MacMogul

It seems odd that it would require disabling the cache altogether. I believe the same utilities will allow you to reduce the cache speed as well (though it may not be possible to reduce the cache speed any further in the iMac DVs as I think it may already run at 5:2). Perhaps that would help. FWIW, I have a G4 running 9.0.4 and all kinds of crap and the game has never locked up (though plenty of other things do occasionally, mostly MS products). Never any problems on my G3/233 before, on 8.6 and 9.0-9.0.4, either. I suppose you could always use this as an excuse to upgrade to a G4. --Bill Edited to add that I also have 256MB RAM, with VM off. Things are almost always less stable with VM on for me. Course, without VM I'm looking at needing another 256MB in order to get my work done. [This message has been edited by MacMogul (edited 12-07-2000).]

I tend to think there might be something special about the M8, as I hit one with 4 50mm AT rounds in a recent PBEM with the results of one track hit, two penetrations (at least one to the turret) and a final kill shot. Color me curious, too. --Bill

Funny, I seem to have had the opposite experience from everyone here. I don't know how many PBEMs I've played, but I rarely win attacks, and usually have trouble with meeting engagements, but have always done well in defenses (though I've only played a few). Maybe it's luck, or my opponents (more likely luck, my opponents have seemed quite capable generally), but I'm currently uncommitted PBEM-wise, so I'd happily test my skill even if it means being smacked around by some of the distinguished posters here.

I'm hoping to start one or two new PBEMs, preferably <=1500 points, any other terms fine, though I'd like someone who can play at least several turns tonight. If you're into ladder games I'm registered at tournamenthouse and thegrognards. Send me a file, MacMogul-CM@bonkhead.com. --Bill

I don't have the manual in front of me, but I'll take your word regarding the typo. AFAIK, you're right on the money with your understanding (and explanations) of how things work. For my money, anybody who accuses you of cheating when the computer picks the forces isn't worth the bother. If you're interested in a game, I could use another, drop me a line (bill@bonkhead.com). --Bill

No offense taken. The one thing this tank battle made clear is that you've got to protect your flanks/rear (especially when you have slow/slow-turreted tanks) with infantry/support assets. Still, I don't play enough armored QBs, I mainly get involved in combined arms games, and after several dozen of those something a little different is really fun. I'm gonna start playing them against the AI while I'm killing time between PBEM turns. --Bill [This message has been edited by MacMogul (edited 08-29-2000).]

Hey Hofbauer, you never been up at 2 in the morning after a 6 hour infantry slugfest in the forest and decided to try something a little different that you know can wrap up in an hour? I had the M8 for spotting. My favorite part of the shot was watching the replay over and over again from every angle and hearing the crew's "Yeah, got him!". P.S. Dittohead, that was a great shot, but the finest sports performance I've ever witnessed was game 5 of the '97 series when he could barely walk from the flu and carried the Bulls anyway. I've been a Bulls fan since '86, and I'm still hoping he'll make a comeback. [This message has been edited by MacMogul (edited 08-29-2000).]

Played an all armor QB game recently in which I was the Americans and my opponent was the Germans. Had a couple of Hellcats, several Shermans, and to round out my points took a M8 Greyhound. My Hellcats rapidly (and somewhat luckily) took out 3 Panthers beofre one of them ran smack into a KT. Bounced two shells off him from about 10m before the KT swung the turret around and pasted him. At that point I was wondering how many tanks I was going to lose trying to get a rear shot on the KT with something that could kill it. I had been moving the M8 up a flank to take cover behind a building and maybe spot some of his tanks. At the end of the turn on which the Hellcat got wasted, the M8 had just moved into LOS of the KT, which had it's turned 180 degrees away. So I order the M8 to fast move to cover, and keep shooting at the KT, hoping to annoy it enough to let my tanks get into position. Go to watch the movie and the M8's first shot is a rear turret penetration at weak point. My opponent couldn't believe it, and neither could I. Total for the QB, 3 dead Panthers, a dead KT and Kubelwagen, and a surrendered PzIV/70 for one dead Hellcat. Anyone else seen anything this good (or bad, depending on your perspective)? --Bill

I get really annoyed when my bazooka/schreck/AT gun team get shot up by the crew of the tank they just killed and I think it happens a bit too often. I also hear people complain about misuse of crews as infantry (which doesn't seem all that bad to me, mostly because they aren't armed well enough to be effective unless the combat situation has already gone completely to hell). What I'm wondering is if it would be possible to model realistic weapon load outs for all crews (so that a bazooka team had a rifle or two, say), but perhaps make crews behave as green or conscript level when not operating their crewed weapon? Would that provide enough of a disincentive for gamey tactics, while balancing the times such crews have to use small arms? I wonder how hard it would be to code such behavior? --Bill [This message has been edited by MacMogul (edited 07-23-2000).]

I suggested that if my mad rush tactic was gamey, using cheaper gun tractors (rather than HTs) in mass might be considered gamey to transport troops, and that the Hummel in a direct fire role was inherently gamey (not that you have a choice in the game). I don't actually believe any of the above is gamey, in that all the tactics have inherent weaknesses that balance whatever gamey characteristics they have. In fact I enjoy playing with Hummels despite the lack of realistic use. It's fun to watch 150mm shells impact. When you get right down to it, it's the intenions that matter. I didn't load up with a gamey OOB, and I didn't rush into the rear with my MMG carriers just to draw fire. Within the limits imposed by the game you have to employ the weapons you have, and I think the game does a good job of negating the value of any potentially gamey tactics. As I've said before the only thing I see as ultimately gamey is loading up some altoghether unreasonable OOB or making use of the AIs targetting issues to take advantage of tanks. I thinks that's the sticking point here, but for that to be a gamey tactic I would've had to have something to kill his tanks with while running circles around the Hummel. All I was trying to do was engage the Hummel long enough to bring some artillery down on it. --Bill

You know, I just checked and they were Wolverines I had (rather than M10s). No more TDs for me (at least not without real tank support), I lost a Nashorn to a HT from 850m in a game the other day. --Bill

As it turns out the Stug wasn't really a huge threat, since it had apparently been immoblized earlier (perhaps by a near miss from my TD, though I didn't see it). Once I had gotten behind it, it was the MGs and AT guns that I had to worry about (and that eventually killed my carriers). Out of curiosity, what would you have done with three armed carriers within 100m of enemy infantry and (potentially) ACs. I think I may have been able to better use them as MG suport for my infantry, but I'm also convinced they'd have been dead just as fast, since my PIAT teams couldn't hit the broad side of a barn (or one of the ACs that's nearby and woulda plinked the carriers pretty quick). Coulda used 'em to get the hell out of dodge I guess, but that wouldn't have made for a very fun game.

Just to clarify, while I was rushing a position that included a Stug I definitely couldn't kill, the Hummell was vulnerable and killing it was my goal. As it turns out, it has survived the artillery and the carriers, and it's likely going to blow hell out of my defense before I can put a PIAT on it. Shoulda bought a tank instead of the damn TDs. Also, I'm with you regarding gamey OOBs. In fact it's the only thing I consider particularly gamey, though the trageting AI does lend itself to somewhat gamey abuse (hopefully that will be fixed soon), and that's probably the contention here, although that's not what lead me to take the actions I did. In my experience, gamey OOBs and other tactics aren't particulalry successful anyway, so the "damage" they do is limited. Of course, in my experience, most tactics aren't particularly successful, but I am learning. --Bill [This message has been edited by MacMogul (edited 07-22-2000).]

Just looking for some opinions. Here's the situation (though my opponent isn't necessarily aware of my complete forces): I started with a British Glider company, two M10 TDs, a Sexton, a Wasp, 2 MMG carriers, two Universal carriers, and two other carriers one with a MG one without (the names escape me for the moment) I also have a 107mm FO, and a spare PIAT (above the PIATs and mortars that cam with the Glider company). I quickly lose the TDs and the Wasp, but the troop and MMG carriers deliver their transport to the buidings I'm attempting to occupy. Meanwhile, I've spotted two Pumas, a Stug III, a Hummell, and two unidentified AT guns. In a desperate measure to tie up, or with luck kill, at least the Hummell, I rush the general area where the Hummell, Stug III, and AT guns are positioned with three of the MG armed carriers while attempting to get my mortars and FO in a position to fire on them. Is this a gamey use of the carriers? Although I wouldn't risk them this way under better circumstnaces, I have no way of bringing a PIAT or other AT weapon to bear without fighting my through two platoons of infantry, and it's going to take 2-3 mintutes to bring down any artillery, during which the Hummell and AT guns can fire unmolested. Addittionally, I have no safe place to position the carriers where they can fire at anything else, since the ACs are roaming around. My position is that desperate times call for desperate measures and that my only other real choice would have been to withdraw 5 minutes into a 30 minute game. FWIW, the carriers were all dead within 2 minutes, and at best they inflicted some casualties on one of the AT gun's crew. They did however stall the advance of the Hummell (perhaps, it may have stopped where it was intentionally) long enough for 107mm artillery to begin to hit the position. Time will tell if I'm able to kill the Hummell. They may also have distracted one of the ACs somewhat, as I was able to take it out with 60mm mortar fire.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Phoenix: Friday night, a six pack, pizza and CM! Looking for a PBEM game tonight. Preferably someone in the PDT time zone. Can start playing around 6pm, able to play till around midnight. Requirements - Tank/gun crews must immediately move to the rear. No gamey crap. Computer generated game, medium sized. Meeting engagement or one side attacks. I don't care. No assaults though. Anyone? Anyone? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Send me a file, bill@macmogul.com, any parameters you want, just let me know what they are. I'm not going to do anything intentionally gamey, but I reserve the right to get desperate with crews. --Bill