IntelWeenie

A lot depends on the situation. If you're playing a QB vs. the AI, let loose and have fun! It would be polite to ask your opponent before doing it in a PBEM, though. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

I think it had a lot to do with the immense surplusses of equipment the Allies had after the war was over. A lot of the "buyer" countries had no modern equipment anyway, so even castoff Shermans would have been better than nothing. Why pay top dollar when you can get tanks for less than the price of the steel in them? ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

Anyone know where I can get the demo? I've seen it in a couple of places, but they said it was no longer available. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

I like the new look, especially having the page numbers show by the topic. But....is there any way to automatically return to the last page of a topic after posting a reply (instead of the first page)? Maybe something to suggest to the UBB programmers? ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by L.Tankersley: Plus, what about target facing? Do you really want to use tungsten when firing at the rear of a Panther, when regular AP is more than capable of scoring a kill? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Not me, that's why I suggested computing T usage based on (suspected) enemy armor thickness and % chance to hit. I have no problem with a Green crew firing T at a "Tiger?" only to later find out it was a Pz IV, but that's because I love FOW. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pillar: What about the Russians? Fionn would be quick to jump into this thread, but since he isn't here I'll have to ask the question myself. What did the Russians do? What did they add? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> They added the concept of defense in depth to nullify the "Surfaces and Gaps" style attack. While on the offensive, they developed what was later called the "Operational Maneuver Group" which is basically an exploitation force. Its sole mission was to tear up enemy rear areas after a breakthrough by other troops. It was to be fast moving with a fairly short logisitcal "tail", the idea being that they would carry most of their critical supplies with them and capture the rest (to maintain momentum). A decent example of this in WWII is Peiper's Kampfgruppe in the Ardennes. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

IIRC, it was originally designed and used to tow aircraft around and was also used as a (small) prime mover by the army. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

I would like to see less tungsten overall, but the conditions of its use changed. I think "bracketing" (firing regular AP until a reliable hit is obtained) needlessly complicates the issue. I would rather see it based on a combination of the estimated % to hit and the target's armor rating. Crews would be less likely to fire T at thinner armor (even if they've already bounced a couple of rounds off it), but more likely to fire T at something like a KT even if there's a less than perfect chance to hit. You can always get lucky, you know and you may not always be around for that second shot. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Steve Clark: Clear something up for me. It can't be officially the Eastern Front since that only assumes a European/America geographic perspective. What did the Soviets call it, the Western Front? Is Russian Front the most historically accurate term?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The Soviets called it the Great Patriotic War. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: But the point remains... even a 75mm HE artillery round has a decent chance of knocking out a tank if it scores a direct hit. Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Any chance of looking at this issue WRT smaller HE hits (2" mortars and the like)? I've seen Panthers killed with them before and it just doesn't seem right. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV: Mmm... 3" bazookas. Pershings & Chaffees vs. T-34s. 106 recoilless rifles. Chicoms! Mmm... anybody hungry? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Mmmmm. Don't ferget them Centurions! Yum yum! (drool) ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

Seriously: CM2:Ostfront CM3:War in the Med CM4:Lightning War Unseriously: CM2:Beyond CM1 CM3:Benito Who? CM4:Hamsterkrieg ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

Unfortunately, I don't think there is. Some (hopefully) useful advice for the two situations you put forth: Problem: Shreck team getting wiped by infantry. Solution: Always keep some infantry supports by your AT assets (if possible). Even a half squad can help, even if it just gives your 'shreck time to escape. Problem: Infantry targeting jeeps. Solution: Tough one. I'm guessing they were targeting the jeeps since they figured they had a better chance to kill them. I never count on using 'fausts as a primary AT weapon. You have very little control over them and they are very range limited. Best used for self-defence unless you have NO other AT weapons. Still, some additional infantry-type supports might have helped kill the jeeps faster, letting the 'faust team get a shot at a tank. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gaffertape: Tiger what the hell is that... That... THING on the Sherman chassis? Looks like a prop from a bad sci fi movie. Those side tubes don't seem to have room enough behind them OR any ability to elevate. Nor do I see any way that crewmen would have room near that centre gun to fire the ball MGs. Any more info on that thing? GAFF<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> IIRC, those are 7.2" Birney guns (recoilless rifles) to take out concrete fortifications. Or something like that. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

Possible gamey tactic: ( ) Since the current game engine does not allow infantry riding on vehicles to fire or be targeted, if you button up your vehicles that have infantry on them, they will not be fired on until they disembark (or the vehicle is destroyed). Any small arms or artillery fire at the vehicle will affect them, though. Note: The "gamey" part is buttoning up. If the tank/HT/etc. is unbuttoned, infantry will be able to target it and the fire will affect its passengers. Some people may not be bothered by this, but I have been ever since I figured it out. BTS: "Please fix! Or do somefink!" (still my favorite one-liner from the board) ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

IIRC, it will remove itself the turn after no one is targeting it, or if it is activated by enemy units. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

If you have some on-board mortars (you will if you're the brits), they usually have some smoke rounds. These can help screen your assauting troops, but the timing can be tricky. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

Sounds like the Gammon Bomb (or Gammon Grenade). It is a handheld antitank grenade. It (obviously) has really short range, but I'm not sure how effective it is in CM (I've never noticed it actually being used). ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mr. T: I've witnessed this previously as well, except while manually targeting an enemy vehicle with infantry without using ambush markers. The infantry just refused to fire and instead decided to watch the vehicle go right past.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I've noticed this if the vehicle is buttoned up, even if it is open topped. I guess it's because there's nothing "soft" for them to shoot at. Ditto if there are passengers. If the vehicle is unbuttoned, infantry can target it and cause casualties to the passengers. If it is buttoned up, they will not target the vehicle and by virtue of the targeting rules, cannot target the passengers! I hope this is fixed in CM2! Close assaults are another story and I have had wildly varying results with it. Targeting a vehicle seems (at least in my experiences) to have no effect for doing this. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

I've noticed it as well, but I can't decide if it's a bug or the AI is just being prudent. I do the same thing as you do, except that I'll stay buttoned further out from infantry(150m or so). ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

You say the tanks did not have LOS to the gun, but did they have LOS to a spot right next to it (within 2-3 meters)? If so, another option would have been to give them area target orders as close to the gun as possible and not worry about moving anywhere. The blast effects can still hit the AT gun, and your tanks will be safe from return fire. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

The only time I use the turn buttons is when zoomed in after "shift-mousing" from side to side. I use them then since the view usually hangs in the side-to-side mode for a second or two before rotating. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit.

An interesting idea, but I think you would not find too much enthusiasm for it from the people who like campaigns. Why? What you propose is a situation where the combat effectiveness of your troops would decrease over time, wheras in a "typical" campaign, troops' effectiveness increases. This difference is significant, I think. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right [This message has been edited by IntelWeenie (edited 10-03-2000).]

Just use a Crack or Elite sharpshooter and imagine it's a sniper. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

1. 1024x768 2. Yes (plenty 'o space since CM came out) 3. No ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right