MrWinterbottom

uhm...well..if how we used to handle MG teams is anything to go by, then I will have to disagree with dalem here. Ever since I first got my hands on this fine piece of software the "we-can't-run-with-the-light-MG" issue have been one of my pet peeves. I am sure BTS have a perfectly good explanation on why and such. And I am confident that they made that compromise for perfectly good reasons. However......... your standard light MG team consists of 3 persons.. the gunner, the assistant and the MG team leader. (Which is actually the XO of the rifle squad) They have their ammunition. The rifle squad have theirs. So in fact, you will normally allways have 3 ammo carriers to feed the MG. There are several reasons for this, mind you. One of them is to make sure that the MG team can operate as independently of the rifle squad as possible. Let us say that you want the MG team on either extremes of your flank. Can you imagine how that would work if the rest of the squad had a substantial part of their ammunition? And believe you me, the other guys are handling a "few" pounds themselves without having to carry the extra load of the MG team as well. Within the MG team the gunner carries the least ammo, the assistant the most while the MG team leader is somewhere in between there. With this loadout the MG team *can* and *will* run. And yes, I have seen it done. And I have done it myself under extreme circumstances. They will not casually stroll down the line while making sure they are taking their sweet time. (seems to me that they are anyway.. ) So I say a heartfelt NOOO! to the casual light MG team out for a somewhat brisk sunday stroll. I'll get off my soap box now. Mr.Winterbottom

Thanks for both links. Was feeling a bit down today, but after reading through that I have to say that everything is roses again. And I am all for the Eurowarrior Jerk of the month award. Mr.Winterbottom

Thanks for the info. I might just go over there and take a look. Mr.Winterbottom

Hate to burst your bubble. But in my opinion, there will never be a "tank of all tanks". Something better will eventually come along. Be it better tactics, weaponary, weapon platforms or all of the above. If we speak of contemporary, I would have to agree that the latest version of the Abrahams is a killer tank. However, I do believe that the main gun is the exact same one as being used in the Leopard II. Which is also a nice little tank. I just bring that up as you seemed impressed with the kill power of the M1A1. But as the current overall nicest tank in the whole wide universe.... now that is more tricky. Lemmethinkaboutit.........(15 minutes passes) heh...got me stumped, mate. Mr.Winterbottom

Just wanted to say that I agree with Warmaker on his post. Ever since the Gulf war (Or the great propaganda war as I like to refer it as) the public have had this weird idea that all we have to do is to send in the planes and bomb the hell out of any enemy and that will be that. Allow me to just put on record that Saddam was a *PERFECT* enemy back then. They just don't come any better than that with all his talk about rivers of blood and all that good stuff, while the landscape itself suited us perfectly as well. I mean...it was perfect. But back to my point.. The whole idea of the "clean" air campaigns to destroy an enemy is ludicrous in my opinion. You will always need the man on the ground to go kick in the enemy's front door. Don't get me wrong. Yes, air power is awfully nice to have. Yes, we *do* need it. But only as a part of the combined arms. Combat support and team work... that is what it is all about. Everything else is secondary to that effort. Allow me to quote something I read some time ago; "It is a dangerous thing when you start to believe your own bull****." I for one think that sometimes we tend to venture a bit to far into that territory. heh..I'll get off my soap box now. Mr.Winterbottom

Agreed. Just because you happen to buy the game online doesn't mean you necessarily would register for the online forum. Took me 6 months of heavy duty lurking before I registered. Just my take on it anyways. Mr.Winterbottom

It's hurting my eyes. Boho. But then again, I can always wear shades. :cool: Mr.Winterbottom

Please tell us the outcome. I am sitting on the edge of my seat waiting. Mr.Winterbottom

Just wanted to add my own little tidbit to this discussion. During my service time in the mechanized infantry we sometimes trained in what we call micro terrain coverage while having different MG's, rifles and of course, the trusty old 50 with the then new MP and the old AP ammunition fire over us. And let me tell you, when a 50 cal passes over you it HURTS. It feels like a whiplash hitting you all over the body at once.(Not to mention your ears) And this was with aimed fire above us. I can only imagine how it would feel with a near miss with one of those bad boys. Not to mention a hit. What I am trying to say is that if I was getting incoming 50 cal, I know I would take notice of it to say the least. And it is very easy to have accurate shots from a well mounted position as they were considered to have a stable trajectory for up to about 1000 m. Hmm..feels like I could go on about this for a little while, but it might be prudent to stop while I am somewhat ahead... Mr Winterbottom

29

Actually, don't even get me started on the MG issue.. >I'm glad somebody somewhere is still using towed pieces and can shed some light on it. I've never seen any outside of museums. I will venture to say that almost all nations still use towed pieces in one capacity or other. >The concept of a few men carrying forward the ammo might be problematic in the CM engine. The bearers would have to be modelled, as would the ammo supply. Not that I wouldn't mind seeing it, as long as it was completely A/I controlled, but I don't know how keen C&S will be on the idea. My guess is not at all. What I was thinking about was more like that the piece gets there in good time, but after the ready-ammunition is expended the rate of fire will hurt. That would of course depend on how far the piece been moved, the quality of the personnel and all that good stuff. So no extra modelling, just some tweaking. Just my thoughts anyways. Mr.Winterbottom

Well... The way it works was that the piece is moved with the "ready-ammunition" and after you have set up, the gunner, the gunner assistant and the commander of the particular piece usually stays with the weapon while the "extra" personnel (That is the ammunition guys) humps back for the rest of the ammunition. Might hamper the rate of fire for a while if it is sustained, but atleast the weapon is able to put some hurt out. That is of course, the theory. In case anybody wonders about it, there were normally two ammunition handlers per weapon. One gets it out of the boxes and then hands it down. Second one removes the fuses and sets any timers and proximity fuses if needed. Then hands it to the loader, which, well, loads it. It may seem like there are many steps to go through before anything goes bang and boom,(Especially since I havent touched what the gunner and the commander is expected to do) but it does work and I have seen amazing rate of fires coming out of weapons with well trained crews. Well, according to my frail memory that is. Sorry about the rant. Mr.Winterbottom

Hidleyho! Just wanted to put my 2 cents in here. Back in the days when I served in the mechanized infantry I had the pleasure of working with some 155mm SPA recruits. Well, before they "moved up" to the big guns they trained on the good, old 105's. (Moving the pieces, setting up, etc.etc.) Anyways, I have always felt that the time CM have given the soldiers to move the piece, say, 100m and set it up for a fire mission have been a bit on the leisurely side. I was thinking that perhaps it was just me, so I'm kinda glad to see that that isn't the case... heh.. Mr. Winterbottom

Ok!Ok! I am coming out of hiding now..sheesh I have been lurking here for 5-6 months since I got my hands on this lovely piece of software. And my reasons for not taking a more active role yet? Well, I must confess that I don't play the game THAT much so I tend to pop in every now and then to read and learn from any posts I find of interest. And btw, I like the XFL...(Flameproof suit ON) Jolly good show! Mr Winterbottom