gunnergoz
-
Posts
2,933 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by gunnergoz
-
-
Sure...as long as the Kubel has a 2000 lb bomb strapped to it and makes darn sure it gets run over by the JS-2...Originally posted by Chad Harrison:Kubelwagon VS JS-2. What do you guys think? Its about the same matchup.
Chad
-
Personally, I think the Bren Tripods are the only answer to the problem.
-
ROFL!Originally posted by CaSCa:I'll translate them all for you and get the results up here asap. I don't actually speak Russian, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
-
After much frustration fooling with the covered arc command and trying to get the most out of my Russian AT guns, I finally gave up and set up a plain old fashioned kill zone and set the arcs for just a few yards out from the guns to prevent them from firing prematurely.
When Fritz ambled into the kill sack, I pulled the pin and presto! In the first minute, 9 panzers bit the dust! And I had only manually targeted the nearest 6! The gunners had intelligently sought new targets and tore into them! Whatta rush!
I was so excited I called over my Russian wife and Mother-in-law so they could share the warm fuzzies (they love seeing Fritzs bite it for some reason). They had a great time watching and loved the Russian crew dialogues. Then when I showed them the piece de resistance, my two sturdy KV's waiting to polish off any survivors, they really got into it and sat around to watch more carnage.
End result was a total victory, with every German tank destroyed and all crews either captured or casualties.
Incidentally, the covered arc command did come in real handy at the end, when the last surviving Pz IV was hiding behind some wrecks. I simply set my AT guns arcs around the sneaky Hun and waited...my trusty AT Riflemen (who had lines of sight) flushed him out and my 3 surviving AT guns took care of the rest.
Interestingly enough, one Pz III never made it to the battlefield, having been left behind with apparent mechanical or track failure. The 2 KV's polished him off once they came into line of sight, causing the crew of the panzer to eventually abandon ship.
A truly satisfying experience!
BTW, I used my Maxim MG's extensively to cause the tanks to button up, then to polish off crewmen. The covered arc command worked to perfection.
Bravo, BTS, you guys are DA BOMB!
NOW SHIP ME THE REAL ONE...
-
We are truly an international fraternity (er, well, there are a few lady players out there, but heck, they know what I intend...)
Great to hear that CM has made it South of the Border. Ole!
Now, as I was just about to say before I read this thread, donde esta mi cervesa?
-
One thing to remember is that the T-34 of 1940 was quite a bit different from the ones produced in the coming years. The later ones were upgunned, first with a better 76mm then the 85mm version. Protection improved and reliability also. The later 3-man turret brought the tank to even more efficiency. Finally, lets not forget that the production run of T-34's far outstripped that of Pz III's and that the tank lent itself particularly well to the Russian production system.
-
-
I say:
FULL SPEED AHEAD on the engine rewrite!
Forget patches, go for the gusto and bring us that new engine!
-
You're correct, Terence, my wife likely would just blush and ignore the foul language, if she heard it in the Russian sound files. She for sure wouldn't translate it for me!
I'm really more interested in her feedback about how realistic and plausible the Russian sound files are, in general terms. I'll be able to review the Italian sound files in CMBB myself, and am very much looking forward to that when I get the full game (which can't be soon enough.)
-
Very interesting and entertaining thread!
My Russian/Ukrainian wife (Born in Ukraine but calls herself a Russian, go figure) is also very skittish about swear words. When I found some Russian profanity in a novel and showed it to her, she became upset and refused to translate it for me!
She's been here two years and can't get over the casual and extensive profanity on US cable TV and movies. My favorite memory is her asking "What is this 'f...k' and why do people on TV say all the time 'f...k this' and 'f..k that?'" Fortunately, her innate Russian reserve and ladylike qualities prevent her from picking up any bad habits of speech (thank goodness.)
She does get a kick out of hearing me swearing in English at people on the freeway, however...
I'll have to have her review the Russian sound files for CMBB when the full game is out.
-
Actually, the guns you're referring to were 105's and 128's. BIG puppies.Originally posted by Foreigner:Think the 88s were powerful? Imagine 100mm FLAK guns....IIRC, some of those FLAK towers in Berlin mounted those - but they could not depress enough to engage ground targets with DF, so when the Red Army stormed Berlin (and Soviet ground attack planes didn't fly many sorties for fear of hitting their own troops), their awesome firepower was of little use at that crucial moment. Though I think those might have caused some major headaches for Allied bombers during raids on Berlin.
-
I think that too many conclusions are being drawn based upon initial experience with the M-40 version of the T-34. The later versions were to various extent, uparmored and upgunned.
Though armor plate quality varied, it seems that the Russians leaned towards mass vs. quality and the armor was considered good enough at the time considering the numbers of tanks being produced.
As to the T-34 being considered "junk" in postwar conflicts, recall that these wars were mostly conducted using the T-34/85...a very different beast than the old M-40. More to the point, the postwar use of these tanks did not use the Soviet-style mass quantity of tanks, or the doctrine that the Soviets developed to take advantage of the T-34's virtues (cheap to procure, cheap to maintain, long range w/o refueling, ease of use, etc.) In the right hands, with the correct doctrine and numbers, the T-34 was a war-winner in its day.
Don't forget the old adage: "Quantity has a quality all it's own."
-
Hi, Mom!
-
I for one would welcom a more complex game with similar or global scope. I'd like to see the complexity kept flexible, i.e. the player could automate many decisions that did not interest them. Ideally, it would allow for corps-division level operations. Anything smaller would be too difficult to play. Ships could be represented individually, except perhaps small combatants or escorts. I could go on and on, but you get the picture...
Mind you, I really like SC and would love to see Hubert do a Pacific or better yet global version of the engine.
-
Ah, Aberdeen. The meadow of steel. (Many with battle damage.)Originally posted by mcgivney:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Mike:
Not so - the Jagdtiger at Aberdeen PG has at least 1 rifle calibre bullet embedded in its armour!!
QB]
Topic shift: I was at the Metro Museum of Art in NYC (yes, we're still here, come visit) and there was a circa 1600's armored breastplate... with a bullet dent right over the heart.
Makes you wonder...</font>
-
IIRC It was devised to brush infantry off of AFV's using the flare/mortar port in the turret roof for access.
-
Just a tad bit in a hurry are we? Mind if we see the game first? It's much easier to mod that way you know...
-
Don't forget the scenario with the Russian mine dogs...
-
And whatinheck is a "Brenski Tripod?"
-
A suggestion to include the role of conventional artillery in the game...give HQ's a supplemental combat value they can lend to subordinate units to represent supporting fires. Technology might improve the HQ strength and range of effect over time. Putting your money into this tech would give HQ's a whole new reason for being. A solid HQ within range could entirely alter the combat effectiveness of conventional units, more than it currently does in any event.
-
I'm beginning to appreciate the elegant simplicity of SC more and more. At the same time, it would appear that efforts to make SC "more realistic" and to "fine tune details"
as we have often seen in this forum, are mostly not practical given the existing engine and design. You can't turn checkers into chess, it seems...
Personally, I'd like to see Hubert go next to the design of a more "heavyweight" grand strategy game that would include many of the neat and imaginative concepts that forum members have brought forward in the past months.
While some more tweaking of SC is probably forthcoming, I suspect that there are limits to the design. It could be that the engine could be re-scaled and optimized for a different level of play (e.g. individual ships and subs, movement after combat, more detailed terrain, etc).
I eagerly await developments!
-
The German subs come into play for me when I can build and base them from the French Atlantic ports. The subs play absolute hell on the eventual AI D-day attack. While expensive, I try to keep 2 or 3 level 3 subs out there all the time. I don't bother trying to clobber Allied MPP unless the Allied surface fleets have been dealt with.
-
Mike, I really appreciate the sensitivity and insight of the questions you suggest. Living vets are a treasure to be valued and recognized. Still, we don't have to be stodgy or unimaginative about speaking with them when we have such a chance...just respectful and appropriate.
-
Sept 1st, 10PM
HE: Not tonight honey, I have a headache...
SHE: That's funny, MUST BE FROM HAVING YOUR NOSE PRESSED AGAINST THAT COMPUTER SCREEN ALL DAMN DAY!
Macgamefiles user do some bashing:
in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)
Posted