Jump to content

Andrew H.

Members
  • Posts

    1,446
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Converted

  • Location
    Midwest
  • Interests
    Games, Literature, History, Running, Outdoors

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Andrew H.'s Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (3/3)

17

Reputation

  1. While I don't think that changing one weapon system would have changed the war, Germany had the technology in 1937 to manufacture the Pz IV F/2, the Pz III 50 L/60, and the StuG III ... with the long 75; I've forgotten the model. I think if they had started the war with the Pz IV as a main battle tank...or maybe with a combination of Pz III L/60's and long barrelled StuGs, they may have achieved just a bit more earlier that could have made *some* difference. At least in production...maybe they would be more efficient at producing the IV if they started with the base model they ended with and didn't need to keep reengineering it during the war. There's no panic over the T-34s and the KV's, so there's no need to develop the TIger I at all. Of course they would have been a lot better off if they had focused on making the manufacturing easier and the tanks more reliable. There were 5 different sherman tank engines, but each one was based on an existing and already proven engine. Two engines were based on aircraft engines or aircraft engine prototypes. The diesel was based on two bus engines joined to a common crankcase (the tank could still move if one of the engines was knocked out). And the sherman used mostly in British service consisted of *5* V6 automobile engines all mounted around a common crankcase. (There was a toothed gear attached to where the driveshaft on each of these engines would have been, and these five gears all interlocked with the toothed gear connected to the tank's driveshaft.
  2. I think it's only a short step from Schwimmwagen to cavalry and bicycle troops. Both of which were used more than the Pershing. Although, to be fair, none of them took out a King Tiger. Still.
  3. It just occurred to me reading this thread that it may not be obvious to non-grogs that a Schwimmwagen is an amphibious vehicle that can cross a river without a ford or bridge.
  4. I love the fedoras on some of the Volkssturm members. They look so dapper.
  5. Komrade Ivan speaks perfect '70's English. Dig it! Because they don't ride in jalopies anymore. And the old man has is own track! I think the dude has the lingo down so perfectly because he was in spetsnaz, where they all learn to rap in American-ese.
  6. It's battlefront. You know it will be more complicated than that. First they will need to determine whether the hole is above or below the waterline. No, wait, I skipped a step. First they will need to determine where the waterline is based on the number of men and equipment being carried by the SW. As well as the density of water, which can vary slightly based on temperature and salinity. Then they determine whether the hole is above or below the waterline...the angle of shot will be important because some shots may enter above the waterline but exit below it. After that, it's a simple calculation of amount of water that can enter based on the number and diameter of the holes. However, what might be tricky is that as a SW takes on water, it will gradually sink, meaning that the waterline for a holed SW will constantly be changing over time; this will be critical for determining the effect of new hits.
  7. And Schwimmwagen. And partisans in Schwimmwagen.
  8. I heard a rumor (or a "rumour") that the MoD was interested in replaying France 1940. I think Battlefront should begin preparing now.
  9. You aren't fooling us Steve; we know that's from the CMBN Space Lobsters of Doom module. What we don't know is why the British MoD is worried about space lobsters.
  10. I would like to see realistic modeling of the sponson gun and turret on the Char B. I would also like to see a Char B. And it should be included in a '39-41 early war module.
  11. I'm a big East Front fan...but I do think that some of the appeal of that front had to do with the fact that the cold war was going on at that time.
  12. Troll post. CMx1 had absolute spotting (or whatever we used to call it). If one unit on the battlefield saw a unit, all other units instantly knew it was there. Instantly! CMx1 did have 38(t)s, though...so it had some advantages.
  13. Despite the many steps, my installation has gone flawlessly.
  14. I would disagree with this - timetables matter a lot, especially at CM's level. It's not a matter of "losing" if you don't capture the village or hill on time, but it is often a matter of the larger attack stopping until tomorrow because you can't move supplies up until the hill is cleared (or whatever). It can also mean the difference between enemy troops being able to escape or being cut off. As others have mentioned, time is compressed in CM - probably by at least 4 or 5 times. A quick 30 minute CM battle would probably take at least 2 hours to fight in reality (if not longer). A 2-hour CM battle is an all-day battle in reality. But the number of *actions* taken in the 30 minute CM battle/2 hour real battle are going to be the same. CM - basically - cuts out the numerous 10 minute pauses where everyone freezes and nothing happens. (Not to mention platoons getting lost in larger battles and the CO having to send a runner after them to point them in the right direction). Of course if I just want to play around, I'll set up a small QB and give myself 2 hours to play it - that way, I can futz around to my heart's content (and I do this a lot). But there are lots of historical reasons for time limits like we have in CM - accounting, of course, for the time compression.
×
×
  • Create New...