Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

Vanir Ausf B

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,589

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Vanir Ausf B

    Back to the topic : Doubts in CM

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scipio:

    I meant, we should not discuss if something is worth to be coded, but of cause we should discuss if a 'problem' is caused by the coding.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    The only thing I see here that I would like to see changed, is MGs being allowed to abandon.

    [ 07-17-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

    0

    Back to the topic : Doubts in CM

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scipio:

    I guess it's still operable, but the crew has run for cover, cause the situation was a little bit to hot. ?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    This is not necessarily the case. Steve has said that if a crew abandons a gun having sustained few or no casualties, the gun is assumed to have been damaged. If they have taken serious losses they are assumed to be too rattled to go back a few minutes latter.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>B) I noticed that crews of support weapons usually try to flee with their heavy weapons. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    This is only true of MGs, and is due to a coding issue (MGs are considered infantry in the CM engine).

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>c) why can a machinegun not be knocked out with a surviving crew? Is a MG not so vulnerable like a 60mm mortar?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    See above.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>d) Maybe a surviving crew would be able to man the weapon of another - maybe killed or routed - crew? Maybe they could even man an abandoned enemy gun?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I don't think you would have the opportunity to use this feature often enough to make it worth while. If you can actually get your own routed crews all the way over to where the other guy had his own guns, you've probably already won the battle.

    I can just see people charging their crews across the map, braving MG and tank fire to make it to that abandoned enemy 88 on that back hill... bleh ;)

    [ 07-17-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

    0

    Tungsten Core Shatter Gap

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Freak:

    What about this extra 65mm of armor on the mantlet? Is this true? Would give kingtiger 185mm + 65mm armor thickness. Maybe an add on in the field?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Look at a picture of a KT and see for yourself. As Rexford said, the mantlet obviously only covers the area immediately around the gun opening. It doesn't even come close to covering the whole turret front. In fact, I just looked over at Achtung Panzer and they list the KTs front turret at 180mm at 9 degrees.

    0

    "SMG GAP" A Proposal...Take 2

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

    It is not possible to "lose" ID info, nor is it possible for a unit of x type to be better/worse at identifying units of y type than z type unit. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    But it is possible for a unit of x type to be better at identifiying other units also of x type than z type units, right? In other words, I think you did say that armor units are better at IDing armor than infantry units. I'm just trying to clarify here.

    [ 07-15-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

    0

    More doubts in CM

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scipio:

    a) Why does a tank don't detonate AP mines? Maybe they don't cause trouble to the tank, but the minefield would be uncovered.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    You may have a point here.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>B) IMO, damage on tanks/HT isn't modeled very good <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    You may have a point here as well, but I'm not sure. I once saw someone post the average number of penetrations needed to kill various tanks, and they seemed higher than in CM, but I haven't done any tests to confirm this.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I don't know it about Alied tanks, but it was possible to remove the onboard MGs of some German tanks/HTs very fast, so even an escaping Crew (if not paniced) could be a usefull unit with a MG.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Game engine limitation.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>FOW - Generally, I think we get to much information about enemy units. I can't even say if I fight with Regular or Elite troops if it wouldn't be shown in the display, so how should I know it about the enemy troops? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    CM2 will have an additional stage of FOW that will hide the information you mentioned.

    [ 07-15-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

    0

    Processor or RAM?

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by phil stanbridge:

    Don't forget here that Widows 98, and maybe even ME do not utilise more than 256mb RAM. NT and 2000 yes, more memory the better, but the "home" o/s cannot.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I'm not sure about ME, but Win 98 uses up to 512 MB.

    0

    Tungsten Core Shatter Gap

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Freak:

    Amazing that there are so many front turret hits on that thing. The allied tank gunners must have amazing aim! I will have to check this out and do a test.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Freak, keep in mind that CM does not model different hit location probabilities for different tanks. In other words, the chance of hitting the turret of a KT is exactly the same as hitting the turret of a Mk IV, a Sherman, whatever. According to Steve this is a limitation of the game engine and won't change in CM2.

    I actually did do a test on this and found that the turret is hit about 30% of the time on a non-hull down tank in CM. The upper hull was hit about 50% of the time with the last 20% divided between lower hull (12%), track hits and gun hits.

    0

    no cd required?

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Shatter:

    So there it not because I am a drunk.

    :D Shatter<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    So, what you're saying is that even if you were sober you would do the same thing. Ok, I understand. No problem.

    But, hey, be careful going down those stairs smile.gif

    0

    Points and Tanks

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    You're doing something wrong. 300 pts for armor in a 1500 pt game is what you get with a Combined Armes setup. Unrestricted would be 1500 for everything except arty. Make sure your game is version 1.12 or the unrestricted category will not be available.

    I get the impression you have not played the game much. You may want to join a ladder and actually play some before deciding the Germans are disadvantaged. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but most expirienced ladder players think the Allies are harder to win with than the Germans, an opinion I share (I'm on the Rugged Defense ladder).

    [ 07-14-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

    0

    Points and Tanks

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DasBaron:

    Why not just a point total that can be used any way you want?

    Now as I've mentioned before. I'm 99% sure I have been using "unrestricted".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I think you're confused. You say you want a point total that can be used any way you want... well that is exactly what unrestricted is (except for arty). With unrestricted you can buy close to a whole company of tanks in a 1250 pt game if you want.

    [ 07-13-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

    0

    Errors in CM !?

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    A while back, some guy who claims to have been a RW artillery officer for 15 year made a post about changes he would like to see in CM arty. I'll cut and paste the relevant stuff here.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>X-00 wrote:

    (2) Sheaf:

    (a)Both the normal and target wide are basically a converged sheaf. An open sheaf (all guns firing the same deflection)was the standard form of delivery

    (b)It's east-west orientation should be rotated 90 degrees to reflect (a) above.

    © Guns are usually placed 50-100m apart in a Lazy W. Using an open sheaf the rounds would fall on a frontage of basically 150m-300m with a depth of 50-100m (depends on the probable error in range).

    (3) C2. Similar to onboard indirect fire, if an allied leader has C2 over an FO that leader should be able to adjust fire. Additionally, in order to increase the importance of Company Commanders if a Company commander can see a target regardless of C2 with a CO he should be able to adjust fire.

    (4) Target Shift Time. The 100m adjust radius (the green line) is arbitrary and frankly shows no understanding of how fire direction is conducted. To a Fire Direction Center it doesn't matter if the correction is 50m or 500. For example say an artillery Battery is 5000m from the target and is directed to shift the gun-target line 50m left or right. The deflection correction would be 10 mils (less than a degree)for a 500m correction it would be 100 mils (about 6 degrees). The FDC and the Gun-line can apply these corrections in seconds. Today and then.

    (snip)

    5. Effects. The effectiveness of an artillery "barrage" significanly decreases after the first "salvo". The Joint Munitions Effects Manual (JMEMs), a classified document, reflects this. Soldiers under artillery fire are very good at finding effective cover after the first "surprise". Veteran soldiers are very good at finding cover. If they weren't they wouldn't be veterans. Additionally, foxholes provides much better cover than is reflected in CM.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    [ 07-13-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

    0

    no cd required?

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Shatter:

    I do own 2 PC's and ocassionally play myself in a battle, by going up and down the stairs each and every turn. So I do need 2 backups to do this.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Why aren't you using the hotseat option?

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Ya I also buy beer in bulk. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Nevermind, that explains it ;)

    0

    To surrender or not?

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cybeq:

    The reason I'm asking is because I just surrendered a PBEM and my opponent told me "that's weak".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Unless you agreed to fight to the last man, as far as I'm concerned you are totally within your rights to surrender when the outcome is no longer in doubt. I get rather annoyed at opponents who keep fighting with a few tattered units when they have no chance. I think most people are like this, and the ones who get some perverse pleasure out of spending 15 turns trying to kill every last bailed crew on the map are rare. Just don't play him again.

    0

    The Tiger Tank

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MikeyD:

    As for skirts on Gs, they may have simply been left off as an aid in identifying the vehicles while playing. Cover up that redesigned upper hull side and all Panther types tend to look the same.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I dunno. Those skirts on the A are functional, tho not very effective. I once shot a whole bunch of bazookas at some Panthers (in the game that is) and the skirts on the A deflected about 3% of the hits.

    0
×
×
  • Create New...