Andre76

In all the books I've read about the fighting in Normandy, the Germans complained about the accuracy of the naval guns and the devestation they brought. So, to me it seems quite ok. ------------------ André

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: 2. In CM2 we plan on having an optional "Rarity" system that will radically alter people's purchasing habits if used. This will eliminate, if used, many of the current unit mixes that break the game away from reality. So putting all game related type questions, do you or do you not think that a vehicle has an inherent worth that should be factored in? OK, with those thoughts in mind, let's see what folks have to say Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This proposal (rarity) can make a lot of players happy, but, for the the love of God, make sure to make it optional. (as you've stated) I think all benefits should cost, as mobility, troop transportation ability and so fourth. So yes, vehicle has an inherent worth that should be factored in. ------------------ André

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by virtualfreak: Wow!can you send me a picture?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I'm sorry, there was now picture of it in the book. But I think the book's name was "Panzer Commander". It was about Colonel Luck and his combat experience from Russia, Africa and East/West of Europe. Very good book! ------------------ André

I've read of Tiger I's cought in massive arty navel bombards on D-day that was thrown up-side-down! I think that answers your question.... ------------------ André

I had a German HMG team who killed 54 poor amis. I really wish we could get ALL the kills, not just the confirmed ones! ------------------ André

I just want to say, and I'm sure I speak on the behalf of the entire CM community; THANK YOU! All your work and many hours is really appriciated and makes CM an even more enjoyable game. ------------------ André

Very nice! ------------------ André

I sent you a e-mail a cpuple of weeks ago and you responded so I thought that was settled. But, I'm *sorry* to say that I can't join you *this* time, but I'll be back (or something like that...) ------------------ André

I'll just second what other people have said: get your mods up for us to grab! Anywhere, doesn't matter, but I can't stand watching your beautiful tanks and not being able to download them! Please, do this! FAST! BTW: How are those regiment badges comming along? ------------------ André

Very cool! But the tank looks to "polished", what about some tear and wear effect also! Anyway, Tiger, I'm using your Tiger mod (the one with the number at the turret) and I think it's really cool with som ID one the tanks (like nr, slogans, regiment marker and so forth) keep up the good work! ------------------ André

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dittohead: Just for fun I set up a battle between 4 vet M4 shermans and 4-vet Nashorns at 1.5 KM. (...) Nash 6 Sherman 4. Well back to real battles. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes, but then if back to "real life" (as in CM) you could run the same test but with no Shermans, 6 M1A3 HT and 2 Nashorn at 500m and see what the result would be... Any ami player has lot's of HT and the fact that these can take the Nashorn out means that the Nashorn is "no-buy" in my eyes. (but it's cool non the less! ) ------------------ André

Ahh.. new QB, and guess what it happend again! The AI (Allies) had three FO (76mm,104mm and 144mm) and did nothing but fire smoke. The game ended with total german victory.... Maybe this is something for BTS to look into? I mean, it's not something that happens a few times, it occurs often and is in my view, a stupid use of heavy arty (100+mm). Yes, *sometimes* it can be effective, but as far as I've seen, the AI made a complete ass of himself everytime! ------------------ André

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bertram: Thus ended the one minute turn, not with the scout HT shot, but with a Puma, a Pz IV and a halfsquad killed by the .50, and a Stug bumped from the road by the HT. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I know I would be uttering some not so plesant words if that happend to me! But maybe it wasn't loaded with Kelly's Heroes, but rabid hamsters!? It sure sounded that way! ------------------ André

Common courtisy and common sense should be enough in my opinion. Besides, what should happen to the people who broke these "rules"? Banned? I think BTS has more important things to do. And It's easy to misunderstand each other when writing fast and perhaps english isn't your native language (as with me). ------------------ André

I've noticed in several QB that the AI seems to prefer to fire smoke instead of HE?!? I never use it for smoke (granted, I'm sure I could use it more). It's seems strange for me when the AI uses 155mm FO to lay down smoke on my village instead for reducing it to rubble along with my troops! Anyone else experienced "over smoking"? ------------------ André

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dalem: I can't speak for everyone (so I won't), but I find the battles where every tank on side X is balanced by an antitank asset on side Y, or where very balanced forces face off, to be far less interesting. -dale<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes, I agree with you there. It can get boring if one always have the "standard" tanks. And things like the Nashorn (and flamethrowers , and..) spice things up a bit. BUT I wondered if there was good *practical* reason to buy the Nashorn over the Marder (or Hetzer, or StugIII or...) And there seems there isn't. But as I've said before, I'm very curious how BTS is going to solve this in Russia. ------------------ André

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by paullus: I find the Hetzer to be a much better buy than even a Stug-III.(...)Worth at least twice its weight in points.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I agree, but the slow ROF is a shame... 'Fire god damn it! Fire I said (BOOM!), oh well....' ------------------ André [This message has been edited by Andre76 (edited 08-17-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Phil the Dill: USA: 104 AUSTRALIA: 20 (I merged Australia with New Zealand - its going to happen for real one of these days - independant total: AUS: 14 NZ: 6) UK: 18 SWEDEN: 13 CANADA: 11 FINLAND: 7 NETHERLANDS: 6 GERMANY: 5 FRANCE: 5 ITALY: 5 IRELAND: 5 BRAZIL: 2 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What is this Phil? Don't you like Norway? Even after I have pointed it out, you still refuse to print the number for Norway(5)!?! And BTW: DID you count us 5 norwegians as swedes? We were in union with them a long time ago, but we kicked their blue and yellow asses back to Sweden (swedes, don't reply please! ) ------------------ André

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by howardb: damage but then again I don't find any afv's in CM effective at longer ranges (something that bothers me).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> We'll see how BTS handles the easteren front. If the germans aren't allowed to pick the T-34 off from a distance the german player will get swamped fairly quickly! ------------------ André

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stuka: I have a leaning towards the panther, it seems a good all round battle tank, good armour ,firepower, maneuverability and doesn't seem to get bogged too often. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I have always liked the Jagdpanther. Deadly and it looks fearsome! No traverse but good sloped armour with the 88 L/71, damn it looks good! ------------------ André

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jarmo: I don't use Nashorn all that much, 'cause I hate light armor always getting killed by the AT-mortars. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Amen brother! ------------------ André

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stuka: Agreed, just because its available you don't have to use it.. In CM2 it will have its day on the open steppes but in terms of bang for your buck, in CM1, your money is better spent elsewhere..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That was my point, there is little use for the Nashorn in CM and should be avoided to spend your point better elsewhere. I just wondered if I could be wrong (yes, it HAS happened before!! ) and someone had a good argument for buying the damn thing (besides the cool name that is ) ------------------ André

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pillar: It's a garuanteed kill pretty much, so long as it hits. The Marder you can survive..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What I mean is that you can use it in two different ways: 1. As a tank. You can go head to head with other tanks, AC's, but then you'll be killed in no time. (due to all sort of nasty things, arty, AC, Tanks,.50 cal...) 2. In ambush.-> flank/rear shots. And The Marder is capable to destroy all allied tanks with a flank shot (with the exception of the 'Jumbo' where you have to hit lower hull), so why use the Nashorn? That's my point. Also: The Nashorn was not intended for this role, oder? ------------------ André

As I've understood it, the Nashorn used to kill the allied tanks from long range to use it superior '88 and optics to good effect. But in CM the distances are short and anyone who have used a open topped, thin skinned vehicle know how vunerable it is once it's get spotted. SO, this leaves these sort of vehicles to be used in ambush only, with flanking/rear shots. Well, my question then is: Why buy the Nashorn? Since you'll be using it for ambushes after all, you can go a long way with the Marder. You'll most likely get penetration (flanking/rear)and it costs less than the Nashorn. Anyone had any great success with the Nashorn (that couldn't had been done with the Marder)? ------------------ André

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Phil the Dill: USA: 103 - they finally got into 3 figures AUSTRALIA: 20 (I merged Australia with New Zealand - its going to happen for real one of these days - independant total: AUS: 14 NZ: 6) UK: 15 SWEDEN: 12 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Where is Norway?! I hope for God's sake that you don't think that norwegians are from Sweden!!! ------------------ André