c3k

Sigh. The driver and the gunner have been going at each other since basic training. The driver is convinced that the gunner will let them all down in a pinch. That feeling was strengthened during a bar brawl against some RAF lads in pub just before the invasion. After the fight, the gunner was found to have fled before the first punch. As for him, the gunner has been furious with the driver ever since the driver ended up with the lass upon whom the gunner had set his sights. The sounds that came from the the pair of them from driver's bunk that night did nothing to settle the barracks. That's their history. In this particular firefight, the gunner was screaming at the driver to pull slightly forward so he could get a better LOS. The driver, deafened by the .50, did nothing. In frustration, the gunner threw some hot brass at the driver. One of the cartridges went down his shirt. In pain and surprised, the driver thought a hidden gun was penetrating the halftrack with impacts. He did as he had been trained: he reversed out of danger. Now, all that should've been blindingly obvious to you. I admit, when I was new to the game, I, too, frequently glossed over the personnel files before I started a new battle. Ken

Excellent turn! The armor battle heats up. (Oh, the punning is poor, but I tried. ) Funny synchronicity: there's a thread lambasting the lack of crews bailing in-game when they get hit, and your AAR shows the PzIII doing exactly that. Good turn. Thanks, Ken

Hmmm, before it's fixed, I suggest you use it to your advantage! Place that 231 behind a building and give it a covered arc so the turret is floating in air by itself. Whatever you do, don't let your opponent know about this...

Um, really?? I mean, you really want this put in the game? How many times were 88's in motion engaged?

Or the condemned man paying children to hang on his boots to help speed him along? Yeah, guttersnipes were in tougher back in the day. Books: "Death by Design" is, I think, the title of a book on my shelf (somewhere). It is a critical look at the manner in which Great Britain designed and produced tanks in WWII. I thought was a good read.

FWIW, when I played through this, I would SLOW that FO team into the densest overgrowth on the flank of the hill. They'd have a 50m circular covered arc and NO ONE would be NEAR them. Nothing like hiding a team only to have the enemy bombard the area because a nearby squad gets spotted. Tough luck on the arty. Pulled a red chit on that one. Your options are simple. Group your men in cover, give them a stirring speech, then lead them in a beautiful charge against the enemy! You man not gain the position, but you will not lose your honor. It has been a pleasure. We'll be watching your assault from the far hill.

Bimmer, Was this in a pre-made battle? If so, which one? Or, a QB? Thanks, Ken

I vaguely recall something about the British Ordance Department finding out that their fuzes were shearing off of their APHE shells. It is a dim memory, with no citations. Take it as heresay, but there's an odd itch in the back of my mind about that. Something to do with the unexpectedly hard German face-hardened armor, compared with the softer British armor that they used when developing their shells. Having said that, I, too, had an M10 which stayed in the fight despite repeated long 75mm hits. (It did lose a lot of sub-systems and a few crewmembers.) I don't think one or two "my M10 survived" stories are enough to declare anything. Ken

Many handgun shooters, military and civilian, experienced and untrained, have posted in this thread already. Actual results have been posted. Youtube links of handgun fights have been posted. Outliers are the deadeye accurate shooters. They are rare, and rarely seen. To back this up, just yesterday a man walked up to his ex-boss in New York City (right at the base of the Empire State Building), and emptied his .45 into the boss. (In the US, wrongful termination lawsuits are only one option available to you.) After murdering the ex-boss, the killer was followed on CROWDED sidewalks. He was pointed out to two NYPD officers guarding the entrance to the Empire State Building. (They have been variously described as anti-terrorist experts. Whatever.) They accosted the killer who WAS EIGHT FEET AWAY!!! Remember that: two officers, one bad guy, range is 8'. The killer pulled his .45 out of his bag (it may have been empty, it may not have been; it's still fresh and facts are sparse). At 8', BOTH officers drew their sidearms and fired at least 16 shots. (Some accounts say more.) At 8', they hit the killer 7 times. Oh, they ALSO hit 9 passersby. (They may have fired more than 16 rounds.) Trained, had the "drop" (they initiated the confrontation), a man-sized target in broad daylight at 8'. And they still missed well more than half their shots. (At least, they missed their target. I'm sure the folks with various finger-sized holes in the bodies would argue that point.) So, to sum: experienced shooters, actual stats, and even an incident within 24 hours, all point to the fact that handguns are essentially worthless as a combat weapon. Their only use is to win a knife-fight. (Oh, and they will LOSE a knife-fight if the fight is initiated by the knifer within 21' and the handgun is in a holster, concealed or duty carry. But that's a debate for another day.) Adrenalin and handguns equals misses.

Plus, sitting around makes the AAR stagnate. Spice it up for us! Send forward a platoon size FAST recce to seize the windmill. C'mon, he may've forgotten to defend it! Maybe it's loaded with mp40/mg42 troops. It doesn't matter to us: just get some more screenshots in! ("Men, higher HQ is asking for volunteers to grab the windmill. I'd go with you, but the burden of command forces me to stay here and fill out the paperwork. Anyone?") The screenies are fun... Keep 'em coming! Ken

It seems to me that weapons are designed for certain ranges, and can be practiced at these ranges, but in real life-or-death situations, every weapon drops down a notch. For example, optimal/possible ranges: Knives, about 6 feet (extended arm, lunge) Handguns, up to 50 yards (some more, based on high-tech and training) Carbines, up to 300m Rifles, 600m Machineguns, 1km Now, in real life, this is what happens: Knives are used while grappling, well within headlock range. Handguns are most effective at "knife range", meaning about 6 feet. Carbines actually hit targets at 50m, and miss at 300m Rifles are able to cause casualties at 300m (sometimes) and almost always miss at 600m Machineguns just waste ammo beyond 600m Now, all the above is VERY ROUGH. The gist is that whatever you THINK a weapon can do, in ACTUALITY, it is nearly worthless until it is used at ranges where you think a closer weapon would be "better". Just adding another perspective.

Re the KIA:WIA stats in the AAR screen: the WIA does not count yellow bases. If it did, would your KIA:WIA stat seem more aligned with what you'd expect? Ken

I eat spaghetti, and am not offended. (Although, seriously, that was the best you could come up with? The lack of imagination reflects more poorly on you, rather than those you sought (unsuccessfully) to disparage.)

That chart: it shows the sights are mounted 2" above the barrel. Most handguns have iron sights which are about 1/2" above the center of the muzzle. So, add 1 1/2" to the drop numbers. Having said that, you're ignoring the psychological/physical issues of sighting and firing at 25 yards vs. 50 yards. If you place a target at 25 yards and get 5" groupings AND, simultaneously, place a backdrop at 50 yards, I agree that you'd get a 10" grouping at the 50 yard location. (Or close enough that it doesn't matter.) However, AIMING at 50 yards is far different than AIMING at 25 yards. The sights wander, your breathing and heartbeat makes a bigger difference, you SEE your sights going on and off target, there's a tendency to rush the shot when the sights cross the target which causes misses, etc., etc. That's why they actually have shoots at different distances rather than just compute where the bullets would've landed, based on a short-range target. Re the 20' comment: I'd be surprised at 50% hits at 20 feet in a life or death situation.

It's amazing how much better one feels they are vs. the TacAI. Reload and replay are wonderful, aren't they?

The crashing issues you're describing are not something that seem to be common. I suggest copying your post over in the Tech Support Forum (or, better yet, send an email directly to BF.C's email support address). Limited intel is far better in CMx2 than in CM1. Have you read the manual?

If you issue a "hide" command, they will go prone. Yeah, they don't spot as well that way. It's a trade-off. I came to CMBN from CMSF. If you haven't tried that, let me just say that Kevlar helmets, body armor, 30 round magazines, automatic grenade launchers, instant smoke, all got me used to a certain style of fighting. The casualties my men suffered when I first played CMBN was a bit disheartening, to say the least! Ken

drtechno, If you need/want any more answers, don't hesitate to post. Ken

Regiment0, Thank you for the detailed explanation and the manner in which you explored this behavior. As akd just posted, he has reported it. It is posts such as yours which help find and fix problematic behavior. Regards, Ken

Yeah, I thought that was funny. Instead of a snarky comment, I'll post a commiserating comment. I'm in a pbem and am getting STONKED by some good artillery. I am, of course, asking my opponent why he feels the need to bombard an empty field. (I'm hoping he doesn't see the dozens of crosses sprouting in mid-air, or my broken remnants fleeing, or hear the screams of the wounded.) If I can convince him he's wasting ordance, maybe he'll stop... Ken

Well, the undergrowth makes a big difference. Trees on grass are like a well tended orchard. I know that every time I pass an apple orchard during apple season, and I see it filled with families with baskets, I think what a tempting 81mm target they make. Check the way the terrain slopes on this map, and the spacing on those trees. It is not out of the question that multiple sightings have occurred. Ken

The views of the Med from Taormina, under a full moon on New Year's Eve, can be spectacular. Just sayin'...

Just wait till you see the Commissars and what they can do with their Makarovs. It's not just the enemy who fear them...

That is a great test... The pictures are very helpful. Side/rear visibility in tanks: I don't have my Tiger references at hand, but the driver and radio operator had sidewise vision (I forget to what degree). As well, the TC had 360^ cupola vision blocks. Some versions of the Tiger had pistol ports around the back and sides of the turret with vision capability. Having said that, the question remains, "should a tank have such good spotting capability for 360^?"

It's interesting how well this game replicates the "meat grinder" aspect of this kind of battle. Whether you're on offense or defense, your front men WILL get chewed up. The only way to limit this is to put a screen up. If you're on offense, that means a few scouts. Yeah, they'll die. But hopefully they'll allow your main force to find the defender's location. Call in the arty to pin the defenders, then manuever your forces. Oh, and that manuevering? Yeah, you'll find more defenders. On defense, a thin screen up front to stop those scouts, a dug in, hidden main line, with fall backs and flank defenses will take so much out the attackers that their assault should stop. Don't think a strong "wall" will stop the attack. You need a "cushion" to absorb the impetus. Defend several bocage lines with light forces rather than one line with all your force. At the end of a battle, it's likely that both sides will have suffered a LOT of casualties from their engaged platoons. Ken