illo

Thanks andreas. I would like to know if outlined areas are vertical surfaces. If so its actually quite bit larger than 30%.

And where is tiger???

DOUH!!.. I forgot huge compression ratio on for jpgs. Well, I hope you get the idea.

Lets compare PzKpfw IV and Valentine. Both have "vertical" front hull plate where vision slit for driver is located. Lets call it "driver plate". Driver plate % of whole front hull. Valentine ca. 30% PzKpfw IV ca. 33% Driver plate CM:BB hit change of all front hull hits. Valentine 0% PzKpfw 50% or more. I think this is unreasonable. Here I Photoshopped little graphical example. Red lines are how CM:BB abstracts armor.

Hi Andreas, I think you might be bit too hard on people who arent so aware of "the facts". I dont think Jägermeister wanted to offend you. So wouldnt it be reasonable to just talk about role of recce and leave his comments to the another thread. I sometimes think twice before posting here, because its so easy to start a flame here just because lack of knowledge. All of us don't research these things as hobby. Calling someone ignorant because he doesnt share the same hobby with you is bit off IHMO. [ December 12, 2002, 07:09 AM: Message edited by: illo ]

Well that seems to scew results quite much making valentine act in early war like super sloped t-34. Maybe somekind of curved armor value would work better in this case. (Like the one we have in stugs) All tanks could be abstracted with same basis. [ December 12, 2002, 06:37 AM: Message edited by: illo ]

CM:BB lists Valentine upper hull as 30mm at 68 degrees. 75L24 AP doesnt have ANY changes to penetrate valentine frontally. Tanks dont even bother to shoot. 1. Shouldnt there be fair (50/50 or more) change that round would hit vertical surface (60mm) of upper hull? 2. Is this surface modeled in CMBB? 3. If yes, why doesnt 75L24 AP shot have changes to penetrate it even under 100m? I had kill change "none" from 50m and I would suppose gun that penetrates 60mm at 100m(by CMBB info screen) would have even slight change at 50m range against vertical surface. I would guess almost all rounds that hit 68degrees sloped part would deflect and continue to hit vertical armor. Btw. PzKpfw. IV has quite similar front hull profile but only vertical surface is modeled in CMBB.(Atleast in info screen) Just the opposite what we see on valentine. [ December 11, 2002, 10:19 PM: Message edited by: illo ]

SPA 508 Tiger I, early 1943.(bad quality pic yes) ? Photo of Das Reich Tiger. (Same camo as in first post) Some model of same. (Its possible that "octopus camo" should be rust brown, atleast it was in some cases) For more detailed pics of same go to http://members.rogers.com/ssocr4/tiger.htm or http://www.ww2modelmaker.com/articlepub/RTarticle/tigera3.htm Panzer colors. (I thought it could be of some use.) [ December 11, 2002, 07:41 PM: Message edited by: illo ]

Here Structure and Equipment, Summer 1942, hungarian army. http://members.tripod.com/~Sturmvogel/Hung2Army.html

Nimrod had 40mm bofors with 120 rounds regarding to this site. http://mtg.ipx.pl/wegry/lekkie.htm

You might do a seach on forums. There was study on allied airpower efficienty in normandy. It shows that panzers were very rarely killed by air attacks. It also shows ratio showing how panzers were usually killed/taken out of action.

Negrin, wake up! Most allied tanks in WW2 couldnt do one track forward , one in reverse.(Ones beased on sherman chassis for example) So they couldnt turn in place. However Tiger could. [ December 05, 2002, 09:36 AM: Message edited by: illo ]

Converting terrain and building mods smaller will have great effect. They will look fine even if every bmp is 50% smaller. Decreasing bmps color depth will help too. Smaller the filesize faster you CMBB runs. You can squeeze quite much without sacrificing much of visual quality.

Withrawing units will panic quite often even if there isnt any threat nearby.

Assault works great. Soldiers dont get pinned (morale bonus) and i usually get all out alive. I think this is bit gamey though. It would be good to have organized withdraw command..even with some delay where withdrawing troops wouldnt turn their backs to attackers and run but withdraw using cover and fire.

Propoganda is anything that attempts to sway opinions through a one-sided presentation of the issue (my definition). It's not necessarily a negative term. "Why We Fight" is good propoganda because it never pretends to be anything else.</font>

Well atleast my Stug IIIf/8s never seem to snuff it. I will upload version with modest 14 kills (for your conscript stuggers) to Mod database. All those fast enough may still get 50kill über Stug at http://www.cmmods.com [ December 02, 2002, 09:30 PM: Message edited by: illo ]

Hi, bruno. You inspired me. Its supposed to be Stug IIIF(L48)with hasty and worn off red-brown/dark yellow overspray. Is this any good? Should I upload it?

sry double [ November 30, 2002, 04:19 PM: Message edited by: illo ]

Ive had MG in "hulldown" position so that it could fire targets it actually couldnt see. (Well in los tool yes, but view level 1 no) This made my opponent very frustrated since his tanks could target my MG but couldnt hit it any way. Rounds hit ground rising some meters in front of my MG, those which went over the rising when far over mg squad as well. I think HE rounds follow visual path...i mean if they visually hit hill they cant go through it and hit target. They will hit the hill or go over it.(in this case missing my MG squad both ways.) I checked position of my MG from viewpoint of enemy tank and yes..even helmet of machine gunner couldnt be seen behind the reverse slope. [ November 30, 2002, 04:20 PM: Message edited by: illo ]

Im sure Andrew gives you permission to make it CMMOS comparatible. [edit] sorry JKMK, missed your post [/edit] [ November 30, 2002, 04:05 PM: Message edited by: illo ]

No need for CMMOS mods for me, basic will do, tho both are ok. It adds some work for modder and delays release a little. So do mods as you wish, but please do em....many.

Btw. could someone upload 2 track dirtroad to mod database? Im sure someone has one from CMBO. It will work fine with CMBB too. [ November 28, 2002, 04:45 AM: Message edited by: illo ]

I like that water very much. I hope you get your CMBB soon.

Has anyone references to point out correct side armor slopes for Panther G? I know earlier models (D and A) had slightly more sloped side hull. [ November 27, 2002, 01:35 PM: Message edited by: illo ]