Rodimzew

THX Germanboy, how could i thought it has something to do with other projects. That's merchandising...of course.

Sorry Guys for having a real question... As an ASL player (please forgive me) and a fan of plastic armor kits (forgive me again)i am interested in russian armor. AFAIK there were 60some T-35 used during 1941 around Kiew and later at Moscow. These tanks were equipped with five turrets, a 76mm turret located at the top center and four turrets around, 2 with a 45mm and two with a MG. Could this Tank be designed within CMBB ? And if, is it possible to control this monster with target assignments for single turrets ? The T-28 was of similar design, being equipped with 2 MG turrets. Maybe that the MG turrets could be simulated in other ways, but the 3 bigger guns on th T-35 would be interesting to use.

Today i've visited my favourite computer games department in our local store and i found CMBO as a boxed computer game. It is distributed here in germany by a company named cdv. So it seems as if BTS has provided a license for selling CMBO. Is it an indication that CMBB is coming soon, because BTS has to earn some money somehow ? :cool: :eek: :cool:

BTW...some other data may be of interest... 8,8cm-Kw.K.43L/71 available ammo : Pzgr.39-1, 10,2kg, Vo 1000m/s Pzgr.40/43, 7,3kg, Vo 1130m/s Penetration on 30° sloped armor: Pzgr.39-1 202mm(100m), 185mm(500m), 165mm(1000m), 132mm(2000m) Pzgr.40/43 237mm(100m), 217mm(500m), 193mm(1000m), 152mm(2000m) Within the CMBO timeframe, the Pzgr.40/43 was very rare. And even if it were available, due to the thin allied armor you would not notice it. I assume it was designed to penetrate monsters like a Stalin2. AFAIK some tables like that above are used in CMBO. IMO even the graphic display is considering Vo's. There is a significant difference in time delay (fire to impact) between i.e a firefly and a sexton...

Does anybody know if Armor Doctrine of the different nations is implemented in CMBO ? or will be implemented. Maybe that it doesn't matter for the timeframe of CMBO, because the allied forces adapted german doctrines. But it may be of interest if a bigger timespan (CMBB) is represented. German tanks were normally equipped with tactical Radio which should be represented in a shorter reaction time, compared to russian tanks or early british and american tanks. Furthermore the German Tanks were assumed to be more independent than those of other nations. IMO this should also be represented (even in CMBO) with a kind of command delay for US and British tanks if there is no other tank ( assumed Tank Platoon leader) nearby. It is also possible to use a different TacAI model to represent different armor doctrines.

Well said...sniff.... I also remember the days, when i was playing ASL. In September 2000 I found a short test in my favorite computer games mag where CMBO gets the best stretegy rating and some points for graphics. However it sounds interesting and i had a look on the demo and i was infected with a kind of virus. ASL with its cardboard is still nice, but the atmosphere is missing...I haven't felt like you, Ricochet, because CMBO was already available as i heard about it here in germany. Some tries with other strategy games (i.e. sudden strike, Close combat series) were not atmospheric enough to keep me busy with them. I always came back to CMBO and I just can't stand waiting for CMBB.

Short update ... The KTs are now dispersed around the city, where my infantry clears the building blocks. It's no easy job (i assume my enemy reads this site carefully) because he keeps some tanks in positions out of the city, where they have firing lanes along the roads I keep him buttoned with mortars and .50s so it's not very effective for him However, he must get into the city to reach the flags...I'm waiting

Thx a lot to all....so i won't hesitate and go for it...after running around with some infantry on close quarters he at least took back the KTs during our last turn....May also be an indication for an arty strike.... BTW : The OOB was set to unrestricted....i will not agree on that in the future :mad:

Very interesting question, indeed. Not to forget the Dutch TO&E, Belgium, Norway... Could be a nice scenario, to seize the "Altmark" with british commandos on an norwegian Fjord (with special rules for assault boats and ropes)...Or to use the 28cm of the german pocket-battleship Luetzow in direct fire mode against advancing soviet infantry and tanks...

Is there any dirty trick in knocking out KTs ???? Or is the only chance to avoid them ??? I have a problem with about TEN of them (5000pts QB) in a dec44 City environment. I tried to engage them with tanks, engineers (DCs), bazookas, 8inch artillery....for nothing... sorry not for nothing, one is immobile... I lost almost all tanks (jumbos with tungstencore, m36s). Ammo is getting low.... my enemy has lost a lot of infantry btw. How to proceed ????

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The British 4.2 inch mortar is cheap and just plain deadly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well said....I prefer them too...even considering the lower ammo supply compared to the 81mm... Ever used 3-4 of them on one target ???

Ok, after several tries i'm now fine with using crocos. In combination with wasps and mg carriers they are horrific...(at least for the enemy) Thank you all !!!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Did the Russians get zooks in the lend-lease act, or did they go through the whole war using ATRs? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ATRs were used by the russians during the whole war. Alone due to the mass of available weapons. Later they proved quite ineffective against the german tanks and were used to punch holes in everything that needed to be punched. As far as i know they got no bazookas via lend&lease. Note that tanks were widely available in the second half of the war.

We often play QB with PBEM. It's always fun to purchase troops without knowing the style of the countryside. But that's how in reality, where you have some troops do achieve something. Planning starts with placing the units and there you can rightup block your path to victory. Look at your units and to the topography and decide whats best. With a bunch of Kingtigers its possible to start on a hill knocking out enemy tanks and withstand a lot of enemy fire. That works due to a higher punch of the gun and a high accuracy. With these thinny shermans i won't try that. You have the choice to close to the enemy and give him some sideshots...thats the strategy. Planning is the implementation of a certain strategy and it depends of the unit selection, the setup and the topography. Should be finished before the first shots are changed because then psycho war begins. You are alwas tried to leave your strategy and to react to enemy moves. But to come back to the thread i personally have not used maps. Planning IMO means that i first build "Kampfgruppen" of tanks, infantry and support weapons. These Groups are more or less independent (depend of the size of the battle)and may have a different stance (Att/Def). The "8" view is useful to find a path for these Groups to the enemy, the "6" and "3" is useful for detailed setup and the "1" view for units that are not supposed to move the first turns. And then "Auf Geht's" and i mark a bunch of units and give them move orders. At start i do'nt use micromanagement. That's of more use within City fights, at bridges or in dense terrain.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> If fact, I would say that it should be mandatory that you reverse after exposing your tank. Otherwise plan on losing it...lady luck will give you plenty of situations where 4 more tanks pop up after you kill the first tank. (you thought that was the only one, ha!) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This tip comes just one day to late. I lost two M36 and a jumbo trying to get them hull down. Lessons learned : If you are hunting up a hill, you should give also a reverse command on beforehand. Otherwise your tank may stop hull down, but face a wild bunch of enemy tanks, blazing you to hell on short notice.

Hopefully a demo of CMBB, but if you ask about ideas it may also be a new CMBO release 2.0, where you can fight shadow rider cavalry with hobbit-manned-bren-carriers or a kind of strip-cmbo....

I've made a strange experience in a game vs. AI, where an american rifle plt has surrounded a Ktiger. The Tank was aiming at a platoon, which closes from the side. I think the CMG was firing first and reduced the squad to 7 guys. After closing further, the tank used its main gun and microseconds after hitting my guys within about 15m distance, the tank was destroyed. because there were no hardhitting weapons around, i assume that the tank has blown itself up to heaven by firing HE. Sound strange, but i have no other explanation. However, the squad panicked.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I disagree. Tankbattles can't be simulated realistic if tanks are not modeled realistic. This includes of course the all aspects of gun fire. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Some aspects should be modeled, right. For me its sufficient as it is...i sometimes have the impression that my gunman is drunk...if its modeled or not ...who cares... <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Yes, but nothing of it is modeled. It's even not abstracted. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Maybe that it is not modeled, but what is the difference if you may imagine that it could have been modeled,because your tank gun misses after seven hits.. and as i understand YOU at least would like if it's modeled ...true ???

Does anybody know if that 128mm gun on the JadgTiger is the same 128mm Flak gun the Germans used against allied bombers? Yes, it was an adaption...same way as the 88mm

The discussion of pros and cons of more accurate gun simulation is very interesting, but i propose not to change anything if the game speed will be decreased therefore. It is a big advantage of the game system, that the game turn calculation lasts not as long as in other games. Really big tank battles might be dreadful if the mentioned reality is implemented. And however, there are reasons for a loss of accuracy, because the muzzle velocity of guns depends on air pressure, air temperature, ammunition temperature. Furthermore there are environmental effects as wind and maybe at least the gunners whisky after scoring a kill, which also reduces accuracy

In my last e-mail quick battle i purchased a churchill crocodile for 300andsome points. However, during the whole battle, this beast has not used the FT althought there were lots of targets within range (100m). Is there any trick to make the churchill use his FT ?? By the way, it was a battle in a city, where i thought the crocodile would be helpful to give "Fire" support. Its shots were always 75mm and mg, but never with flame. I think he could be more effective, especially looking at the price.

It is realistic, no way, to use half-squads for intelligence purposes. I think it is also a good idea, to provide these teams with some fast, small, cheap vehicles like jeepmgs or m20.

My experience with Shrek's is positive and if i could select one i take ist. On Defense i combine them with one or two HMGs to suppress approaching infantry. if there is much infantry approaching, they are mortar fodder. They are an ideal weapon for streetfighting. I usually keep them in the second row of buildings, behind a platoon which holds the first line, together with a the HQ. If armor appears, they move or sneak into the first row, second story to try a shot. Comparing the Shrek with a PF, the Shrek is more independent and is more specialized to AT use. The platoon seems to be better in firefights against infantry. I never used yet a PF equipped squad for stalking tanks. But if i put a Shrek to a PF-equipped Squad, they gain more shots to the tank. One or two shreks with a platoon lets you build AT-Strongpoints in your defense line and move them quickly within the line. In an advance situation i keep them some distance (20m) behind and above (2nd level) the squads in the "save" building row. Normally there will start an infantry struggle in or between some buildings and if armor appears, the Shreks will advance and shoot. I always keep my shreks hidden, it even helps in open ground.