Tero
-
Posts
2,033 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Tero
-
-
Originally posted by Treeburst155:
Tero,
I think my email is down.
I tried from my office email just now.
my home email is (still
) -
Originally posted by Treeburst155:
At this point there is no prize for this tournament other than the thrill of victory over the UberFinns.
An added interest is the fact that most of the Nordics will have served in the military as IIRC all of the Nordic countries have national service.
(I have no umlaut)
Sure you have. You may not just know you have them in your machine.
ASCII codes
ü ALT+0252
Ü ALT+0220
If you are an UberFinn the prize is that you get to prove, once and for all, your superiority over neighboring nations.
Will there be separate scoring for national teams and individuals ?
-
Treeburst155
My ISP bounced your email address.
>This Message was undeliverable due to the
>following reason:
>
>Each of the following recipients was rejected by
>a remote mail server.
>
>The reasons given by the server are included to
>help you determine why
>each recipient was rejected.
>
> Recipient: <Mikeman@cablelynx.com>
> Reason: <Mikeman@cablelynx.com>... we do not relay
>
>Please reply to Postmaster@tmt.tele.fi
>if you feel this message to be in error.
My email is
-
What would this event be without the resident überFinn ?
Count me in.
-
Originally posted by CMplayer:
Of course you must have an incorruptible third party actually implement the model.
Of course.
How about this? You have a computer run an abacus simulation, simulating a computer running CM under the new Microcrap OS. Since you don't need any graphics, the videocard issues shouldn't cause problems.
Agreed. An added bonus is the facts that you can start using child labour to produce MOD's as they can be produced with regular, industry quality crayon found in any home housing toddlers.
The only difficulty would be in visualizing the board when giving orders, since everything would be text based, acc to some sort of coordinate system. Perhaps a sand table would be in order?
For larger operations a sandbox would be required. But I agree in principle.
And then, in order to more rapidly set up the sand table after every turn, you could run a virtual sand table program on a second abacus.
In case there is no second abacus a wooden plank can be used to simulate the abacus.
I really don't see where the problem lies.
The only real problem I can see: you may have to fight your children over the abacus and the sandbox. And the MOD's they produce may not be that historically accurate.
[ 10-30-2001: Message edited by: tero ]</p>
-
Originally posted by CMplayer:
You just have to model the rest of the computer which CM is running on and grab the random numbers however that system happens to do it.
Ah, the old Stetson trick. That might work. However, what about the integrity of the calculation ? You might inadvertantly choose numbers that are less than correct vis-a-vis the CM model thus tainting the outcome in a gamey fashion.
-
Originally posted by Mace:
Err, anyone know how to port CM over to an abacus?
That has proven virtually impossible. With abacus there is little or no room for randomness in the calculations (except if you count in errors as being random).
-
Originally posted by Colonel_Deadmarsh:
Sure, the program emulates the Apple II games alright but how do I scale back the amount of colors on my monitor from 16,000,000 to 4?
No need to adjust the monitor. The emulators do all that for you automatically.
I have found out that keeping to B/W setting looks and works better than trying to use colours. Reminds me when I played my C-64 games with a B/W TV (anybody old enough around here to remember them ?
) -
This is slighly off-topic:
I was strictly a C-64 / PC guy until I found this Apple II retro site:
http://a2war.theunderdogs.org/emul.htm
I am happy to report the emulators work also under NT.
[ 10-30-2001: Message edited by: tero ]</p>
-
Originally posted by Spanish Bombs:
but fortunately I do not have to explain to her that I am going to something called "sauna day".
No explanation is needed. Every woman in Finland knows it is merely an excuse to get blastered with friends. If you started blabbering something about a computer game the wives would raise hell but if you are only going to sauna with some friends no explanation is needed.
Suffice it to say that I went home and fell asleep in the middle of Band of Brothers.
From a guys night out in the sauna you are not even expected to come home before the morning paper.
One lesson learned: the one sure way to clear the bar of CM players in the midst of heated discussion: plug in the damn karaoke machine. I think the first song they were going to play was the ewok victory dance from Jedi.
I would have thought a LAN game of CM would have been more effective.
-
Originally posted by Jarmo:
Hey, I have a hairy butt too! There's no going around it. The theory is faultless.
Lets not get overly excited with the hairy butts.
Sauna day is coming up and only us Finns go to sauna with other guys butt naked and are still able to ignore the other guys ascessories. Being drunk as skunks does help but(t)...
One more nail to the theory: did you guys catch the new Charlies Angels movie ? The girls talked like Ewoks in one scene and we had to rewind the tape several times to verify that they did speak Finnish in that one scene.
-
Is there any news on the CMBB and if there are any changes coming to the opening of fire from Hide status (ie without a deliberate Ambush marker set) ?
In CMBO the troops open fire at the optimal range (up to 100 meters LOS permitting) even when the enemy unit is clearly heading for a more lethal kill zone from which it would be almost impossible to escape.
IRL the opening of fire would be timed so that the maximum number of kills would be made with the first salvo.
-
Originally posted by ciks:
Is this true?
This is first time I hear this.
Could someone comment?
I for one have not noticed any noticeable difference for the better if the team has been in not-tired state. If there is a difference it must be minuscule at best.
-
Originally posted by Juju:
Definitely a nominee for the longest topic title ever.
How about this one:
FO's and procedure concerning FP's, TRP's and TOT FM's using maximum ROF with a limeted number of volleys to obtain the perfect surprise against the unsuspecting enemy.
-
Originally posted by The Commissar:
That would be a good idea if the AT teams weren't hapless morons who can't hit the broadside of a barn while standing inside.
According to BTS the consistent unluckiness is being looked at.
Sometimes it went as far as having Vet teams not being able to score a kill at 60 meters or so, until the 4th or 5th shot even.
Or not even with the 4th or 5th shot.
Boy would I be pissed if after shot 2 the cross eyed idiots went and hid, letting the target skip away the next turn.
But I bet not as pissed as you would be if they got shot at, suppressed and routed after having fired with full ROF with nothing to show for it.
-
Originally posted by CMplayer:
But MUCH better would be a full blown set of SOP options, for all the units in the game.
Agreed.
But that would easily lead to the national bias/force specific SOP quagmire.
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:
I've had several AT teams get a kill on the 3rd or later shot. I would have been annoyed if they had packed it in earlier. More realistic? Would depend on the situation.<hr></blockquote>
Indeed. But I would say the weapon itself is of such nature that you would want to fire it only if the first shot hit chance is better than 60-70%.
Also, with only 5 shots there really is no way you would want to expend them on the same target during a single 60sec reaction phase. And miss the lot leaving the tank alive.
-
Originally posted by Michael emrys:
You can already implement the haul ass option by giving the team a movement order and a pause or two.
Yes. But TacAI has the upper hand in synchronizing the procedure. With a constant pause you are liable to get the team shot up if you pause for too long and the Absolute spotting takes full effect in case the opponent has not overlooked combined arms and close support for the armour by infantry.
Having them otherwise go into a hide state after the second (or whatever) shot as part of the TacAI is an interesting idea. I'm not sure it would be universally well received, however.
I personally would not stay up while reloading a weapon which backblast broadcasts my position to every unit in sight.
Besides, IMO the only true state for any infantry unit not doing anything is Hide. There is no Stealth mode available in CM.
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Jeff Duquette:
Touché
very good point.<hr></blockquote>That touché was only a partial one. Internal flaking, no serious damage.
The tie up of men is true. But what is the percetage of raids made against fuel related targets compared to the other kinds of targets ?
-
Are there any stories circulating about any possible improvents on the Pzschreck (and possibly separate Pzfaust) team performance.
In CMBO they stick to a target and expend all rounds in one 60sec cycle. And reveal their position in the process and they start drawing fire like excrement draws flies.
I would think realistically two (failed) shots should be the maximum before the team assumes Hide mode and/or haul ass to a secure position to try their luck again later. And not expend all their precious ammo in one turn and/or get killed in the process.
-
Oh, and on the subject of the Red Army gun accuracy:
The Finnish regarded the 45mm AT gun especially dangerous (and useful) in direct fire support role (it was phased out from the Finnish inventory in the mid-90's). All infantry direct fire cannons were called the Whip because at normal combat ranges the shell would explode before or at the same time you heard the gun go off.
There are numerous stories about Finnish AT crews sniping Red Army bunkers and emplacements over considerable distances with the 45mm AT gun. And there are numerous stories of Finnish soldiers being killed by long range shots that took off their head.
[ 10-27-2001: Message edited by: tero ]</p>
-
Originally posted by Jeff Duquette:
Ziess had a 93 year history of manufacturing quality optics prior to the outbreak of WWII. Soviet Ziess -LOMO -- had a history of 3 yrs? How much of that 3 yr experience involved construction of Military Optics? If I recall correctly Ziess had been manufacturing rangefinders and binoculars for the German Army since at least the 1880's.
Interestingly enough a Finnish officer is on record saying the optics on a wartime Stug were better than those on a modern T-72.
Mind you that remark is dubious as it does not specify if the "optics" include visibility to the outside provided for the TC and other crew members.
-
Originally posted by PzKpfw 1:
Recently released material in both German & Russian seem to refute that Soviet optics were as poor, as we have previously been led to believe
The Finnish tankers used both Soviet and German optics. They regarded the German optics superior to the Soviet optics.
I do not recall any remarks stating the Soviet optics being especially poor, only remarks that German optics were better.
-
Originally posted by JasonC:
Iron Chef is quite right and JonS's sarcasm is misplaced.
Agreed. Lets give the guy a brake. And some typing lessons. His ideas and opinions get trampled by his typographic presentation which leaves much to be desired. He who typeth perfect can throw the first character.
But JonS's sarcastic comments did not even acknowledge the actual point being made, which was distinctly not "that mobilization increases output", nor that "Germany was being bombed", but that their war output was still growing despite being bombed, through 1944. Which was a byproduct of late economic mobilization, and the slack it left before then.
Perish the thought the bombing campaing itself was a failure.
.50 / 20mm as AT
in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)
Posted
Originally posted by Romeoman:
The penetrating AT fire would cause them to withdraw, but without abandoning the tank when at all possible, even if some of the crews were wounded or killed. This is another feature badly missing: panicked or out-of-control tanks, withdrawing or driving to the rear.
Agreed.
A Finnish KV-1 took several 85mm rounds in the face during the summer of 1944 fighting without any of them penetrating or doing any damage. The crew reversed into cover and bailed out after that. The story goes the crew stagered as if they were drunk. Their ears and noses also bleeded profusely. It took some time before they could climb back into the vehicle and continue fighting.
The resilience of AV's to such hits should be more akin to the way unarmored vehicles resist to HE fire... We've all seen trucks under fire from MG's 200 metres away and not abandoned directly (although 1 or 2 rounds in every salvo fired are bound to hit the truck).
Not exactly the same. A truck under fire will reverse out of harms way PDQ. The driver will rely on the speed of the vehicle to carry him into safety. OTOH a tank (even a sports tank like the M18 is sluggish compared to the truck and bailing out is often the only option for the crew to save itself.
Also, a non-penetrating HE round is almost worse (or at least as bad) as a non-penetrating AP round. Imagine the pure kinetic energy of a 105mm howitzer round slamming into the vehicle coupled with the energy of the exploding round. A friend of mine served in the field artillery and he told me that even a modern tank with reactive armour can not ignore field artillery fired at them directly.
The same goes for the .50's, as they can fire at very high rates of fire if the target is close enough to ensure hits without prolongued aiming (unlike now when there always are those 5-6 secondes between bursts)...
Except most 50cal mounts are not that stable mechanically (not as stable as the 20mm gun mounts) and thus their recoil would prevent any accurate sustained bursts.