Specterx

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kingfish: The Americans and Free French get 105 and 155 VT, the British get 25lbr and 5.5in VT.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Really? I've only seen Ami players use them, and I almost always play Axis in QBs.. oh well, live and learn.

I'm not sure.. I think you may have the answer though (KO vs abandoned).

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Peaveyyyyyyyy: Make him waste his arty, by hitting 'withdraw', and running the boys back aout of range, unless: 1) There is nowhere for them to go and 2) You're sure it's only 81mm Mortar. The 81's won't hurt too bad, especially if it's area fire. :cool: Treebursts can be nasty. I believe the allies have something called VT artillery??? :confused: which is designed to treeburst, so it may make a difference which side you play.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Only the Americans have VT artillery. It's not really designed to "treeburst" as such. The way it works is a small radar unit contained within the shell detonates the charge when something comes within a certain distance of the shell (i.e. the ground). This produces a similar effect to treebursts, i.e. shrapnel is thrown across a wide area of ground under the explosion and coverage is more "complete" than with a conventional howitzer round explosion, which often results in large "uncovered" areas around the detonation site as shrapnel is exploded not only outwards but upwards. Hope that helps .

Overrated: I think that Jabos are overrated. Having air support is always nice, but I've never actually seen the rockets/bombs HIT anything, usually about half of their fire is directed at FRIENDLY forces and they're far too prone to getting lost/shot down. I'll rather have a Kingtiger or a pair of 105's than a Jabo. BTW, I think that King Tigers are certainly not overrated. The added slope to their armor makes them a much tougher nut to crack. Usually in large games I buy 3-4 of them (assuming we're not using tank type restrictions), put them on a nice hill and let all hell break loose. They're certainly NOT close combat vehicles, nor are they "blitzkrieg" type tanks (too slow and vulnerable to infantry/flank attacks), but if you get a platoon or so in overwatch positions then you have a decisive advantage. One of the AARs on the CMHQ ("fionn vs. some poor sap that gets his face bashed in") provides a good example of how to use these vehicles properly, and conduct armored attacks in general. Kinda went off on a rant there.. heh Underrated: Axis light armor (assault HT's, armored cars). In closed terrain games a few of those armored cars armed with short 75's backed up by a platoon or so of 50mm ones can be a real problem for Allied armor. I've found that in small QB games (~1000 pts) these units can really prove their worth, back them up with an ATG or two and the enemy will be running for the rear in no time. Edit: One tidbit to add... The German assault halftracks are tough little bastards too, in my last game one of them shrugged off TWO hits from my last Sherman before succumbing, and the sherman was then killed by a 75mm "C" round from another HT. P.S.: Add more AAR's to the CMHQ! Those are a great read. [ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: Specterx ]

Personally, given a choice between the M10 and the M36, I'd take the third option and go with the Firefly . If being gamey like that isnt an option, then I'd have to say I prefer the M36. The turret is faster (important for getting those flank shots on heavies) and it has better anti-personnel capability, enabling it to deal with light guns or infantry as well as tanks. If you're using the Panthers vs 76 rule then the Hellcat is undoubtedly the best choice (for american forces.. still like the Firely/Challenger). It's blazingly fast (55mph?) and has such a fast turret that it can simply run right past Axis heavies and blast them from the side/rear.

Alot of people don't like QB's for some reason. I think they're OK, although some of the computer-generated maps are less than perfect. Large maps especially are always wider than they are deep, and this is not always desired. Anyone have any info about modifications to the QB system in CM2? What I'd like to see are tools to specify a greater range of sizes (Tiny, Small, Medium, Large, Huge), and maybe an option to select side lengths? That way we can finally fight over some deep maps. The ability to play exisiting CM maps with a custom force selection would be nice too (I realize this is possible with the "pick your forces and email to a third party" method, but that's sort of time-consuming and inefficient).

One thing that often bugs me about CM is that a shell, even light ones (20mm, 37mm) almost always "knocks out" a vehicle when it penetrates. Now, a tank shouldn't become knocked out unless it has suffered some kind of catastrophic damage - fuel exploding, gun destroyed etc., and a 20mm round sure isn't going to cause that kind of damage in one hit. I remember reading somewhere that until tank guns got up to about 75mm in size a tank would often have to be hit with five rounds or more before it would become combat-useless (either by crew casualties or internal damage). A related problem that I have concerns mostly open vehicles, like the M7 Priest. If an AP shell were to hit the Priest, wouldn't it be more likely to simply pass through the armor than cause real damage? Does anyone have any real data on this?

In contrast to all of this, I was playing a game where I was Axis defending against an Allied attack. My JpzIV, which was my primary AT asset, got into a position where it traded head-on shots at medium range with a PRIEST. A PRIEST. The priest fired two shots, the second one hit and destroyed the Jpz. Now, something is wrong here. A sherman 105 gets scared off by a flank shot at a weak tank, while an open-topped paper-skinned artillery piece attacks a dedicated tank killer head on at medium range.

Arty spotters aren't less effective when hidden... for one thing they can't call down arty while being hidden. You're thinking of a situation in which arty spotters do not have a clear, unobstructed LOS to the target they are calling fire on. To answer your question, HQ units do not loose effectiveness while hidden. In fact, HQ units in command of other hidden units will help ensure that the unit remains hidden (i.e. doesn't get nervous and open fire too early).

What he means is AFTER the crew has been shocked, and when they are no longer shocked, it is still not possible to unbutton the tank. The reason for this is probably because the TC was killed and all of the other crew members have other jobs, so none of them can act as an observer.

That's why they call 'em "crunchies"

On baiting: I've actually found that baiting works better against humans than against the computer, since humans tend to make a more concerted and obvious effort to remove threats. A great example of a perfect trap is an 88mm flak gun with good LOS (and therefore a huge danger to Allied armor) paired with a platoon of SMG squads. The Allied infantry comes up to try and assault the gun, and the SMG's tear em up. On AI ammo selection: Sometimes the ammo selection is downright stupid. In the last game I played, my Jpz IV was shooting at a machine gun in rough terrain. the Jpz actually fired smoke at the MG, supposedly in the same way that a tank is bracketed with AP before using the tungsten. It wouldn't matter except that the smoke obscured the MG, which got away, and my Jpz exhausted its supply of smoke rounds for nothing.

If you dont mind, I'd also like to test out your scenario, having made several myself.