Chupacabra

Yeah, but Marines are crazy ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

Although I can't offer any specific evidence, I suspect that this happened more often than we might care to say. Military folks can correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it a fairly standard military adage that you should never reenforce defeat? ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

Uh, the short answer is both. Tanks support infantry, infantry support tanks. For the reason behind this, try the following: A) Take an all infantry force, and give the AI an all tank force, in any type of battle. See what happens. Now take an all infantry force, give the AI an all infantry force as well. Have the AI defend in a town. See what happens. I apologize if this seems a bit elliptic, but it's really the best way I could think of to explain why things are the way they are ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

RE: Atomics - I don't think there was even a slight possibility of the US dropping atomic weapons on Germany. Others have made this point much better than I, but I'll lay it out: the war against Japan was of a fundamentally different nature than the war against Germany. Racial and cultural differences were perceives as so great, that all other concerns of fairness, humanity, morality, were wiped away by a consuming desire to win. Studies were done which determined that a significantly smaller percentage of Americans fighting in the Pacific had moral compunctions against killing Japanese than Americans in Europe did against killing Germans. The war in the Pacific was significantly more brutal than the war in Europe, and that brutality made it possible to consider using a weapon of such extraordinary brutality as the atomic bomb. In contrast, Americans of German descent made up a large percentage of the American population. IIRC, in 1914 1/4th of all Americans claimed some degree of German descent. After WWI, German emigration to the US increased, and then fell off again after 1933, so I can only assume that that percentage remained stable or even grew slightly. Hell, half of the guys who designed the A-bomb were German. I believe that if it was likely that the Nazi atomic bomb program had moved quicker, and if Hitler either used or threatened to use atomic weapons against the Allies, then the US would have retaliated in kind. But that is a what if, and a moot point. The US simply would not have nuked Germany otherwise. And, as John pointed out, we most certainly did not have atomic bombs sitting around in 1939, or 1941, or June 1944. You cannot argue that the US did win or could have won the war on its own. Winston Churchill wrote after the war that "England provided the time, America provided the money, and Russia provided the blood." And I think that's a good quote with which to end this post. ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super. [This message has been edited by Chupacabra (edited 10-10-2000).]

It's currently ordered, AFAIK, in the order in which you or the scenario designer purchased the units. ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

Steve, RE: the heatsink thing Out of curiosity (my interest is purely academic), how would this have worked? Unless the barrel of the MG was physically in contact with the hull of the tank, I don't see how the heat would disperse any more rapidly than any other MG. If the barrels of coax MGs were in contact with the tank hull, I can see this happening, but in the Shermans on display in the IWM, the coax MG seems to be mounted in a sort of canvas sleeve, and the barrel doesn't come in contact with the hull at all. Otherwise I guess you could say that the Earth acts as a heatsink for all MGs Once again (as I make sure to clarify in these grog-type discussions ) I have no interest in this other than that I'm curious and I like to wrangle. ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PeterNZer: Wearing a hat won't help you win! PeterNZ<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It will if it's my beer hat. It's one of those incredibly cheap baseball hats with the foam front and mesh sides, and it says BEER! on it in bright red letters. And it is the key to my powers. I'll see if I can get my folks to send it to me ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

You should probably pick up some of the Michelin maps as well. The auto maps probably won't help much as I imagine the road network is substantially different now than it was in 1944 , but Michelin also makes excellent Ordnance Survey-type maps with topographical information. ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PeterNZer: We didn't go out drinking! perhaps we will soon =) See if those europeans are as tough as they'd like to think! PeterNZ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Mmm, I'll have to defend America's honor, I guess. Time to break out the beer hat! ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

I was just in Montelimar in the past month. Beautiful place. Wish I had pictures to post, but unfortunately not. ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CavScout: If you believe that, which I take it you do, then that means the Allies out-performed the Axis at the tactical level, on average. If the battles were always "even" and knowing the Allies continued to make progress, wouldn't this mean the Allies were better at this level? Cav<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> A) No one is arguing that the Allies didn't possess an enormous material advantage on the strategic level. This material advantage certainly did affect the outcome of the war. An obvious example of this would be Kursk. AFAIK, the Russians in fact took heavier losses than the Germans. Yet Kursk is considered a Russian victory because the Germans couldn't afford the losses they did take, while the Russians could absorb heavier losses with, if not impunity, then at least more easily. This situation held true for the West front as well. CM models this only abstractly, if at all. The sort of heavy artillery and air support which the Allies received is not modelled within the scope of the game. Yes, of course there were battles in which the Allies possessed a material advantage on the tactical level. There are canned scenarios in which this is modelled. And, as others have mentioned in other threads, the Allies can typically field more tanks than a German force with an equal number of points. Do the math. It's far cheaper to field a platoon of Shermans than to field a platoon of Panthers. There were also battles in which the Germans possessed a clear material advantage on the tactical level, for example, many of the early Ardennes battles. It is my understanding that it is military doctrine that an attacker can always bring local material superiority to bear against a defending force. Why is it so hard to believe that, in the scope of the game, the Germans could have local material parity or even superiority in some cases? C) If, as you state, you have no trouble defeating the Germans as the Allies in the game as it is currently, why would you want to beef up the Allies further? I dunno about you, but cakewalks don't interest me. I'd rather use tactics to beat someone than overwhelming material superiority. I ask you again, what exactly are you calling for? ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

And I quote - <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Orginally posted by Big Time Software- The myth of Allied material advantage at the tactical level, as a rule, is just that... a myth. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> [This message has been edited by Chupacabra (edited 10-09-2000).]

CavScout - What point are you trying to make, exactly? Should we make Shermans rocket-powered, atomic-cannon firing ubertanks? The game is not unbalanced. If you have poor luck playing against the Germans, modify your tactics. But there simply is no German superiority. [This message has been edited by Chupacabra (edited 10-09-2000).]

You can't get away from me that easily! I'm in. ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

WYSIWYG is computer geek slang for What You See Is What You Get, and I believe was coined by Steve Jobs in reference to the Mac OS, although I'm probably incorrect about that. WYSINWYG is therefore What You See Is Not What You Get. What Squirminjoy, I think, is referring to is that, in CM, the graphics are merely representational. The real action is the engine cruncing numbers deep down in the .exe somewhere. The graphics serve only to allow the player to see how the battle is unfolding. In this specific context, he is, I think, implying that just because the two different turrets aren't modelled graphically doesn't mean they're not modelled in the engine. ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

I'm a specialist in bad tactics, does that count? ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Colonel_Deadmarsh: I don't care if we have to sacrafice a little reality for better play.... Why would this be so bad? CM is not 100% realistic. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think CM should move towards being more realistic, not less so. IMO more realism makes for better play, not the other way around. People have offered you several suggestions on how to avoid the problem you're complaining about without changing the game -suggestions which, I might add, have been verified by RL military folks on other threads. Try placing your infantry in such a way that the enemy physically cannot fire DF HE at your troops without exposing itself to your own AT weapons. Easier said than done, of course, but... ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

Dukester - I came into this game knowing virtually nothing about Real WW2 Tactics , except what's common sense. IE - it's better to shoot at someone when they can't shoot back, it's better to have two people shooting at someone than one person, it's better to shoot at someone from the back than from the front, it's better to shoot at someone a lot than a little, that sort of thing. But as for the "Well, SOP among Sherman drivers in August 1944 was to..." stuff, I'm clueless. And you know what? The game is fun. And I'm learning. If it's not fun for you, that's one thing, but you seem to be requesting a change which would detract from everyone else's fun, and that's another thing entirely. As people have pointed out, there are several good tutorials in the full game. ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: Hey, one of you Gerbil wannabes feel like sending me a file with a password? No, I am not checking up on which chump is losing worse, but am actually curious to see the problem in action Thanks, Steve steve@battlefront.com<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Will do, let me track it down. ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Madmatt: As I was corrected on this last year from Scott Clinton I believe (I think it was you Scott! ) That Jagdpanther was NOT taken out from those rear rounds. Those were done later on at close range as part of a battery of penetration tests after that vehicle was in US hands. Madmatt <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> According to the display in the museum, the Jagdpanther was taken out by a Cromwell which flanked it and put those four rounds in it, the last one in the engine compartment, immobilizing it. If this is incorrect, someone should take it up with the IWM ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

Bump. Anyone? Any ideas? ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

In case anyone can't tell, I'm the sexy bastard in the blue sweater. I'M A SEXY BASTARD, I TELL YOU!!! ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aussie Smith: Guys If there is one request I have it is that when you take pictures could you have someone stand near the vehicle so relative size can be determined. Craig<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Actually, we did do just that for many of the pictures. I'm not sure what happened to them (*poke guys with the cameras and webpages and stuff*), but I think we have pictures of people next to all of the tanks. ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

As I, and other people, have said, DON'T PUT INFANTRY IN BUILDINGS WHICH ARE EXPOSED TO DIRECT FIRE HE. I promise, follow this simple instruction, and all the rest of these complaints will go away. ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

I've posted something on this before, but got no reply, soooooo... Currently playing a QB against the dastardly PeterNZ and his band of syphillitic hamstertruppen. Night, fog. An M8 of mine spotted two of his armored cars, and was then taken out. His armored cars moved on, and out of my LOS. Problem is, I still have spotting information on those armored cars. No sound contact, but full spotting info. I magically know where they're going. Before you ask the obvious question - yes, I've double checked. None of my units have LOS to his vehicles. So, this would seem to be a bug, yeah? I don't think I should know what his vehicles are doing, should I? ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.