Tanaka

There are a good numbers of refinements, which for sure make “going back” to CMBO unthinkable. For instances, one of the new feature I like more is the new “non-Rambo” like infantry; now you really have to support your guys, or they will call it a day Has you have ordered on-line, you will have a nice 260pag manual to read with almost all the new feature explained on it… The CDV (EU version), I think it has a less impressive manual, but in compensation has a PDF with the full one in the CD. Perhaps, some “unfortunate” CDV buyer could make the illegality of sending it to you…

When you 1st run the demo did you sow a white screen asking if those "were the resolution/colours you wanted"? If you didn't, then is that screen your system is not capable of displaying... The TNT2 for sure can display it, maybe the monitor can't... Try using the search function on the top of this board, but regarding the technical help forum.

Do I have a chance to say something with the 75L24? And the slope, did the 60º slope work ... even if it was a lilet bit, please, give me a chance here :cool:

I mensioned the Maj Bach Rgt because it was a good exemple of an uber use of a 88mm Flack gun Obviouseley if he was defending the alfa Halfaya passage, he couldn't go far away from it PS- You have to slow down answering my posts, has I actually have to do some work today

Ok, in principle I agree with you, but perhaps it is too much reading into it to state that this was because 37mm gun loses. I think 75Lx guns are more within the reasons why the frontal turret armour was upgraded. (Take out the L70 one… nothing they could do about this one at close/medium distances)

We could start to talk about 88 (AT role) in Africa korps service... Maj Bach in Halfaya, or yet during the formidable DAK retreat from El-Alamein. For me what is important to notice is the time to dismantle the gun and go away to another defensive firing position...not the time to put it up. Some times the gun was fired still attached to the gun tractor… if we could do that in CM… On other hand, I bet most of the LW 88 crews weren’t that combat expert… So, to model it in CM, would be kind of “gamey”

Aim seams to be only used for the overall "to hit" chance, that’s why the chance goes up after each shot and with the expertise level of the crew. At a first look, aim is not used for "where to hit" chance, but... it can be, how did BTS come about with a 30% chance for a turret hit? Maybe this number, instead of using a regular average of all turret hull ratios, has in itself an increased chance for a turret hit, since at short distance (at least), it is where the average gunner will be aiming (same level shot the aim is done to the upper upper hull and turret). I know that some particular aiming points were issued to gunners of vehicles and guns (in likes of the 3,7cm Pak vs. T-34). In the heat of the battles these things where hard to keep in mind, ok an expert crew, should be able to remember them, but… we never know PS- I kind of see a 2nd ww gunnery confrontation has I see 2nd ww plane dogfights, both of them have a lot of instinct and adrenaline going on. By contrast, in a nowadays confrontation,(in most cases), we have professional crews together with a lot of computation behind each aim. Ok, I know adrenaline still is there, but its share of the "things" has been “tuned” down, as for instinct, lets let the computer do that

This is typical selfish crap of "I know you don't" coming out of you... How can you possibly know what he or any other did/didn't do during beta test? I honestly hoped that after you cool down your attitude would change, but in the bottom, it didn’t It has been told in this and other topics, the engine uses a 30% chance of a front turret hit once a hit has been scored. Ok, it is a limitation, but at least for CMBO the variations in turret size weren't that "important". Obviously now (in CMBB), at the limits of this variation interval, (Panzer IV, T-34 and KV-2 for instance), problems will show up. In my view the problem can be solved with some kind of "bonus" given to vehicles in this situations. Obviously it isn't for me to decided if the bonus should be applied or not, I don't have the full data and I also don't know if the investment needed to put a correct bonus in compensates the effort. I tell you, there are other "important" game engine limitations, which somehow in very particular (or not that particular) situations reproduce a distorted reality... I will not tell wish ones are, as you seam to me to be the "know all" type, and for sure you already must have noticed them

To kind of "solve" the problem, within game version limitations, some turret armor “bonus” (in regards to real live) should be added/subtracted in accordance with the math behind the "to/where hit" model. This way, tanks that unrealistic have a bigger chance of getting a front turret hit, would have an in game turret armor/slope bigger then in reality, on contrary tanks with above average turret size, would have less armor/slope. The correct "bonus" to give/take involves some math, but I assure you it can be done and within reasonable results. Notice this is just an idea, and might or might not already be in the game… …on other hand, maybe the overall turret/hull ratio variance is to small in all tanks to just invest days to find the correct “bonus”. [ October 29, 2002, 05:39 PM: Message edited by: Tanaka ]

Ok, thanks I was about to leave all my “curved” toys in the garage

In my game version, all Panther have “curved” for the turret slope… Yes, and no… I agree that the probability of a “bad” ricochet is smaller then in a Phanter, but nevertheless, it is there still. The question still stands; what means a “curved” hupper hull slope in a JgPz 38t ? Does it means the same has in a, lets say, Panzer II F ? It affects them both in the same way (in game terms) ? Nowhere in my game version there is the “rounded” word has a slope ratio… it is always the “curved” one.

Attention, nowhere in his post he says something that leads into this conclusion… I’ve played 2 in CMBB(hehehe); one was good and “fair”, the other was a total joke… I thought to myself; “I know what Andreas wanted, he wanted to humiliate guys like me that brag themselves of never losing to the AI in CMBO, yes, that is the propose of this “thing” I just played More seriously now, as I’m much more pbem QB guy (or “fair” scenario*) then a scenario one, for me CMBB didn’t need any scenarios to buy it; any scenarios it brings, I consider it an add-on. Also, I’m lazy, so I don’t do any scenarios, I just consume them, so I usually lack the “guts” to complain about them *What is a far scenario? "I think there should always be a way for either side to win " That’s an idea… What type of win? A CM win? …or just to do better then historically was done ?

Yes, but in game all Panzer V have “curved” has slope… T-34, Panzer V, SU-85 and so on, I can easily see a “curved” gun mantlet, and has it occupies most of the front turret, I can also “see” a “curved” slope. Now, for instances, on a JgPz 38t, the front gun mantlet takes at maximum 40% of the front upper hull structure, how can the slope be “curved”? This last “cuved” affects the JgPz 38t has much has it affects the Panzer V? This is just an example why, in my view, there is a need to know precisely what implications, in game terms, “curved” has a slope means. As it stands, a “curved” slope t34 front turret, means in practical terms a 0º slope turret, has at a first and simple approach there is a 50/50 chance of a “good” deflection or a “bad” deflection.

Decided to dig this one up, to give it a 2nd shot... Ok, this I can easily understand has an improvement, but… Because of this, regarding kinetic energy projectiles, I can’t see it has an overall improvement… unless we are talking about including battlefield weapon changes in the 50’s (a bigger predominance of C charges danger) and metal armor improvement. Also I notice that if the tank has its turret not aligned with the hull (more then 30º) the shots would not be deflected to the top armour, but to the side armor or the ground. Has I see it, it’s all about engagement doctrines (non head on combat, 30º “going by”) and probabilities… for sure not an “easy cut”. Ok, does CM take it “all” into account? If it does, I will be even more amazed with the details that you guys put into the game… and will open an all-new debate regarding tank battles in CM, specially regarding Panzer V doctrine

See how that guy is fully relaxed in the "heat" of the battle!

Hmm... Interesting, me too I'm also in Portugal; this elevates the number to a fantastic 3 ! (2 cubanos, um deles mouro e um insular )

Hmm... Only now I notice there is another active* Portuguese CM player, interesting… I'm also obtaining an US version by a 3rd "party"; mine is taking quite some time to arrive at the end of the 1st stage… and it was pre-ordered Will survive a few more days *There was another Portuguese player, he also was from Madeira and also a teacher... hmm, maybe you are him :confused: Thin Red Line, Don’t I know you from somewhere? Tanaka “scratches” his head… Wait, I remember… Now we both have a good justification for why Turkey stayed outside of the EU “train” again

Look in this topic; http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=001691 (Madmat has a post on page 2)

After these words, it is quite obvious the 1st round of the tournament will be played with 1.01. Maybe 1.02 for the 2nd round...

Hi Cyberfox, If what I read in the forum is true, (divided squads end battle pts problem), it might be a good idea to make sure the tournament only starts after the 1st patch is out. Ok, eager ones, calm down, probably the patch is out before November… Just in case… we never know Ps- Btw, post it here for 2 proposes… 1-* bump* 2 –your mail server some times is temperamental

If it is there, I think it is, then it existed and was used... You can bet on it

US

The drivers are at least on number 30.82... update your drivers (It might has nothing to do with the problem, but you should update them any way).

For you red ba$%! who leave E of the iron curtain there is no early CMBB release… As a matter of fact, it will have a different name, it will be called CMGPW (Great Patriotic War) and it will cost you 1 zillion “rubbles”!

No, no, no... make them an offer they can't refuse Tanaka reads BTS post; Tanaka looks into its long list of American fellow CM gamers... Tanaka smiles Most probably, this fall, some US citizen will buy a CMBB game to is "grand mother"