leakyD

Holy Hell! :eek: :eek: :eek: You guys are killing me! Simply amazing.... OK, come t'think of it....mebbe once these guys get their hands on CM:BB, that western front thing'll be hard to go back to....mebbe....

Sheeet, dawg! Y'alls a bunch of demanding bastiches, ain'tcha? First, y'want naval guns. Then, y'want the game, like, yesterday n'sheeet! Well, fines. String me up 'n let me flap in the wind like old glory.... but don't come whining to me when you's ain't gotcha navals guns and that chaffee thingy is off in the recycle bin, and yer wishin' you had that snow 'n trees, and all those other goodies after yer dun tuckered from wiping out loads of 'script ruskies or depleted jerries and those factories get all old 'cause there ain't no machinery or room for tanks n' stuff in 'em n'all that.... One word: Rewrite! Oops... Guess that makes me a demanding bastich too!

Cripes! Y'think I'd stumbled 'cross a peng thread er sumptin'. Just having fun, ma! But serioulsy, folks, don'tcha just wanna have all 'dem mods rounded out before we lose ourselves in the east? Don'tcha? ... ... ... Ok....fair enough. Foobar, you can have the watch, but don't go sleeping with ma lady (well, at least until my bones turn cold, ok? It's a respect thing).

Look, I may be a lurker here, but there's a method to the madness, OK? We still gots all these mods for CM:BO coming out, right? And the jagd-tigger and tanks' bldgs (holy photo-realistic she-ot , batman!) and that chaffee and wherethehelldidthepershingmodgo, etc. So, is it too much too ask to push things back a bit so we can get all this candy done for CM:BO? Besides, it'll give y'all a chance to chance to get that naval arty in, right? ok, jus' funnin'....well, kinda..... Hats off to all the modders. You all rock. Considering the DL gauntlet for the demo, this'll be wonderous to get my salty ass back in the spirit of things.

VJ- good eye. I missed that! (makes me wonder what what other "unhistorical" rubbish will be included in the game...heh...) Glad you like 'em, gents. Right, then: Modders, git bizy!

Hi there- I thought this might be interesting for the modders out there. Would be kinda cool to see some of these posters on some upcoming CMBB building mods, don'tcha think? :cool: Soviet Posters A few samples....

Hey gang- Would anyone here be willing to wait an extra month for CMBB to get that 2nd bldg texture included in the game? that, or what kinda bribes are gonna work on for the BTS boys? light/heavy damage textures would be amazing. I'll cross my fingers and hope and pray MM can figure a way to squeeze them in. ~leaky

Someone correct me if i'm wrong, but wasn't it soviet doctrine to NOT enter combat w/ full external fuel tanks? I believe these fuel tanks were for extending the range for roadmarches/etc. At least that's the modern soviet use for them is (well, from what i was taught in my AT weaponry classes in the US Army (late 80's) - ie; shoot at 'em all ya want , kid. ain't nuttin' gonna happen!). Maybe the soviets had to learn a few lessons first in WWII before it became doctrine to enter combat with their external tanks empty! Anyone have any clarifying info?

Someone correct me if i'm wrong, but wasn't it soviet doctrine to NOT enter combat w/ full external fuel tanks? I believe these fuel tanks were for extending the range for roadmarches/etc. At least that's the modern soviet use for them is (well, from what i was taught in my AT weaponry classes in the US Army (late 80's) - ie; shoot at 'em all ya want , kid. ain't nuttin' gonna happen!). Maybe the soviets had to learn a few lessons first in WWII before it became doctrine to enter combat with their external tanks empty! Anyone have any clarifying info?

Steve- An idea just popped up: What about as part of the rewrite (and as a "realism" option), points during a battle are given/taken for said tactics. that is: I might destroy the town and take it, but the negative points incurred makes the battle a draw (or worse)! might help to "encourage" folks to use more realistic tacts as part of a "realism" setting (which, again, would be optional). this would be esp. interesting if the rewrite ever came back to barbarossa: those germans *really* needed those buildings! just a thought....

Steve- An idea just popped up: What about as part of the rewrite (and as a "realism" option), points during a battle are given/taken for said tactics. that is: I might destroy the town and take it, but the negative points incurred makes the battle a draw (or worse)! might help to "encourage" folks to use more realistic tacts as part of a "realism" setting (which, again, would be optional). this would be esp. interesting if the rewrite ever came back to barbarossa: those germans *really* needed those buildings! just a thought....

CMMOS rocks. this needs to become a standard. i *had* all the mods i wanted installed once... then i found CMMOS! now, i can have unit 'sigs and different mods for different scenarios (12 pz div [or 21st, or LAH, etc] woods, country, city, etc), not to mention some CMMOS only enhancements that you can't buy at any store (ronco special anyone?) GEM: please (oh, please!) have you and your peers *highly* encourage BTS to issue a "fatwah" and get folks online w/ CMMOS. if you haven;t used CMMOS yet, i'd like to use a simple analogy; win95 is cool, it works and all, but the features of win98 make the upgrade worth the effort. likewise w/ CMMOS. in a nutshell.... make it so!

hey G- what qualilty crews did you have? just curious if my results were crew induced or actual gun characteristics. thanks!

ya, more pricy, and the HE doesn't quite have the kick either (14 compared to 34 of the PaK40). i guess it's up to what they are being put up against. the PaK40 is well rounded, but if you only want to kill armor (and make sure whatever is hit, dies) the -600 might be the ticket. :cool:

MM- great stuff... just played small QB (700 axis defense) and had two PAW's w/ crack crews. took out the 2 ami tanks in the first turn, and then shelled up the attacking troops pretty well. great gun. fast ROF, great targeting (then again, it may have been the crews), and they seem hard to hit (they survived all kinds of fire, xcept about 100rnds of 81mm- that'll ruin anyone's day- and a zook rnd). had these things been made sooner, allied tankers would not be having fun...turreted hetzers w/ these things? ugh....

Moriarty- thanks for the inf- ya, i figured it'd be just as vunerable as any other gun...my curiosity is whether they are any better than any other guns for axis. the 88's got a punch, but are pricy. puppchen are cheap, but w/ a low AT ammo load. this looks like a good middle ground between the puppchen and the 88's. perhaps that's why they were made?

Hi y'alls, just did a search, and no dice, so i'ma asking if anyone has the skinny on these little babies. specifically: are they any good at killing armor? the HC round looks impressive, but is it worth a damn? are they high velocity (ie- no "lobbing" of round to target)? anyone used them and have any advice? thanks! :cool:

is babelfish not good enough? well, i guess if your looking for an *accurate* translation, then prolly not.... Babelfish

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy: Nebelwerfer was only a code-name for the rocket artillery. The heavier calibres were specialised bunker busters, different job from what the 150mm was intended for. The 150mm had chemical rounds produced for it, the others did not, AFAIK. 8,8cm FLAK used DF HE in north-west Europe. I am a bit surprised you can not do that in CMMC, are you sure about that? What you can not do in CMBO is indirect fire HE from the 8,8cm. I believe it ought to be possible, but it is not modelled. I don't think this has anything to do with more open spaces in Russia and the Ukraine vs. France. There are a number of spaces with long LOS possible in North-West Europe (Pas de Calais, Norddeutsche Tiefebene, large tracts of Belgium, the Netherlands). BTW, there were Sturmtigers on the Western Front. The fact that CMBO does not model them is due to a choice by BTS to focus on other vehicles.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> hey a- thanks for the NW clarity. not *totally* up to speed on their history, so i appreciate the insight. as for the HE for the 8.8 in CMMC, someone was complaing about not having any, so i presumed it was unavailable. maybe it was a supply issue (as supply is modeled quite acuratly in CMMC). and sturmtigers on the western front? really? i had no idea. maybe CMBO whould be re-written after CMBB so i can have an sturmy-tiger in the Aachen fights (or wherever they were used). we'll see who knocks *who* down then! again, thanks for the clarity.....

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Peter Svensson: I'm a little surprised the larger rockets don't have a smoke capability. Weren't they Nebelwerfers too? Maybe someone can enlighten us.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> great thread gang- and peter, mucho thankos for the arty chart. been working on gettin my smoke skills dialed, and this has helped. I may be reaching here, but i believe the reason the Neb's don't have smoke is due to the theatre of operation. seems LARGE amounts would be needed on the eastern front, not the western (esp, since significant Counterattacks we're possible there). maybe it was an operational/supply issue (ie-use the ammo where it's most needed, esp for late war germany). case in point - why no sturm tigers for CMBO? operationally, made more sense to have them where they were needed most: eastern front. i'm playing the CMMC, and a guy was asking why the 88 Flak couldn't direct fire HE, as it did in real life (the area we are attacking in has some LONG open areas - man, i coulda use some long reaching HE!). my retort was that it was perhaps operational to the theatre, and the long, open steppes of Russia encouraged using the HE there, as opposed to the western front, where large open areas were not a common. can't wait to see what a couple of 300mm batteries of NW smoke would look like. got a funny feeling Jerry's gonna need it over in the east....