ParaBellum
-
Posts
2,061 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by ParaBellum
-
-
Uh, isn't this information available in the detailed unit statistics by pressing the 'enter' key?
-
Eyelevel, I guess this comes down to personal preference. I usually like to observe the whole battlefield at lvl 5 for the 'big picture', than move to the different 'hot spots' and watch the action again from lvl 3/4.
I use the lvl 1/2 mainly for positioning units or watching some real gripping scenes.
The bigger the battle, the more 'replays' I need with different views.
-
You two should charge money for this!
-
Didn't have the soviets BIG problems with their AT rounds? That is, rounds that should be able to penetrate the armour because of calibre/weight and muzzle velocity but fail to penetrate because the rounds shatter on impact?
-
Looks like we have a new entry to the CMBB FAQ. Just in case...
-
The gfx are the way they are because when the CM engine was developed, the aim was that it should run on low-end computers as well as on medium range ones. Wargamers, that were the audience CM was built for, are far more reluctant to upgrade their machines every year than your typical FPS fan. Since CMBB still uses (basically) the same engine, what we see now is what could be done with the 'old' engine.Originally posted by Mercury:The designers have clearly mastered the engine, but why do the graphics come in as a poor second? Certainly where animation of the men is concerned, the AFVs are fine.
Why argue against improving the look?
When CMII will appear, the average user's machine will be far more powerful than the machines CMBO was developed for, so I'm sure (and BFC stated that repeatedly already) that the gfx will be vastly improved.
Mercury, I'm not arguing against grafical improvements, hell I want to see CM with the best possible gfx myself. Just not at the cost of a cut-down in other, IMO more important areas.
Absolute spotting comes to my mind...
[ October 27, 2002, 09:08 AM: Message edited by: ParaBellum ]
-
*sniff* man, that was beautiful... No, there's just something in my eye...Originally posted by Bruno Weiss:[QB...Like the North star, Tom is there. Guiding us to the safe harbor of mod downloads, ensuring peace and tranquility in our time through the fair and equitable distribution of mods to the masses, selflessly he devotes himself to the public service for the betterment of all modkind...
[/QB]
-
I object very strongly. I already have enough 'whiz-bang' games with fantastic graphics that I played for a week or two and never touched them after that.Originally posted by Mercury:So forget the engine rewrite, that seems to produce the most gripping and tense contests, please get those graphics nailed down to perfection, we know it can be done!
For most wargamers, and CM was always targeted towards that group, the content is much more important than shiny gfx.
With the engine rewrite though I'm sure the graphical quality will make a big leap forward, but, I hope, and am quite sure about it, not at the price of less complexity/realism.
-
Zarquon, don't try to argue with Schoerner... Someone who calls Rennecke a "nationalistic protest singer"...
Just a short sample from one of his lyrics:
"Dem Führer treu gilt der Befehl,
Ehrlichkeit spricht aus der ganzen Seel'.
Kennt keine Gnade, wie es auch schreit,
diese Rasse stellt sich jedem Streit.
Kampf bis zum Tod, Sieg oder Misere,
verlieren ist Schande doch siegen ist Ehre.
Ob Dealer,Mörder,Eindringlinge oder Antifa-Zecken
fьrchten tut sie jeder der Dreck am Stecken."
Yeah, protest singer...I'm glad Goebbels didn't record songs, you'd surely label him 'protest singer', too.
Schoerner, have fun living in your own world. Every time you post some reasonable, CM related stuff and I think maybe you're not THAT weird you post something like that and confirm my suspicion.
BFC, sorry for this off-topic post but like Zarquon I'm really getting ticked off by such blatant nonsense.
Ah, and hi mom!
-
Tom's doing an awesome job with his site. I've downloaded tons of mods from his old site and downloaded several already from his new site. Since I disabled download accelerator I usually get no problems.
I'm very thankful for all his work and dedication, his 'Ardennes mod' for CMBO is one of the three must-have mods for me.
-
I got a question regarding trees in snowy conditions. In a current PBEM set in November '42 with snow I get a beautiful white scenery with 'autumn trees'. It looks kind of strange when on the white plains you see beautiful 'indian summer type' trees in red and gold.
Even with the 'blizzard' setting I still got no 'snowy' trees. When I changed the date to December I finally got the winter version of the trees.
So, are the type of tree models tied to the month? I think it would be more reasonable if they were tied to the weather conditions, with the winter trees being used whenever you choose snow or blizzard conditions.
-
The Hs129 used a electro-pneumatic loading system that enabled the 7,5cm gun to fire at a ROF of about 40 rounds per minute, although it could carry IIRC only 20-30 rounds.
I'd say the automatic Flak guns like the Bofors 40mm and the german 37mm Flak were the most rapid firing guns with a decent AT capability.
IMO there is no point having a dedicated AT weapon with high ROF if
a.) the calibre is too small to hurt the target
or
b.) the calibre is big enough to kill the target with one round, so why bother with a high ROF?
-
Only for guys with red jackets and Zhukov's memoirs under their arm who I pick up at train stations...Originally posted by Andreas:He buys a mean coffee, too
-
Hehe...
Lt. Hortlund, this really has been discussed to death already.
ScouseJedi summed it up pretty well :"...but I'm afraid it must legally be classified as a game..."
-
Not to forget the WAFFLE HUT, the organization of ex-WAFFLEGRENADIER vets of WWII.
-
No doubt...
-
Bone_Vulture, read again what you wrote and what I quoted...
-
Sure about that?Originally posted by Bone_Vulture:Ditto. And IRL, the Panzerfausts were vastly more effective than Panzerfausts.
-
Originally posted by Dirtweasle:
I buy infantry units for Parabellum to blow to bits with heavy artillery. He seems to enjoy it greatly, and it also give me the illusion of doing that matters durring the turns.
-
I encountered the same problem when I played the AI a few days ago. I was wondering what the AI was doing when it assaulted my positions with 4-5 gun tractors! I mean, I've seen the AI doing silly things but that was really scary.
I was even more astonished when I opened up on them with several MGs and a platoon of infatry less than 150m away and couldn't kill them.
After the AI surrendered, the "gun tractors" suddenly turned into various versions of the SdKfZ 251...
Yes, the vodka ration was cut drastically for my men after this incident...
-
-
Hmm, let me guess... The Author suggested to play this scenario from the soviet side because...aah...wait! *think* Oh, this is a hard one... *think more* ...because...*think even harder*... Yes! I got it! Because it's not too enjoyable from the german side?Originally posted by JVril:I KNOW it sez "recommended as Red Army against AI" ...
Yesss! Ha! Man, that was difficult.
[wipes sweat from the forehead]
-
Yup, I always enjoyed Fionn's AARs. He obviously put a lot of work into them and were IMO both informative and entertaining. Unfortunately some guys felt obliged to bring their personal gripes with him into the last thread.Originally posted by Jazza:I Doubt you'll see anymore from Fionn, the last time he put one up, he caught a lot of **** from people for no real reason and then decided not to make anymore public because of that.
A shame really, good aars ruined by a few assholes.
Fionn surely isn't a saint or a very easy character but I never quite understood the hostility of some towards him.
I miss him and his contributions to CM.
And I'm looking forward to some new AARs. Hell, I could even try one myself! Hmm... Got to think about that...
-
Wow, great effort WP, thx a lot!
:eek:
Infantry Types?
in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)
Posted
According to www.feldgrau.com
"Fusilier: An historic German term often used to refer to heavy infantry units, original refering to the type of weapon carried of the same name. During WWII used to name infantry formations with some recon abilities that replaced an infantry division's recon battalion mid-war when the Germans reduced the number of standard infantry battalions in their divisions from 9 to 6. See also Grenadier."
"Jäger: If used in conjunction with other unit types it indicated the infantry component of that general type, such as Fallschirmjäger, Gebirgsjäger or Skijäger. When used in its hunting sense jäger did not necessarily imply infantry. Thus Panzerjäger meant anti-tank or tank hunter and not armored infantry. Also refers to a term put into use in 1942 to help boost the morale of light infantry units. See also Grenadier."
"Grenadier: An historic German term often used to refer to heavy infantry units, originally refering to the task and type of weapon carried, in this case hand thrown explosives (now known as grenades). Early in WWII used to refer to certain units to signify their elite status. On 15th October 1942 all German regular infantry regiments were renamed as Grenadier-Regimenter in the hopes of increasing their morale by establishing links to their elite counter-part units of the past. Grenadier was also used later in WWII to refer to the basic level of German soldier in an infantry unit. Instead of simply being a Gefreiter one became a Grenadier"
BTW in today's german army we still have several of these 'old' designations. The modern 'mechanized' heavy infantry is called 'Panzergrenadier', the light infantry 'Jäger' (including Gebirgsjäger/mountain troops and Fallschirmjäger/airborne). 'Jäger' is usually the description for light, higly mobile infantry. The Jäger units (served in one in 93/94) are specially trained to fight in difficult terrain/urban areas.
[ October 28, 2002, 06:25 PM: Message edited by: ParaBellum ]