Holien

"When in doubt dismount" nice video but has not changed my view of the use of Bren Carrier or Half Tracks.

Good thread.
I've come into this quite late.

I've seen and read all the stuff you are referring to John about US vets , and how  they are dying off, being treated poorly.
Read it for years. Quite saddening.
An old colleague , A Dr I used to work with here in NZ. He used to work for a defense contractor in Saudi.
At the end of the Gulf War, him and his team of Drs had some high level US brass come in.
They asked about reported symptoms there - gulf war syndrome. Any one have reported symptoms?.
They said no none that they were aware of, and they asked was there any medical evidence they could have to look at and see what was going on to help them better understand this.
The US Lady looked to another military colleague and said all destroyed? And the guy nodded yes.
They were told the 000s of files on this were all lost and unavailable and sorry couldn't help them then they left.
 The Dr concerned said it sounded dodgey as hell.  They were of the opinion they were trying to cover up loose ends and get rid of evidence.
 
Dr Craig Paul Roberts pretty much summed up this war with Russia and Ukraine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoAH0VXbwfU&feature=youtu.be
I respect his comments regarding US foreign policy and current economic issues
In his comments he also noted how it started - with western meddling.
He noted how the Russians keep casualties down with troop rotations etc and that is of relevance to this thread.
he talked about all that and the ghosting of units. Quite interesting.
Its worth listening to.
We all know Russia is involved. They had to be. They were simply protecting there country and economy.
I would be if I was Russia.
 
The Russian military have made physical plaques / commemorations to battles in the Ukraine but have not listed where the battles where etc - its like a place holder.
When this is all over they will honor the dead.
 
Also I wonder your thoughts John as you may have been around the scene at the time Roberts was assistant treasurer to Reagan.
I found his comments enlightening as to the nuclear issues and modified treaties today the US has allegedly cancelled in an aggressive fashion.
I respect his economic views. They are quite realistic. 
What did you think on his comments from a military perspective?   etc 
He talks about the dealings with Israel and drones and the Georgia Crisis  in exchange for Irans missiles systems codes? legit?
I see Israel PM is in Russia or just was over Syria.
I  suspect there is some link. Obviously regional defense concerns.
 
As to loss of life - a comment on the shot down air liner MH-17.
http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/which-airlines-fly-over-ukraine-how-can-you-find-out-your-flight-route/story-fnizu68q-1226996428536
The Ukraine is responsible for there airspace. They should share blame irrespective. 
It was absolutely irresponsible to allow any international flights thru a war zone with flying aircraft etc shooting at one another. But its common place generally as height is the safety margin for the aircraft concerned as per the link i noted. I think its kinds nuts but how the air flight business works.  Ukraine should have perhaps said to the UN its too dangerous and banned flights
Few air liners are flying over Iraqi warzones. The British have decided to stay in there. British Air ways.
A few have pulled out. They have shorter range air to air missile launchers so less risk i guess and no air to air attacks in general.

Squad Leader Board Game...

Fond memories

Yes that would make a 3rd type of issue and I guess there is nothing that can be done about that.
 
There seems to be three types of issues?
 
1. A possible bug where units that clearly arrive in 1st scenario are then not moved into second scenario. I.e. the Panthers and MKIV's.
 
2. A unit that used to be available is no longer available due to changes in unit structures i.e. TOE
 
3. Un intended effect when units get equipment not originally planned for by designer.
 
I am really interested in trying to prove point one as that should work if a designer places units then they should carry through?
 
Point 2 is nasty as a designer has to re-check everything when new engine / patch is released?
 
Point 3 I guess happens even less but one to watch for..
 
I guess that scenarios / campaigns are not baked into frozen state and the code change can change the design? This I hope can be looked at as the life blood for the game is the playability of the scenarios and campaigns IMO as a player.
 
I guess as a company having new engines and people move to new theatres and pay for new content is what is needed to keep company alive... So if old stuff gets broken it might encourage players to move to the new shiny toys...
 
I am just slightly concerned that designers are burning out and we will lose classic Campaigns that really should still be open to people when they can get to them....

LOL! Yeah, there's a lot of information being presented and a lot of talking past one another. I think.
 
At this point, I'd love to see a summary. The problem with any question about penetration values is, IMO, that there are so many variables and that most of the discussion is based on theoretical numbers, not tests. (Shoeburyness and Isigny nothwithstanding. Those provided some data, but were hardly thorough enough to create absolute certainty about the ballistics. The purpose of those tests were to see what Allied weapons worked, and which didn't.)
 
An additional complication is that the question here (which I -think- is whether the 76mm should always defeat the Tiger I frontal armor at less than 800m, given a normal angle to the face of the tank), starts to get into the realm of "maybe". (Hold yer horses! Let me esplain.) By "maybe", I mean that neither the armor nor the projectile have an overwhelming superiority over one another. There is no question that a rifle round cannot penetrate a Tiger face. There is no question that a 76mm at 500m will penetrate a halftrack. 
 
I've attached two quickly found internet tables.
 

 
and 
 

 
The 76mm gets close to, or exceeds, the 100mm Tiger armor thickness.
 
But wait.
 
What type of armor are the tables based upon? Do they have the same characteristics as the Tiger armor? What is the RHAe of the high-hardness Tiger plate? (They kept that quality up, unlike other tanks.) The Tiger armor's 100mm was a MINIMUM thickness. Often it was a few mm thicker. What about the zimmerit coating? Did that add resistance? Or reduce it? What about hitting things on the front, like brackets, cables, etc? (Then, we can talk about edge effects, too.)
Finally, we also need to realize that the front hull plate was sloped back at 10 degrees from the vertical. 
 
We're splitting hairs. Really.
 
If there is an issue, it needs to be presented clearly. Definitions matter. (Not trying to reignite a flame, just stating a fact.)
 
I think we all recognize that CM's armor/penetration model is probably the best one available to the public. If there is an inaccuracy, I'm sure we all would appreciate it being resolved.

Battlepack 1: The Great Swan
Northern France and Belgium
September 1944
 
In just two months, between 6th June and mid August, the Allied armies in Normandy destroyed the cream of the 1944 German Army. Following this resounding defeat the Allies bounded across France in just a few days. It is during this period of stunning advance that Battlepack 1: The Great Swan is set, following the advance of the British 2nd Army from the Seine River, through Belgium, and all the way to the high water mark of the advance along the Meuse and lower Rhine.
 
The first phase of the Great Swan occurred when the 43rd Wessex Division seized a crossing over the Seine at Vernon in an opposed assault crossing. The battle here lasted several days, and the first 24 hours in particular were considered to be very dangerous for the British troops. However the bridgehead was stabilised and then gradually expanded to make room for follow-on forces. Prelude, the first battle of the Campaign Amiens Tonight, is a semi-historical examination of the difficulties of pressing back the determined German resistance which was able to make good use of the thick forests along the Seine river banks.
 
Shortly afterwards the British forces exploded out of the bridgehead and began racing across Northern France and into Belgium. From the first German resistance to the breakout was weak and disorganised - they were too busy fleeing back towards France to form a cohesive front. Engagements during this period tended to be small scale, and highly confusing. The Copse is a tiny scenario that takes a hypothetical look at one of these minor engagements. Overnight the advancing Allies generally rested, and prepared for the next day’s advance, while the Germans continued their relentless withdrawal. Celer et Audax and Nulli Secudus look at what happens when small British force disposed in hasty defence finds itself in the path of some withdrawing Germans in the middle of a rainy night or on a misty morning.
 
During the advance to Amiens the 11th Armoured Division was ordered to advance through the night without rest, culminating in an astonishing advance of 48 miles in just 24 hours. Tallyho follows the vanguard of this drive as they approach the location of a temporary halt at dusk. The next day found 11th Armoured at Amiens, embroiled in bitter city fighting (The Somme), and then pushing out of the city into the open ground across the river (To the green fields beyond). This was not the end of the war, and the Division soon found itself heading east once more (And the beat goes on).
 
Within days the lead elements of XXX Corps, made up as always by the armoured cars, found themselves in the region known as ‘the Crossroads of Europe’, a place where famous battles to decide the fate of nations have been fought since time immemorial (A crossroads near Brussels).
 
Soon after reaching Antwerp and the Belgian boder the advance petered out, stopped more by the logistical strain of leaping forward 200 miles in a few days than by increasing German resistance. Field Marshal Montgomery famously tried to kick-start the stalled advance with Operation Market-Garden. Those battles have been dealt with elsewhere in Combat Mission. However, in the weeks prior to the launch of Market Garden there were about a dozen planned airborne operations, all opf which were cancelled when they were overtaken by events. But what if the advance had been halted in the vicinity of Brussels?
 
One of the planned and cancelled airborne operations was LINNET II, which was to seize bridges over the Meuse west of Aachen, and open a route into Germany. A group of “what if?” fictional scenarios looks at how this never-fought battle might have played out. The flat ground between the Meuse River and Albert Canal would have provided excellent landing grounds (Drop Zone CHARLIE), while securing the river crossings was dependant on holding the high ground just east of the Meuse against counter attacks (LINNET II). As this operation was never launched, the exact details of Operation Linnet II are vague, and this vagueness has been exploited to look at the effect of differences in the detailed organisation of British and American ground and airborne forces when given the same ground and objectives, fighting against the same enemy.
 
Following the failure of Market Garden the British made a concerted effort to close up to the Rhine along its lower reaches before the onset of winter. This phase of the campaign saw a partial reversion to positional warfare, and the re-emergence of deliberate attacks against strong defences (Swansong). Often these attacks were supported by the specialist armour of the 79th Armoured Division (Hobart’s Funnies). With the onset of bad weather at the end of September the frontlines became static, and the heady days of The Great Swan became an increasingly distant memory.
 
In total Battlepack 1: The Great Swan contains over 25km2 of brand new, highly detailed handcrafted mapping.

Your taking my "Huh" far too personally dude. Thanks for doing the tests, but from my perspective they didnt tell me anything we didnt already know, so I didnt really understand why you were using data very similar to my own to make an entirely opposite conclusion. Thats what the Huh was for. I appreciate you taking the time to test for yourself, my "huh" derives from your use of the data, not the gathering of it. 
 
As for partial penetrations, I just cant see how you can see them that way. It doesnt make sense. I mean, aside from the definitions given by the US and others, its not logically sound IMO. The "energy" of the round being the function of PP is not reasonable, since that would already fall into the damage modeling of full pens. Even shells that made it all the way through would do so at differing velocities, affecting their results, and separating PP and P based on that would be highly misleading. It would be like calling a bullet that missed by 5 feet a miss, and a bullet that misses by 10 a partial-miss. 
 
I mean, the word itself is self-explanatory. a PARTIAL penetration PARTIALLY makes it way through the armor and is lodged there is some form. World war Two definitions of this term corroborate this, so why would BF just make up their own? It seems to me that you guys who think this way are more interested adjusting the semantics so that you don't have to acknowledge a potential problem (or at least something we don't understand) with the game. There simply isnt any other reason to presume PP's are complete penetrations IMO unless your trying to make things fit in a certain manner. It just doesn't make any sense. You start twisting the words that much and pretty soon it will be impossible to make any sort of definitive statement about anything.
 
And as for them destroying tanks: The do NOT most of the time, just judging my experience and Rinaldis 30% figure from earlier, 70% of them don't do enough to kill the tank. There is a perfectly good reason to have separate PP, P, and Spalling decals. They are not the same things. A hit that strike the armor and carries on it merry way can still cause the armor to spall. Spalling is an effect, not a type of strike. A Partial Pen is a type of strike, specially one where the round is lodge in the armor. You MIGHT get a very massive "spalling" effect from that, since a round that is poking it head through the armor, or has almost made it way through is likely to send a hell of alot of materiel into the tank. In fact, Im prerry sure you can get PP's spalling at the same time, if not in CMx2 CMx1. 

Thanks for the reports Doug, and yes some luck but also you made the right calls with positions of the Panthers, you recognised the threat and moved in time to counter what Bil was attempting.

The M10 duel was a 50/50 die roll I guess?

You are right it was all about the tanks and without that edge your infantry would have had a tough time, saw one of your HMG teams on your right got mortared to death, Bil certainly had the edge with those.

BTW, I just got back from meeting Bil FtF and brought him a consolation drink as I happen to be in Richmond this weekend and he kindly agreed to meet me. We had a good chat about the game and it was really nice to thank him in person for all the previous AARs he has done for this great community of players.

Thank you to both of you for the entertainment.

Cheers H

Thanks for the reports Doug, and yes some luck but also you made the right calls with positions of the Panthers, you recognised the threat and moved in time to counter what Bil was attempting.

The M10 duel was a 50/50 die roll I guess?

You are right it was all about the tanks and without that edge your infantry would have had a tough time, saw one of your HMG teams on your right got mortared to death, Bil certainly had the edge with those.

BTW, I just got back from meeting Bil FtF and brought him a consolation drink as I happen to be in Richmond this weekend and he kindly agreed to meet me. We had a good chat about the game and it was really nice to thank him in person for all the previous AARs he has done for this great community of players.

Thank you to both of you for the entertainment.

Cheers H

Well paper tiger has been mia? I wonder?

I would say the game is nearly done?

Well played. I think it was a tough map and with the well placed Panther's Bil had a couple of chances but they did not pay off for him.

The duel with the M10 and Panther if it had gone the other way would have changed the game. (Statement of the obvious).

You roll the dice and sometimes lady luck does not shine on you.

Im new to combat missions,all i played was the shockforce demo before i got black sea. The campaign i have played so far i think is awesome! Granted i am only on the third mission of the american campaign, but its take me about 4-5 hours to compete each single mission. I have had to vary my tactics wildy to fit the mission, and poking the bear is just awesome i think. All the single scenarios ive played so far ( ive only played 5 and beat 3) are really cool. This is probably my favortite strategy game atm. I might be missing something becuase, like i said, i never played the older title, but i just dont see how anyone could call this unimaginative. This is almost the perfect wargame imho, although i dont play it more than 2-3 times a week, usually i am tired from work and working out and i go for lighter game to relax, since this game requires so much planning, attention, and time, But when i need a tactics fix, this is the game i go to

No fair! I almost choked on my sandwich. My wife was about to start with the Heimlich maneuver. You gotta warn people before tossing things like that out there.

I believe that politeness is key for good critiscism.

The first thing to do is to never, never attack your opponent directly. Always remember: Engage the problem, not the opponent. Else you won't be able to move forward.
 
Second: Make the other person feel understood. If you say "I believe that this and that needs improvements" and somebody else says "nope", first follow point one (don't attack) and then show them that you are on their side: IN this case, you both want to get the best out of a game. Don't say "You are a fanboy", or "F****** old breed", say "I can see where you are coming from, and, while I agree with some of your points, I do believe that further clarification is needed, so that you can understand mine". Be constructive.
 
Third: Be careful how you open up an issue. If you say "This is s***, this should change!" you'll immediately see the answers you got: If you attack something others will defend it. Instead, try to show everybody what your motivation is, and why you believe your way is better.. "I'm seeing other games with features I believe might improve the experience for everybody. I know that my position might be controversial, please help me make the game better."
 
Also, note how you should try to, immediately, inlude the people you are talking to. They can help you, you can help them. You aren't engaging each other, but you are tackling the problem. Include them, and ask them to include themselves!
 
And, fourth: Don't hunker down in your position. The moment oyu hunker down is the moment you feel that everybody attacking your position is attacking you and you start attacking them. Take a safe distance from all of your arguments. And, if you realise that you are wrong, take a step back. You aren't loosing if you got the best result for everybody!
 

Criticism doesn't equal attacking something. You can criticize in a polite way. I have never seen something good coming out of anything that startes with "your s*** is s***." While having a discussion in of itself can be fun, I don't think that's your goal here.
 

Techincally not true, atleast if you are refering to the comment I have in mind.
 

Nothing about death. Just about complaining somewhere else. But please don't misunderstand me, I do not agree with this statement.

What gives you the right to think they need to respond to you?

Aurelius,
 
Please re-read my post. Am I defending BFC? Perhaps. I was trying to let Wiggum15 know why his posts don't carry any weight.
 
Am I mad if someone calls me a fanboy? Not at all.
 
Am I a fanboy? Maybe you think so.
 
Shrug.
 
As a counterpoint, look at Lacroix's post, just above. He quotes me and adds a "lol". Why? Because he does not have a rational counterargument. Lacroix is another one to whom I give no credence. His posting history has caused this. Criticism is acceptable, even desirable to improve the game. The negativity expressed by several, like Wiggum15 and Lacroix is counterproductive.
 
Back to your point, Aurelius.  I will not stand by silently when I see posts which are counterfactual. I try to reply to posts with the same level of respect and maturity as they are made. Look up my posting history. Find where I say this game cannot be improved. Find where I do not support ideas to improve the game. There is a world of difference between trying to improve something and just tearing it down. Yes, this forum can get defensive against inflammatory posts. However, this forum also allows those inflammatory posts...for the most part.
 
Irrational, immature, insulting, and inflammatory posts should not be accepted. Defending BFC? No. I am defending a game system I enjoy. I will not passively watch a few malcontents poison a forum without pointing out their falsehoods and distortions.
 
Regards,
Ken
 
Edited to add: As a beautiful counterpoint to everything Wiggum15, Lacroix, et al., have posted, look at this: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119875-worrying-60mm-mortar-behavior/page-1
 
We have a criticism of behavior which is specific and it includes what behavior was expected. A member of BFC's team checks it, finds it has merit, and posts an internal report about it. And then provides feedback to the OP about it. This is just one of hundreds of threads which prove how distorted are the statements posted by Wiggum15 et alia.

The more I read about the issues and why they want a new game engine. It appears it is all about the graphics more than the game features.

It just drives them crazy to not see their frame rates at 60 and the game not appearing as it does for them in some other games.

Yes, there is rants about game features, but between this thread and the others they have high jacked. Most of the desire and attitude they show is when it comes to the graphics and how the game functions.

No one should really be defending CM when it comes down to these items, they are outdated and do not use the computer power as it possible could. But some of that is intentional and some of it is from the inability to create a new engine with each new development in home computers.

This is a small time company and they cannot afford or meet them demands. Even if they started today on a new engine, by the time the publish it will again be outdated, plus they have always believed in making their product so it would run on older machines so that everyone that played did not need the latest new rig.

So face it, you young Bucks that are Graphic Porn sluts will never get your fix from BF when it comes to giving you fantastic graphics.

So for you, just keep hoping for a big money company to provide that to you, but Guess what, they do but with no game substance. They draw pretty pictures and take your money and you wonder why you get so bored so quickly. Because you always need new porn to fill your lust.

No game Porn Here, Just a great game -

We are on same page
 

 
The English way =
 
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?YesMinisterCourageValue
 
What you want to watch out for is when I use the word courageous decision
 

You seem to be quick with personal judgements. Where did I write about problems finding mods? Have you never read this or any other forum? Even PBEM is already too complicated for many customers. My point of view is taking the DAUs into account.




And I thought I mentioned several facts?
 
Is it beyond your imagination that someone can think outside the fanboy-box. Because the current system is good enough for you, doesn't make it any more accessible for the average customer.
 
I raised several arguments why I think the current implementation sucks - btw which arguments did you reply to when you are talking about throwing the baby out with the water?
 
For many customers even installing mods in a special folder is already too difficult.
I also often cannot understand the reflexes on this forum: instead to think about the additional possibilities and optionalities, the mindset of fanbois is strictly binary.

Transparency is one of the main design principles of user friendly software. If something is not transparent, it is rejected by customers.
And searching for mods that fit to a scenario and installing them separately is such a case.
 
But this doesn't make the problem go away: the average customer will never see your mods currently, although he has played scenarios from you.
 
How many CM customers even have heard about mod-tags? How many of them can install mods? How many know, how the tag system works? 
How could this system have been tried, if the game doesn't check if a subfolder exists?

And Kohlenklau, if the current system was such a big success, how high is the percentage of scenarios with dedicated mods?
I guess even 10% is way to high!
Now lets take into account how many are downloading and installing the mods. You probably end up in the low single digit percentages... Great system?

Go get a life!
 
Senseless post.  No need for it.

Oh I can see it now:
 
Chapter 1 - "Thinking About Attacking"
Chapter 2 - "Attacking"
Chapter 3 - "How to Attack After Attacking"
Chapter 4 - "Defending Counterattacking"
Chapter 5 - "If Your Attack Fails... A Hypothetical Argument"
Chapter 6 - "Submachine Guns in the Attack"
Chapter 7 - "Killing Your Enemies... or How to Attack Without Moving"
Chapter 8 - "Fratricide, a Tool for Victory!"

Excellent work!!

The radio code word we used at the time was "River City."  We didn't lose many folks, but you'd usually have 10-30 seconds to finish what you were doing before the call centers, internet, and even the official DoD connections to the "real" internet got shut down (the military intranet stuff kept going, but it's not like you got on gmail with that).  Our Artillery Battalion had a mascal and one of the dudes who died was first generation immigrant from Guatemala.  We did not have normal contact with our families until they'd found the dude's family in his home country so a real human in a US Army uniform would tell them their son was dead and we are so sorry.
 
Which is why this Putin mess pisses me off so much.  Oh.  Your son is dead.  SORRY it didn't happen really but he's just as dead.  HEY.  There's your kid on youtube getting probed by Ukrainians.  HE SHOULDN'T HAVE GONE ON VACATION!
 
It's like my god, I knew if I died Baghdad wasn't going to know peace until my body was brought back, and some Captain and a Chaplain were going to have to tell my family that I died serving this country I love.  Or if I went missing my country was going to do literally everything it could do to get me back or ensure I was really dead before it gave up trying to get me back (even if I was a crapbird like Bergdalh).  
 
Russia?  Pffft.  Their soldiers are cheaply sold for questionable goods, and are quickly forgotten when they're broken.  Someone's son is worth more than that, but it's readily apparent Putin's concern for that son, and for Russia's children's future only carries as far as ensuring his corrupt buddies have places to build casinos, and a tinny hollow version of "russian glory."  Whore's makeup on a corpse if you will.  

Thanks for the video that really helps, wondering what you will decide on for force...

Why is it absurd Sburke? If we are going to call Russia fascist, because of cynical actions of its state, and then dismiss that your state makes some pretty serious cynical decisions themselves, is that reasonable? So, the thousand posts here http://www.911truth.orgas well as hundreds of other sites, means all these people talk absurd nonsense?

Arguably, the difference is the FSB guys got caught doing what they were doing, while your guys didnt get caught doing what they were doing. Thats the difference. The end result is the same.

And the talk about the excuse machine, dude, noone is making excuses for what the Rus. Government is or is not doing. Im saying dont be sitting on your high chair calling them fascists, and then pretending that there are no similarities in US's actions of the past, that could just as easily apply that terminology to themownselves.