Sig

Hello. Part of the variety of distances claimed to be the limit to identify somebody (or something) *may* be due to differences in night vision. I have no information about statistics linked to night vision, but I know that some people are more (or less) able to see in the dark than the mean population. Someting to do with density of rod cells in the retina? Has anybody informations? Sig PS: just to show the existence of differences in perception: quite some years ago, I read a scientific paper proving that the "red" color is percieved differently by some people. It has to do with a one aminoacid mutation in the receptor located in the cone cells of the retina. This lead to a slightly different signal emitted by the cell when it absorbed the wave-lengths in the reds. Interesting.

Hello, A little bit of nitpicking concerning the visual representation of the grenade in CMBO: a german grenade when thrown, rotates around it's center of gravity. It doesn't fly like a round object. This rotation has the additional effect of making the grenade bounce when it hits a hard surface, increasing its range but also sometimes decreasing its accuracy. Now, concerning the range: don't forget the time it takes for the grenade to detonate. If your detonator explodes after 3 seconds, the *effective* range of your grenade will obviously be far shorter than if it is set to explode after 6 seconds (like for instance the HG42, see previous post). Sig [ 07-02-2001: Message edited by: Sig ]

Hello, Just some info about Stielhandgranaten (NOT the german ones, unfortunately): the swiss army had a very similar model called HG42 (Handgranate 42), basically a copy of the german one. You could screw a hollow cylinder of metal on the "head" of the grenade, which then was called a defensive grenade. This cylinder, nicknamed "chocolate", was preformed and had the same little squares you find on the american "pineapple" grenade. Drawback: adds a sgnificant weight to the grenade. It was never used during exercises with live ammo (safety reasons). The main drawback of this type of grenade: it takes time to prime (sp?). Just pulling a little ring of steel is faster than removing a cap, grabbing and then pulling a string. One advantage: you could assemble (screw) many heads together, thereby creating a good demolition charge, or even a sort of small bangalore torpedo. An additional info: the explosive charge of aroung 300g was lethal in a 2m radius for a standing man. OTOH when prone, as long as you were aligned properly, almost no risk... with a good helmet. And one more thing: the smoke! A nice black cloud develops when the grenade detonates. So you can basically say that for a soldier, a grenade is only lethal when a/ he doesn't see it incoming(!!) or b/ the blast of the explosion can't diffuse (eg: inside a room, a bunker, a foxhole, a crater) or c/ he has to jump out of cover to escape it and is then killed by the covering/pinning fire (most SOP ask for this covering fire for exactly this reason). Concerning the problem of the fragments: don't forget that if a fragment can travel farther than you can throw, *YOU* are also in danger of being killed, except if you lay low (and lose vision of the ennemy for some critical seconds). Perhaps one of the reason why some armies chose the "blast-only" grenades. The other being having more explosive for the weight. Don't know. Perhaps some grog has the answer. Sig (Edited because THEY call an ananas a pineapple! Tsktsktsk. Thanks Beltfed) [ 07-02-2001: Message edited by: Sig ]

Hello, First, thanks for the feedback. Now just a little comment concerning the distance to the MLR: I was assuming that BTS will implement these much demanded loooong maps for attack scenario. If this is case, no problem because (second point) it is my opinion that these terrain modifications should be placed in the attacker's deployement zone which will be at quite a distance from the defense. Another good point: is this relevant considering the around 30 minute battles we play? Well, yes, because this should simulate the careful preparations made before a breaching attack, this short, powerful blow to overcome a carefully prepared defense. However, I totally agree that this "engineering" should *not* be available during the type of QB simulating an hasty attack (don't remember if it's "attack" or "assault" QB). I agree also that the technical aspects (the modification of the terrain tile) can be a problem, a critical one in fact. No answer for that, sorry. I'm not a programmer. What I try is to find a way, easy to implement, to simulate this often obscure but crucial work by engineers. The idea just came as I was re-reading "Bagration 1994" by Steven Zaloga (Osprey campaign series Nr 42, ISBN 1-85532-478-4). Page 33 (emphasis is mine): "(...) Two critical, but often overlooked, Soviet advantages were engineer support and logistics. (...)" The author then discribes shortly why this support was crucial to the initial success of Operation Bagration (for instance river-crossing, swamp-crossing, etc). Oops. Need to stop. Too late on this side of the Atlantic. *yaaaawn*. Sorry. See you tomorrow. Sig

Hello all, Much has already been said about the impossibility for engineers to breach roadblocks or modify terrain features during a typical CM battle. Personnally, I believe this is realistic considering the time available. However, engineers are now little more than specialised first line infantry, with a bonus (mine removal). I would propose the following: to simulate the role of engineers before battle has started, why not give the possibility to the attacking player to buy their work. Examples: You think you need to cross impassable terrain, like a marsh: buy corduroy road tiles. Or you know the terrain will contain some kind of a stream: buy ford tiles. Lots of rough and you want your armor to roam the map freely: buy dirt road tiles. These tiles would be placed before the battle starts in the same way the defender places mines, or roadblocks. This possibility would only be available to the attacker (in defense you already have it: roadblocks, wires, mines) and would only be placed in or next to the attacker's deployement zone. These tiles would simulate engineers heavily involved in the preparation of an attack. A good real life exemple for this would be the extensive preparation before Operation Bagration, when all these little streams in Byelorussia where rendered fordable for tanks by the russian engineers. I see one problem with my proposal: the map is not visible before the start of the battle, so what should I buy?? Suggestion would be to give a bit more information when choosing the terrain: for instance instead of having only our usual CMBO features (farmland, rural,... low hills, moderate hills...etc), I would suggest to add to these choices more precise features: swampy (moderate, very..), rough (moderate, very,..), streams (few, lots...), etc... Only a few examples. Such a system would keep the map "secret" (which I think is good), but at the same time give sufficient information to make the proposed "engineering" system work. That's all. Any thoughts? Sig

Hello all, I think we should not let this thread deviate in the direction of how we deal with potential cheaters, but focus on what Martin proposed. Personally I would feel more confortable with a foolproof anti-cheating method for the exact reason Martin gave: sometimes I want to play somebody I don't know. And in that case I hate to waste even one atome of energy trying to discover if yes or no this person is a nice guy or an ugly cheating bastard. Too lazy to become paranoid, I suppose. So, go on Martin, I'm with you. Just my opinion. Sig

Mission accomplished. Sig

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MrSpkr: While you are technically correct, in modern terms, Biological warfare has been conducted for thousands of years. A favorite tactic in teh thirty years war, the barbarian invasions, and many other ancient conflicts was to catapult diseased, dead bodies over a city wall during sieges. While there certainly was a desire to impact the enemy's morale with this tactic, there was also a desire to spread teh disease among the defenders, to make them too sick to continue the fight. Often times, dead bodies or dead animals were placed in water supplies to poison the water. Everything old is new again, eh? MrSpkr<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Partially agree with you. The fact that bioweapons have been used during History is perfectly true. However, the main difference and a critical one is that scientific research is now applied to the problem and specific weapons can be designed. Modern genetic engineering techniques only make things worst... I believe (but it's only a supposition) that the only inhibition toward the use of bioweapons during the bleakest hours (from the soviet point of view) of Barbarossa would have been their unreliability, and perhaps also a lack of developpement in the existing program (see previous posts). When you are cornered, surrounded by ennemies (again, USSR perspective in the 20-40ies), it must be tempting to use every weapon at hand. Today, I would be more pessimistic: as I said, modern biology will soon or later allow the design of "smart" bioweapons, meaning you could use them with little risk to yourself. So falls on inhibition! Remains only the political cost. And here comes the "track record": no significant modern use, meaning no pictures to stir the public opinion, meaning no concern in the population and no political pression to increase control and ban. OK, OK, I darken a bit the things (I hope). Was only to point out that it's not because soldiers usually kill their ennemy by lead poisoning, that futur wars have to follow this model. Unfortunatly for civilians. Sig

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jonah: Sig, The island the Brits tested Anthrax on in 1942 is Gruinard Island (in Scotland actually). The island was decontaminated in 1986 and declared free of anthrax spores in 1990. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thanks for the info Jonah. Personally I would be very reluctant to visit such an island. Probably an ill-founded fear. After all you seem to have survived without harm . Sig [ 04-16-2001: Message edited by: Sig ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Blenheim: With chemical weapons happened something similar to nukes... Nobody used them, because everybody was too afraid of the counteratack. Hitler was really against its use probably due to his WW I memories. Gas attacks were particulary terrifying, and he had images of mustard gas bombs in Berlin in his mind....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Careful: bioweapons are not at all similar to chemical weapons. First of all they reproduce!! Secondly there is far less "track record" (if I dare say so) meaning by that: nobody has really experienced the horror of their use (to the contrary of chemical weapons during WWI), thereby less inhibition I fear. Another thing which is to remember: no need to kill with 100% efficacy, just make people sick and overload the health system of the target army/society. The only thing which could have helped preventing the use on a large scale of such a weapon is the lack of control if the disease is contagious: it could very well hit your own people, especially in the case were the front lines are close. In the exemple of Stalingrad Alibek writes in the book (p30) that within a week of the initial German outbrake, thousands of Russian soldiers and civilians living in the Volga region came down with tularemia, prompting the Soviet high command to rush ten mobile military hospitals into the area. And just to add to the bioweapon use during WWII: don't forget the infamous Water Purification Unit 731 in Manchuria, which conducted Japan's bioweapon program. They made horrible experiments on POW's (incl. US, British and Commenwealth prisoners) to test various germs. IIRC, their commander, LtGen. Shiro Ishii was hired by the US at the end of the war... This clone of Dr Mengele was probably too precious to be hanged... Sig

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scipio: This is the first time I heard about it. My only informations about bioweapons in WWII was Churchills plan to bomb Germany with Anthrax, but war was over before they start - thanx god, cause I'm German :eek: !<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It is true that Great Britain researched extensively anthrax (a truly horrible weapon with very high lethality when "properly"(...) used) with the objective to weaponise it. IIRC an island somewhere north of Great Britain was heavily contaminated with anthrax spores and it is only very recently that people where allowed to come back. Sorry, I don't remember the name of this island. According to Alibek's book, official start of a bioweapon programm in USSR was 1928 when the "Revolutionary Military Council signed a decree ordering the transformation of typhus into a battlefield weapon" (quote from p33). Sig

Hello, just finished Ken Alibek's "Biohazard" (Delta Book, publisher: Dell Publishing, April 2000, ISBN 0-385-33496-6) which relates his career as an actor of significant importance in the soviet bioweapon program from his beginning as a student in medicine to his defection to the US. What attracted my attention was his reference (page 30 of the book) to the possible use of tularemia(*) against the Germans panzer troops on the Volga during late summer 1942. Statistically, he claims, the number of natural cases in Soviet Union was around ten thousand in 41. In the year of Stalingrad, the number soared to more than one hundred thousand in the Volga region, coming back to normal in 43. Despite the closeness of the front lines, most of the victims seemed by far to have been the Germans. Furthermore, 70 percent of the victims came down with the pneumonic form of the disease, a probable consequences of a purposeful dissemination. To give more weight to this supposition, Alibek learned years later, that a secret weapon facility was located in Kirov and had developped a tularemia weapon in 41. On page 36 of his book, Alibek writes also about an outbrake of Q fever among the Germans in Crimea in 43. He says he was unable to investigate further, but that Q fever was practically unheard of in Russia prior to that outbrake. Since we are starting to talk about the Great Patriotic War or War in the East or whatever you want to call it, does any of you, history grogs, have any information about possible bioweapon use during WWII, especially on the east front? Some precisions: Alibek gives no clear references for his sources. Perhaps he doesn't remember (his discovery was in 73 whene he was at the Tomsk Medical Institute). He just said he found the inforamtion when he was reading a twenty-five-volume History of Soviet Military Medicine in the Great Patriotic War: 1941-1945, and was also reading some scientific journals from this period. Thanks for feedback. Sig (*)Debilitiating illness. Highly infection, but almost never spreads directly from one person to another. Chills, nausea, headaches, fever. Untreated, lasts form 2 to 4 weeks, but can continue for months. Lethal in 30% of untreated cases.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lorak: One thing to keep in mind also. Using the withdrawl command also causes a big moral hit to the unit. Lorak<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> True, but if you use the command *before* the unit is too badly shaken, they recover nicely. It's often the only way to extract units with long command delays form a situation which starts to develop badly. Hehe, ever tried to save a green isolated unit from incoming artillery fire or a charging ennemy? With a 50 seconds command delay, if you don't use "withdraw" all is lost. I must say that I only recently started to use "withdraw" on a regular basis and I regret I haven't used it more often before. Would have saved many pixellised lifes in the past. Sig [ 04-12-2001: Message edited by: Sig ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gyrene: (snip) I've almost had an entire Commando Skorzeny scenario ruined for me when a hidden "Elite" SS squad opened up on an Allied tank way before it had reached the ambush marker. (snip) Pretty lame, and I hope it gets fixed in CM2. Gyrene<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I've seen this behavior from time to time. They (or one of them) simply lost their (his)nerves and opened up too early. Which I feel is an accurate modelling of reality. BTW, it seems that low experience troops are much more prone to do this kind of things. Just my opinion. Sig

Hello, I'm not *at all* a micromanagement fan (at least in CMBO), but I think the idea for specific ambush triggers is a good one. No big change, just three: "ambush only armor", "ambush only soft", "ambush all". The big advantage would be for scenario designers who would be able to create more challenging ambushes and help the AI-guided defense to become more dangerous. Just my opinion. Sig

Well, I know that quite a few (don't have the number, sorry) joined the Republicans during the spanish civil war. They were all sentenced to jail when they returned home since swiss law forbids foreign military service for citizens. However, the sentences were not very severe, if I recall correctly. More symbolic than else. If you ask if many Swiss joined nazi Germany in a structured unit (like the Wiking division for "Nordics" or the Azul division for Spanish), the answer is no. However, at that time, in the country some people were quite enthousiastic about nazi ideology (a small minority, but very vocal and very anti-bolchevik), so I guess some of them joined the German army in the fight against USSR. OTOH I remember that others joined the Allies in the fight against nazisme, so... Sorry for the lack of precise numbers but I'm not an historian and I don't know very well this particular part of Swiss history. I will try to ask for more precise information. BTW, concerning the legendary corkscrew, take a look at the topic "A sad day in history..." in the General Discussion forum, and you will see the Light! :cool: Sig

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 109 Gustav: You've gotta admire an army that issues a knife with a corkscrew to its troops.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Tsktsktsk, time to correct some information concerning this Überweapon As some former US president said: read-my-lips: NO CORKSCREW on the army knife issued as part of the swiss military equipement! The knife looks all metal (and not red) with a little swiss flag on one side. It has only 4 moving parts: one regular blade, one funny blade to open cans, one screwdriver blade (doubling as wire cutter and lid opener) and one pointy thing to perforate (mostly your finger). That's all. Oh, forgot: it also has a hole on one side where you can put a string. This was then used in the old days of rifle grenades as a plumb line (sp?) when firing indirect. Another thing about the Überweapon: some blade combinations where specially designed to help dismantling the former swiss army assault rifle (Stgw57). And just to kill a persistant rumor (mostly created for marketing purpose I suspect): there is *no* special officer knife. Hope you all feel better now that you have had access to this classified information Sig

Mmh, not sure I understand exactly what's the situation. But if you mean, you want your soldiers to continue their advance and while on the move, fire at an ennemy behind them, then I think it's quite understandable they can't. Quite difficult (more like impossible) to shoot accurately at a bunch of bad guys while moving backwards over uneven ground in the general direction of another potential enemy position. So I would guess it's a feature. Just my opinion. Or they should all be equipped with rear-view mirrors on the helmet and shooting over their shoulders . Perhaps a new mod? Sig

Hehe, no don't. Low glucose levels can sometimes have an effect on brain metabolism . Some guy (don't remember the name) once said: if you ask questions you may perhaps look stupid for a few minutes, but if you don't ask questions you will certainly remain stupid all your life. A wise man, indeed. Sig

This is because the inside of a building is abstracted: in reality your troops are probably in one room and the enemy is in another. The game engine simulates a real building, with all its interiors, even though the graphic engine only shows you an empty box. Hope it helps Sig

Interesting reactions. Am I totally wrong if I assume that in the case a TV company would present a gladiator show with real killing (gee, after all they have to earn their money and it's their own life.) some of you would find arguments to defend it? As I said: interesting reactions. Sig

I absolutely agree with you! And these unpredictable events are in fact a major plus to the game interest: they force you to adapt *all the time*, imagine new ways to win, create new solutions. Bad for the nerves, good for the brain. Sig

You will be happy : yes, he gives the address of Appui-feu. The 2 other addresses he gives are the BTS and de MadMatt. BTW, the article ends with these two sentences: (ahem...translation mode ON) "...Don't get it wrong: Combat Mission is a real revolution in the wargame category, in multiplayer as well as in solo mode. You must absolutely not miss it!" (translation mode OFF) Hope last sentence makes sense...sounds weird...must be low on glucose. Sig

Interesting post. Good to see things put in perspective in the text you quoted. Sig

Mmh, you are right if you would consider the *dismantled* HMG. By dismantled I mean: on guy has the MG, another the tripod, another the spare barrels, the others transport the ammo. I have only fired once a MG in its light configuration, but I remember I helped a team to transport their HMG ammo load: its HEAVY!! And I was in a very good physical shape since it was after 3 months intensive army training. Arg, after half an hour climbing (was mountain infantry) I just though my shoulders and my back would break. So I believe it has lots to with the amount of ammo needed to fulfill the HMG role. Other point is: once in its tripod configuration (I.E. HMG configuration) its a real pain to transport, *very* inconvenient. You can hardly run, more a trot(sp?) than anything else. So for a fast move you would need to dismantle it again, run to new position, mount it, etc...life expectancy under fire and fighting efficiency would not be very good. BTW, the HMG I speak about is the one still in use in the Swiss army. It is basically a MG42. Sig