ParaBellum
-
Posts
2,061 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by ParaBellum
-
-
I already see it coming...Originally posted by GRUMLIN:...I would love to see a fantasy LoTR version. Mmhhhh.. tactical gaming without having to pinat a million figures...hordes of orcs overrrunning hobbitholes.....elvish ambushes in the woods - giant spiders on speed......
"...my elite Ringwraith just got killed by a conscript hobbit with a 'rear penetration'!! Fix or do somefink!!"
"...why do my Mumaks always bog down in muddy weather? This can't be realistic!"
"...Uruk-Hai shouldn't surrender that quickly! As they are modelled now they are nothing but overpriced Hamsters!"
"...why won't my Hobbits engage a Balrog? According to the LOS tool they have 0.00001% chance of killing him, they shouldn't run as soon as they spot him!"
...not to forget Rexford's posts: "... mithril armour quality in middle earth as reported by Durin son of Dong, Volume XXVII-XXIX."
etc...
-
Well, done comrade! The rodina needs you. Feel free to drop me an email.Originally posted by Becket:Para -- just saw that you are in CMMC2 on the Soviet side. I've joined up as well. Mind if I shoot you an email about training stuff?
-
Ok, lets make it an attack this time. 2000 points should enough IMO. Which side do you wanna play? Russians again?Originally posted by MasterGoodale:You're on PARABELLUM!! :mad: Abbott!? :mad: If you would be so kind as to create Parabellum's place of rest we would be grateful. Here is what I would prefer, and you can get Parabellum's preferences and try to meet somewhere in the middle.
1. I would like a small map of your design.
2. I don't care how hilly it is as long as the units match the terrain.
3. 2000 - 3000 points
4. Mid-day, clear, dry or very dry (I love fire)
5. I would prefer to defend if Para wants to try taking my blood and TNT-soaked ground!! But not another meeting engagement.
The rest is up to you! :mad:
GRAARARGRGAGRGRAGR!!! You're going down this time PARA! I made a special stop at the local prison to get my TNT this time!! :mad: You've never seen TNT so bitter!! :mad: :mad:
Shall we buy our own forces or shall we let Abbott do this. If we choose our own forces I vote for the 'unrestricted' setting.
Day setting with clear sky and dry ground is fine with me.
I'm gonna drop Abbott an email and hope he's got time for us.
-
No problems here. I think it could be your Gfx card/monitor settings. Maybe adjust contrast, too.
Is your monitor placed ín a position where lots of incoming light is reflected from the screen? The more light the room you're in, the more difficult it is to see in night battles. You could try ro tamp down the lights a bit when playing night battles.
-
Who ever said CM 2 would feature a new engine, rebuilt from the ground?Originally posted by Maj Soshtokovich:CM 2 is pretty much CM 1 in a different guise with a few ( ie: limited) changes. It is NOT rebuilt from the ground up ( as engine 2 is expected to be).
Did BFC personally tell you things they didn't tell the rest of us? They're really mean, aren't they?
Your quote "...at least 50% of eastern front battles were encirclement battles..."
You do know the difference between operational warfare and tactical warfare, don't you?
-
Hey MasterGoodale!
February has come and my schedule got a bit less busy.
Already fit for a rematch? I think it's time to contact Abbott again.
Ah, and time for another epic AAR with HOT MOLTEN TNT and weird tactics...
Regards,
-
Considering CDV's record I'd say they'll release it about one day before the BFC version. Then, after about 3 hours they will realize that it brings back the SS-runes, take it from the site immediatly and need about four weeks to get the new, tested version up again...
That is, after they by mistake uploaded the wrong patch, called "Wet_Lula_does_Barbarossa_V12.exe".
-
Anybody's seen the classic german movie "Die Brücke"? In it there's a young soldier firing a Panzerfaust inside a house without looking back...
The result is, well, ugly...
If you can get your hands on a copy, make sure to grab it. IMO one of the best war movies ever made.
[ February 06, 2003, 03:00 AM: Message edited by: ParaBellum ]
-
Originally posted by Bruno Weiss:
...Infact, tell em Michael Dorosh sent you. That will give you a status roughly equivilent to demonstrating a butane lighter to the Jawara tribe...
ROFL!
-
Quite difficult since the stock scenarios begin in June '41 and end in April/May '45.Originally posted by Samson:... regardless, all I really want to know is what handful (let's say 10) of armor and vehicle mods to download that will most likely show up in the stock scenarios included with CMBB.
The tanks that you'll run into in the early war scenarios will be very rare in the '44/'45 ones and vice versa.
Downloading some different models of the T-34 and the KV and SU series is never a bad idea. Same is true for the different variants of the german Pz III and IV and Stugs and from mid'43 on you'll see more and more Panthers.
-
Thank you, very much appreciated!
-
-
First: both the SU-122 and the SU-152 are definately not the right tanks for dueling with Panthers and Tigers.
Both are assault guns and their main task is to blast german infantry strongpoints. Look at the data for the SU-122. It's armed with a short (L22) 122mm gun with a pretty low muzzle velocity (about 330m/s for a hollow charge round). That means you won't be able to hit a german tank at longer ranges because the gun is simply not accurate enough because its trajectory is pretty curved and not flat like the german long 75mm and 88mm guns. In CM the higher the muzzle velocity the more accurate a gun is.
Same problem with the SU-152. Although the gun is better the muzzle velocity is still far lower than the german guns'. And what's even worse, because the rounds consist of two seperate parts it takes ages to load them.
Did I mention that german optics are superior to the soviet ones?
Conclusion: Never ever engage in long-range duels with slow-firing assault guns with low muzzle velocity against Panthers and Tigers. They will die. A lot.
If there's absolutely no other way (there always is...
) at least use the 'shoot and scoot' command so minimize their vulnerability. Use dedicated tank destroyers like the SU-100 or SU-85s or buy a lot of T-34/85, use their superior speed, drop a smokescreen with a 82mm FO, close in and flank the german cats.
[ February 03, 2003, 02:56 PM: Message edited by: ParaBellum ]
-
Oh, a charming fellow he was.Originally posted by Soddball:Who was this Heydrich fellah?
Besides that he was an SS-Obergruppenführer (General) and head of the SD. He was one of the key figures in the expulsion/murder of jews in Europe. After the german attack on the soviet Union he directed the Einsatzgruppen that followed the army groups and murdered hundreds of thousands people, mostly jews.
After the "Wannsee-Konferenz" in 1941 he was responsible for the execution of the Endlösung, resulting in millions of jews murdered.
I'm pretty much puzzled by some of the comments I read here...
-
I like to use them in attack/assault QBs.
In a recent PBEM I had to coordinate an infantry attack with tank support and 2x82mm FOs for smoke and 2x120mm FOs for suppressing the enemy. Since I couldn't get LOS to the important areas I decided to use preplanned arty strikes since these are precise even when targetting without direct LOS.
All arty missions were planned to start 10 minutes after the battle began. My infantry needed these 10 turns to get into jump-off positions, then the 82mm FOs layed down a BIG smokescreen while the 120mm hammered the defenses at the projected breakthrough points.
My infantry charged through the smoke and my T-34s and light tanks raced forward and broke into the enemy positions.
It was a nice example of how useful the preplanned arty missions can be.
-
Simply put: no.Originally posted by MAsta_KFC:...Could the models and textures (i'm sure the textures are easy, since they are just BMPs) be extracted in some way from CMBO and implemented into the CMBB engine?
The models are hard-coded into the engine and without BFC releasing the source code it's not possible to change, alter or replace them.
BFC have stated several times their oppinion about releasing the source code. Expressions like "...never...from my cold dead hands...when hell freezes over..." were used.
-
Seanachai, you pathetic demi-grog!Originally posted by Seanachai:This all begs the real question, of course, which is whether the young lady in question could run with the HMG, rather than merely crouching over it.
Where did you see a HMG in this pic?
I actually really would like to see the girl bend over a tripod, but that's not the question here.
Back to the pool with you!
To me it's quite clear that the (hot) babe in that pic ran quite a distance with the LMG, and being happy it wasn't a bloody bren tripod, decided to get nakked as quick as possible to chear up the Kameraden.
Well, we all did this once in a while...
-
The "Holzgaser" was not only used in Germany during WWII but also in a lot of occupied countries where gasoline for private use was hard to find.
They were used in quite some european countries up to the 50's in cars, tucks and even buses.
It was far from being an exotic exception in these days.
Edited for schpelling...
[ January 28, 2003, 08:14 PM: Message edited by: ParaBellum ]
-
Originally posted by redwolf:
Simply: foxholes represent hasty fortifications. The troops simply didn't had time to dig a proper trench or didn't expect heavy enemy attacks in their area.If you want to simulate well dug-in troops, don't use foxholes.
Edit: while typing saw Andreas' post.
-
Just did a quick test:
A rifle squad in a foxhole gets 44% exposure, a rifle squad in a trench 9%.
These figures are pretty much the same as the ones given in the 'Reibert'. For those that don't know what I'm talking about
, the 'Reibert' is the annual updated german soldier's handbook first published in 1929.I got mine when I served in the Bundeswehr in 1993/94. It's also called 'the bible' of the german soldier.
Again, the 'Reibert' gives an 'protection value' for a foxhole of 50%, and for a trench-like construction of 90% against incoming fire.
Although these are, of course, rough figures I still think they show that the data in CMBB isn't that far off as Redwolf suggests.
-
The AI in CM isn't too capable when attacking, as in most tactical wargames. Therefore you've to help her a bit when designing a scenario.
You have to give the AI some clues where to go. One or two small flags usually help a lot, same goes for roads that lead towards the VLs.
Organize the AI's forces a bit. Put the tanks in a position from where they can roll towards the VLs. Put the infantry in positions from where they have covered approaches to the VLs.
And most important: If you defend against the AI, give it a BIG bonus on forces. Since the AI tends to attack piecemeal it'll need these troops.
When I defend against the AI I usually give it at least +50% troops and +1 experience.
-
According to my "Reibert" a hasty foxhole (one soldier/one hour to dig) gives about 50% protection against enemy fire, a "Kampfstand" (two soldiers/three hours to dig) which, I think, can be compared to a CMBB trench gives 90% protection vs incoming fire.Originally posted by redwolf:...Then, the difference between trenches and foxholes is irritating. 2% exposure in the trench, 46% (or so, no CMBB here) for the foxhole, both in the open. How can a force which builds these trenches can be so lazy to dig foxholes right next to the trench that leaves 46% of their bodies exposed when fighting from them? Get in front of a mirror and measure how much 46% of your body is. It's not only your head, it is almost down to the waist. But you had time to build a trench to to a 98% coverage.
So BFC's figures don't seem to be too far off.
[ January 28, 2003, 05:29 PM: Message edited by: ParaBellum ]
-
17.62MB! Thx for this effort, MrNoobie! Downloading as I speak...er, write.
What a package!
-
I disagree. A competent opponent will not make such stupid mistakes when placing his AT guns.Originally posted by RSColonel_131st:Scouting PAK's with infantry can't be that hard. If your enemy has them protected by infantry close by, you can most likely see the gun while you get into the skirmish with infantry.
If your enemy protects them with an infantry belt ahead, chances are his PAK's can't support his Inf. Wipe them out with Tanks and continue Scouting.
Of course, last alternative is to use Armored Cars or similar fast scouting vehicles, with emphasis of fast movement and cover. They are cheaper as a tank if you lose them, and they might be able to spot the gun without staying to long in the cone of fire.
He will place his Paks as far back as possible combined with some guns sited for flank shots against advancing enemy tanks.
Your infantry won't be able to close in since long-range HMG fire will pin them down.
His infantry will be in position so that if enemy tanks engage them, they'll get targeted by his AT guns, preferably assisted by TRPs.
'Reverse slope defese' comes to mind.
If you put your infantry in position where enemy tanks can 'wipe them out' with your AT assets unable to interfere there's a serious flaw in your defense plan.
Armoured cars or other lightly armoured/armed vehicles? Why should I bother to open fire on them with my precious AT guns? They do not pose a serious threat for my infantry and won't spot anything while moving fast.
AT rifles will take care of them. Or maybe a light Flak gun (20mm). The AC will be dead before it even sees the enemy.
[ January 27, 2003, 04:42 PM: Message edited by: ParaBellum ]
slightly off topic
in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
Posted
Hi Mom!