tools4fools
-
Posts
387 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by tools4fools
-
-
Hey,
My grandfather who was in the Whermacht mentioned tanks about two times. From 39-45.
Later in the war he was in Finland with probably much less Russian tanks around.
But still, the only two occasions, where those tanks were sure a real danger to them, when I asked him if they were T-34's (all I knew at the age of 16) he never said "yes" or " "no".
Guess it din't matter. Big steel monsters.
Now I wonder how often Russian soldiers encountered German tanks - considering that there were even less German tanks around compared to Russians.
The foliage thing makes sense too.
Knowing the war (which you sure do) you as a veteran commander should have known that it *might* be an Uebercat, maybe even a KT, reacted accordingly and saved a great many lives of your soldiers....
Marcus
*****
-
Could anyone point out a few laptops (reasonable priced)which do play CMBB?
Video card problem seem to be the biggest problem;
Which cards are best?
Seems ATI card and shared memory do not work well?
Considering buying a laptop myself - but it has to play CMBB well...
Any recommendations appricated.
Marcus
****
-
Wasn't Tsingtao originally made with German assistance? That's probably why it's the best Chinese beer I know so far...
Yeah, Yunnan is real spectacular; I came in via Laos (Mengla-Ganglanba-Jinghong and traveled along the Burmese border (two side trips to the actual border) and then north (Lancang-Lincang-Dali) up to Lijiang on my first trip, second was down to the spectacular rice terraces and ethnic minorities of Yuanyang (red river valley) and then along the Vietnamese and Lao border directly to Mengla and overland to Laos again.
Yeah, Hongkong would be a good meeting point as there are some more CM players there: I was planning to catch up with them last trip, but cut my trip short due to SARS - not that I was scared of the disease really, but once I saw that there were 50% of all flights canceled and other countries started iussing travel restriction on people coming from HKK I got out quick; Didn't like the thought of being stuck there and nobody knew the developement of things then.
Next time will sure contact Griffin Cheng and the others, got e-mails from some of them.
Used to play CC with lucero1148 in Manila before CM came out.
Thanks for the offer, hope we can have a little CM meeting ihn Asia coming winter!
If you ever happen be in Switzerland, there is place in our house to stay a few days! Just make sure it's during summer (May-September) because during the other months I need my well deserved little yearly vaction
All the best
Marcus
****
-
6 BILLIONS of chicks???? Man, I always thought Chinas total population is around 1,2 billon...
That beer there must do a real god job...
Unlike the lousy "mineral water bber" brand I had in some places in Yunnan (0,7 Vol alc)
Near Shanghai? Well, my trips to China were Yunnan last year, a real sweet province, and if I say sweet, I mean totally sweet.
Hmong villages northwest of Guilin might be on the schedule next trip; maybe I could put in a little detour via Shanghai an then owards to Hkk. Hkk, Bangkok and Manila are always on my schedule since I got friends living there. And the ladies there aren't ugly either
In Manila I do play hotseat games with my friend (Lucero1148) as well. Maybe next time in China as well...will see.
Regards
Marcus
****
-
Will do mods for both I guess.
If 3D models will stay the same as in BB mods should be compatible.
-
ups, double post
[ July 18, 2003, 11:33 AM: Message edited by: tools4fools ]
-
Couldn't see your pics.Originally posted by Tero:Originally posted by tools4fools:
Goes both way - A HMG, inf gun or tank on a small elevation got much better LOS into that forest and can shoot at defenders in there
It is a bit more complicated than that. The question is if they can see the defenders positions so they can shoot at them.
And being on a small elevation some distance away from said patch of forests puts them on a pedestal in the open for any and all weapon in range to take pot shots at. Which would put them in a position which is not unlike standing up.
>>>>> just being on an elevation away from said hill doesn't mean automatically that they are in the open. They could be hidden in a farmhouse, patch of woods, etc, or it could be a hull down tank (all regading CM).
LOS goes both ways of course and you can be shot at by anything that is hidden in there.
Point was it would be possible to bring direct fire support in which would not be possible in an undamged forest.
- which it could not do if the forest would still be there.
That depends on the amount of undergrowth.
>>>>>> Regarding CM you can shoot a bit into all forests, most into tall pines (because of less undergrowth I think). In a shot up forest like the one on the pics your LOS into the (former) forest is way longer in any case.
And all that cover gives you the possibility to sneak in there without being seen by the defender
Which do you see better, a moving object or a stationary object ? In a tangeled mass like than you can sneak over a position and get shot from behind.
>>>>>Moving object of course;
Making noise and being detected is sure a problem crawling in there.
Maybe an undamaged forest would be better for advancing infantry? Easier and less noisier to advance, still some cover around if needed.
- albeit you are better ready for some handgrenades as if you sneak in there sooner or later you will be heard by the defenders...
You are forgetting the felled trunks and branches muffle the effects of hand grenades. They can even deflect them back at you.
>>>>I didn't think of the reduced effect of handgrenades in such terrain. But I think I would throw'em anyway if I hear someone sneaking (crawling) around in 20-30m distance. I think he would have to worry more about where the muffled blast will be deflected to
if I go into a real forest with infantry, I cannot call in direct fire support.
If you go into a real forest you will not be able to hump heavy direct fire support at all so you will end up relying on indirect fire support, mainly mortars. Or your SAW's and other automatics your troops carry.
>>>> seems we agree here.
if I go in that blown up forest, I can call in direct fire support
The thing is your direct fire support may end up blowing and shooting YOUR people up by mistake.
>>>>that can happen in any terrain, no?
If I got blue LOS to enemy troops, well I target them and shoot at them. No?
- if there is still someone alive in there, that is. Looks devestating.
That kind of devastation takes several days, even weeks to adcheive.
Wonder how long it takes, how many guns and rounds since it is not exactly a small aera. An amazing picture of destruction.
Wonder how effective such bombardments were. Effects on morale, percentage of casualties.
For the defender best would be if he hides in a kind of mess as seen on these pictures but in a intact forest.
It is not as simple as that. For example in an intact forest the trees block you LOS so the attacker can get much closer without being zapped after having crawled to get to the jump off point. And (depending on the undergrowth) the attacker does not have to fight the obstacles of felled trunks and branhces in addition to dodging bullets and firing their weapons.
>>>> Where would you hide your troops then in a not damaged forest?
And didn't I say that (ideally) the hiding defenders are in the thick undergrowth, while the attackers should be ambushed in a relative open part of an undamaged forest (if possible)?
See next point...
Attacker should be ambushed in a realivly open aera - small path or clearing - with realtive little cover. And no direct fire support possible due to the forest blocking LOS.
That assumes the attacker prefers to break cover and go into the open when they are in a forest.
>>>>>Doesn't that contradict your comment above where you say an attacker in a undamaged forest does not need to fight felled trunks and branches? I guess you would try to to put your ambush point in such a place that the attacker has to cross it. A small stream or somefink like that can create such a point. I would think that troops which do not expect enemy troops around would use paths and lighter undergrowth to advance.
The best alternative for the defender is close combat so the (relative) open LOS and the effects of heavy fire support is negated.
>>>>Agree, I would put my troops on hide and ambush at very close range.
BTW, the reverse slope doctrine works in this kind of terrain too.
>>>>>Sure. If mother nature was nice enough to give you the needed hill
http://www.sodatkuvina.cjb.net/images/Talvisota/Rintama/cwdata/400301TaipaleMaaliskuussa.html
Regards
Marcus
****
-
Käytän 7x8 km2 karttapohjaa joka kattaa kaiken Talista Ihantalaan ja Juustilan kanavalta Talin myllylle. Kaikkea en aio "värittää", mutta esim. Leitimojärven-Portinhoikan seutu on jo melkein kokonaan pussissa ja joitakin muitakin tärkeitä seutuja, esim. Marjamäki. Portinhoikka-kartta onkin jo Skenaariovarikolla. </font>Originally posted by Andreas:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Scarhead:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Andreas:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sergei:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Keke:
Siiranmäki, so no worries.
Mitenkäs ison alueen Ihantalaa meinasit tehdä?
-
Goes both way - A HMG, inf gun or tank on a small elevation got much better LOS into that forest and can shoot at defenders in there - which it could not do if the forest would still be there.Originally posted by Tero:Originally posted by tools4fools:
Don't know about cover, but LOS is sure better than before!!!
Depends. For the defender that is a clear bonus. For the attacker...... to be able to see INTO that kind of scenery properly you need to stand up (and even that will not necessarily give you a better view). As you know standing up in in the open in the combat zone can be hazardous to your health.
And all that cover gives you the possibility to sneak in there without being seen by the defender - albeit you are better ready for some handgrenades as if you sneak in there sooner or later you will be heard by the defenders...
At the end:
if I go into a real forest with infantry, I cannot call in direct fire support.
if I go in that blown up forest, I can call in direct fire support - if there is still someone alive in there, that is. Looks devestating.
For the defender best would be if he hides in a kind of mess as seen on these pictures but in a intact forest. Attacker should be ambushed in a realivly open aera - small path or clearing - with realtive little cover. And no direct fire support possible due to the forest blocking LOS.
-
I haven't bought yet any air support, but in one of my PBEM's my opponent got a fighter bomber and I didn't have any AA guns. Knocked out 1 of my 3 T-34's and two of my five T-70's.
Fairly effective I would say.
I was running a few test afterwards and my observations were that they do hit friendles sometimes - but most of the time they do hit the opponent. And they hit hard. It seems that like one in three bombing passes is a hit - which seems to me that those guys are all little Red Barons. Strafing runs on light vehicles seem to be even more accurate.
I sure won't leave home anymore without AA capabilities - or own fighters overhead.
-
Did you realize how fast those T-26 "dart" around?!? They not only get the puny 45mm gun, , paper thin armor, slow turret, but real slow speed as well!Originally posted by laxx:If we treat it with the same brittleness as a Half-track, then the t-26 cannot be used against armor but against infantry. so that means no frontal "hunt" command, just darting around in Fast Move or move covered by lots of infantry.
The T-26 sure is my last choice for the Russians.
German side? In BO it was the MkIV; too expensive for its usefullness and taken out too often by Stuarts. That changed a lot in BB; turret armor reamins a weak point, but small caliber ala Stuart tend to kill far less often. And the PzIV seems to hit much better these days with the optics modeled.
I really like the PzII in BB; makes short work of any russian light tank without exposing other tanks or AT guns. Good against infantry. Always buying some.
-
Don't know about cover, but LOS is sure better than before!!!Originally posted by Andreas:Is there more or less cover in this forest?
Marcus
****
-
no Stug E here, but where in China are you living currently?Originally posted by tooz:(love you all, free beer at my house) :confused:
I mean free beer is worth to do a detour. And that detour could last as long as seven month...
Was in China last trip twice and might be there coming winter again.
And I like real beer, no 0.7 alc "mineral water beer" stuff.
But'em in the fridge...
Cheers
marcus
****
-
Because your German friends are too polite...Originally posted by Warphead:See Matt, nobody thinks I should learn to dress!
I can see you guys were having some fun.
Liked that pic of Matt and his GF with the "piggy bank" between them!
Amazing pic as well in the other album of the partial penetration of 102mm Tiger front plate :eek:
all the best
Marcus
****
-
Sort of, the PIV and III were older designs than the T-34, so the "efficiency" of the T-34 is pretty poor when an older chassis is able to keep up with and at time surpass it in protection and firepower. [/QB]Originally posted by Bastables: -
I'm with Andreas here; T-34 (and PzIV) were simply older designs. Newer designs were improved upon experience learned from those older designs (pros and cons).Originally posted by Bastables:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by tools4fools:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Andreas:
You are right Mike, and I did *not* word it quite correctly. I think it is an unfair comparison. You can of course make it, but it is a bit senseless, since you are, to a degree, comparing apples and oranges.
Looking at this point the Sherman actually looks pretty bad in my opinion.
Improved designs of both oldies (T-34 and PzIV) could still go up against the newer design (Sherman) until the end of the war (except for a the Jumbos of course). </font>
-
I'm with Andreas here; T-34 (and PzIV) were simply older designs. Newer designs were improved upon experience learned from those older designs (pros and cons).Originally posted by Andreas:You are right Mike, and I did *not* word it quite correctly. I think it is an unfair comparison. You can of course make it, but it is a bit senseless, since you are, to a degree, comparing apples and oranges.
Looking at this point the Sherman actually looks pretty bad in my opinion.
Improved designs of both oldies (T-34 and PzIV) could still go up against the newer design (Sherman) until the end of the war (except for a the Jumbos of course).
-
Hard headed you!Originally posted by tooz:I can't wait to see the camo pattern you described.
Are you going to beat it up a little (dirty it)?
It will look somfink like this:
Still needs a lot of work; and it wont look as neat anymore once done, as I will beat it up a bit. To see how that looks take a look at my recently released JPz IV (JPzIV under "Frontschwein"-handle - he did the CMMOS work for me).
Has to be enough til next week (probably end of..., depending how much I can do this weekend) when it will be ready.
G'night, 4.27am here, time to shut the machine down.
Marcus
****
-
Juju,
simply mind blowing!
I will love to blow those up, even deep in Russia
And take your time, winter is still far...
All the best
Marcus
****
-
I have a kind of ambush pattern for a H of the 9th PzDiv '45. That will be the next after the J is done.
Marcus
***
-
The wire mesh Schürzen create only one little problem - they show up as weird b&w patterns if looked at the tank from view level 4 or 5 and from some distance.
Cammo pattern will be dark red primer (which looks like a red brown) with dunkelgelb painted over in wide stripes; The dunkelgleb stripes will be seperated by thin white lines from the red primer. Thanks to Makjager for providing me with this cammo pattern, since I was looking for something different than bi- or tricolor.
Winter version? Hmmm, doubt it, since I have about 4-5 different cammo patterns for the IV long series which I want to do first.
But one might be a weathered dark yellow varaint and maybe someone else will do a winter paint job.
Marcus
****
All the best
Marcus
****
-
It has not been ignored, but it takes some time; This one is getting its cammo pattern right now (and uit will be a J):
Later on some H, G and late F will follow.
Patience
Regards
Marcus
****
-
Originally posted by OZ77:
[QB] The penetration ability of its 7.62 cannon is superior to our 5 cm KwK and the 7.5 cm KwK40(unfortunately we dont see it in CMBB).
Depends how this is meant. I think it is meant as "5cm KwK and short 75mm KwK can penetrated T-34 armor only at short range while 7.62 gun can penetrate Pz III and IV". And that's in CMBB.
Note that it is mentioned that T-34 armor can be penetrated from side, rear and gun mantlet at short ranges. Tha's in my BB as well.
Despites this and the lack of radio and 3 man turret the T-34 is the better tank in '41 - better than the Pz III, IV and the Sherman. No Shermans around at the time...
And the T-34 comes with a very affordable price tag in BB as well!
Worst tank in BB would be T-26 series. Slow, lousy armor, puny gun, just a crappy tank. But then you can't expect too much for the few points it costs
-
I do agree most of the part with what you pointed out; however I think the transition from alerted (still somehow useful) to panicked and worse (useless) is too fast.Originally posted by Scarhead:It would be nice to have such a command. But not realistic.
Try not to be on the receiving end - try to create panic in the enemies ranks! Excessively overwhelming forces, unexpected situations and flanking help spread panic, thus panic is a just reward for a good maneuver - or for a poor positioning of troops if you are stricken by panic!
How gamey is it to withdraw your helpless units to a safe place when they themselves have lost situational awareness and don't know where it is safe?
Note that they usually start to panic and either cower and creep somewhere where they think they have better cover or run - and do really weird things after they got hit while running. If somebody yells "get out", he does not say "get out, and make sure you don't run there, there and there!" Usually the NCO runs as the last man, so he can't even say "follow me". And if he is worth his money, he stays with his troops after they run -even in the wrong direction!
Gruß
Joachim
Troops are easily in an "alerted" condition and recover quick as well. Once panicked they are useless, but not for too long. Ok we me. Routed or broken they are really screwed up for a longer time: OK with me again.
Only thing is that for panicked troops, I think it should be possible to have a bit control about them since it's the first step into loosing control. If their commander tells tehm "Let's get out of here and over there is a good place to hide", they might still listen to this particlular. Route or broken troops which really had enough should stay out of control.
Too be the "usefull" to "useless" is too harsh.
I think it shouldn't be black and white. Therefore for "panicked" troops "retreat" as only order still available, while broken or routed stays as it is.
or somefink like that.
Dind't mean to implement gamey retreat order.
In my opinion routed and broken troops should surrender more easy as well. I mean your broken or routed troops run away, about 30 -100 meters as usual in CM (now, how realistic is that?) and then get slaughtered if attacked again. Just like sitting ducks. I think they would
a) run farther in the first place
or
surrenderSimpler said:
let panicked (or worse) troops run more far from action regardless what cover is around.
Will get back tomorrow or later today, not such a good idea to post at 4.30am after work and with a few pint later as well.
Sorry for notuseofspillchecker....
Marcus
****
surrender
"Shoot & Scoot" vs "Hunt & Scoot" - a new order for CMAK?
in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
Posted
The only problem with the "hunt&scoot" order I see is that using hunt the tank will engage enemy target until it is destroyed. It will not start moving after a shot or two.
Therefore it should be "contact, shoot & scoot".
The only problem I can see here is the scoot command. Let's say you order your vehicle to contact 150m ahead. Then reverse behind a building which is 120m ahaed from the tanks current position.
That means if there is a contact at 50m ahead, your tank will shoot at it and then continue moving forward to the building...
Maybe we should have an additional command which is
"contact, shoot, reverse out of LOS"
But such an order might be overused then.
Same a "contact & reverse out of LOS" for AC. Give your vehicle such an order across the whole map. As soon as it spots enemy tank it reverses. Tank got most likely no time to get a shot off. Great. But I like to PLAY this game and not have an autopilot. If I want to scout I put a move order until a point I want to peek around the corner. Then reverse order. If I screw up because before I reach that point the enemy has LOS on my vehicle (and blows it to CM heaven) I found that perfectly OK. Beceause I screwed up. I don't want the game to fix my screw up - less interesting game.
What you guys think?
Marcus
****