gredeker
-
Posts
437 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by gredeker
-
-
Here's my off-the-cuff response:
I think your question has a lot to do with the scope of CMBO vs. the scope of the action described IRL. CMBO assumes that the enemy has already been located, and that a battle is imminent. I suspect that many of the RL stories posted have to do with the recon phase of the battle, which is outside CMBO's scope.
-
Note: Remember, kids, the wink -Originally posted by Holien:Hey TB,
Talk to German Boy, He is a great designer and might knock something out for you.
Failing that WB is ok...
(For Non Brits (or those not tuned to a Brit wave length, as there are some Non Brits that have become attuned) please take the above with a modicum of Salt, Pepper and Vingar is optional)
- is a clue for you, the reader, that irony is likely included in the post.For those of you who aren't familiar with this literary device, irony is defined by Webster as "the use of words to express something other than, and especially the opposite of, the literal meaning." Thus, we can safely assume that Holien's remark of "Failing that WB is ok" is an ironic statement, and that he very well may mean the opposite.
Remember... the
is your clue that irony is included in the post. We hope that this literary moment will enrich your enjoyment of the board. We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...
And, lest I forget -
[ February 26, 2002, 07:50 PM: Message edited by: redeker ]
-
I'll second that sentiment, especially since many of us will get at least four years of gaming out of CMBB.Originally posted by sitzkrieg:Besides, I think June 22 would be a very appropriate release date.
-
I seem to recall from one of those CM unit databases that some of the "+" models actually have better hull armor than the Jumbo.Originally posted by JasonC:The W+ armor is pretty tough stuff. It will stop 88 rounds, not just 75s. Even Schrecks can have trouble with it, from the front. The thing is, the turret is still the same 89mm vertical armor, easily penetrated by all heavy German AT weapons.
So while the hull improvement is major, the tank as a whole can still be killed from the front aspect - especially if hull down. This means the tactics of exploiting the front plate are much trickier, and more limited, than the best German types, heavy Churchills, or Jumbos.
No references, I'm at work.
-
Wild Bill hasn't released the scenario for general consumption yet. He may be making some changes based on feedback from the ROW tourney, which featured this scenario.Originally posted by Lane:I read Spanish Bombs Post.
Question? were can I download Wild Bill's
new scenario "We Can't Wait"?
Sounds like a good scenario.
Thank's for any info.
Lane
If you can find someone who played the Axis side in the scenario, they could send probably send you the tournament-saved, password-fixed, PBEM-only version used in the tourney.
-
I've shared a bit about my playing of "Sounds in the Night" on the other thread. Head on over and say a piece.Originally posted by Treeburst155:Oh, I forgot to mention the only game you cannot discuss at this point is "Crisis At Kommerscheidt".
Treeburst155 out.
Any word on an estimated completion date for the remaining game?
-
OK everyone...
We can now talk about the odyssey that is "Sounds in the Night".
How did people set up their defenses? Their attacks? Any notable encounters during the scenario?
FWIW, I was defending Americans. I set up a tripwire of half-squads, crews and extra HQ's the entire width of the board (because I'm paranoid during night scenarios) but generally in front of the bocage, with the MLR generally 20-30m behind the bocage in the grain. I had some great luck early in the game, and my TRPs were placed in pretty good spots.
Warren "ran the gauntlet" down the road with a StuG and a platoon of HT's - surviving all the .50 bursts and bazooka rounds thrown their way - and pushed through to the rear large VL, which was largely undefended. A comic cross-country chase ensued, with an M10 and a Sherman chasing the StuG at a range of ~100m, but the vehicles couldn't see one another because of the vision range being only 50m. Luckily the chase was resolved favorably, as the StuG turned to face his attackers while he was still in some brush. This slowed down his rotation just enough for the M10 to catch up and brew up the StuG from a range of 9m(!) while the StuG still had another 30 degrees of rotation to go to bring his gun to bear on the M10.
-
CDIC,Originally posted by Holien:CDIC can you send me the last turn and the password so I can see how the master placed his PB's.
Those PB's did sod all for me and I need to work out how better to place them for other games.
H
I'd like that final map and password also. I think I've come up with some good positions for the PB's, but I'd like to compare it with what you did.
-
I think this is correct, but it doesn't help with light vehicles against strafing. I played one game where I lost two halftracks parked between tall buildings to strafing air attacks.Originally posted by CMplayer:I don't know about the smoke, but if you have AA weapons they will fire on the airplane. 88s and 90mm cannons won't do so, but the other flak type weapons will.
I'm not sure about this, but I believe that parking vehicles in the narrow space between two buildings might help protect them from 500 lb bombs (if the buildings take some of the blast from a near miss on the other side).
-
I just finished my AAR for HCRE last night. I found myself doing lots of "D'oh!" and "Man, I should've..." and "What was I thinking when I..." while watching the movies. That Firefly crew deserves a decoration - posthumous, unfortunately.
-
Well, I've finally finished and sent off my last AAR. Now I officially have nothing to do but wait.
-
Why on Earth would these be considered "gamey"? :confused: It is SOP to lay down covering fire in suspected enemy positions, so as to avoid ambushes or prep them for an assault. It was done all of the time in RL.</font>Originally posted by Liebchen:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by redwolf:
There are some SP arty tactics that might be considered gamey, like area fire on a building without LOS to the target unit or area fire near a gun where the gun has no LOS (by a millimeter).
-
I guess I'd better hurry up and finish that last AAR!
-
I like them too. They have blazing speed on roads, and the extra armor is nice compared to the SPW 251/9 HT. Even so, I usually buy the 251/9, since it tends to have 40-45 HE shells, and the 234/3 has maybe 30-35.Originally posted by Silvio Manuel:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by manchildstein II:
believe it or not i like the psw 234/3 as 'most bang for the buck.'
The 251/9's HE loadout is the highest for Axis forces along w/ the Panzer IV (40-45)...neither of which can match the Tiger's 40-45 88mm HE shells, of course, or the StuH's 25'ish 105mm HE, if you can spare Armor pts. for them.</font>
-
It was my understanding (no references, at work) that those auxiliary diesel tanks were similar if not identical to 55-gallon drums. It was also my understanding that they could be remotely dropped from inside the vehicle, and that in fact it was one of the first things done when receiving fire or entering a battle (similar to an airplane ditching the drop tanks before entering the combat zone).Originally posted by Iron Chef Sakai:Thanks! Thats insane that those are fuel tanks, at first glane i always thought them to be fuel tanks but then looking at the location i'd quickly change my mind thinking that would just be crazy to have fuel tanks right there. I can see why the crews would take them off.
Will the fuel tanks on the T-34's be modeled in CMBB? Will they be more vulnerable to sharp shooter fire of even rife fire?
Also did the T-34's have a problem with getting their fuel tanks shot at? And if so what and how much detriment to the operation of the vehicle did it cause? I assume it would be bad, but to what extent and how common i have no idea.
I want to say that they were used primarily for extending range on the road march up to the front, not during the actual battle; as such, BTS could certainly say that the tanks fall outside the tactical nature of CMBB. If they are included, then BTS will have to model their vulnerability while still on the tank, come up with an animation sequence for dropping them, etc. Given that CMBO doesn't doesn't currently model the vulnerability or detachability (is that a word?) of a Crocodile trailer, I wouldn't be surprised if these auxiliary fuel tanks were left out of CMBB.
-
Check out the graphics near the bottom of the page here:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/120.htm
It has high-speed picture of a sabot round discarding the sabot. You can even see the supersonic shockwaves.
-
There was a real American device called the T34 rocket launcher, consisting of 60 rocket tubes (five inch?) attached to the turret, synched with the gun for rough aiming capability. The rockets were fin-stabilized, and therefore inaccurate, but imagine the damage a platoon of Sherms armed with these could do.Originally posted by xerxes:Having played lots of CM one wonders what types of weapons that could have been and would have been useful in WWII combat.
Things I'd like:
6. Direct fire, multiple rocket, large caliber, afv.
-marc
I also wouldn't mind seeing those 28 and 32cm rockets that were attached to the sides of some German halftracks.
-
I've seen a Sherman abandoned after being both immobilized and losing the main gun to a quad 20mm flak truck. The Sherm still had functioning machine guns, but after another couple of hits from the 20mm, the crew abandoned the tank. I don't remember the tank's experience level, but it was probably green or regular.
-
Mine would be:
1. Ranville.
2. Ranville double blind.
3. High Cost double blind as Allies.
-
Two observations about that film:
1) That seemed darn steady for an SMG.
2) That barrel got smoking hot in just a few seconds. It looks like you'd need to be really careful when changing magazines so you don't get burned.
-
The bald one indicated in another thread that tanks now button and unbutton as they see fit. I don't recall if this applied only to Russian tanks or to all vehicles.Originally posted by Wilhammer:Will the AI be able to decide to un-button (which it never does in CMBO)?
-
I believe you're correct, but I think some of your to/from actions in the last paragraph are reversed. For example, a Hetzer should avoid engaging targets that are substantially higher than it, due to the decreased relative angle of their glacis.
However, the important thing to remember is to always try and seek hull-down status with German armor in this situation. The same angle that makes your turret and upper hull front angle more effective makes your _lower_ hull front _less_ effective. I can't tell you the number of times I've moved a Panther or Hetzer a few meters too far forward, then lost it to a lower hull penetration...
[ February 08, 2002, 04:16 PM: Message edited by: redeker ]
-
I wish I had thought about this in a certain tourney scenario (hint: rhymes with "Gruel at Grompaire"). I lost five HTs in that game (three of which were far behind the front lines and contributing nothing to the war effort) to strafing Jabos. My tanks, on the other hand, survived all rocket attacks.Originally posted by CombinedArms:My one thought in a scenario is to exit HTs, trucks, jeeps, etc. off the board ASAP unless you desperately need them onboard for some reason. Jabo bombs may or may not hit, but then the plane comes back and strafes! And I've seen a pair of jabos kill 8-10 HTs, etc. easy, which is an awful lot of points literally up in smoke.
So my advice is--exit those light vehicles before the Jabos arrive, if the briefing leads you to expect them. Or, if they've just bombed, run like mad for the exits with all light vehicles, preferably through scattered trees.
-
Yeah! I wanna see Stuka and IL-2 wreckage on my battlefields BTS!!!Originally posted by Vader's Jester:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Captitalistdoginchina:
Some indication of when a plane is shot down, either audible or visual.
Plane Wreckage on the battlefield
</font>
Wild Bill's Rumblings of War [Part IV], aka RoW
in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)
Posted