Panzer76

Oh, I would just LOVE to hear the "this is a feature" boys explain this. Oh, it seems thay all shut up now, wonder why...

I see your point, and I support the allied having the ability to perform a counter measure if the axis would have such an option. But, the fundemental difference in our opinion is that Im against ANY such options. Rather, as there is a problem with the current implementation, SC2 would maybe include differnet unit sizes, as it already has been mention.

We have all experienced this in one form or another, and when it happens its really annoying.Bug ot not, there is something clearly wrong here, and that should be OBVIOUS to everybody. Nit picking about screenshots etc isnt very helpful. I would also like to see an offical answer to this, can we expect to see a fix for this? This problem is on the same level as the pre 1.02 AFV that fired right in front of them when in hull down, and that one was fixed.

Yes I understand that, but my point still stands. You could have many a such option which would not improve the game as I see it. For instance, if you are playing against a human Im sure he would have like the oppertunity of defending such countries which he is denied thorugh such an suggestion. Ultimatly is's just different views on how the game should be played. I see that we differ in this view.

It's just not gonna happen.

The problem with your suggestion, as I see it, is that the game is enjoyable to play because you can ALTER history. So, in game you could help defend Norway and thus denying it to the axis. Else you could say that many of the battles in WWII could be options and you should just pay some points for it to happen. But it's not much fun, and kinda defeats the purpose of the games, dont you think?

The US did bomb Tokyo with AC based bombers.

I dont even own SC, but happend to stumble over this post. Regarding the invasion of Norway: German forces landed in Oslo also, but here they lost Blusher, with several thousands soldiers on board. This gave the norwegian goverment time wnough to evacuate the goverment and the royal family. The southeren part of Norway was taken over in 3 weeks, the northeren part 3 months. Germany suffered it's first defeat of WWII in Narvik, and was on the defensive. Norwegian and a British/French force held Narvik and was attacking south. BUT, the invasion of France led this force to be evacuated and all military help to Norway stopped. This led to the fall of North Norway. So, as you can see, it's not a given thing that the axis player should be able to just take over Norway by just expending some points. If the allied player is willing, he could, as historical, stop the german advance, and if he wanted to go the whole nine yards, maybe expell them.

Doesnt also the 12,7mm modern heavy MG come with HE rounds, I seem to recall that from my time in the army.

Hi. In a PBEM I have going, I ordered my Stummel to area fire. To my surprise it seemed to not fire at all. On closer inspection, it did fire, but it only on occation said "Reloading" (it fired 5 shots) and I never saw any smoke when it fired. Also, the sound was not syncronised with the action. Anybody else experienced this? I have never seen anything like this, and I havent done any hardware changes with my machine. [ March 01, 2003, 05:34 AM: Message edited by: Panzer76 ]

In a recent PBEM my opponent had 6 T34's trying to hit my Pak (hi Joe! ) but none hit and my Pak just took them down one by one. The reason for this, it seems to m, is that the Pak was located right behind a rise in the terrain. Thus all shots either hit in front of it, or wnt over its head. This terrain feature made the Pak impossible to hit for the T34s. When it comes to AFV hitting soft targets, have a look at the recent rexfod post.

Oh, in the same way someone here could come and say, yes Keke, that is a record... It would be according to your first expleantion. Thing is, players can choose wrong units. Like KT in heavy forested snow map. I just find it amusing that you want your game to be some sort of record.

You gotta upgrade to 1.02. Then you'll find that option as with Combined Arms etc.

True, but Keke feels this HAS to be a record, the only proper answer is, yes Keke, it is a record. So Keke, you ask if it is a record, some have said no, but you werent sattisfied with this asnwer. And anyhow, how are we to say that it is a record, is there like a Database with ALL games played were we can check? No. Yes, you killed alot of tanks, and Im sure you played well, but as Ive said before, there are quite a few CMBB players out there, so I dont think it is a record. And anyhow, a record of what? To accuratly measure thses records, one would have to play on the same map with the same forces. Would it be a bigger "record" if I played on a pool table map with Tigers vs T-26? I would kill more vehicles than you did. Would it be a bigger "record" if I played on a urban map with lotsa T34s vs Stugs and a very inexperienced player? I hope you can see that there is no way one could quantify your "record". It is a amusing story and all that, but starting to talk about records is a bit silly. IMO.

Maybe you can start a record web site then, so we can all come and post our records there. Im looking forward to play my kid brother and post my super record there.

Look, you asked a question, you got a reply. But you refused to belive that it wasnt a record. So why do you ask at all if you dont accept the answer? And yes, I was refering to the game ladders like BoB etc.

It has happend to me also.

Keke, we understand you are proud of your achivments, and not knowing the skill of your opponent, maybe it is. But I think you have to relize that there are quite a few players out there, and for every one that comes on the forum with new "records" there are so many more out there, with as big, or bigger "records" that doesnt tell us about it here on the BBS. If you want an accolade, play the ladder.

Some different figures (for Valentine): "This tank was most massed produced British tank - 6855 units were build. Another 1420 tanks were build in Canada. Soviet Union received 2394 tanks from UK and 1388 from Canada." I have more faith in this number when it comes to delivered AFV. From: http://www.battlefield.ru/library/lend/valentine.html

You compared it with the Maus, which never saw any action. If you want to compare the T34-57 with a german AFV I think the Sturmtiger would do nicely. So, it was NOT common, very rare, but it did exist, and it did take part in combat.

On leand lease tanks: "So I found myself in the Saratov Tank Academy. Sometime in June the academy got T-34 tanks, before that we were trained on English Matildas and Canadian Valentines with 57mm guns. Incidentally, the gun on the Valentine was really excellent! It could easily penetrate Tiger's side armor! And Valentine itself turned out to be a very successful vehicle, low, literally human height." On the "fictious" T34/57: http://www.battlefield.ru/t34_57.html

Thanks for the effort!

The winner is, Le Tondu! As a side note, it could ofcos be a captured T34 or somfink.

I can see you'r using the rarity system, good for you. When you do, keep in mind that the "best" AFV isnt neccesserily the most expensive. Older models can be more expensive cos they are outdated models, and thus werent that common in that particular timeframe. Without the rarity on, the differences in price for the StuGs are around 1-2 pts. [ February 13, 2003, 11:43 AM: Message edited by: Panzer76 ]

What did u expect? Ofcos the StuGs will slaughter the T34's, since they approch head on, and the only way the T34 can penetrate the front is with Tugsten ammo. Tests like these arent worth much, as the T34's strenght is speed and mobility, and use this to flank AFVs like StuGs. You could just as well substituted the StuGs with King Tigers for that matter.