offtaskagain

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Erwin: I know someone has figured all this out years ago... What is % probability of air arriving for axis and/or allies? How is combat resolved once it arrives.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I can't tell you what the % is, but it's pretty obvious if one arrives. Either 4 rockets streak into your lone Tiger or two massive explosions announce the death of an infantry platoon. Any flak guns on your side will swivel to engage the plane once it arrives. Once their main ordnance is expended they usually make 2 strafing runs, unless they experience heavy fire, in which case they will break off. Veteran pilots are less likely to make suicide runs into heavy flak, as it does down planes every now and then. [ 06-06-2001: Message edited by: panzerwerfer42 ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ninotchka: Really. So a Stuart can bust thru bocage and a Tiger cant? Seems ludicrous. Ive read lots of accounts of fighting in bocage country and tigers,mk IVs did cross bocage.. One ref from sherman commanders Ken Touts account 'Tank!' '...no bloody engineer blew that gap' shouts Bookie in my ear. 'Must have been made by a tank''Too wide for a sherman by far,'says Bookie, assessing it with a drivers eye. 'Probably a Tiger then?''Hope the buggers not waiting on the other side....'<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This is probably just another example of tigerphobia. Tigers could cross bocage but they would expose their thin underarmor to any armor waiting for them. It was never SOP. The allies developed a form of plow made from I-beams to chop holes in the dirt banks so the Shermans could plow throw rather than go over. They went through the middle rather than go down the dirt lanes because they were almost always watch by infantry with pzfaust and schrecks. I don't know if they ever fit the plows to Stuarts but i bet they tried. Probably wouldn't work as the really old bocage had banks 5 feet high with hundreds of years worth of tree roots growing in it.

The Russians made very extensive use of dug-in T-34s. At Kursk all tanks in the front lines were ordered dug-in after the first day or two due to the carnage the Tigers and Panthers were able to inflict at range. Also they dug in hundreds in and around Stalingrad.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gunnergoz: Many an enemy was killed by a GI wielding his entrenching tool. The one I had dating from the late 40's even had a bare polished edge, ready for sharpening. Propaganda is everywhere, but sometimes the truth can be strange and incredible too. One thing is sure, the Russians used a lot of captured 'fausts! There were thousands of the things lying around in those days.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The Germans made 1.3 million Panzerfaust 60s in December '44 alone.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Warmaker: ...more specifically, the TC's MG for panzers which CMBO seems to ignore that the Germans put MG42s at the TC's hatch while the Shermans and other Allied AFVs get .50 cal MGs. Why is that? Is this gonna be fixed in CM2 or not at all? :confused:<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> They weren't usually equipped. The Germans tended to give priority for MGs to infantry units because the tanks already had two.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: At least one Marine I read about carried a sharpened screwdriver with him throughout the Pacific - like it better than the fighting knife. Maybe cause he never had to kill anyone with it?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> In WWI both sides were known to charge trenches with grenades and a sharpened spade. If you don't believe me read "All Quiet On The Western Front".

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Duquette: . Best spot on a tank is the driver’s position IMHO (unless you’re the gung-ho leader type). It’s fun driving a tank. In addition when you have to make quick halts you don’t get whip-lashed ala the TC and loader. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That's probably very true for the M1s. The driver is almost laid flat on his back. I've heard rumors that drivers occasionally fall asleep.

That picture doesn't show up. -

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Triumvir: I don't see anywhere in the article that they are doing relative spotting. They say in CGW (fair use, etc) that "in 1941, most of the Russian tanks didn't have radios; the tankers had to use hand signals to communicate. The command model is changing in CM 2 to reflect such difficulties." This doesn't necessarily imply relative spotting.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If Robert Mayer says Steve told him it would be in, then I would bet Steve wouldn't lie to the managing editor of CGM

I don't know if anybodys seen it yet, but "Day Of Defeat" is pretty fun. I just got it from a demo CD from a mag I bought while searching for the CM2 article. Unfortunately, the Hetzer I saw isn't driveable, but those MP-40s and MP-44s are alot of fun city fighting. It makes Half-Life alot more fun playing with stuff from CM!

The poll appears to have closed.

ASL Veteran, since when does a tiger have a howitzer size weapon?? JasonC was talking about his personal experience in firing M109 155mm SP artillery pieces, not tanks. The Tiger uses single piece ammo which probably weighs around 50 pounds, whereas a 155 shell is 100 pounds without the propellant bag. [ 06-04-2001: Message edited by: panzerwerfer42 ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Monty's Double: Remember, there were only a couple of Super Pershings in the European Theatre. In order to protect them they had lots of extra armour welded onto the front. This made the turret front heavy, so big, wing-like counter-weights were added. I'd guess that when the turret traversed, anybody sat on the back of the hull would get clouted by these honking great weights, so that's why CMBO doesn't allow them to load up infantry. Also, because they were so rare, you'd bet the guy charged with looking after one wouldn't be too happy about a load of sweaty GI's crawling all over his pride and joy. There's a book called "Deathtraps" or something like that with all this in, but I can't remember who it's by.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Exactly two were made, but I don't think they ever got to Europe.

I doubt any of the Russian guns could take on an Ferdinand/Elefant. Over on the thread Steve started about Elefants, http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=019294, there is a picture on page 2 that shows chips in the front armor, hull &superstructure, from a 152. They don't look like they did a whole lot of damage, but I bet the crew would've rather been somewhere else.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael emrys: Steve can correct me, but I think what he actually posted was 1.5 rounds per minute, not the other way around. That figure is much closer to the 2 rpm quoted here, which could have been arrived at by rounding up anyway. Several people on this board have been extolling the ISU-122 as a tank killer, but it has been my impression that that honor more properly belongs to the SU-100 because it had a higher velocity gun. So, does anyone have any actual penetration stats on both weapons? It's interesting to note that it was the SU-100 that remained in service long after the war. I think Egypt still had a battalion of them in the 1973 war. Michael<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The SU-100 was a better tank killer, but there were far fewer of these produced, as the 122 could already kill everything short of a Maus.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ramor: Will it be possible to import items from Cm2 into CMBO for scenarios? ie. new city and rural buildings,German armor not already included(Panzer 3s for instance or elephants for Italy scenarios). Would be nice if we could.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It would be impossible to import vehicles as they are hard coded into the .exe. I assume theyre going to leave the skin system as is, so you should be able to swap those.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pvt. Ryan: There is no chain of command for vehicles in CMBO. Like all units there is a delay before vehicles begin to execute their orders. The length of the delay depends on the experience level of the crew. A green unit will take much longer to start moving than a veteran unit will. An elite unit starts to move very quickly, I think with a delay of three seconds.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> IIRC, organic tank platoons with leaders are going to be part of CM2.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by [CoFR]Archangel: I just played Drive to Mortain,,and won as ally. As I get to the end of a map in a turn,,,should it extend itself, or do you have to wait until the next scenario? (I waited at the end of the 2nd map and took it in the shorts from an unseen Nazi 155 spotter). I loaded the same map in the editor, and noticed I could have went further when the game called it for me. I read the manual and I think it said something to the effect that the game would end if I was kicking butt, but wasn't sure if that was against AI. I realize command plays a big part in when a squad gets off it's ass, but how doesn't movement of tanks work...basically, how is it decided who goes first, as vehicles have no commanders. Is it the delay, then terrain/hill or incline and then they go by speed? Thanks,,,awesome damn game!!! [CoFR]Archangel <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You have to wait till the end of each battle for the map to extend at the start of the next. What exactly do you mean with the tank movement bit?

The title of "Zvierboy" belongs to SU-152, not 122. It means animal hunter, in regards to its ability to hunt tigers, panthers, and elefants. The SU-122 wasn't much of a tank killer, being similar in role to the Sherman 105s. The ISU-122 on the other hand, was an excellent tank killer.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Username: I wonder if gun hits on these vehicles should be a more common event. The 152 barrel is just a huge target. BTW whats that tube attached to the side of the vehicle? Not the extra fuel tank in the back but the one next to the fighting compartment? Lewis<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> My guess is a gun cleaning rod, similar to the one carried by Panthers.

Anybody have an armor penetration table for this beast? Is that last picture an 152 or a 122? The barrel looks a little long for a 152 . [ 06-03-2001: Message edited by: panzerwerfer42 ]

There is no such thing as overkill in combat.

What exactly is electric firing any ways? Is it using a motor to trip the firing pin, or actually running current through the powder?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Victor Semensi: I would gladly give up the Super Pershing slot in the game code for one of an M16. Wasn't only one Super Pershing ever built or used in combat?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I believe there were 2 built, but they certainly never saw combat.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B: Then maybe the LMG should be made more powerful. No one has yet provided a logical reason why 2 men cannot opperate a MG at full or near full efficiency given that the necessary equipment is near at hand. I restate that MGs are under modeled in CM under some circumstances as is, so a lessening of MG effectiveness would not result in increased realism.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The main reason HMGs have higher firepower is they can afford to burn up more ammo per burst. Thats because they have 6 men per crew to carry around it all. Also the tripod mount makes it more accurate so more bullets are on target. It's also easier to change barrels, though 2 men probably could do that just fine.