Mike D

Mr. Davie, Tom, please don't take this reply the wrong way. But, it will be interesting to see how you and inductive reasoning stand up against someone that watchs the entire movie from each of the previoius turns and knows exactly what is going on. How many battle field commanders do you think there are out there that issue orders to their troops, then close their eyes, wait for 60 seconds at a time having no real clue what is really going on, and then open their eyes and try to deduce what the heck has transpired in the last 60 seconds in order to give their troops their next orders????????? I think you will be doing exactly the equivalent to this if you play the game as you propose. But then it is a free country (Canada still is too, isn't it?), so by all means have at it. My guess is not very many, and most of those that have tried to do so are long since dead and/or got a lot of their men killed in the process. By the way, this is not a public challenge. Just some thoughts on your statements. In any event I would very much like to know how your little experiment in not watching the movies turns out after you have played a few games against some folks (not the computer AI either). Especially head to head w/ a timer on. Not much time for scratching one's head and trying to "inductively reason" what has happened over the last sixty seconds then, right??? Of course there isn't much time to try and deduce what is going on on a real battlefield either, which is exactly what CM is trying to model. And I would imagine that just as in real life you are going to want all means at your disposal (sight, sound, battle reports, unit status reports, etc.) to understand what is going on when you are playing a gaming simulating such combat like CM. In any event please try your experiment against ten people playing in head to head mode over the internet with a turn limit timer on and let us know how it turns out. As for me (and most others here I imagine), I'll stick to watching the movies to help understand what is going on vs. trying to induce it from before and after turn status data any day. The battlefield is a dynamic place and CM's playback capability is much more than just a "cool" side show to entertain us or provide "eye candy". It can, and should be, used as a real tool to help us arm chair generals to better ascertain what is going on on the battlefield in order to make rational, well informed, command decisions before issuing orders to our troops. I think perhaps you are missing the point of having the movies in the first place, no? But to each his own. Regards, Mike D aka Mikester [This message has been edited by Mike D (edited 08-22-99).]

"No award, but you certainly "won" the contest" Darn, I was hoping to get a free copy of the game! "What you have to keep in mind is that these battle descriptions are compressed timewise. The action of taking out 3 tanks in "short order" probably took 5-10 minutes (or longer). That is 5-10 turns in CM scale. Could of even happened quicker if the enemy tanks were bunched up and in open ground with a really good gunner." Steve, while in general I would agree with you, I think that in some instances (perhaps not very often though) at least a couple of tanks could be knocked out within a single 60 second period. "Point here is that you can do combos of drive fast, halt, hunt, move, etc. in 5-10 turns quite a bit. You can even do combos within ONE turn. Drive your tank full speed (Fast) to get to a good clearing, then order it to go into Hunt mode and advance towards the enemy's flank, then pehaps change back to Fast." Being able to issue combinations orders utilizing waypoints, etc. to combine rapid short movements with fire / hunt orders is exactly what I wanted to here you say. Hopefully you can do this to some degree even within a given order plot phase? If this is already possbible in CM then there is no need for a special "attack hunt" order. How many move / fire and/or hunt orders can be strung together and issued to a single tank for a given turn??? "What you did NOT see in WWII combat was a tank driving full speed ahead whacking stuff while still on the move. Because of the gun systems and turrets of the day, such shots wouldn't likely hit the broadside of a barn." Absolutely not, I'm totally in agreement w/ you here. "So, CM reflects WWII combat very well as is. You drive fast to get into a good spot, then get into a firing position, shoot at the enemy, then move on. Our Hunt order allows you to tell a unit to stop and fire on the fly as the situation dicates. Units will also fire while doing Move and Fast orders, but much less likely so (especially for Fast). Hunt is designed to have the vehicle cease movement and concentrate on killing stuff." Sounds good to me. Will experienced tank crews suffer less of an accuracy penalty employing these move and fire, move and fire, type of tactics?? I would certainly think that would be the case. "Hope this is clear." 100% clear, and thanks for the response. Sounds like you guys have this base covered just like all the rest. Mike

Charles, Cool, didn't know you guys had added this capability. Mike

FWIW, I believe in my recent readings that German Tiger crews were also outfitted with a single sub machine gun (probably an MP40???) along w/ pistol's for use in order to protect itself if it had to bail out. Regards, MikeD aka Mikester [This message has been edited by Mike D (edited 08-22-99).]

Charles, Great post. Thanks to you and Steve for weathering the storm of comments regarding the graphics (I uhhmmm, probably even contributed to them myself to some small degree) and other aspects of the game that people just can't seem to accept to be possible. In doing so you will hopefully prove that there is more to wargaming than what you described above and set a new standard for wargaming excellence. My hat is off to you guys. Best of luck and hope that CM starts to reach "critical mass" and becomes a huge hit. Then you can sit back and wave at all the naysayers and big game companies that never thought you could do it and say, "see, we told you it could be done, and now we've proven it!" Regards, Mike D aka Mikester [This message has been edited by Mike D (edited 08-22-99).]

Lokesa, You definately need to add Patrick Agte's "Michael Wittman and the Tiger Commander's of the Liebstandarte" to your list. A truly exceptional book if I do say so. To see a couple of excerpts from the book read my most recent post. BTW, thanks much for compiling this list, I was hoping somebody would do this so we could all have a single place to find all of these great books. Mike D aka Mikester

This being my 100th post and all I thought I'd pull out all the stops and write a doozy. While I don't know if the game needs such a mode (more on this later) I thought it would make for an interesting discussion if nothing else. Also, I've so much enjoyed the book that I've been reading that I thought I would share some of the truly incredible stories about the 1st SS Panzers Heavy Tank Co (later Battalion) related therein. Including one about German tank ace Michael Wittmann. First though, let's take a look at what started this. The following is taken from Fionn's post in the "Some assistance is required thread" "Hunt: This is a very slow movement but once it spots the enemy it will halt and engage it until the enemy is destroyed so proper usage of these various commands would result in exactly what you are describing." Having read this post in addition to also currently reading a book called, "Michael Wittman and the Tiger Commanders of the Liebstandarte" has got me thinking (by the way simply an outstanding book, I'm only 1/4 of the way through it and it just keeps getting better and better. Highly, highly recommended). I hope that I don't go too much off the deep end here, so bear w/ me. If nothing else maybe I can win the coveted all time longest post award here at BTS And, at the same time relate a couple of astonishing stories of the achievements of the Liebstandartes 13th Heavy Tank Co. (all Tiger I's) in Russia. First to business, I'm beginning to think there needs to be another mode in the game that I'll call "Attack Hunt". While I'm hopeful that the game will allow (maybe already indirectly does???) something akin to what I'm about to describe with its existing command set and orders structure, I'm not sure that it does (maybe with the 60 second turns it won't be too difficult to achieve the type of results that I'm about to describe by issuing various changes in orders to the tanks during each turn). Part of what "worries" me here is the statement above (I'll assume it's true for now) that the current "hunt" mode is a slow and methodical form of advance. While this is fine in theory and most certainly would be appropriate in many cases in terms of advancing into enemy territory depending on the given tactical situation, it definitely stands in sharp contrast to many of the accounts that I've read so far in the aforementioned book which occurred on the Eastern front in '43 and early '44 in terms of actual German armor tactics. In fact the book mentions time and again how German panzer units on both attack and counterattack missions advanced anything but slowly and methodically, often times against a far numerically superior force, and wrecked absolutely havoc among the enemy forces causing them considerable losses. While I realize that in some ways CM / west front and the east front are different. Trust me, I couldn't see what I'm about to relay to you as described in the book taking place in the boccage of Normandy for example. However, there are plenty of other places all over France, Belgium, western Germany, etc. similar in terrain and military situation where such things could have and probably did occur (haven't gotten that far in the book yet so I don't know for certain). So what am I blabbering about anyway? Well here are two excerpts of actual combat occurrences described in the book which, to say the least, are extraordinary. However they also help to illustrate what I mean by "attack hunt". Furthermore, trust me when I tell you this that the book relates dozens of other action accounts by German units in attacks against very well dug in Russian infantry, tank, and AT forces, where time and again similar (not nearly as extraordinary though) results were obtained from using the exact same tactics of quick advance, momentarily stop, fire, quick advance, stop, fire, and so on. The more I read, the more obvious it becomes that the Germans had the art of tank warfare and tactics honed to a very fine level in comparison to any of the Russian or Western Allied powers they faced. This first excerpt from the book starts on p.77 and relates the story of a single Tiger I tank during the battle of Kursk in summer of '43. Note that in the interest of time I'm leaving certain "non-critical" bits of the story out. "SS-Unterscharfuhrer Franz Staudeggar of Wendorff's IInd Platoon was unable to take part in the attack by his company on the morning of the 8 July as his Tiger had suffered mechanical breakdown. He therefore stayed behind in Teterevino. A few hours later he was told that a group of about 50 to 60 Soviet T-34's was approaching from the northeast. Without hesitating for a second, Staudeggar used all the means at his disposal to make his Tiger derivable again, then set out alone in the direction of the reported enemy tanks. On the way a grenadier advised him that five Soviet tanks had already broken into the German positions (all infantry formations). Shortly thereafter, he saw the infantry knock out two of the T-34's. He was able to dispatch the remaining three in short order. Then, suddenly, two T-34's appeared on the railway embankment. Direct hits destroyed both in a matter of seconds. He then drove through the infantry positions into no mans land, completely on his own, one man against 60 enemy tanks (several already destroyed of course). Then he saw them. Five more tanks emerged from a wood beyond the railway embankment. He issued his instructions to the crew. Immediate Heinz Buchner took aim at the first and put a round into its turret, whereupon it exploded. The other T-34's now opened fire on the Tiger. Staudeggar fired repeatedly and destroyed all five Soviet tanks in this incredibly difficult fire fight. Then more T-34's poured out of the woods and Stuadeggar immediately took up the fight. He directed a stream of orders at his gunner: aim, fire, hit! The hardest work was done by the loader Walter Henke as he heaved shell after shell in the breech of the 88. Herbert Stellmacher kept the Tiger constantly in motion (between firings), skillfully changing positions in front of the mass of enemy tanks so that they were unable to zero in on the lone Tiger (first evidence of need for an "attack hunt" order IMO). The green T34's with the red star were not far away. The Tiger's solo battle lasted for two hours, by which time Stuadeggar had destroyed a total of 17 tanks! The Tiger had taken hits but they had inflicted no damage. The enemy finally realized that there was not getting through there and withdrew. However, Staudeggar wasn't ready to just pull back to the security of his own lines. He wanted more. Throwing caution to the wind (well sorta) he set his Tiger in motion to track down the enemy tanks. It was a daring decision (and perhaps none to wise IMO) whose chances of success were limited, for the danger of walking into a Soviet trap was great. The big Tiger rolled forward slowly; its commander's attention focused on the terrain (great example of "hunt" mode being employed here, but we shall see that they quickly shift gears to an "attack hunt" mode momentarily). An AP shell lay in the breech and Buchner sat a the telescopic sight, senses taut. Then, suddenly, he saw them; the enemy tanks had regrouped in a gully. The Tiger's engine raced as it approached (going into what I call "attack hunt" mode here), then halted abruptly and the first shell left the long barrel and struck its target. The Tiger fired shell after shell and Stuadeggar picked off 5 more T-34's from the middle of the mass of tanks. With its AP ammo expended, the Tiger began firing HE rounds. Four additional T34's were seen to be hit. The Soviets were completely dismayed, the Tiger seemed invincible. The survivors took flight in panic in hope of avoiding total destruction…." IMHO, it is plain to see that in this admittedly incredible action, that the commander used a combination of both "hunt" and "attack hunt" modes of operation. BTW the next day infantry patrols confirmed the kills and Staudeggar was recommended for the Knight's Cross. In case you lost count he destroyed 22 enemy tanks in just this one action! One day after that it was awarded to him for his incredible bravery in stopping the Soviet thrust. My next example starts on p.161 and I'll try to keep a little shorter in the interest of time. It concerns the actions of our old friend tank ace Michael Wittmann in Jan. '44. Early on the morning of the 13th, the Soviets launched a major attack. They breached the German MLR (main line of resistance) and advanced to Chesnovka. Wittmann and several other Tigers were ordered to advance there and stop them. "Michael Wittmann and his crew quickly climbed aboard the tank; the commander gave the command "panzer march!" and the Tiger set itself in motion. Wittmann concentrated on the terrain in front of him, searching for the Soviet AT guns he so respected. Sitting at his feet was Bobby Woll; the gunner slipped on his headset and throat microphone. He checked his equipment and released the safety in order to be ready to fire immediately. An AP round already lay in the breech. It was quiet inside the tank ; the only sound was the rumbling of the tanks motor as it approached the enemy positions. In staggered positions behind Wittmann were several other Tigers of the 13th company. Woll was adjusting the range scale, when suddenly he heard Wittman's voice on the headset: "Attention, tank at two o'clock." Woll immediately trod on the pedal and the Tiger's turret began to rotate in the assigned direction. With his left hand he set the range on his telescopic site, while with his right he turned the elevation wheel. Soon the first T34 was in his sight. As soon as the pointed-post reticle was superimposed on the tank he fired. It was a direct his which blew off the Soviet tanks turret. Wittman's driver pulled away immediately and drove on (more of what I would call "attack hunt" mode quick movements,stops, firing, moving, etc.). Wittmann spotted the main body of the enemy tanks. He gave the order to fire, but Woll had already targeted the nearest tank. His shot struck it in the side. Woll immediately took aim at the next; the sound of the 88 firing and the impact of the shell were one. Gunner Woll worked with uncanny precision. His forehead pressed firmly against the telescopic sight's headrest. One tank after another fell victim to Wittman's Tiger. The tank remained constantly in motion so as to not offer a stationary target to a T34 or lurking AT gun Wittman maneuvered skillfully in front of the Soviet tanks, stopping only briefly to fire (again, perhaps a mixture of "hunt" / "attack hunt" modes). The other Tigers had by now joined the battle, their 88 mm guns barked sharply. Suddenly a fountain of earth rose up in front of Wittmann's Tiger. Wittmann saw a Soviet heavy assault gun. Two hits were sufficient to disable this new foe. The loader immediately inserted another round and the Tiger moved off. Then another firing halt and once again an AP round struck home. There were burning T34's everywhere in the snow covered landscape, but several Soviet tanks were still driving about and firing wildly. Wittmann knocked out several more tanks before the furious battle ended. Exhausted and emotionally drained, he set out for home. In the action described above, together with action the previous day, Wittman had destroyed 16 T34's and 3 assault guns. Raising his total kills to date to eight-eight! Wittmann, already a Knight's Cross holder was recommended for and received the addition of the "Oak Leaves" to his KC. Woll was recommended for and received the Knights Cross, having previously received the Iron Cross." Needless to say, another simply amazing story. I never knew the details of how the German's actually fought their armored battles before reading this book. It is simply incredible. Also take note of how both officers took full advantage of only momentarily stopping to fire, then quickly darting off to some other spot to once again stop and fire. Over and over again you see the same thing described in battle after battle that this unit took part in 1943 - 44 Russia. It is relatively easy to ascertain that other German tank units used similar tactics as well. Other accounts tell much the same story when the Germans were on the attack. Take for example how commander Jochen Pieper used mixed armored (halftrack) Panzer Grenadiers, with Tiger's (and other tanks lent to his PG's for the attack) in the spearhead to dauntlessly (very well planned out before hand I might had) rush a village and take it by storm. It describes how the PG's in their HT's stormed ahead w/ guns blazing right along w/ the Tigers (again using what I would call "hunt attack" mode to quickly advance before the enemy could react.). Supporting follow up troops and Pzkw IV's and V's were not far behind in support of the attack. In any event, I hope CM's command set and orders structure supports such tactics and actions as they are quite evidently a very major part of the German tank and combined arms tactics. And if the ability to somehow achieve an "attack hunt" mode is not in the game I would most certainly think that it should somehow be directly or indirectly implemented. Hopefully it already is. By the way, do I win the award for longest post???? If nothing else, I hope everyone enjoyed the stories from the book. I know that I have. Regards, Mike D aka Mikester [This message has been edited by Mike D (edited 08-22-99).]

CoolColJ, This was disucussed at great length in the past and if I recall correctly the answer was a resounding NO (try searching back through the old threads). Primary reason BTS is not including it being that it doesn't have any "long" campaigns where you would keep the same units from battle to battle ala Close Combat series. Therefore, no need to have capability to rename units. Which is more or less along the lines of what you've referred to as role playing. For this and other reasons I know BTS decided to not allow renaming of units by the players In any event, I imagine it is getting way too late in the development of the game to add renaming units back into the equation. Or many / most other changes either for that matter. Mike D aka Mikester

Steve, Thanks for the lengthy and detailed reply. I was kind of afraid that CM was going to suffer from this phenomena, but hopeful that you guys might have found a way around it. Your explanation of why this isn't possbile is entirely understandable. Guess I'll just have to wait for a couple of years for the 2500Mhz Pentium cpu's and video cards w/ 256MB of ram running at 1000Mhz to come out. Then we can all have some real fun!!! Mike

Patience my friend. You've been here what, all of a little over a week? Unless of course you were lurking here before that Anyway, some of us have been around here from the beginning and have managed to wait this long, so I think you can sit tight along with the rest of us till our long awaited baby arrives. Heck, I know I've been waiting for well over a year, probably coming up on close to two years! If I and others here have managed to wait for that long you can hold out for a month or two can't you??? I know it's tough, I don't have much patience alot of the time either. But in the end, BTS's approach to doing it right the first time and releasing a quality product will benefit us all vs. rushing some garbage out the door just to appease somebody (first release of East Front comes to mind, my God, what a mess that was). Mike D aka Mikester

Steve, "US a Heavy Weapons Company would be a real PAIN if it were on the attack." I would assume in real life that these types of units would most likely not be deployed as a whole, but instead be broken up into platoons and assigned to other rifle companies, etc., as necessary for heavy weapons support. If so, I would hope that you guys could shed a little light on such matters in the manual. I.e. how should heavy / special weapons companies, AT companies, etc., be employed by the scenario designer in a realistic manner. From what I understand deploying such units "en masse" is totally unrealistic to begin with. "In general the big task is the Deployment Phase and the first turn." My question here is in regard to the turn timer (there is still going to be one and it is optional to use, right?) that was discussed some time ago here on the board to prevent folks from taking all day to plot the perfect set of moves durning the plot phase (especially annoying, and for that matter pretty unrealistic in general, when someone does this and you are playing over the net head to head). In any event, if the first turn is going to take an inordinate amount of time to plot one's moves relative to the following turns in the rest of the game my question is will the timer automatically give us some extra time during this first turn to be able to properly and realistically give our units their orders on turn 1? I would think if it doesn't it might very well end up being detrimental to the game. Especially for an attacker who should be allowed the needed time to properly order his units on turn one to reflect prior operational planning and jump-off orders given to his units prior to the battle beginning. In fact, I would go so far as to say maybe there shouldn't even be a time limit on turn one, perhaps the timer should only "kick-in" from turn 2 onwards….? Regards, Mike D. aka Mikester [This message has been edited by Mike D (edited 08-22-99).]

CCJ, I gave up on Talonsoft's xxxxFront series after my first experience w/ the orginal East Front. A horendous piece of junk to say the least. As far as CC series goes don't even get me started there. I actually have bought and played all three of them, but the gross inaccuracies and problems w/ making head to head play work in all 3 of the games in the series have made me vow to not even consider buying CC4 unless they make some very drastic improvements. And something tells me that I'll be so happy playing CM that I won't even need to bother looking at CC4, or any other game for that matter, for quite some time to come Ahhhhh Steve, I think I've been waiting around for Computer Squad Leader / CM for something more than a year. I used to surf the old BTS (long before the CM chat section was ever added) and Avalon Hill webpages pretty frequently. I can remember for the longest time on the BTS page where there was nothing more than a short blurb on the upcoming title and a single small picture of a squad leaders head in profile holding a pair of binoculars if I recall correctly (taken from the front of one of the AH SL series boxes if I'm not mistaken). And at the time the game wasn't even called Combat Mission. Not sure when that was, but it was way over a year ago. Heck, it's been at least a year since the CM chat page was added at the old BTS website, right???? Mike D aka Mikester [This message has been edited by Mike D (edited 08-20-99).]

Night Combat: My understanding is that many times the Germans would launch attacks at night (i.e. more common for them to do so) vs. the Brit's and American's who most often would not make such attacks. This would lead me to believe that through a combination of experience and training in actually conducting attacks at night that the Germans should be less likely to panic at night and have better overall unit cohesion and command & control while conducting night op's vs. the Western Allies. Is this true, and if so, does CM model this correctly???? Mike D aka Mikester

BTS, I know this is a really dumb question. But how truly 3d are the trees, buildings, etc. going to be as you move around in CM? What I'm getting at is in many games they look 3d (panzer elite for example), but in reality when one approachs them they start to appear as more of a flat facade. Then, as you move through them (often times right through the side of a building wall for example in Panzer Elite) it instantaneosly feels as if you've just moved through a transparent wall. All of a sudden your on the other side of the supposed trees / wall and all you see are the terrain features on the opposite side of the "majical curtain" representing that feature. If you turn back around it appears once again as if you are staring back a "flat" looking scenary wall of trees, building wall, etc. Having not seen CM in person and not having any screen shots with a camera attached to a unit attempting to move through such features its kinda hard to tell how well CM stacks up against some of the other games out there. To be quite honest w/ you I was surprised that Panzer Elite even allowed tanks to drive right through building walls and out the other side as if the didn't even really exist. They did at least have the insight to turn the building into rubble behind the overrunning tank. But the graphics as you moved through the building in your tank were as described above. Same if you moved through trees, or other similar terrain features. Of course, this doesn't even touch the subject of whether, or not, the tank should have even been able to drive right through the house in the first place which is totally unrealistic to begin with IMHO. In any event, I certainly hope CM has a better 3d representation of trees, buildings, etc. than those depicted in Panzer Elite, Over the Rhine, or some of the 3d golf games that I've seen. Mike D aka Mikester

Fionn, Ahhhhhhh, now I see where you were heading w/ the large maps. Hey, if that kind of thing will work, that will be all the better. Mike

Along with Doug's question. If there is anything that you guys specifically want us to "demo the heck out of" then just let us know. I think you will have all the help you need and then some. I'm thinking like if you need alot of people to check out the head to head, or play by email features, or maybe build some quicky user made scenarios to make sure the scenario editor has been put through its paces (not sure if this is going to be in the demo version, but it sure would be nice), etc. Whatever would help you guys to help build us a better game prior to initial release. Mike D aka Mikester

Fionn, I would have to agree w/ most of what you have said. I don't think there is any way someone is going to tie an operational level game into the CM engine. Just too many difficulties in doing something like that. As far as the meta-campaign goes I think that is a great idea. I know it was discussed before, just can't remember the details of the discussion. One potential problem I can forsee (BTS can correct me if I'm wrong here) is that I don't think the game system and/or the average users computer system is going to be able to handle 50km by 50km maps. I seem to recall Charles or Steve stating an appx. max. map size, but can't remember what it was. My guess (and it is just that, a guess) is that realistically we are probably looking at 10km x 10km or maybe upto 15km max. Mike D aka Mikester

Great to hear things are "on track" and moving right along. Also extremely happy to here that an early demo will be out as well! Mike D aka Mikester

Steve and Charles, This is great news!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thanks for all of your hard work in making this happen so quickly and your excellent attention to detail. Regards, Mike D aka Mikester

Fionn, Last word I heard was SP4 was going to be out for quite some time to come. And if they don't make some significant improvements to the game I won't even consider buying it. Is Pacific War 99 something new? Or is it a retitle of the other pacific theater game that was orginally supposed to come out sometime soon (can't remember the actual title / publisher of the game that I'm thinking of). Mike D aka Mikester PS: will go over and vote for CM after I get done here.

Rex, I think what Charles is getting at is that from 400m on outward that a HMG that hasn't moved (has never moved?) will get a firing bonus in comparison to one that recently has, not that the firepower of a given HMG that hasn't moved will be more effective at 500m vs. 400m. Steve/Charles, Can the HMG's or other MG's be preregestered into the target markers, or just the AT / artillery type of guns? Finally, I'd have to say I agree w/ what I think I'm hearing from several folks above in that once a HMG or other major weapon moves, it loses all bonus effects for boresighting into preregistered markers, etc. In the case of the MG's maybe a small accuracy bonus could be regained after being moved and becoming established in its new position for a couple of turns and/or firing at the same target for more than one turn. However, any reference to firing on the preregistered/boresighted marker areas should definately be lost. Regards, Mike D aka Mikester

Lt. Parker, Or, should I say Mr. Parker? Hope you didn't take most of what I said w/ too much seriousness. For the most part I was just poking fun at you. It wasn't easy to resist when you made such a wonderful target of yourself in your very first post no less! Obviously, though, I mistook most of what you said, so no hard feelings I hope. In any event, as the others have said, welcome aboard. Hope you enjoy this forum as much as I have. Regards, Mike D aka Mikester BTW, are you really a lieutenant? If so, what service? Just curious.

Hey Chris, the guy already had to edit his original post (twice no less) just to come up with the wonderful gem of wisdom that he has given us so far. I really don't think we can expect much more "enlightenment" from our our wonderful new friend here on the board. He obviously is of the mindset that first person shooters and "sims", as he calls them, are the only games worth playing. I say that is his loss. As far as sarcasm goes my opinion is that his message is full of it. But then, it appears to be full of a couple of other things as well. Mike

Egads! Mr. Parker has gone AWOL, stolen Commander McHale's PT boat and raced over here to leave us a love letter. Just wait until Capt. Bingington finds out! He going to have you shipped off on the next boat to Alaska to spend the rest of your career w/ the Eskimos. In any event, this is the kind of post that doesn't even warrant a response because the person posting it has absolutely no idea of what they are talking about. Have fun playing those other games Mr. Parker, you haven't the faintest clue what you will be missing as far CM is concerned. Mike D aka Mikester

Charles, Thanks for the reply. I thought that "thing" / slots on the end of the barrel was it, but wasn't sure. The double muzzle brake must refer to the fact that the Tiger I's muzzle brake has two pairs of slots vs. the single pair seen on most other tank main guns that you see from this period. At least that is what I see in the pictures in the book and elsewhere. Guess the double slots provide for more braking and therefore less recoil of the gun when it is fired. Mike D aka Mikester