CavScout

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Henri: For some people, opining that the German soldier was the best fighting soldier of WW2 is akin to Nazi-worship. Whether we like it or not, it is a fact, although it is clear that not ALL German soldiers were of this ilk.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Is this really true? How does one determine who is the 'best fighting' soldier? The Germans certainly had more experienced men for much of the war and green US units would be at a disadvantage untill they 'learned' the ways of comabt. Cav

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gen-x87: Ill give you that one, it was a combination of Hitlers shortsightness, always fighting, and a combined world effort. For the time they were on the offensive they really were quite efficient at breaking lines and eveloping the enemy. In the end they ran up against a larger army with more weapons And yes I learned after the V4V series of games that the germans almost never had Mech infantry.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Or even motorised infantry. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> This is the chinaSyndrome as I like to call it. I would hardly call the chinese army anything great. But they sure can throw some cannon fodder at you. I think we could have produced a better tank than the sherman and I believe all the crews who watched in horror as thier shells bounced off Panther and Tiger tanks only to watch a 3 foot hole open up in thiers would agree. Gen<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I hardly call the Sherman 'cannon fodder'. One thing people always seem to forget was the US had to build a tank that could transported to Europe or the Pacific to do the fighting. How many Shermans could your throw into a tansport ship over a Panther or Tiger? Cav

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DrD: Germany basically took on the world and came awefully close to winning. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> How close did they really come? The Germans did have the chance to take western Europe but when they turned on the Soviets, and later the Americans, they were doomed from the begining. It's one thing to play crack German units in a game while on even odds with the opposing force and great supplies. But would you play them if the battles were slighted more towards reality when you MIGHT have some of the neat Panzers and you MIGHT have fuel to move them and you MAY even have some ammunition. Heck, would one be so eager to play the Germans if you had to sit through a murderous artillery barrage or air attack? Would it be fun if your German forces suffered most of the causulties via indirect attacks over direct fire like it really was? CavScout

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Elijah Meeks: Scott, Though I'm sure it may feel like it at times, I, and others, don't see this increased vulnerability you describe or amazing accuracy of the MGs on the tanks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I've lost several TCs in "A Day in the Cavalry" to unknowns. I never say any indication of incomming fire and one of the tanks was actually well to the rear of the main battle line. I assumed it was sniper fire. Would there be an indication, visual or sound, if it was? Cav

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gen-x87: For me it is because of the following reasons. 1. German army was really quite efficient, this is never explained in Western history books. When I learned about WWII in school it was mostly. Germany invaded Poland, the allies banded together, Japan attacked Hawaii, the US joined and we kicked some Axis ass! In a way this is my way of point a big fat middle finger at the propoganda machine that continues to this very day. And a way to say hey it was not all rosy after Normandy for the Allies. 2. Damn they have cool uniforms and even better looking weapons. Tanks look much more menacing and tough when compared to a Sherman, I dont think General Sherman would have been proud of that tinderbox on two tracks. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I have to disagree with number one. The German army MAY have been really quite efficient in certain areas but it wasn't army wide. Everyone marvels at Germany's 'efficient' Panzer forces but they always forget that those mechanized forces were a small fraction of the German army. Overall the German army was plagued by its inefficiency. So much of it relied on horse power or feet to move it around. The German army as a whole was hampered by its overall lack of motorization and mechanization. As for number two, it may be true that the US didn't have the most menacing tank but they did have the tank that was one of the most widly produced and did win the war. The Germans were designing a new tank for just about everything that came along. The US settled on one basic design and was determined to mass-produce it. The Germans would have been better off, IMO, selecting fewer and less-complicated designs and building as many as they could instead of producing a few highly technical beasts. Cav

I ordered mine last Thursday (a week ago yesterday) and recieved in Monday. I also live in Cali, in San Diego. Cav

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CEO: Well, it is a big deal when my 4 armored cars get smoked in the first few seconds on the first turn because they are not in the process of hauling ass. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I would suggest a better starting position. Seriously, in real life you would have had to pull into the game's start position. Would you pull into a fully exposed position like that? Would the enemy wait for you to start, like the game does, before firing? IMO, it is not unrealstic to have a first turn command delay but it is unrealistic to start in an overly exposed position because you don't have to deal with battle set, i.e. moving into the start positons, as you would in real life. Cav ------------------ "War does not determine who is right - only who is left." -Bertrand Russell "For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-Jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary period, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which is likely to be the more ominous for the Axis--an American decision that this is sport, or that it is business." -D. W. Brogan, The American Character

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CEO: I would like to requst the following be added: When a unit is given orders to move on the FIRST turn of the battle, there should be no command delay for the unit. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't think so because the start of a battle is, in game sense, just a place for us to start the game. In the real world the fight/battle/manuver has been going along up untill that point. Even in the best timed of operations, everyone is not going to start at the exact same time. There is going to be some early starters and some late starters. CavScout

I too sometimes wish for longer missions. I am currently playing "A day in the Cavalry" and the 15 turn battles just don't give me the time to manuver like I want. On the other hand, it does give some sense of urgency to the player. A player may want more time to position this or that, to make sure that is clear BUT would the battlefield commander have such a luxury? I doubt it. On the battlefield the local commander rarely has the luxury of taking his time in executing a mission. You have forces on your flanks that you must keep on-line with and forces to the rear that must keep moving. Unfortuantly, the war around you doesn't stop while you fight your battle. Being recon myself, 19D , the time we wanted to take to do a mission and what the BC or SC wanted us to do it in were vastly different. Cav ------------------ "War does not determine who is right - only who is left." -Bertrand Russell "For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-Jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary period, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which is likely to be the more ominous for the Axis--an American decision that this is sport, or that it is business." -D. W. Brogan, The American Character

Also, as silly as it sounds, mazke sure you D/L the PC patch. I was in a hurry to play and downloaded the patch only to find I had D/Led the Mac version! DOH! Cav

Why does the Navy carry Marines around? Well, sheep would be too obvious!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dar: I'm confused by the answers here. I thought on most tanks only the drive sprocket was powered by the engine, and the road wheels were free to turn... Am I way off here? Are there several axles on modern main battle tanks that are actually powered? Dar<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You thinking is correct. The sprocket is what is driven by the engine. If the track is completely thrown then the sprocket spins free and you would lose drive power to that track side. [This message has been edited by CavScout (edited 08-23-2000).]

Thanks for the quick reply. Cav

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ghengis Jim: Hey I am very new to this game as you can probably see, but I cannot figure out how to use the artillery spotters for indirect fire. I mean, isn't indirect fire technically when nobody has any idea what is getting shot at? Thats what I always thought, but then, I have probably been playing the east and west front series too long. What I mean by that is how do you get your artillery to fire in a general area W/out your artillery spotter actually seeing this area? Or is that impossible...?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> "Indirect fire" is fire delievered onto a target that does not use the target itself as a point of aim for the weapon/director. An easier way may be to think that indirect fire does not require a LOS from the weapon to the target as one does not aim the weapon at the target. Cav ------------------ "War does not determine who is right - only who is left." -Bertrand Russell "For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-Jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary period, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which is likely to be the more ominous for the Axis--an American decision that this is sport, or that it is business."-D. W. Brogan, The American Character

How do you check which version of CM you are playing? I want to verify the patch was applied. Thanks, Cav ------------------ "War does not determine who is right - only who is left." -Bertrand Russell "For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-Jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary period, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which is likely to be the more ominous for the Axis--an American decision that this is sport, or that it is business."-D. W. Brogan, The American Character

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Malmvig: Thanks to Phil the Dill we now know where we all come from Now - When and where did you learned of the existence of CM? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I first heard of Combat Mission in a review, I believe it was Computer Gamming World. Cav ------------------ "War does not determine who is right - only who is left."-Bertrand Russell "For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-Jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary period, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which is likely to be the more ominous for the Axis--an American decision that this is sport, or that it is business."-D. W. Brogan, The American Character