Soddball

I'm damn busy right now what with jobs and wimmins and politicking and whatnot. :mad:

I believe that there are some bits of advice on that issue. I guess Madmatt left some settings on the demo so some people have to go back and reconfig the settings to make it run. </font>

Game downloaded. Game installed. Game don't run. :mad:

Athlon64 3500+ 2GB RAM Geforce IV Ti4200 Double-click icon, doesn't load.

I am currently downloading it. Should be done by the end of the month.

You just whore yourself for anyone, don'cha? :mad: </font>

My name is Harold the Angry Goose and I sanction this thread.

My name is Harold the Angry Goose and I sanction this thread.

TEMPLARS!!!!!!1!

I can't think of anything more likely to stop me buying the game than that stupid 'woooo' noise Americans feel the urge to make. Keerist, get some frigging cultural perspective.

Guderian's book on 116th Panzer and another one I'm reading called 'It never snows in September' (about Arnhem from the German point of view) both continually raise the problem of doing anything - moving vehicles, getting supplies, launching attacks - due to 'jabos'. Whilst Jason's point that planes rarely killed tanks is probably true (it's hard to get any accurate figures but it seems likely), they wrought havoc amongst everything else.

However, the interdiction ability of the fighter-bomber is consistently underplayed by you. Reducing the mobility of the enemy and keeping him off the roads, as well as hitting his supply lines, disables his armour and his attack strength just as surely as hitting the armour itself.

Yah, well, welcome to the MOD's procurement policy. This year they've spent £2.3Bn on new offices (including £1,000 per comfy office chair) and £47.19 on equipment for the armed forces. Wankers. :mad:

I think Jason overstates his point. There can, under certain circumstances, be a 'cheat'. Is it significant? Not IMO. I doubt that I've played as many games as Jason, but in my experience the 'reverse slope bug' isn't a big deal. I've played few games where I haven't turned up without mortars. A dozen rounds on target will solve the problem. Failing that, area fire with a MG will suppress the gun. ATGs are spotted too easily in the game anyway. This was never a deal-breaker for me.

As opposed to your 'Game-ily work up one edge', which is sporting and gentlemanly?

Because if you target the MG nest and the MG becomes suppressed, it can become invisible to you. Your vehicle will then stop firing at it and it will be able to recover. By using area target, fire will be continuous and you have a better chance of breaking the unit and forcing it to rout.

Would those have been common enough to cause the uparmouring? And even with the uparmouring, what's the chance of stopping an 88 round?

If these were manufactured for early T-34s (that is I assume those in combat in 1941-1942), does it suggest that existing armour was inadequate even with that slope? What would T-34s have been facing in 1941 that made such extra armour necessary?

Congratulations!

If you're couping, you'll have to coup my coup or I'll have to coup your coup.

Beyond about 1.5km the accuracy on the 88 is very poor - far poorer than one reads about in accounts of its use in Africa, for example. As has been said here, use MGs or sharpshooters to button tanks, use covered arcs and hide commands for the AT guns, and use the reverse slope of hills to protect you from HE blasts.

Not that I'd want to brag or anything, but you can find surnames of my both veteran grandfathers coded into CMBB. :cool: </font>

It's a Blackadder reference. Your humour gene appears to have been disabled.

Have to say I'm beginning to feel the same way. For some reason I assumed the kind of people who play these tac games were a cut above the usual teenage FPS-whoring retards, but after some of the comments in another thread in the CMBB forum I've revised that assumption. </font>