Cybeq

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Patton_71: Personally, i enjoy a ramdom setup by the computer. This may sometimes result in a diffocult fight, but no one can at all mention the word 'gamey" in that instance. Patton_71<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't know.... You are having the "game" pick your units. I would submit to you that not everybody who plays by e-mail knows what the production numbers for all WWII AFV's were. At the same time I think we can agree that in a QB 18 of any AFV could be considered "gamey".

I, too love the little M8 HMC. I like to pair them up with Stuarts to cover them. The Stuart has three mg's and the M8 has the howitzer. A match made in heaven. I agree with the statement that one drawback is you have to spend armor points to get them. That sucks.

Given that in a typical QB you can buy three MG42 LMG's for the price of one MG42 HMG is there any logical reason to buy HMG's? I'm talking PBEM, ME, 20-30 turns. You could say that you gain ammo loadout. So what? You probably won't live to use all of it anyway. Not to mention the fact that the ammo loadout of 3 LMG's very nearly equals the ammo in the HMG. You could say that you gain survivability because of the larger crew. I would argue that 3 LMG's are more survivable than 1 HMG because they present 3 seperate targets. You could say you gain firepower. But 3 LMG's firing on one target equal/ exceed the firepower of 1 HMG at all ranges but those over 500 meters. All I can see that you gain is range out to 1000 meters, but c'mon, how many of us actually open up with machine guns at 1000 meters in this game? It's rare to have a tank dual at that range let alone exchange machine gun fire. The speed on the LMG is slightly higher too allowing you to redeploy/keep up with moving platoons easier. So what am I missing? Why pick HMG's?

The light mortar. It brings a smile to my face. I have no experience with the German 50mm so I will restrict my comments to the Brit 2 inch and U.S. 60mm. I "usually" will not group my light mortars into arty parks preferring to alot one per platoon. The reason is because it always seems like the platoon that needs a little HE help is out of LOS of any arty park I have created. You lose firepower by spreading your light mortars out but you gain flexability. To me that is more important. I'd rather have a little firepower where I need it than a whole bunch hiding in some useless corner of the map.

Hello again, Mr. Bobcat. I just wanted to clarify to everybody about my decision to surrender. I did not surrender on the basis of casualties / lost units alone. I based my decision on my ability to make effective war against my opponent. If I was in possession of the VL's I would not have surrendered as I had enough units to mount a potent defense. But, since Bobcat owned the VL's I needed to push him back. In my mind I simply lacked the horsepower to uproot him. Also, I have an aversion to needless virtual bloodshed. I will accept casualties to a point but I have my limit. I know it's just a game but I try to make it as realistic as possible by ordering my men the same way I would if they were real. It's a limitation I must get over if I am to play effective PBEM games. I made a STUPID mistake by sending that StuH 42 over the hill instead of my Hetzer and it upset me so much I FORGOT to give any orders that turn! I just E-mailed it back to him! That mistake broke my fighting spirit. In retrospect I should not have surrendered. I should have continued to fight on in the spirit of competition. When I meet Bobcat on the battlefield in the future I will give him a better game.

Oops, i forgot to mention the important stuff. What I purchased. I bought 2 regular infantry companies, six panzerschrecks, one 81mm mortar FO, one vet sniper, one vet Hetzer, one vet StuH42, one vet Sdkfz (37mm flak), one mg-42 lmg, and umm I think that's it. My sniper popped his Churchill tank commander on turn 3 or 4. I felt confident I could flank it and did. But with the wrong tank! I used the StuH 42 because it was closer and paid dearly for my mistake. If I wouldn't have made so many mistakes early on I could have held out and possibly pulled a win out of it. Looking back I should have had more arty, less panzerschecks, and definately a PZIV/70. When playing Fionn's Panther 76 the Allied player can buy a Jumbo or a Church. This means a hetzer will have a hard time killing one and a StuH42 doesn't have a chance! I'm learning more playing by E-mail than I ever did playing the AI.

What is your opinion of PBEM opponents surrendering? Do you think you should fight on regardless of your losses? To the last man? The reason I'm asking is because I just surrendered a PBEM and my opponent told me "that's weak". He seemed kinda perturbed. But I honestly had no capability of winning. Why continue? It wasn't fun without a glimmer of hope.

Ok, here's the difference between no hills and gentle slopes: (1) A lack of "hull down" locations and (2) no such thing as "reverse slope" defense. To me this is a major thing. Anyway, the game is over and I surrendered. There were two bright spots in the game. One was when my panzerscheck took out his Stuart with one shot at 164 meters! The other was when I had flanked his Churchill with my StuH42 and had the drop on him at a range of about 200 meters. MY stupid StuH fired smoke instead of HC and the Church wasted me. Live and learn I guess. Turns out a StuH has virtually no chance of getting a kill on a Churchill. I made a few stupid mistakes and lost my ability to go offensive on him. I still had a substantial defensive capability but he had the VL's so I had nothing to defend.

If you have HE and HC and you get kill: none when targeting an enemy AFV is this the rating for the HE ammo or HC? I guess I have the same question for AP Vs. T. I was under the impression that the kill rating was for the main ammo type only. Am I correct or mistaken?

I just had a similar experience in a PBEM I am playing. I had flanked a Churchill with my StuH42. I was hull down 170 meters away and aiming at his side armor. I had 2 c rounds. The to hit percentage read 71% and kill: none. Even though I had a kill: none I thought that was the rating with the main ammo type (HE), not HC. So I left the order stand and sent my turn. When I got it back I watched the movie in horror. Even though I had the drop on him and got the first shot and the range was close my Veteran StuH fired SMOKE!!!!!! What was he thinking!?!? The Churchill rotated his turret and fired twice. The first shot was a gun hit, no damage, then..... BLAMO! My StuH was toasted. Crud.

I usually use ambush with infantry AT units. Order them to hide then have them target an ambush marker. To cancel an ambush simply cancel their targeting order. The main drawback of the ambush command is lack of flexability, i.e. your ambush is at 12:00 and enemy approaches from 6:00. That's bad news. So, in situations demanding flexability I just hide my units and let them open up when they want to. I save ambushes for road intersections and bridges in defend situations only.

I use whatever suits me at the time. I usually never go above X2 though. Realistic is my favorite though.

It has been my experience that the more experienced the crew the faster they reload. They also hit more often and break less. There is a HUGE performance gap between crack sharpshooters and regular sharpshooters. I know this for a fact.

Ok, we're on turn 6. This sure is exciting! Totally different ball of wax from playing the AI. This is what I know so far of his forces: 1 75mm Churchill, 1 Stuart and what I'd estimate to be 2 companies of infantry, both British and American. At turn 1 he rushed up my right flank with >= 2 platoons infantry and a Stuart while simultaneously rushing infantry down the center into the town along with a Churchill. My left flank seems devoid of ememy activity. He owns both VL's! I won't divulge my plans here but comments are welcome. When this is over I'll give all the gory details. P.S. Even though he said it was no hills we're playing on "gentle slopes"! Questionable tactic, or mere oversite? [ 07-01-2001: Message edited by: Cybeq ]

Thanks for the suggestions guys. I have already purchased and deployed my forces. Common sense dictates that I not reveal my force composition in a public forum. However, I feel that I won't be handicapped by my purchases. My tactical ability on the other hand.....

Catnip: I forgot to mention we are playing Fionn's Panther/76 rule.

I just got the setup. Here is the deal: Axis 1250pt. Meeting Engagement Village Moderate Trees Clear, Day No Hills! Now, ordinarily I would have no trouble choosing units but I'm a little frightened by my opponent's choice of no hills. I have never played a game with no hills. Are there any hard and fast rules to playing on a flat battlefield?

Usually I prefer quantity as the U.S. and quality as the Germans. The U.S. armor lends itself to group tactics very well. Weak armor combined with weak guns that swing fast and shoot quick just beg to be used in swarming tactics. I absolutely love killing Panthers with Stuarts. It makes me giddy. Recently I've been playing QB's using both quantity and quality methods as both the Axis and the Allies and I have found the Allies can be more effective at quality than the Axis can be at quantity. In other words you have more flexability as the Allies but I think a quality approach is the way to go as the Germans. I'll take one King Tiger over 5 Lynx's any day. Conversely, I'd prefer 5 Stuarts to one Pershing.

Hmm, A very intriguing subject. I'll assume you absolutely will not go over 100 pts. In that case my choices would be: Allied defending:M10 Wolverine Tank Destroyer (98pts.) Allied attacking:M24 Chaffee Light Tank (100pts.) Axis defending:Hetzer (84pts.) Axis attacking:StuGIV (99pts.) If you favor quantity over quality you could get two H39 Hotchkiss's (46pts.) I've personally never used these but there must be a reason they're dirt cheap.

Somebody mentioned the 2in. mortar's chief weakness being it's short range. Yea, that sucks but I think it's small ammo loadout is another weakness. Despite these weaknesses I find myself loving the little guys. I don't attach them to a company CO. I prefer to leave them with the platoon. They are fast enough to advance with the platoon and will be there to provide supression when you need it. They can also throw smoke to cover your movements (very handy!)

Close Combat is a game whereas CMBO is a simulation. Big difference. You found that out when you sent a tank into the midst of infantry. That might cut it in a game but in a simulation that trys to reflect real-world outcomes that action will always be suicidal.

Most people are going to advocate using a stand-off tactic with the King Tiger. If the maps were bigger that would be the ideal way to use it but given that the map sizes in CM are smaller than ideal for the King Tiger I would not advocate parking it on a hill and using it in overwatch. In my mind it can best be exploited by using it as an assault tank working close with your infantry as you advance. It's speed is slow? All the better to move with the infantry. Move it up slightly behind your infantry. When they encounter a stubborn pocket of resistance use the King to blast it to kingdom come. It's turret is slow? That's only a problem if your reacting to the enemy. Keep it proactive and it won't matter. The shock factor (to the enemy) of seeing a King mixing it up at his MLR is worth the risk in my mind. One more tip: stay on the road if at all possible.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CombinedArms: Query for the Stuart fans: What's a Stuart got that a Greyhound doesn't have? Obviously, both are fast, cheap, with thin armor and 37mm guns. But beyond that I haven't really closely compared them. Is there a tangible reason why Stuarts keep getting mentioned with no mention of Greyhounds, or is it simply a matter of this being a thread about tanks, not recon vehicles? Are Stuarts cheaper? I admit I haven't really looked.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I mentioned the Stuart as my favorite tank in a tank vs. tank scenerio. The lack of a referral to the Greyhound was just to stay on topic. But since you brought it up I love the Greyhound too. The big bonus with the Greyhound is that it doesn't use up your armor points since it is classified as a vehicle in the game. In a game where I choose my units I will usually opt for Greyhounds over Stuarts based on that fact alone. However, Greyhounds only have two machine guns and I think their turret is slower. Add to this the fact that they are open topped and you can see why the Stuart is the better AFV.

It was the Gold Demo that made me buy CMBO. I look forward to any new demos. The main reason I will download the CMII demo is because I'm curious if it will even work on my computer. Might be time for an upgrade! I'm also very curious as to how you could improve the greatest game since Steel Panthers. Can it be done?

Best tank vs. tank in the game when taking price into consideration is the Stuart. Cheap price will allow you to outnumber enemy armor. High ROF will allow you to get more shots per turn. High speed will allow you to outflank / outmanuever. The 37mm gun will penetrate all "normal" tanks from behind or side at typical CM ranges. Armor is impervious to small arms. Given that in CMBO most armor can be defeated by most guns at most ranges typically experienced you encounter a phenomenon in which logic dictates speed and numbers over armor / gun superiority. In this environment the Stuart is king. I won't even mention the three machine guns used to hose the infantry since the original question concerned only armor vs. armor. Stuarts rule!!! You can accept this fact or be destroyed by it.