Medieval

I agree with others about the IV as being somewhat vulnerable in the game due to close range battles and its thin armor- especially in the side and rear. However, BO is a 1944-45 game- late war where the Allies start producing effective anti-armor AFVs and weapons. Largely, it just gets outclassed.... I think you'll find the IVH/Js AWESOME tanks before the late war period. Andy Member- the IVH Club.

Wanted some suggestions from people that model on which company makes the best WWII AFV models (details, scale, good directions, etc.) and what hobby stores are good for these sort of things. Not worried about where they are in the US but if they have a website, let me know. Thanks, Andy

I can't wait for CM2, Eastern Front, etc. IMO, Steve and Battlefront should approach the expansion of the game much like Hasbro's Advanced Squad Leader.. in modules or scenario packs. Create the entire WWII Order of Battle and provide terrain for all theaters, including PTO and North Africa. There is plenty of material, plenty of scenarios/operations to design. Just take your time and get it done right. I'd LOVE to see an early war module on the western front... French H39s and B1-bs tearing up Pz Is and IIs. Medieval

I can't wait for CM2, Eastern Front, etc. IMO, Steve and Battlefront should approach the expansion of the game much like Hasbro's Advanced Squad Leader.. in modules or scenario packs. Create the entire WWII Order of Battle and provide terrain for all theaters, including PTO and North Africa. There is plenty of material, plenty of scenarios/operations to design. Just take your time and get it done right. I'd LOVE to see an early war module on the western front... French H39s and B1-bs tearing up Pz Is and IIs. Medieval

Its not how I define victory that matters... its how a scenario designer does. Perhaps, its the vague orders or explanations.... basically you design your attack/defense on what needs to be accomplished, correct? So if it says "Hold the building cluster at ALL costs" I'm going to design and execute my defense based upon that. Now, I do it, lose some men and vehicles (no kidding, huh?) in the process but I defend the buildings. DRAW. I say that blows.

I've posted this before but quite some time ago. Who has a problem with the way victory's are decided relative to how _most_ of the objectives are written in the pre-game writeups? Statements like you must hold the bridge at all costs!! are placed in the mission area. So, the game ends and I've saved the Bridge at Cheneux and it says DRAW!!! Why? I lost a few of the flags, true.. but how could I have not? The game is a classic fall-back defense. I want more a quantitative victory condition system! Blah blah blah. End of rant.

The STUG MUST be closely accompanied by infantry.... try to keep it hull down or guarded. They are better for defense in many ways. Keep the frontal armor facing all potential threats.... 8-)

I thought it was a Panther in PR.... hmm, I'll have to watch that scene again....

That certainly is fate.... the chances are slim to none. A backblast could start a flame but not a blaze instantly... nor an explosion. In addition, I've noticed many buildings blowing up from HE rounds... and its happening more and more it seems. A Panther of mine in Parker's Crossroads BLEW to pieces a 2 story Heavy building filled with like a company of Amis. Most died. That's a bit over the top. Andy

Are the victory conditions in scenarios TOO vague for most of you? Maybe, I'm missing something... I think that victory conditions for each side must be more precise... perhaps, more numerical in nature. For example, I've played a few scenarios that, in conclusion, have me in control of ALL flags, the enemy routed. However, they have a draw in place... is it b/c I lost too many men/didn't kill enough men, etc.? There have been other games I've played that say "hold the bridge/town, etc.".... does that mean if 1 enemy squad is alive in a small building, I lose? Arnhem: Red Devils- my roommate played it as the Germans and went across the bridge on the first battle... there he stayed until the end and the computer called it a MAJOR ALLIED VICTORY?!?! Its tough to micrmanage your OB in the game if the victory conditions are not extremely precise. ------------------ "And if Never Have You Should, These Things are Fun And Fun is Good." -Dr. Suess

Are the victory conditions in scenarios TOO vague for most of you? Maybe, I'm missing something... I think that victory conditions for each side must be more precise... perhaps, more numerical in nature. For example, I've played a few scenarios that, in conclusion, have me in control of ALL flags, the enemy routed. However, they have a draw in place... is it b/c I lost too many men/didn't kill enough men, etc.? There have been other games I've played that say "hold the bridge/town, etc.".... does that mean if 1 enemy squad is alive in a small building, I lose? Arnhem: Red Devils- my roommate played it as the Germans and went across the bridge on the first battle... there he stayed until the end and the computer called it a MAJOR ALLIED VICTORY?!?! Its tough to micrmanage your OB in the game if the victory conditions are not extremely precise. ------------------ "And if Never Have You Should, These Things are Fun And Fun is Good." -Dr. Suess

There is, INDEED, a huge difference between fiction and non-fiction. Can't beleive you said that.... I play ASL. Each scenario and Campaign is based in history. The battle is modified to make it as balanced as possible. I.E. both sides have a chance to secure the vicorty conditions. But, I love the game and play it partly b/c it is historical. ------------------ "And if Never Have You Should, These Things are Fun And Fun is Good." -Dr. Suess

Wild Bill, is Herrlisheim included in the game? I thought I had looked for it last night but couldn't find it. Maybe, it was a dream....

Keep in mind, fellas, the Russians are not a part of this thread. If so, I may have to move from the Panther to the T-34 M43... but, we'll see its iteration in the game I hope. And this is all LATE war stuff. The Stuart is one of the BEST early war American tanks. The French B1-Bis is the best 1940 tank in the war. German armor couldn't touch it.... too bad the French had no idea how to use it. :PKeep in mind, fellas, the Russians are not a part of this thread. If so, I may have to move from the Panther to the T-34 M43... but, we'll see its iteration in the game I hope. And this is all LATE war stuff. The Stuart is one of the BEST early war American tanks. The French B1-Bis is the best 1940 tank in the war. German armor couldn't touch it.... too bad the French had no idea how to use it. :PKeep in mind, fellas, the Russians are not a part of this thread. If so, I may have to move from the Panther to the T-34 M43... but, we'll see its iteration in the game I hope. And this is all LATE war stuff. The Stuart is one of the BEST early war American tanks. The French B1-Bis is the best 1940 tank in the war. German armor couldn't touch it.... too bad the French had no idea how to use it. ------------------ "And if Never Have You Should, These Things are Fun And Fun is Good." -Dr. Suess

Keep in mind, fellas, the Russians are not a part of this thread. If so, I may have to move from the Panther to the T-34 M43... but, we'll see its iteration in the game I hope. And this is all LATE war stuff. The Stuart is one of the BEST early war American tanks. The French B1-Bis is the best 1940 tank in the war. German armor couldn't touch it.... too bad the French had no idea how to use it. ------------------ "And if Never Have You Should, These Things are Fun And Fun is Good." -Dr. Suess

Keep in mind, fellas, the Russians are not a part of this thread. If so, I may have to move from the Panther to the T-34... but, we'll see its iteration in the game I hope. And this is all LATE war stuff. The Stuart is one of the BEST early war American tanks. The French B1-Bis is the best 1940 tank in the war. German armor couldn't touch it.... too bad the French had no idea how to use it. ------------------ "And if Never Have You Should, These Things are Fun And Fun is Good." -Dr. Suess

Keep in mind, fellas, the Russians are not a part of this thread. If so, I may have to move from the Panther to the T-34... but, we'll see its iteration in the game I hope. And this is all LATE war stuff. The Stuart is one of the BEST early war American tanks. The French B1-Bis is the best 1940 tank in the war. German armor couldn't touch it.... too bad the French had no idea how to use it. ------------------ "And if Never Have You Should, These Things are Fun And Fun is Good." -Dr. Suess

The question was not 5 tanks vs. 5 tanks.... in that situation anyone could conceivably win with similar Gun sizes and Ammo. The Sherman Jumbo as a nice assault tank but not a Panther...

PLEASE do not say King Tiger or Sherman Jumbo.. they were not. The Tiger is a slow beast that is infantry meat in towns. The Panther- all designations. Best mass produced tank every built for power, speed, close-combat defensive systems and smoke. ------------------ "And if Never Have You Should, These Things are Fun And Fun is Good." -Dr. Suess

We have 2 different experiences then... that's good. Maybe, I'm getting lucky. In regards, to HE vs. AP accuracy, I worded it poorly. I would say HE was less effective in killing infantry relative to AP's success in knocking out tanks. For example, AP was shot at hard targets and was made to pierce armor... and it did it rather well. HE was fired not at indivdual men but at general positions to cause problems and kill, of course. There were NOT HE shells for bunkers or HE shells for when infantry was in Holes or HE shells for when infantry was on a beach. Therefore, it was less effective in its usage then AP was in its. And I was stating that HE seems to be extremely effective (for me) when it was not. But, I would say that HE was of lower velocity then AP. [This message has been edited by Medieval (edited 11-01-2000).] [This message has been edited by Medieval (edited 11-01-2000).]

I think tanks hit too often in this game.... tankers were not surrounded by computer models or such. There are many MANY things that went into a tank's accuracy and firing ability at all ranges. In fact, I think that tanks are too easy to kill in this game at times. ------------------ "And if Never Have You Should, These Things are Fun And Fun is Good." -Dr. Suess

I'm throwing this out there to gather information and opinions... HE is certainly effective... but how effective? It seems that when I target a squad with an AFV it always seems to completely destroy the squad...HE is less accurate then AP rounds. It could certainly hurt infantry but it would have to POUND that target for a few turns... in CM it seems like its 1 turn and BLAMO.

Just My Opinion- Don't need em'. Part of the intrique for me is to "recreate" the battles and actions of WWII.... God knows, there were thousands and thousands.... I'd rather not waste my time on anything that is fiction no matter how fun the game is... its bogus.

(I apologize if this has been spoken of before). Not sure if others have used this tactic but I believe it to be invaluable. DEPLOY units into half-squads both on defense as well as for the attack. Not all of your squads mind you, just ones for key tasks. I could write a long treatise (on how to use them/when to use them/why to use them/which unit type you should deploy in any given OB) but I won't. You figure it out on your own.... I will say this, though... halfies on the attack draw fire and thus draw out hidden troops... if they die, SO? Use the other halfie to do the same somewhere else. On defense you can use them to for ambushing on flanks or as bodies to fill certain areas. Medieval

I think your thoughts are valid. Certainly, it is an excellent infantry killer with its high ROF and power. You need to PROTECT this baby, though. As you point out, keep it way back under cover.... and it will be your best friend. Andy