Iron Chef Sakai

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1: As to the effectiveness of the Sturmgeschutz, , SP guns etc, an example is that from, August thru Nov 1944 Sturmgeschutz, & Panzerjager were credited in an German report, with causing 22 - 32% of the the OPFOR tank losses, compared to German tanks which were credited with 22 - 26% of the OPFOR tank losses. Regards, John Waters [ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: PzKpfw 1 ]<hr></blockquote>Patton was a blow hard, and probably would have wet his pants if he came face to face with an enemy soldier pointing a rifle at him, never mind a tank

Boston/ma, contrary to my screen name i am not of asian decent.

if your interested in ladder ploay, check out rugged defense

glory hound, yeah, but patton was the king of the glory hounds, well a tie with monty.

well at least your not being juvenile about the whole thing, i wouldnt doubt that what you state is true, as the americans did excel at infantry support, constantly pulling out all the stops.

thats rough, snow already?? compounded with the fact that hulk hogan or somebody is your govenor, could wisconsin be that bad? hehe

so your comparing the effectiveness of american equipment on the japanese and expect the same results against germans?? the sherman looked state of the art in the pacific theater, just because it shined there, does not mean that suddenbly it's better then a stalin tank. the japanese army was ill equiped, right down to small arms, all of it was terrible. want a good laugh? take a look at the pistols they were issued.

why do you hate bill gates? i'll bet you never even met the man, so hating him just for the fact that he made more money then you is quite silly.

even so, still looks better then a sherman.

tell that to the germans ducking for cover under unrelenting barrages of katyushas. they were effective. if they were not effective, they would not have been used.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by jshandorf: So then like your tactics...they are useless. I convinced Madmatt in the chat room to add some doo-hicky to the game to tell you how damaged the buildings are. You can all now thank me for the little asterisks informing you of your imminent doom. Also... remember when tanks rarely fired thier main gun at infantry? Well, I got that fixed bitchin to Steve. After they fixed that then all the tanks started shooting smoke instead. You can thank me for that too! Phhhffft! Jeff<hr></blockquote> haha, care for an ip game sometime?

this thing is still going on and actualy getting worse? hehe, ok i think it's time everyone had thier warm milk and took a nap.

sevastapol was so heavily defended for a reason. it was vital ot the soviets, they wanted tp keep the city at all costs.

well i'll give you one reason, the black sea. it was the russian biggest port where inports an exports shipped constantly from. sevastapol was more important to the russians then say.....stalingrad

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Gee, Brian, we are all positive that BTS is taking notes on all this stuff, for that CM II game dealing with NWE slated for...well, it's not really on the slate yet, is it? How about we give it a rest? Slapdragon's post was brilliant, your posts, unfortunately, put you in the same league as Iron Chef Sakai. But your punctuation and spelling are much better. Honestly, take a look at how any other game - especially ASL - dealt with the matter of Schurzen vis a vis sandbag armor. It was not modelled in Allied tanks, but was modelled on German ones. You lobby for changes, but give no reasons why they should exist. If your conclusion is that more research is needed - well then we agree with you. So what is the point?<hr></blockquote> haha, thanks for the compliment dorosh, but i see your once again taking the easy way out of an argument by simply complaining about the lack of a bibliography left in ones post to "proof read". simply stating something does not make it fact dorosh. your welcome to your opinions, but being so linear in thought is constantly highlighted in your posts. i would like ot know who made you the ultimate authority on other people opinions and posts, and if your going to include a small list of your friends, again might i add on a computer forum, then you have already proved my point. i think you should be more tolerant of other peoples thoughts and opinions, just because someone may disagree with you, does not make them wrong. and just because someone does not leave a bibliography of suggested reading for you to catch up with everyone else on a certain subject does not make it false as well. i never leave bibliographies because i always assunmed that most people on here already knew everything about ww2 and those that did not, soon would, no big deal. you have a point with my spelling dorosh, but i have a question for you, what does my typing have to do with a world war? you seem to construct scarecrows or false men, ie false arguments that corelate nothing to an actual subject ot tear them down. when someoen brings a point up that your ignorant to, you have to rsort to commenting on spelling? you may as well comment on your shuffle board game last week or somethiing, makes about as much sense.

nothing was safe from that gun at the time

sevastapol was built up to withstand attack from heavy naval shelling keep in mind.

your missing my point, if you took the manpower, and in place of the massive railguns, had regualr artillary shelling the city, wich keep in my they did already have there, would hasve been bad. the rail guns were critical in taking sevastapol. the conventional artillary piece would not have been able to dent the soviet defenses in place there. sevastapol was not paris, it was a heavily fortified city. without the rail guns pummeling the heavy foritfications, the germans would not have been able to force the soviets inot a surrender there. the battle would have raged into a stalingrad type scenario, wich the germans most definetly could not afford, there for the rail guns indeed proved there worth in that particular battle.

you have to fire them en mass, like the germans actualy did, they fired more then a volley lasting 60 seconds. the russian katyusha's were not laser guided either, but when fireing them for an hour or so, the area is going ot be blanketed. don't expect to destroy your enemy with on measly neblewerfer volley, the wepon was not inbtended to be effective deployed like that. i find the games stats to be pretty much as close as your going ot get with vehicles and weapons, and am finding more often then not, the main problem is players deploying the weapons wrong.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Warphead-: There were seven Karlgeräte in total. Thor was one of them. One was the prototype and six production models. All of them differed in number of roadwheels and other parts though. The barrel could be exchanged and the was a 60cm (Gerät 040) and a 54cm (Gerät 041) version. The "psychological effect" of the shells was highly praised. Apparently the actual damage done was mediocre.<hr></blockquote> the actualy damge of a shell the size of a volkswagon mediocre? the guns were crucial in penetrating the heavily fortified city of sevastapol, convetional artillary would not have been able to dent alot of the bunkers there. he damage done from these guns was huge, when deployed.

i realy need to start re reading what i type before i post. i meant the gustav in my earlier post, not thor.

hehe, waffen ss are not hampsters!! i like ot use them and when i do there as effective as my tactics, just like any other unit.

true, but you have ot admit, in game it would look impressive to see the damage that the largest guns ever built to this day could do on the eastern front. though i do agree with slapdragon. i can't wait for the game to come out, its going ot be a lot of fun. do you think the nkvd will be shooting at any russian units that panic and try to flee? imagine that in the game, hehe

i was wondering if rail guns will be an option in cmbb. i know if they are going to include a sevastapol scenario of some kind that without the heavy 800mm railguns such as "thor", the fortress city will be impossible to take, as such would have been the situation if not for the heavy shelling the city took by these monsters. though if included i think they should have a high rarity since they were not the easiest things to transport and set up. Thor actualy had a crew of 1500 men, and a general was in charge of it, yes of 1 single gun, kind of a waste in my opinion.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by panzerwerfer42: I've irritated and exasperated most of the people on this board.<hr></blockquote> i seem to fall into this category as well, combined with the awsome might of in-proper punctuation, i feel that i am an intricate part of the well oiled machine that is this messege board