Scipio

Keith, your comment is bad because you first should read the rest of the discussion, so you don't need to bring up the same points again.

Well, beside all facts and/or rumours about the HHL : it was not the only infantry AT weapon. I guess we turned this dicussion into the wrong direction, cause the idea was an 'Assualt Vehicel' command. This can be done in many ways and with many weapons. 'Molotow Cocktails' and 'Geballte Ladungen' (grenade bundle) were AFAIK common on both sides, or even the 'Private Ryan' method (if this was realistic), jump on the tank, open the hatch and throw a grenade into it. We just give the command, and the squad attacks the tank with everything that's available. This has been done at the front, it was known to be risky, and that's why the German had a Special Badge for the Single Handed Destruction of a Tank. Why not just alter the normal attack command? Just something like this: when I order an infantry unit to target a vehicel (or maybe even any other target) a request pops up like 'Attempt destruction yes/no', so we can directly order if we just want to shoot the tank with rifles, so it must just close the hatches, or if we want to try to destroy it, so the troop attacks with everything available until the tank is detroyed, out of range or the squad is out. [ 01-04-2002: Message edited by: Scipio ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Bastables: ... But It still stands that the Hafthohlladung series was seen as a poor weapon when compared with the panzerfausts. Again I stand by the thesis that successful close assaults were not a big killer of AFVs relative to gun kills and/or mechanical defects/lack of fuel.<hr></blockquote> The HHL is in my source (German, Panzerabwehrwaffen) described as very succesfull. I guess you missed some facts. a) The HHL is a defensive weapon, cause the soldier must get in touch with the tank. In early war the Germans were mostly in advance, the need for this weapon was limited. Anyway, it was one of the few available AT weapons for the infantry in early war. In the later war, the Germans had the Schreck and especially the Faust, a very cheap, easy to use and effective weapon, so the HHL was simply obsolete. c) AFAIK - but not 100% sure - the Germans had production problems because of the lack of the magnetic components. Graaf Spee, AFAIK a tank already retreats when he notice close enemy infantry. And we are talking about a defensive tactic - this means, the AT troop waits somewhere in an ambush for his chance, but he won't move over the map and search a tank to destroy.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Panzerman: Do you think that having a new command will change this? Your men when they attack the tank will still be in the open. The tank can still move faster in most cases, and yes they can still shoot at your men. I think it would be more aproperat to ask for a fallow AFVs type command, so your infantry will just follow a vehicle. This type of command could also be used to follow ones own AFVs as well.<hr></blockquote> Indeed I think so. 'My men in the open' - Well, what does this mean? I wouldn't send them over 500m of open terrain to attack a tank. But close to wood? Or in a city? In a trench or foxhole? Of course can a tank move faster - if he is ordered to move. Of course he can shoot my men - if he has spotted them. A buttoned tank is nearly blind, especially to close infantry from the sides or from behind. Yes, I think a 'assault vehicel' makes sense in very much cases. Nevertheless, a 'Follow vehicel' order would make sense, too, or any other command to order vehicels/infantry to move together at the same speed to cover each other.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Panzerman: Whats the point of the said command. Men already assault tanks and/or vehicles if they are close. It sounds to me like you want BTS to make a graphical display of the action, nothing more. <hr></blockquote> I don't agree. You can order your men to run close to a tank - and then you can pray that they will do the right thing.

As Tero said: range. What would you prefer - run into the open close to a tank to throw your whatever or attach a magnetic charges, or shot from 100m away with a Panzerfaust or -schreck while in cover? And - close attacks were indeed effective, that's why the German developed the Zimmerit coating. The only unlogic thing was that the German were the only nation that made great use of magnetic charges. [ April 07, 2002, 03:55 PM: Message edited by: Scipio ]

Happy new year to all of you. Have fun with your friends and your favorite neurotoxin(s)

Michael, why do I have the feeling that you try an evasion tactic to stab me from behind? Amidst_Void, you can download them at WarfareHQ

The only real historic winter camo was plain white. I heard rumours about a grey Splinter (No 3), issued to Gebirgsjaeger, but I wasn't able to verify this. The Blackdot (No 2) is a modern Russian camo, the Fleck (No 4) is based on the modern German desert camo.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Why doesn't someone offer the modified files as wavs for download instead of putting the unmodified ones up? :confused: <hr></blockquote> In my case, because I won't pay for the webspace and especially traffic that will be needed for 20 megabyte of uncompressed waves. My latest update has something about 4 MB uncompressed. It has been downloaded for 220 times in the last days. That's already nearly 1 GB traffic, for only one file in 5 days! Further questions?

Okay, the problem is simple. CM needs a specific format for the wav files: 16bit-signed mono with a sample rate of 44100Hz The tool I post at WarfareHQ converts them automatical back into this format. Other converters don't do so, as it seems. It's possible that you can enforce a conversion into the needed format by preference settings. Depends on the program. But I recomment that you use the program I offer, if possible.

A late present: This pack uses again my installation tool (sorry MACs*, for Windows only). This enables you to exchange all camos between Wehrmacht/GB, FJ, SS & Volkssturm. As usual exclusive @ WarfareHQ *If we have a Mac programmer here who is interested to convert the tool for the Mac, please contact me @ scipio@scipio-net.de The tool is written in VisualBasic. [ 12-26-2001: Message edited by: Scipio ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Justin5471: When I downloaded them they ran really slowly. Its a bit off putting when some one cries out and it sounds...all...sloooowwwww. Any suggestions? :confused: <hr></blockquote> Which program did you use to transfer them from mp3 to wav? And BTW, who is Scorpio? [ 12-26-2001: Message edited by: Scipio ]</p>

It's the Char2C. It was weighted 68t, and the exact armorthickness is not know, but it was at least 60mm. It was well armed, but only 8 km/h speed. [ 12-25-2001: Message edited by: Scipio ]</p>

Without doubt the best looking wargame. And the best sounding. And the best at all.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by sitzkrieg: I also noticed none of the graphic mods on the site list credits to either BTS or the original author in a readme file. They mention where the original mod came from but not if permission was granted. Are you sure you had permission to do those mods, Scipio? Hate for you to have to remove them.<hr></blockquote> A copyright remark with all information is included in all zips. BTW, I downloaded your sounds a few days ago. You must have used the same source like me. They sound very similar

Once again I have updated my Combat Mission sound mods. The update includes 5 x medium explosions 1 x fire 2 x HT death 2 x MP44 2 x incoming heavy artillery 1 x RR/Bazooka 35 German voices I have also re-encoded ALL my sound mods with the Lame-audiocodec, which offers a much better quality. Enjoy You find them as usual at WarfareHQ [ 12-23-2001: Message edited by: Scipio ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Artillery now has more realistic fire delays based on the formation the artillery is attached to. A Battalion asset will have a much smaller delay than an Army or Corps asset. We also have added Prepatory Barrages and on map mortar vehicles can now benefit from HQ spotted indirect fire just like their unmotorized brethren have been able to do.<hr></blockquote> I would like to hear more about the new artillery model. How about starshells? Phosphor? Realistic 'off target'? Etc

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Louie the Toad: I thought that article from WWII posted weeks ago showed that indeed surviving members of units were used for all kinds jobs.<hr></blockquote> One minute after they jumped out of their tank? I don't think this is realistic. First, they have no weapons - except some pistols. Then they have no orderes. So they would first need to find usefull weaponry, then they need to find someone who order them to do something. What doesn't mean that they want to find someone who tell 'em to risk their lives a few minutes after they survived the dead of their tank/gun. Even if Hollywood tell us, human beings are usually not so heroic. Even if they are they would need some time to organize, and I guess more time that the CM timeframe gives us. Beside that, if they would just get beserk and join the battle out of command, they are just that: out of command. So you wouldn't be able to give them orders.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Tanaka: The scoring system in CM "invites" the players to not use crews in risky tasks. So, I really don't see any problems with crews in CM.<hr></blockquote> This is right, but the few points really doesn't matter. The information you will gain does. Just see it this way : a crew uncovers your hidden AT. You kill one or two crewmen instead of the valueable tank you are waiting for.

I hope the 'best of the best' problem will be solved by the rarity function in CM:BB

Wouldn't it make sense if the crew always try to leave the battlefield to friendly map edges under AI control? Of course I can't swear it, but I don't think that it was a common practice that a field commander forces a surviving crew to stay and fight, or to use them as scouts.

The east front has seen a lot of more or less improved gun carriers with all calibers of AT guns - AT guns are fine, but they needed mobility. I hope we will see this vehicels in CM:BB

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by sitzkrieg: Did you get permission first?<hr></blockquote> SIR, YES, SIR We do not post anything without the permission of the author at WarfareHQ. I have uploaded the file again. It should be working now.

Michael, I was hoping that you would send me a check for the advertisment