Cybeq

The weakness of the 20mm AA gun is the same weakness as all AA/AT/INF guns. They are effectively immobile. I try to smoke'em and get out of their LOS or assault with infantry through the smoke. They can't shoot if they can't see. They can't manuever around the smoke since they can't move so a smoked gun position is neutralized.

I only played the demo a couple of times. I ordered the full version almost immediately after playing chance encounter on the gold demo. I don't have any real AAR's but I remember taking out that german inf gun in VOT with a 60mm mortar and thinking: "Yea! that's how it should be!" I remember moving a Sherman up the road in chance encounter and was stunned when I saw it engaging multiple targets simultaneously with main gun and machine guns. When I pushed the germans back off their little hill and destroyed all the Stug's I had a real sense of accomplishment. CMBO was and is a very different animal. When you graduate to CMBO from other wargames you must (in the words of Yoda) "unlearn what you have learned". Real world tactics work in this game. That makes it rock.

I don't know what everybody is getting all riled up about. 'Ol C. Dunphie is obviously a dim-witted slouch. He obviously does not own CMBO. He obviously does not play CMBO. Therefore his opinions on the matter are irrelevant. He wandered in one day, perused a few old threads, and jumped to some outlandish and outrageous conculsions. In doing so he stirred up a hornet's nest. Let's all just simmer down a tad. P.S. His book sounds interesting. Too bad we can't trust the information contained therein.

I must be missing somthing. Are we talking about M36 Jackson Vs. M10 Wolverine? Or do some people think the M10 is the Hellcat? Just to clarify: M18 Hellcat, M10 Wolverine, M36 Jackson. Now that we have that cleared up I think the choice between M10 and M36 is not even a contest. M36 wins every time. It's when considering the M18 Vs. the M36 that the player is presented with a true quandry. The M18 is absolutely the fastest thing on treads in CMBO. Fast turret and tungsten to boot. I don't even consider M10 Wolverines in PBEM. To me the choice comes down to M36 or M18.

Overrated: German 37mm flak halftrack. Supposedly this thing slices, dices, and makes julian fries. Eats light armor for breakfast, houses for lunch, takes a big infantry crap before a final dinner on pillboxes. Due to a widely publicized BUG (which has yet to be addressed by BTS) it is also supposedly nigh unto impossible to kill. Tanks will not use AP against it, only HE. Well guess what? It turns out that HE is a pretty effective anti-halftrack weapon. So is the U.S. .50 HMG. So are mortars. So are AT/INF guns. So are MMG's, LMG's and SMG's. So are flamethrowers. So are PIAT's and zooks, mines, gammon bombs, pillboxes, artillery, hand grenades, recoiless rifles, AA guns, and infantry squads. In fact, granny's garter made into a slingshot and firing nothing but old marbles has been to K.O. these things when the wind is right. Way overrated if you ask me. The fact that they are considered gamey is laughable. Underrated: Crack/Elite sharpshooter. Get one of these bad mambo-jambo's, put him in a patch of trees with good LOS and hide him. Watch as the enemy tank commanders die brutal but precise deaths. With one of these guys on your team your AT work is half done. A buttoned tank can't see so good. A buttoned tank can be easily flanked, easily destroyed. He may not make the goal but he gets the assist every time.

The game doesn't model an infantry squad climbing aboard a tank to shock it. However a crack or elite sharpshooter is great for popping a tank commander at extreme (600m) ranges, thus shocking it for a while and leaving it permanently buttoned. As you read above an infantry squad is far from helpless when close to a tank.

Isn't the "damage" rating you are talking about actually the firepower rating? Like was stated earlier a casualty is a casualty so the caliber of the bullet doesn't matter. Accuracy and volume of incoming bullets (at a given range) is what counts most. When evaluated this way I think the MP44 is rated right about where it should be in respect to the other small arms.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chad Harrison: last night i was playing a QB ME TCP where we were battling it out in a city. since i am a gamey bastage, i brought along two german 75mm INF guns. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Since when is buying a couple of guns considered gamey!?!?

I don't have a whole lot of experience with the Chaffee but it was one of my faves in Steel Panthers. During QB's I usually go for Stuarts as my light tank of choice but I think I'll give the Chaffee a go next time. Yes, I've thought about what tank I'd wanna be in during the war. I honestly don't have a clear cut favorite though.

AC - Armored Car Arty - Artillery HE - High Explosive LOS - Line of Sight MG - Machine Gun LMG - Light Machine Gun HMG - Heavy Machine Gun AP - Armor Piercing (Also Anti-Personnel) SPA - Self-Propelled Artillery AFV - Armored Fighting Vehicle AT - Anti-Tank VT - Variable-Timed (I think) HC - Hollow Core HMC - Howitzer Motor Carriage BOHICA - Bend Over Here It Comes Again

So there I was..... engaged in a PBEM with a worthy opponent. 250 meters in front of my hull down 75mm armored car was a platoon of British infantry hunkered in a patch of trees. They were not positively identified and only showed as generic Brit markers. I told my AC to area fire in the center of the enemy group. Movie begins: My AC adjusts main gun. FIRE! One 75mm HE screams home with a satisfying boom, bodies go flying. One squad gets I.D.'ed. Area fire (orange target line) turns to red target line as AC fires on this one squad. AC continues to fire on this one squad until it breaks and routs then it quits firing because it no longer has a positive I.D. on ony other units! During this lapse in firing I come under fire from a 2in mortar hidden in the trees my AC was supposed to be area firing on! Luckily I did not get killed and will be able to plot another round of area fire. So, it this an intentional design feature or a bug or plain dumb luck. I don't care either way but knowing will help me in the future.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sergeant Saunders: OK, I'll bite! What are the other two of your three complaints about Combat Mission?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 1. Mortar carriers have to fire in direct mode. It sure would be cool to have a spotter for those bad boys. 2. There is no "unit roster" (a la Steel Panthers) available. Other than that I have no complaints about Combat Mission

I think it really comes down to about 50% luck, 50% skill when using inf AT teams. I have had best luck when they operate as part of a platoon. Working close to infantry seems to protect them better. Also, if they hang back and sneak forward you can usually keep them hidden from enemy armor. I always end my move command with a hide. Hide works better than ambush too. A hidden scheck will only unleash when it is assured of a kill. Ambushes are too inflexable most of the time. I only use ambush when I'm certain of an enemy route of advance. Sending them out on their own is sending them out to die. It makes a good diversionary move though.

No, it is not gamey. My current PBEM opponent used a wasp to good effect to burn me out of a few buildings while simultaneously denying my re-entry into said buildings. Cheers on his use of the wasp. Jeers to my SMG squads for not firing their panzerfausts.

This whole issue of gaminess really torques me off. If you wanna whine and moan about things not being fair and certain units being off limits then perhaps you would be better off playing a game like chess. In chess each player starts with the same pieces in the same place. Each and every time. Over and over. Forever and ever. I have a casual interest in WWII but I do not have the time nor desire to become a freakin' professor of OOB's and production numbers and which units fought in which battles and the tactics they employed. I like wargames because I get to control my forces. I get to buy my units. I get to select the tactics I will use. I'm not trying to emulate anyone or anything. If the game engine will allow it, I'll try it. If it's effective I'll use it. If you don't like it, don't play me. Now, having spewed all that I will say that I frequently use what I would call "conventional" or "non-gamey" forces. But they're probably not historically accurate either. Does that make me "gamey"? Who cares? Can't we just play?

If you have one platoon and the enemy has one platoon and 6-8 buildings in which to hide I'd say the enemy has a significant advantage. Attacking an equally sized force entrenched in buildings is not my idea of sound tactics. I wouldn't attack at all until I had some way to gain either a 2 (or 3) to 1 advantage in either numbers or firepower. You will lose more men than he does if you go toe to toe with him. Rooting infantry out of buildings requires HE, fire, or superior numbers, preferably all three.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sergeant Saunders: I have always loved the Hummel, since my old "Panzerblitz" days. Question: since we are talking SPG here. Can the Hummel for instance fire indirect? If so how? It's got that lovely 150mm gun that I would love to fire over the hill so not to expose vehical, but can't figure out how. :confused:<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ah, yes. You have discovered one of my three complaints about Combat Mission. You CANNOT fire your SPA in an indirect mode. That's just wrong. Although, technically your FO's could be calling in arty fired from SPA.

Happened to me with a 37mm flak halftrack! I checked it's kill box and it said "unidentified vehicle". Hmm.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by von Lucke: You're not seriously comparing the accuracy of a spottlessly balanced match rifle (turned barrel, hand-loaded rounds, expert marksman, etc.) with an off-the-rack piece caked in mud fired by Pvt Joe Snuffy, are you?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No, I'm not. I was simply illustrating the utility/functionality/desirability of the Garand here in the new millenium. And the matches I was referring to are shot with stock Garands. But even a caked with mud Garand fired by Pvt. Snuffy is more accurate than a caked with mud Enfield. Having said that, let me just clarify that I think the Enfield is a fine rifle and I hope to own one someday. Check out these cool Enfields at Gibbs Rifle I think the Enfield is the coolest looking bolt-action ever.

To me, this topic is rather laughable. Around the turn of the century the Germans invented their Mauser action and developed the K98. This rifle was vastly superior to anything anybody else had. The Brits and Americans came up short in the bolt-action rifle department and desired a "K98" of their own. The Americans developed the 1903 Springfield and the Brits developed the Lee-Enfield, both borrowing heavily from the Mauser design. Among these three rifles the K98 is generally considered to be superior with the 1903 Springfield a close second and then the Enfield. All in all a fairly equal bunch. These rifles all participated in WWI. When WWII rolled around the Brits and Germans carried their WWI weapons into battle while the Americans developed a next-generation battle-rifle. This rifle, the Garand (designed by a Canadian no less) is considered by many to be the greatest battle rifle ever developed (including Patton). It's accuracy, range, power, and rate of fire surpass the Enfield. It is still used today in rifle matches.Garand Match It's value today on the open market surpasses the Enfield by a huge margin. In short it is superior to the Enfield in every conceivable way. Well, except magazine capacity. If your American friends give you a hard time about the superiority of the Garand again gently remind them it was invented by a Canadian, John Garand.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JasonC: They are good for misdirection, confusing the enemy about your numbers and strength. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KiwiJoe: LMGs are the perfect scouts IMO. Because they are so cheap you can afford to purchase several and advance them into unknown territory to flush out ambushes. They are also good placeholders for VLs.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This is exactly what I mean regarding tactical flexability. The ability to perform more than one job. And remember, I'm talking about 3 LMG's versus 1 HMG. Not 1 vs. 1. I am currently engaged in a PBEM where I have selected a number of LMG's. We are on turn 12 out of 20 and so far I have lost 15% of my LMG force. 100% have been utilized in some fashion to advance my cause and 0% are out of ammo. This is only one experience though. I usually do not buy LMG's. I'll pass judgement on the LMG's after this game is through.

Well, I did a little experimentation after posting this thread in an effort to educate myself. I found that 1 HMG targeting a single squad will cause more casualties than 3 LMG's shooting at a squad at the same range. However, the LMG's by virtue of their greater volume of fire will keep the enemy's heads down a little better (not much) than a single HMG. Both MG's seemed to be equally effective at repulsing a single squad advanced against them. So, I guess everybody is right about 1 HMG being more effective than three LMG's. However, I feel that three LMG's will give you more tactical flexability under most circumstances.

Somebody must know the answer.

If you area fire a treeline with a machine gun and advance your troops into said treeline will the area fire stop when freindly troops enter the area? What about other weapons set to area fire?

What are the units you find yourself facing most often. As the Allies? As the Axis? Is there an overwhelming favorite unit exerybody seems to choose?