Panzer76

Well, I re ran the test with Elite crew, I would assume they could target better. Result: Exactly the same. 2 IS-2s never got LOS to target, even though orderd to seek hull down to target multiple times. The 2 others happily fired ALL rounds into the ground. This is serioulsy something BTS should fix! Any offical answer to this? BTW: The hill is built like this :9-10-11-11 and the target 140 m in front of the AFVs when they are in a hull down pos.

Re: Mud. Yes, if I had a choice! In this case the vehicle STARTED in mud, and got lost while I was trying to get them on a road.

I did a test, and found the results to be quite remarkable. 4 IS-2 with green crew. No enemy. I sat them up in front of a small hill, and gave them "seek hull down" command to a target ca 100 m in front of the hill. First of all, 2 of the AFV never got hull down to the target, even though I gave them the orders multiple times, they stopped before they could get LOS to the target, which either means they THOUGHT they could see it, in case the hull down command doesnt work properly, or the LOS tool doesnt work properly. So, of the 2 IS-2s that did manage a hull down pos to the target, here is the result: Shots fired :13 Shots that hit ground 5 m in front of them: 13 On top of that, 2 TC got killed. Isnt this remarkable?! This shows that the seek hull down pos order is useless in this setting, if you seek hull down to the target! 100 % of all shots hit right in front of the tanks!

Im getting pretty fed up with tanks that shoot in the ground a couple of meters in front of them. This typically happnes when the tank is in a hull down pos. One would assume that if there is a risk for hitting the ground right in front of it, the tank would instead be careful and rather overshoot the target. And ofcos you have those tanks that fire round after round in front of them. This is just silly, and annoying! Ive lost TCs, got damaged guns and hit friendly troops in front of them. And all this trying to be sensible, i.e. taking up a hull down pos. The way it is now, I sometimes have to put the AFV in full view just so it can hit something else than itself! Isnt it possible for BTS to patch this? I would hope so... [ January 24, 2003, 09:48 AM: Message edited by: Panzer76 ]

I've been playing quite alot of scenarios latly and most of them are pretty good. Though I wish more designers would include a description how the scenario is best played (TCP/PBEM/AI). But, Ive stumbeled over some really annoying scenarios also. In one you begin with your tanks in full view of surperior enemy ATGs. And subsequently all your reinforcements starts there also. Losing half of your tanks before you can give them a order isnt very amusing. In another one you have lots of heavy tanks and HTs.The problem is that this is a muddy map, and you lose around half your tanks (immobile) and HTs just trying to MOVE your vehicles to nearest road. Extremly annoying! But ofcos, most scenarios are good, keep it up!

Havent anybody tried this scenario vs a human opponent?

You could have some standing there, out of LOS and shoot and scoot when the tigers are looking somewhere else. I took out all three Tigers with 2 IS doing that.

I dunno, maybe you were on LSD while checking the number No, your not the only one that can load it up and check, but most people wont or cant at the time they browse the BBS. Anyways, thanks for the effort you put in Redwolf, Ive seen many a interesting point being raised by you.

If it happend or not, it cant be done in CMBB, and thats all that matters for your friend Only indirect fire you got is provided by FO's and on board mortars. The Sturmtiger is just added for fun purpose anyway as it was extremly rare.

I havent played with the KV-2 much, but if the figures Redwolf gave are correct, then Im surprised. in RL the KV-2 couldnt even turn it's turret if standing on a slope.

************Jaegermeister SPOILER!!!!************* I just wanted to say thanks for the high quality scenarios you have made! I've noticed that you have made several scenarios I though was good, and today I played Jaegermeister. As allies against the AI. Well, I learnt to use the shoot and scoot commmand often! Too bad sometimes the TacAI (in a hull down pos) manages to hit the ground 3m in front of it! Cost me a damaged gun and a shcoked IS-2.... Anyways, the Panthers gave me some real trouble in the village center, and I managed a major Vic with only 2 IS-2's left. Without those I would have gotten a Tact or maybe even a minor as they blocked the way to 2 VL's and picked my tanks off. As defender I found the scenario far too easy. the Germans can deploy too far up on the map and makes the starting point for the soviets a valley of death. The soviets didnt get 1 VL, and managed to destroy 1 tank, vs 17 of theirs... I used the SMG sqd's in the end to rush the small forest with the first VL and killed 40 of theirs without losing 1(!) man. Needless to say I got a Total Vic. So, as anybody had any luck as attacker against a human opponent? Against a player with some tact skill, this should be a no brainer for the germans, or...? PS! Tell your kid that I liked "Approch to Sevastapol" also. Had to play it as Im in it Damn hard as attacker!

Have you a surround sound card installed? Are you using a 5.1 speaker system etc? If the drivers doesnt work properly you could get that result. It has happend to me, I could only hear sounds far away from where the camera was zoomed.

I found the T-70 very useful in a recent battle against StuGs. Since they are fast you can easily outflank them (provided there is any cover) and from both sides. Maybe you will lose one, but since they are so cheap it's no big deal. Also the ROF of their guns is vital when u try to squeeze in as many flank shots agaist the Stug while it tries to turn around.

First you say that most other people are busy also, then you say that "given limited time" most americans only learn english.... It's a good thing we in central Europe have so much spare time on our hand so we can learn english, and many learn a 3rd language also. And, belive it or not, we also MOSTLY use our native language, but still learn other ones. Reminds me a bit of when I was in NY, this american that worked in UPS was surprised to find out that the Autralians had their own money, he thought they used American dollars... and he asked if we had unleaded petrol in Norway.... being the 2nd largest exporter of oil in the world, one would asume so.. And there are so many other stories one could tell. Anyways, it should be stated that this was the dumbest guy I met in US, but he sure fitted nicely in the stereo type! I guess one major reason for many americans being ignorant of whats outside the US is that it's such a large country, and most of them will never step outside of it. They have everything thay want right there, and there is so much to see in the US. Coming from a small country things are different, since it's not the "center of the world" you MUST learn about whats outside it, and about world history, not just your own country history. [ January 20, 2003, 10:26 AM: Message edited by: Panzer76 ]

Would you care to point us to which law you mean? As it is with almost every law, some countries doesnt sign it, which in a internet sense of case, renders the law dead. Because then the "illigal" data could be hosted by a server in a country which didnt sign the agreement.

What can I say... such a thing would only happen once in a blue moon. I have never experienced something like that. Though luck! But Im sure you have alternative ways to dispose of that tank, as yours is toast for sure!

I would just like to add that I experience that flaw also.

SU-85, just think it's sexy. But she's a ugly bitch compared to the Jagdpanther!

Welcome to the UBB. The controls and camera angles etc all represent what's in the final game. You get used to it.

Here is just a quote from a russian tank commander which makes a small comment on this: "There was nothing they could do because those were Pz.III, Pz.IV tanks, and I was in a T-34 whose frontal armor they couldn't penetrate. - A.D. But did they hit you? Yes, of course they did." Of cource, just a personal opinion, but still, this guy had experience too. From : http://www.iremember.ru/tankers/bodnar/bodnar.htm

You cant use the CMBO blast and compare it with CMBB blast values because the general blast values in CMBB are higher than in CMBO. E.g. the same gun in CMBO has a lower blast value than in CMBB. [ January 12, 2003, 08:03 PM: Message edited by: Panzer76 ]

Interesting. Now the question is, does CMBB reflect this?

CMBB simulates optics for russian armour also. But it doesnt state so in the "unit chart" because CMBB simulates that all russian optics are of avreage quality. The germans has lots of different high quality optics, and is therefore specified in the "unit chart". What you can discuss is the quality of the russian optics. If you have anything to add on this subject, feel free to do so.

Your post tells me your a Bush fan! Anyhow, I know all the "gun damage" stuff is abstracted, but really, it happens so often. Wouldt track damage be more frequent? I would think so. As it stands now I get gun damage more often than track damage. It seems a bit strange methinks.

Hi there. In a recent scenario I had a Stuka drop a 250 kg bomb quite close to 3 russian tanks, distance from impact from 25-100 m. Anyways, they all got shocked , but further more, they all got gun damage. I would suspect that the risk for track damage (immobilization) would be far more likeliy than gun damage. In RL, how easy/difficult would it for a tank to be gun damage, from my readings it doesnt seem like a big problem. Tracks on the other hand.. Have anyone elese experienced "excessive" gun damage from airstrkes?