Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

gunnergoz

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,933

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by gunnergoz

    Shermans and Burning Too easily.....

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    kking199-

    Disagree with what? Where did I say that the Sherman was optimized for AT purposes? It wasn't. With the 17 pounder, it could hold it's own with a good crew getting off the first shot...but that's about it.

    No, my point, which seems to have been missed, was that the Sherman's beauty lie in it's producability, reliability and global mobility (i.e. it could be shipped anywhere and could operate almost everywhere). It was well suited to the American style of mass production, had the right amount of reserve space for later upgrades and could be counted upon to keep going when other, better engineered tanks were sitting ducks waiting for new transmissions or other fancy components.

    No one in their right mind would try to describe the Sherman as some sort of uber-tank. It could and did toe it out with enemy tanks of course, but it wasn't primarily designed to do that. And if you had to go after enemy armor, you did it with numbers and manouver and knew you'd pay a price for your efforts, but it was a job that had to be done and those wonderful guys back then did just that.

    The fault lies not with Patton, as some seem to think, but with Army Ground Forces, led by General Leslie McNair (who later died in the over-bombing accident in Normandy at the beginning of Cobra). These gentlemen, including McNair, saw tanks as exploitation weapons, designed to rampage about the enemy's rear and destroy men and materiel. They wanted to fight tanks with specialized guns and vehicles, and so we ended up with the Tank Destroyer force. The error of their thinking was not immediately apparent in the early war years.

    Patton, known for hyperbole, exaggeration and flights of fanciful boasting, is not one General I'd quote much on. I might follow him into battle, but I wouldn't let him design or produce my weapons because he was not very good in that deparment.

    The debate about the Sherman will never end, because some people will always look at this era (WW2) with their feet firmly planted in the present day, when tanks are known to be among the best tank killers. These folks will not be able to look at the situation WW2 planners and producers had to cope with, given limitations in resources, manpower, time and technology. Those people came up with the Sherman, and used it as one tool to pummel their enemies into submission. Were there tanks that could whip the Sherman? You bet! Was there ever a tank that a lucky Sherman couldn't take out? Probably not. That's not really the point, though. The main point is, the Sherman and the T-34 for that matter, were both war machines designed for mass production and mass application. The Germans' vaunted superior engineering and technology might have had merits one-on-one, but the war was about numbers as much as anything else.

    Put it another way: Put a few excellent men in excellent tanks, and you have the German Army. Put a lot of very good men in very serviceable tanks, and you have the Allied forces. Script a nice war and see what happens...Bottom line: we all know how this movie ended, folks.

    0

    Deer-in-the-Headlights: Reaction of Tanks to Strafing Run

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    I love the new aircraft features but one thing I'd like to mention is, a/c almost never operated on the battlefield alone! There was invariably at least one wingman per attack plane, and usually an entire formation would attack together. It seems odd to me, then, to just have one a/c doing an attack run, even in a CMBB-level battlefield and time frame.

    So- has anyone tried a battle with 2 or more a/c diving down to wreak havoc? What was the outcome?

    0

    Grass mod

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Nice job indeed. Personally, I'm finding it a real challenge to design grass textures for CMBB without using the original grass as a starting point...the reason being, the richness of the new terrain features tends to cause confusing texture overlaps (eg with tree bases, etc.)

    I'll figure something out, though. :D

    0

    Italians in Stalingrad

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    I watched "Come and See" with my 75-year-old Russian Mother-in-Law recently. She sat through it very absorbed by the film. Her comment at the end was, roughly, "yes, it was just like that."

    We, comfortably playing PC games in warm houses, debating ad infinitum about how many Tigers can dance on the head of a pin, have no idea...

    0

    Shermans and Burning Too easily.....

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by dd:

    weren't sherman's nicknamed "Ronson's" by the Brits?

    (As in Ronson cigarette lighters "They light every time!")

    They were indeed. Mind you, this comes from the one country besides Italy which could not manage to produce ONE decent medium tank the whole war. Even the Brits admit their tank designs were flawed from the start. The Churchill and Valentine had strong points (pun intended) but were of limited utility.

    Funnily enough, the Brits loved the Sherman in use and couldn't get enough of them. In Africa it saved their bacon as the first tank able to take on the "Mark 4 Specials" with the 75mm/43 gun. The Brits used large numbers of Shermans in prefernce to their own poor designs.

    The bright spot for the Brits was their gun design of course, the 17 pounder being the best Allied AT capable gun in its class.

    I think that the Sherman is fasionably "unchic" these days and knocking it detracts from its actual reputation as a war-winning implement that served gloriously in its day. It was no Tiger, but it didn't have to be. And if a lot of good men died fighting in it due to its flaws, a heckuva lot more were carried into victory thanks to its virtues.

    As ususal, my two bits worth... :D

    0

    Shermans and Burning Too easily.....

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Russia's Shermans were for the most part diesel powered, the US forces rejecting that version for the gas V-8 they preferred. The earliest US versions used a modified, de-tuned aviation radial engine, giving the Sherman it's distinctive height.

    The Brits got the Chrysler multibank gas engine version, BTW.

    [ October 03, 2002, 03:34 AM: Message edited by: gunnergoz ]

    0

    Comments on Nvidia cards to buy

    in Combat Mission - Tech Support

    Posted

    Hello, friends

    I'm about to upgrade my system and am looking at buying with the new unit an Nvidia 128MB card, either the 4400 or the 4600. Does anyone have experience with how they work with CMBB?

    I'll be installing it in a ASUS RAMBUS P4-253mhz system, BTW.

    Oh, yeah...which OS do you all prefer? I'm inclined to go with XP but home or pro?

    Thanks! :D

    0

    Nividia 32 mg card and 2000 pt games

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by murpes:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JPSeiler:

    I have a Geforce 2 MX400 (32MB i think) and a athalon 1200, 640 MB Ram and the most games work fine, all details are set to full.

    Ok cant play the Stalingrad Oparition, but i think the most cant ;)

    Greetings

    Jean-Pierre

    This is one of the reasons I'm disappointed there isn't a FPS counter, so we can give quantitative answers to questions like this.</font>
    0

    CMBB INSTALL ISSUES! COME HERE FOR LATEST INFO!!!!

    in Combat Mission - Tech Support

    Posted

    Yep, "s__t do happen" but with BFC at the helm, at least I'm confident I'll get a fix, and pretty quick at that.

    I'll be needing one of those new CD's of CMBB, thank you. The quick fix download files work fine, the game runs OK and that will do me until the replacement disk can be mailed out.

    It's not a perfect game, or a perfect company, but I don't live in a perfect world and (blush) I'm far from perfect myself.

    As bad as we consumers must feel, I suspect that the folks back in Vermont (or whereeverinheck BFC-ville is) are pretty upset themselves right now. I take a little comfort in that, knowing that they have an investment in doing things right and pride in their product. It will all work out and, anyway, by the time we're playing CM-II in a couple of years, it will all be a laughable memory. Life is too short to sweat the small stuff.

    0

    You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll hurl...but you eventually will install CMBB!

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    San Diego is happy and noisy tonight.

    Mailman delivered package at almost 5:00 PM. Install started. Aborted after about 90% complete. Cursing starts.

    Went to tech forum. Read advice from BFC. Installed rest. Launched executeable. It RAN!

    Played around a bit with game. Ooogled graphics, units and options. Wet my pants and wept for joy. That's what aging does to you, a good leak is a wonder to behold.

    Oh, yes, CMBB ROCKS!

    Thanks, guys. It wasn't perfect, but it got here and it works. More than I can say about a lot of things in life.

    What really makes the difference is how much you guys care about us, your customers. Thanks.

    :D:D

    0
×
×
  • Create New...