out us Germans to be evil. Did you ever stop to think that us Germans thought of the Allies as evil.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No ****. I always thought the Berliners were anxiously waiting for the gallant Soviet army in their shiny tanks coming to liberate them. But what I have found interesting is that when making the assumption that Allied propaganda is false, then the Nazi propaganda would be honest to the bones. Oh yes, there's no evidence of Holocaust, that is all just crap... but of course there is clear evidence of Allied war crimes that doesn't need to be mistrusted. JP, how do you know that the people posting on this forum exist? Maybe Steve and Charles are writing all these messages... maybe there is no Germany, or any other world outside Australia... Fortunately I know at least two sensible Australians for this hairless friend of man, so I won't say anything about how Aussies have treated the Aboriginals and the possible connection between that and the behaviour of this JP. Just an individual case.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Formerly Babra: Merkava Mk III <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If I had to fight in a desert, I might pick Merkava, but otherwise I think mobility is of the essence. I think in European theater some six T-72's (you get about that many for the price of one modern MBT nowadays) can beat one Merkava by out-manoeuvring it. Oh well, the original was about one-to-one battle... but that would be tactically stupid, wouldn't it?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Insu: Of course the German PzV and PzVI are superior to tanks like the Sherman one on one but we are speaking about to totally different doctrins. The allies always had to consider more factors than firepower, hull thickness etc. The tanks had to be sea transported to every theater and so they were developed with that in mind. Can you imagine JP how to ship a Königstiger PzKw VI weighing app. 70 tons?!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I doubt Shermans were designed to be mediocre (compared to best German tanks) just because it helped transporting. In other case you might think they'd put some extra armor and bigger gun such as the British did with Firefly. Just improving the gun and optics to make the 75 mm gun more accurate wouldn't have increased weight too much. And no matter what the doctrines were, I bet US tankers were happy to receive Pershings. Remember, doctrines are tailored up to the situation of material realities, not vice versa. A tank as heavy as Königstiger was, in my opinion, a bad design, but I guess it was the Soviets who started that arms race. And in 1944 it didn't matter did the Germans manufacture jet fighters, ICBM's, U-boats, Kingtigers or Lederhosen, they were losing anyway. Just one more thing: while Panther was a good tank, it wasn't FAR SUPERIOR. It was maybe superior, but it still was a huge piece of scrap metal when hit by the right weapon. When I played the Valley of Trouble scenario, I killed the Panther with the first hit from a Bazooka. Now, JP, go and start a new thread: BAZOOKA IS FAR SUPERIOR!

Myself being an old role player, what's the actual role playing here? Do all players have a character they play? Like Cpt. Stonewall who never retreats (and pays the consequences), 1st Ltn. Hopper who always starts drinking after the battle is going on, etc? And do these characters have conversations along the lines of "Hey I just heard from Army HQ that those damn Paras have taken a bridge over Rhein... looks like we're not needed anymore." "Damn, I hope they fail." How about interrogations of captured enemies? "Ach, wir haben zwei Tiger in die Reserve..." Seems like endless source of possibilities, but I suppose your focus is on the tactical combat.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Disaster@work: I think you have one of the critiques right. If you can be anything in WWII, why would anyone want to pick a infantryman? What if the other people play the battleship and can pound you and dozens of other buddies to bits while you plink away with your rifle?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But of course, as we do know, battleships didn't win any of the important battles such as El Alamein, Stalingrad, Ardennes... And of course infantry ain't that teethless, at least if they are given heavy FlaK and coastal artillery support. Well, at least in the Real World, I have no faintest idea if they are going to include every branch of arms into the game.

For German tanks online, it is worthy to pay a visit to the www.achtungpanzer.com .

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jadayne: He played civ, but could never get really good at it without the instructions. Eventually he bought it because when it was finally made available here and has since bought Civ 2, and Civ Call to power. I don't know whatever happened to the Pirate CD.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I remember when my friend got a pirated game called Flashback. I think it was by a French company, Delphine. Well, I liked the style of that platformer, but something that kept me from just copying it was that it was in French. God, I don't understand French!! Yet I wanted to be able to play it, so eventually I bought an original English version (and had a clear conscience). Maybe those nasty French coders had let that version out themselves, just to make me buy the game? Something worth to think of in BTS? I mean, just think of it, having your scenario descriptions in French, all in-game data in French, and so on. Or maybe in Danish, Dutch, Mongolian or some other unimportant and horrible sounding tongue, otherwise no French would pay for it... Anyway, I think it's quite utopistic to count that pirate copies just increase sales. It's like I would assume that person whoever picked my wallet from train seat a month ago is going to send it back to me... and there was about 150 US$ worth of money in it! Grrr!

It will be very interesting to see KV-1 with its rear-turret mg in 3d. Also the other shameless bitches like T-28, T-35 and M3 Lee. T-35 had a whole of four turrets, one 76,2 mm gun and two 45 mm guns, dual kitchen sink and lots of other peashooters to create phallic envy among the Germanic invaders, or at least make them laugh till the tummy hurts because even AT rifle could stop it. Or a moderate slope, for that matter... but it sure looked good in parades!!! I think the 3d-enviroment of CM is the only way to model the limited rotation of the different turrets correctly, so that the rear turret ain't shooting forward through the others and so on.

I have heard that CM2 will only be available to Playstation 2, because it can show enough polygons to play the whole Kursk without a slowdown. The game will support force feedback controllers.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Törni: But Winter War was a small border clash, considering the mehalomannic scale of Barbarossa. The Soviets did not strike our contry with all their military might. The sheer numbers would have gotten our nation eventually annihilated. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> According to Russian researches, 2.268 Soviet tanks were destroyed during that war. Additionally 1.275 tanks were withdrawn because of damage. At the start of Winter War Soviets had about 24.000 tanks as a whole, so they had lost about 15 % of them! Think about what would have happened when facing German Panzer divisions... Stalin was not an idiot. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Soviets had better weapons (T-34) and autobahns were wide open to Berlin. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Unfortunately they didn't have T-34's in numbers in 1940. And only one prototype KV-1, which was tested in Winter War. Even in 1941 half of their tank force consisted of miserable T-26's. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>No help from France or Britain to Nazis since they were in war with them! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Even if Soviets were capable of attacking in 1940, the Blitzkrieg in west was over too quickly. When Stalin agreed to the non-aggression pact in 1939, he indeed had envisioned backstabbing when Germany attacked France, but he didn't believe Germany would win. Instead he expected to see something like in 1914. Maginot-line was world famous...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by herbjorn: I was wondering why they didnt go ahead and change the design for the Tiger I from vertical to sloped AFTER it had been in production for some time, say, early 44.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well they DID develop Tiger II with sloped armor. It's just not that easy to change vertical armor to sloped, otherwise you might think they'd done that to Pzkpfw IV instead of developing Panther. Neither did Russians change KV's side armor to sloped one. Armor is not just the exterior of tank, it's also the frame, and changing it requires a lot of adjusting, balancing and testing. The production lines and techniques also have to be changed. At the same trouble you can design a whole new model.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jarmo: LOL! Must have made a few guys at german high command a bit peeved. I thought it was american privilege to arm soon-to-be-enemy countries! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Not just that, but in addition the German Mountain Army in Lapland had only old French Somua and Hotchkiss tanks and some Pz-III's, totally obsolete by that date. I bet if there are still any of those German veterans alive, they don't think anything good about Finland, especially the mosquitos of Lapland... heh.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tss: Any idea who got the biggest patch collection? How many? Can't remember his name just now (my sources are at home). He was a 75mm PAK gunner who fought on the North side of Lake Ladoga. I think he got 19 confirmed kills during the fighting of Summer 1944 (the badges were not awarded for tanks destroyed prior May '44). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Nope, as a matter of fact panssarijääkäri Toivo Ilomäki, a Mannerheim-cross knight, from 5th Divisions 24th Gun company, destroyed 21 Soviet tanks during the summer. The second was corporal Jaakko Rytöniemi (a knight as well), who eliminated 13 tanks with his 75mm. Third best was a StuG gunner, with a score of 11. And the max. number of strips for the badge was 4. The fourth strip came after 15th tank was destroyed, so Ilomäki is the only man who has them all (don't know if he still lives). About the topic, during one battle one AT-man succeeded in shooting four T-34's with a Schreck, of which two burned, but it came out that they had already been killed by StuG's. This fellow just kept firing. Must have been quite stupified when he was told he only wasted ammunition... as a player I of course would strongly dislike such waste, but it would be realistic.

In The Real Life triple-A's main objective isn't to kill the plane, but to make it cautious and force it to make high speed zig-zag strafes so that its attack would be as ineffective as possible. Just making the pilot think he could be dead meat did affect his ability to hit the targets. In WW2 you at least could hit something even with an AAMG, but nowadays the chances are theoretical except against heli's, and they're so heavily armored that you need a LAW to penetrate them.

I have a vision... the ancient spirits are talking through my mouth... oh, wait... they say... archers in towers! Ottomans with a huge siege gun! Hot oil, siege towers, ladders, fierce close combat after the wall is breached! BTS, could we please have a Medieval Combat Mission?.. the ancient spirits rest now. The oracle has spoken. I guess a medieval CM battle would be like this: you place your units and give them initial orders, then the game processes a six-hour movie of the first turn based on those orders and tacAI improvisation. That was the only turn. Defender migh be able to give orders to his reserves a couple more times.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aacooper: Gotta have the Finns! Wouldn't hurt to throw in the other nationalities too, including the Italians, Croatians, and Spanish. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> At least Romanian army would be necessary, because they played a critical role in Stalingrad, and Bulgarians. Slovaks, Croatians, Italians etc. were not very important, but it wouldn't hurt (except for the people who are supposed to make the Croatian OOB right). I wish some sort of Polish Home Front would also be available, to recreate Warsaw 1944. As in 1944 and '45 these Axis nations joined the fight against Germany, it would also be necessary to have them able to fight against Germans. (Hmpf, I forgot to mention Hungary.) [This message has been edited by Sergei (edited 07-07-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tss: About ski troops (I once again can't quote text). An infantry squad can't carry skis in combat as it is practically impossible to shoot weapons while carrying skis. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Indeed, if you are firing your weapons. But let's suppose your squad is crossing a frozen lake and get ambushed by a machine gun. Your men want to crawl, not ski, out of there, yet they don't want to leave the skis there, so they dismount but still bring them along. Now, I don't think it would be necessary to portray two cases of dismounting, attack and retreat, separately. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Instead, the ski troops usually left their skis in an assembly point some hundred meters away from enemy positions. In some cases, for example when preparing ambushes behind enemy lines, the skis would be left a couple of meters behind each individual soldier. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes, that's correct, but I was thinking whether this is a tad too difficult to model. The abandoned skis would have to be created as some sort of icon, and it would also create micro-managing. Also, what if I wanted them to bring the skis with them while they are on foot? I think about it just like you can't leave PaK ammunitions to planned delay points while in reality this would have been practised. You just have to "roleplay" a bit. When infantry mounts on skis again, maybe there would be just some extra delay which not only includes strapping the ski ties but also finding them and bringing them to men. Say, Tommi, have you found any notes whether during a battle of CM scale Finnish infantry would have risen on skis multiple times, or would they just move on to a location nearby target and then just fight as regular foot men for the rest of the time? If the latter one is more true, then remounting wouldn't matter (except for recon patrols).

Say, if Poland and Winter War won't be in CM2, will they be in CM3 or CM4 (the one with early war years)? Ski units will be important. The way Steel Panthers presented them (just infantry with high movement rate) made me laugh, they would ski through artillery bombardments, trenches and everything. Once I tried a generated battle between USA and Finland, and it took place in Sahara yet Finns had ski infantry. Eh. I think ski infantry should be more likely to get hit, and when they get fire they would immediately dismount. Player should also have the option to dismount the guys any time. The men would be presumed to be carrying their skis among them, so they could remount once the shooting ceased. Light infantry & AT guns and machine guns would also move in sleds pulled by their crews on skis, there wouldn't be separate sled units with pullers idly waiting for something to tow. I would also like to see all types of snow: half-melted snow, frozy snow, powder snow etc. The game should also model the differing tarring and lubricating methods of different armies, and downhill skiing.... oh, sorry. Got carried away... Just one more thing: observation balloons! They were used by Soviets at least in northern sector. They could direct artillery barrages if troops were moved near front line.

I wish Germany would have won the WW2, then we all would have learned German in the elementary schools. ...NOT!!!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Berlichtingen: First level?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I too had a lot of trouble with the end-of-level monster. Damn that Rommel is tough, with 150 hit points! But then I deployed a second construction yard nearby and started building lots of tanks, and finally was able to rush the Germans. Has anyone found A-bomb from a crate? [This message has been edited by Sergei (edited 07-02-2000).] [This message has been edited by Sergei (edited 07-02-2000).]

Certainly full FOW is the only way to go, except in the beginning. When first time playing the beta demo, I was like slapped into face when all I could see of the enemy was question marks. But soon I understood the system. Now, an interesting thing is that you always tell that the enemy troops you've spotted are, for instance, three squads, not six half-strength squads. Maybe the squads are carrying a flag so the observers can tell which men belong to which squad? Can my men make exaggerations of enemy, like recognizing a PaK 40 as an 88 mm FlaK? I understand this was all too usual in WW2.

No Tom, I believe Shep is just trying to say that the game allows using crews which have abandoned their vehicles or guns for reconnaissance, and he finds this gamey. He also suggests that no recon info from bailed crews would be passed to player, which would in his opinion cure the problem. So it's not about what the commander sees, it's about gamey usage of crews and a solution to this. I think that's what he said.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Seanachai: and one was a German Pak 40 that was placed in a foxhole behind a house, but aimed straight through the same structure, so that half the gun was inside it (I know that the graphic representation is somewhat different from the actual game engine tracking of such things, but this gun also seemed to be firing as though the house weren't there...) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Actually not very unrealistic, because the PaK team might really use high explosives to blow a good, well covered fire sector through a house. But I guess the game doesn't model that kind of things.