Soddball

You would also probably enjoy 'Tiger Woods'. It's good fun if you're playing as allies in a 'have your arse handed to you by tanks' kind of way.

Perhaps I'm being misunderstood. I don't intend to suggest that the planes I named were common, or hugely widespread. I know full well that the Russians deployed large numbers of Il-2/10 (although not immediately) and what I was trying to explain was that the Germans fielded a far greater variety of planes. That's what I meant by 'paucity'. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The He-177 was a four engined aircraft. There were two engines linked together in each nacelle. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sorry. I always think of it as a 2-engined plane, and forget there were 2 in each nacelle. You're right about its unpopularity - Goering forbade Heinkel's sending him any more, if I remember rightly. I'm also aware of the effectivess of the 190 and of the Stuka (when the latter had or needed fighter cover). My aim was to raise the question about the appropriateness of AT guns on aircraft - be it 37mm on the Stuka, 50mm or 75mm on the Henschel and Heinkel, whatever. My feeling is that these weapons would add a breadth to any CM battle. I wholeheartedly agree that there were much more common weapons of war. I didn't seek to address those, because they are partially covered by the current air power system. I did seek to question whether a larger range of aeroplanes might offer rather more depth. Instead of feeling confident that your armoured heavy tanks can handle 20mm cannon fire from aeroplanes, the worry that you could have a 75mm round stuffed through you from above would make the boldest commander cautious. Incidentally, if the Il-2 is to surface in CMBB (as it will in some form), should it not be deployed in pairs as a ground attack aircraft? I thought either that or as a section of 10 at 1,000 feet

*BUMP*ed because any answers were rather lost (understandably) on Monday. Thanks for your input.

Just received an email from my girlfriend who works in London, saying the FTSE has been closed down and Canary Wharf has been evacuated.

You bastards better just keep posting, because I can't get ANY information apart from what you are putting up. Thanks for the updates.

All the world's news websites are blocked I can't find any info. :mad: And I can understand you guys are upset, but, please, the language.

Buy a flamethrower unit and walk them slowly back and forth. When the guns open fire you can find them without a problem

German 37mm guns were mounted on the Stuka dive bomber for anti-tank work. IIRC the 37mm FlaK is also capable of ruining a Sherman's day from the side or rear.

Have tried search, and it doesn't answer my question, which is: How will air power be used in CMBB? I've been looking through the different types of planes deployed on the eastern front by Soviet and Axis forces, and ideas seem different. For example, Soviet forces seem to have a paucity of ground-attack aircraft. Their main plane for this was the Sturmovik, and it was very good. It used bombs, rockets and cannon to achieve its objective. The Germans also used bombs, rockets, and cannon, but also used other weaponry to devastating effect. The two that spring immediately to mind are the Heinkel He177 and Henschel HS129. The 177 was a twin-engined level bomber which was equipped with dive brakes to allow shallow dive bombing attacks. The Henschel was a ground attack craft with a heavily armoured nose and powerful firepower. Henschel developments include 37mm gun, 50mm AT gun, 75mm Pak AT gun :eek:, and a battery of six smoothbore rocket tubes which fired down automatically when the plane flew over metal objects. Heinkel's main AT weapon was a 75mm AT gun. 700 of various sub-types of the HE-177 served on the eastern front, and 'several hundred' Henschel 129's with heavy AT weapons also served in the same theatre. I'd be interested to hear how ground attack aircraft will be employed in CMBB and also what the gathering feels about the above planes and whether they would be an 'interesting' addition. You can see that their numbers are not insignificant. (Edited for minor stupidity) [ 09-11-2001: Message edited by: Soddball ]

I used to know a girl who worked as a reservist on artillery. At least, I assume that's what she meant by handling 8 inchers.

You can use headquarters units to spot for the mortars. So long as the mortar unit is within the command radius of the HQ unit, you can click on the HQ unit, shift-click on the mortar, and then place the target based on the LOS of the HQ unit.

Of course, if your troops open fire on their own side during a turn, there's not alot you can do about that. Am playing QB attack, as British, at night, and have just had a 'messy' turn. Firstly a german flamethrower unit inside a house just shot at my platoon HQ, also inside the house - and the house goes up. My platoon and HQ rush outside, only to be mown down by a second platoon surrounding the house. This turn I have lost my PIAT, 2" mortar, HQ, and 11 of 20 soldiers. :eek:

Yesterday, I was playing a QB vs AI. One of my British sharpshooters took a pot-shot at a crewman in an H-39 Hotchkiss at 400m. A second later, the vehicle was 'abandoned'. I assume I killed the tank-commander/gunner and the driver bailed out as a result. This raises a question in my mind about CMBB tanks. If I understand correctly, lighter tanks early in the war would have had smaller crews (generalisation, tell me if I'm wrong). Stuff like tankettes and tanks with 2 crewmembers will be really vulnerable to their commanders being picked off by sharpshooters (or infantry, of course). Can anyone else shed any light on this?

Holien, how about if we rename our team to 'United Kingdom' and you team up with us? It seems silly you representing Wales all on your own - particularly since you live in Coventry Seriously, it would make sense if we're short of a team member and you're short of two.

For those in the UK, a worthwhile visit if you get the chance is Seven Sisters country park, in East Sussex. The park has lots of concrete pillboxes facing the channel, some of which are dug into the chalk hills, others buried in the ground. When the weather's good it's a nice day out (wildlife park, plants, flowers, etc) but fun for the grogs too Those pillboxes IIRC were quite light versions, with walls a couple of feet thick and had slits a few inches high (so they would presumably have been MG only). They could still have made an invading army miserable though.

And it's gonna get worse, buddy! I'm just about to unlimber my arty and give you the hosing of your life. INCOMING!

I think you raise an interesting point, Holien. Are you asking whether foxholes can be modded for CMBO aswell? I wonder if it's possible but I suspect that foxholes are just foxholes, and there aren't different mods for winter and summer foxholes, so you'd be forced to switch mods when you played summer/winter games. Anyone else more knowledgeable have more details?

Man, that's a mother beautiful map.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Also, we need to make sure that canine and equine sound contact markers are different from normal infantry markers. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I thank God I wore my corsets, for I think my sides have split. You know where the door is for worthless comments.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Originally posted by Soddball: I MADE A CONTRIBUTION! I feel all worthwhile! Briefly. Reality returns. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Actually, Matt's "Hmmmmm..." was him contemplating banning you for trying to create more work for BTS. You'd better think more carefully before throwing out any more "good ideas". <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ROTFL! I know my place, yerroner. Yessir. *bow* How about big pictures of cake in place of the soldiers? And how about altering the TacAI for tanks so it targets the first thing it sees until it dies? Yessir. Any chance I can get a job with the Playstation boys?

I MADE A CONTRIBUTION! I feel all worthwhile! Briefly. :eek: Reality returns.

I was thinking less of a mod for CMBO, but perhaps as inclusion in CMBB. It would be valuable, for the single reason that confusing half tracks with trucks/jeeps/armoured cars can really throw your attack/defence. Since they would sound different in real life (I think, and would like to hear from people on this), maybe they should have different symbols in the game-before they're correctly identified.

Thankyou Jason. I only wish I could type faster

I wonder if it's because they had Panzerfausts, but I would also be interested in hearing the answer. Come on you grogs!

I wonder whether their perceived level of effectiveness in CM is linked directly to tactics employed by CM players that wouldn't have been employed IRL. As you were describing, Jason, attested kills indicate that the tanks were deprived of infantry cover. Perhaps what players are observing is less incorrect modelling and more incorrect screening of their armour.