Degrees of Frost

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pvt. Ryan: ..... the MG42 had a voracious appetite for ammo, but wouldn't a pillbox have a pretty good supply? A heavy MG42 has 95 points of ammo and a pillbox has 3 MG42s with 250 points combined. Three MG42 teams have more ammo than a pillbox. Like I said, I don't know how much ammo a pillbox had historically, but I don't think they would go through all the trouble to construct one only to have it overrun because it ran out of ammo after 30 minutes. A pillbox shouldn't have unlimited ammo, but if the LOW ammo isn't appropriate, maybe the max ammo should be increased to 500 or somefink. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't know if I totally agree with your maths there Ryan. A pillbox has 250 "bursts" from the three MGs that I presume are FIRED AT THE SAME TIME. A HMG42 team gets 95 "bursts" - and a HMG team is carrying so much ammo that the team can't run (I have the right don't I ? - hasn't it been argued that its the weight of ammo thats the problem isn't it ?). So by my somewhat shaky maths (its late and the lab chemicals are getting to me) a pillbox has a bit over seven and a half times as much ammunition to use as a HMG team. If we assume three or four guys carry the ammo for the HMG team it would mean we would be looking (to move the ammo stockpiled in a pillbox) at enough ammo to fully laden about 25 to 30 individual guys such that they can't run anywhere. I am thinking a pillbox has a TRUCKLOAD of ammo in it ! [This message has been edited by Degrees of Frost (edited 12-13-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Commissar: Interesting...so close turreted tanks can be incapacitated by heavy arty, eh? I wonder, can a KT be, oh lets say, immobilized by some of those 150mm's? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes even King Tigers can be immobilised by artillery - 4.5 inchers can do the job. Then you can use two Sherman V's to scream down on one of its flanks and around to its rear (sounds like a good plan so far ) - then lose one Sherman to your opponents 50mm AT screen (which I reckon is acceptable) and get the other one 87m behind the immobilised KT and watch one of your 75mm shells bang into the KTs tracks and then the second 75mm round bang right into the beasts rear lower hull . Then you can watch said 75mm round ricochet off into the wild blue yonder and then wait while the KT lines your sherman up and then blows it and its crew away.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wayne: The scarcity of this tank was due to small numbers of the 17pdr AT gun. AT units were given higher priority than the tank producers. The Americans wanted to put 17pdrs in some of their Shermans but the British said there was not enough. I've often wondered why we did'nt put 90mms in Shermans as a stop gap before the Pershings came out. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I have heard it was the other way around. I read somewhere-or-other that the Brits offered the Americans Firefly conversion kits but the offer wasn't taken up. Instead they went with the 90mm. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dr Brian: Since the Challenger was not available for the Normanday landings, it was produced as a stop gap until the Challenger became available <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I thought both the Firefly and the Challengers were both stop gaps - to be used until the Centurion and perhaps, a better example would be the Comet, were available in numbers. The British army tried to shoehorn the 17-pounder into everything they had available - the Archer for example squeezed a 17-pounder into- a bloody ugly contraption that couldn't fire until the driver got his head out of the way of the recoil mechanism. The Black Prince, which would have been a bit of a hand full in the CM universe, was an attempt to get a 17-pounder attached to a Churchill - the Centurion crueled that one.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Formerly Babra: Centaur was an interim vehicle until the engines for the Cromwell could be mass produced. The Liberty engines for the Centaur tended to shake apart at high revs, so they were relegated to training duties. Only a few were present in Normandy. Other than that, it's pretty much the same beast.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Didn't the Royal Marines get to use them - they stuck the tank in a landing craft to provide close support during landings.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by M Hofbauer: Visually showing a trench doesn't make sense as long as infantry squads are abstracted in the first place. Essentially, the "foxholes" you are referring to are an abstraction of all kinds of foxholes, trenches, makeshift dikes etc. that an entrenched infantry squad would be having. you don't seriously believe that there really is supposed to be a foxhole big enought to hold up to 12 men? see, the trench is already there, albeit in an abstracted way to fit the abstracted infantry occupying it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But it doesn't simulate a system of trenches. If you have to move your squad from foxhole to foxhole (even if the foxholes are only metres apart) you expose them to enemy fire without being able to provide them with any cover. It makes it a little difficult to shift squads to reinforce another defensive position.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Madmatt: American M16 Quad 50 halftracks (and the other variants) are not in the game. Two reasons, other than in a few instances during the Bulge it appears that American AA assets were usually assigned to rear echelon defense and not in the front lines where most of the action in CM takes place. Obviously during the Bulge the rear echelon WAS the front lines so you hear about them employed there more than anywhere else. Now, that in itself is not enough to for us to have excluded its admission, the real deciding factor was one of time. There was not enough time to get the texture, model and texture map all done in time to make it in the final release. A decision was made to leave it out so time could be spent on other issues. Add in the fact that German Airpower was marginal during most of the time period of CM and the inclusion of other Allied AA elements and it became unfortunate but necessary to leave it out. Madmatt [This message has been edited by Madmatt (edited 11-07-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It still seems odd given the presence of the Ostwind and the Wirbelwhatever. Those two portable AA guns had a total production run less than 100. Weren't most of the Ostwinds conversions of Wirbs ? Surely these rarer-than-hens-teeth vehicles were seen right at the frontlines less than the M15 and M16's (and what about the M19 or was it T19 and the British Crusader conversions ?). Those of us who have experienced air attack from an Axis player have to endure the German flyboy whizz around until he runs out of ammo while our aircover is driven off by a single 20mm cannon may not be particularly impressed with the abilities of flexible MGs.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Suicides-by-Steve: Know what really gets me? Try moving a column of armour while it's pissing rain out, therefore forcing you to take the roads only. Now try moving 10-15 different units up the same road. It becomes a logistical nightmare... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> well, thats probably pretty realistic

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by IntelWeenie: The US did this very thing with the designation of the 106mm Recoilless Rifles right after WWII. (They were actually 105mm) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> and the British army did too. The gun in the Comet was designated a 77mm when it is a de-rated 17-pounder (76mm).

The PBEM game in question has been completed (an American victory i might add ) so some of the questions asked above can be more fully addressed. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Degrees of Frost: Also the unit was deep (more than 25m) in the pines - and in my experience you can have units running around that deep in pines and they will not be spotted from hundreds of metres away. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The unit it question was a platoon HQ that had suffered a single casualty earlier in the game, so we are talking about three guys which I imagine should make them more difficult to spot. They had become "Alerted!" (losing one of your members to an artillery barrage will do that I guess) and were hiding. They were positioned 27m from the nearest edge of the pines. They at no point had LOS to any of my units - so I presume I did not have LOS to them with any of my units <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Degrees of Frost: In any case I will ask my opponent to find out exactly what that unit was "experiencing" during the bombardment and maybe this will answer some of Henri's questions/observations. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The three members of this HQ all became casualties at the same time and these casualties were inflicted by a single, stray, 105mm VT shell. They didn't panick or rout or anything else before they all became casualties yeilding the Infantry? eliminated icon that I spotted from many hundreds of metres away. The other eliminated unit that I spotted when it was eliminated was a Volksgrenadier SMG squad which was also hiding (15m from the edge of the pines so could see out and had LOS to my positions) - I don't know how many shells were required to cause the 8 casualties and unfortunately the PBEM files for those turns have been deleted.

Can panicked, broken and routed squads continue to spot enemy units ? It appears that they can - in a number of QBs I have noticed that my panicked, broken and routed squads still appear to be able to provide information on units firing at them and enemy units they pass, by chance, while fleeing/"heading for cover" - these messed up units are the only units I possess that have LOS on these enemy units yet I still know their positions and movements. Surely units in such disarray should lose the ability to spot the enemy. Even those units firing upon them, those units they could spot before routing etc. should revert to generic markers IMHO.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fernando: I got some information about it (an official report in fact) and people repplied with their opinions but not with facts or reports. I’m still waiting for an official report and not for opinions. People say “I think 16 mm is not enough armor and artillery can penetrate it” but don’t contribute with official reports and opinions aren’t enough for me. I don’t know how artillery works and my knowledge about basic physics is a bit rusty but IIRC a shell just dropping from 1000 m height will hit the ground at 140 m/seg . IIRC some AT guns had muzzle velocities of about 800 m/seg. Well, the kynetic energy of those AT shells is about 25 times greater than that of my “dropping” artillery shell then. I think artillery shells impact the ground at higher velocities but they are still much smaller than AT shell velocities so its kynetic energy is much smaler. You know, if they have half the velocity then its kynetic energy is 4 times smaller, if its one third then it’s NINE times smaller, if one fourth then it’s SIXTEEN times smaller and so on. I asked for artillery grunts because they know what are the trajectories and velocities of artillery shells. I guess mortar shells have the smaller velocities among artillery shells thus having the smaller kynetic energy. To kill a Panther with a 60 mm mortar seems rather odd. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Would the kinetic energy of the falling shell be the only important factor here ? Isn't it quite likely the falling shell would explode upon hitting the upper surface of the tank. I don't know what sized fragments are generated when a 25 lb shell detonates nor the kinetic energy these fragments possess. But is it possible that the shrapnel is capable of penertrating 16mm of armour ?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: My question though is in a fight of recon units, how many ostwinds are going to be mixing it up? Was it common to throw Ostwind flakpanzer platoons out as recon elements? I think Tom's question involves a tussle of recon forces, not just 37 armed vehicles. Of course, on the American side the Hellcat comes to mind as the ultimate killer. The Tiger of the fast tracks. Although historical and killable by the 50mm on the Puma, I would definately restict its use in this scenario. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> How many Ostwinds were actually produced ? More than 100 ? The impression I have is that they were as rare as hens teeth and on that basis would have absolutely no role in recon. How many Pumas ? I thought they were also pretty damn rare.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Henri: Here is what may have happened: the enemy soldiers were hiding, so you couldn't see them. As their casualties increased, they began to rout, but as soon as they got up, they were killed and fell over dead. In other words, what you saw was hidden enemy soldiers breaking out of hiding just before they were eliminated.At least that's what I would guess... There may be another factor in that what you see is not necessarily what is there: the game shows you what your side THINKS is there given the information available. However in my experience, once a unit is shown as dead, it stays dead. There is an outside possibility that there were TWO enbemy units where you only saw one, and the sequence of events that you saw did not all correspond to the same unit. Henri<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> OK - the german unit was whacked by a stray round and the Infantry? Eliminated icon appeared at EXACTLY the same time as the shell exploded. There was no appearance of movement one might associate with a panicked/moving unit other than the icon getting up and keeling over. This happens from time to time in normal play when a prone infantry unit is eliminated - the prone figure gets up on a knee and then keels over backwards yeilding an icon of a prone body on its back. Also the unit was deep (more than 25m) in the pines - and in my experience you can have units running around that deep in pines and they will not be spotted from hundreds of metres away. I have never seen fog of war generate eliminated unit icons that don't really represent eliminated units - nor I have seen the fog of war generate eliminated unit icons for units that have not actually been eliminated. As for two units being involved my opponent has got his units spread out in those pines (as a result of my enthusiastic use of artillery ) - so the events I have described previously involve only a single unit. In any case I will ask my opponent to find out exactly what that unit was "experiencing" during the bombardment and maybe this will answer some of Henri's questions/observations. [This message has been edited by Degrees of Frost (edited 09-16-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken: I don't have time just now to check if this has been discussed before, but I endorse the issue. If you kill a unit or knock out a vehicle, suddenly you know exactly what and where it is. Say you knew the enemy had a Jagdpanther, and by a fluke you immobilised it with artillery and it was abandoned, you would know this without being able to see it. That would be a bit unfair, wouldn't it? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes it certainly would be ..... In the particular PBEM game I am playing this information has confirmed for me that my opponent is indeed hiding a second platoon in the forest so I will be pounding it again next turn. Of course the eliminated unit could be a machinegun or panzershcrek not attached to a platoon - but I think not (but then time will tell). I have triple checked now - not one of my units has LOS to the region where the dead Infantry? icon turns up before the bombardment (at the end of the turn previous to the one where the icon appears) or at the end of the turn during which the icon does appear. However when I watched the turn movie it may be possible that an unbuttoned Sherman may have got a peek in the direction of the eliminated unit. But the tank commander had to have spotted a stationary (except when it got up and keeled over and when the icon actually appears i am pretty certain the Sherman does not have LOS), hidden infantry unit through 25m plus pine forest at a range of 450m - but as we can't use the LOS tool during the turn movie I don't know whether there was LOS or not.

Well I just tried to replicate it. Set-up a whole lot of different german squads (to get different squad sizes) hidden in a pine forest. Squads were also set at different distances into the pine forest (from Amis) - at depth where they (german squads) could see out - at a depth where they couldn't. Setup a whole lot of 105mm VT spotters and proceeded to let them rip into the hidden german squads. NO Infantry? eliminated ICONS APPEARED during this bombardment and german squads remained hidden from the spotters view even when eliminated (and more than 70% squads were eliminated). I guess I will have to go back and look even more carefully at the turn in my game where the Infantry? eliminated icons appeared to ensure there was no LOS (and I am sure there wasn't - but it never hurts to triple check). My opponent assures me his guys were hiding when they bought it. So at this stage I am CERTAINLY NOT yelling "bug, bug, bug". And I did a search - but didn't get anything that seemed promising.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV:

Yeah fellas - its a bloody ripper of a game !!

I am playing a PBEM at present and am having some success as Amis destroying a couple of german platoons (I saw them go in but haven't seen them come out) hiding in a great big bunch of pines with 105mm VT artillery. As the incoming shells bang into the trees I suddenly see german bodies appearing - prone bodies labelled as eliminated. We get an airburst and then a german infantry icon keeling over. The odd thing is I could never see the german squads (eliminated squad icons appearing greater than 75m away from the last know position of a german squad) and none of MY units have LOS to the now eliminated squad. The squads have been eliminated by stray rounds from the 105mm dropping outside any of my units LOS. My closest units are 400-450m away and never indicate a sound contact. So my question is how do I know I have eliminated an enemy squad ? Do the VT shells have little pilots inside them that radio back saying "we got them a beauty mate" ? [This message has been edited by Degrees of Frost (edited 09-15-2000).]

This situation can be very frustrating - the crest doesn't appear to give infantry behind it any cover and when fired on they head for cover - any cover - which sometimes means the poor sods head straight out from behind cover and head across the enemies LOS in the open - getting shot down the whole time.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Seanachai: And you live in the southern hemisphere?! Norwegians have no access to Penguins, a creature of the Antarctic, and other south polar realms. The term you are thinking of is 'tarolling' and involves Norwegians doing something uspeakably unpleasant to puffins. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I never claimed it was a TRADITIONAL norwegian pastime (like tarolling) - they ship the penguins in special. Like Aquavit a penguin is much better for trolling if it has crossed the equator a couple of times, which means penguin breeding farms have failed to spring up across Norway to cater for this particular perversion.

Interesting - I always THOUGHT it was a Norwegian sport that involved torturing penguins. [This message has been edited by Degrees of Frost (edited 09-03-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by patboivin: I thought of saying: Put 'em in a circle facing outward, like Bison protecting their young. It will give you a 360 degree arc of fire!! Put them on top of a hill and you're set!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't know about that one dude - since when do bisons pack heat (of the 75mm variety) ... Of course the obvious answer is the wolves started it and have had it coming for a LONG LONG time.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by John Hough: 6) Exploiting holes in the reality model. I'm not sure, as I'm no grognard, but it seems kinda likely that driving a platoon in halftracks up to 10 m away from an enemy platoon, dismounting under fire, and fighting would be a bad idea, though I've used it quite effectively. Fix the reality model, if this, or anything else, is unrealistic. -John<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Didn't feel up to addressing all your points John But this (specific) one seemed the easy to deal with. Make troops exiting vehicles as exposed as all get out. I have had this tactic used against me and it really sucked. Have used it against the AI (just a test I assure you) and found it successful) I am sure it was used in reality once in a while when the enemy was pinned and most members of the target squad wounded - but against a full squad it would seem suicidal to tootle up to a building containing a squad of Brits (lets say) and jump out of the halftrack and spray them down with MP40s - but in the game it seems to work more often than not. There has to be way to pin the bastards in the halftrack so they stay in the vehicle - imagine them banging against the wall - yelling "Could you please get us out of here, driver I am not going to get out here". <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Steve - Big Time Software: The point about HTs driving up to within 10m of a target isn't something we canspecifically code around. It isn't *smart* to do this because the defenders might use grenades/AT weapons. If you have done this and had positive results, you got lucky or applied knowledge of what the enemy has (or is likely to have) when plotting out your moves. There ain't nothing we can do about either of these things So again it comes down to average gain for use. If you tried this in, say, 5 scenarios where you know nothing about the enemy forces, I bet you wouldn't be happy with the overall results And that *should* cause you to rethink the tactic and not use it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Should add the caveat that german halftracks to alot worse facing Americans (love those rifle grenades) in that situation. But if the halftrack is on a road and approaching at speed - the SMG squad is dismounted and attacking so quickly that AT assets such grenades or demo-charges don't get much of a look in. So my suggestion is maybe reduce the immediate combat effectiveness of dismounting squads (the squads leader may have difficulty directing his squad as they are jumping and after they have jumped out of a halftrack) and make them more susceptible to enemy fire. [This message has been edited by Degrees of Frost (edited 08-28-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jarmo: I've had problems with (1.) Eudora and emailer suffer of it also. What helps is compressing the files. Between Macs, stuffit is the way to go. With PC's it's Zip. Zipping and unzipping on mac is easy with MacZip, it's drag and drop. And it's free. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> had the same problem (1)- using Eudora Pro 4.2 - got my opponent zipping them up and sending them to me - works fine.

I don't have a particularly common last name but its cropped up twice in QBs. Both times my "alter ego" was a Lt in a British Airborne formation - both times I completed my set-up before I noticed - and both times "my" platoon HQ was overrun holding a flank by hordes of bloody SMG squads. Its a little distressing seeing a "relative" get overrun and their platoon wiped out to a man. Next time I will ensure my "relative" gets a role in the centre where he will no doubt get steamrollered by a bunch of tanks that won't play fair - "just a little closer - then that PIAT will be able to reach you"