MyNameW

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by not another gamer: About effective armor slope in hulldown / reverse slope I can't quote BTS saying so but I think I remember reading it long ago and it really seems to get me in my games. The velocity and hence trajectory of shell is taken into account when calculating angle of hit. So, those low-velocity (relativly) Shermans get "plunging fire" on my shiny Hetzers and JgIV's (greatly) reducing their effective armor slope. Nailing them when they are all snug and HD on a reverse slope. Makes me very sad.<hr></blockquote> AP shell's H-velocity is 600+, V-velocity is ~10. "plunging angle" is about 1 degree resulting in effective armor thikness is reduced about 1-2%.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by not another gamer: About effective armor slope in hulldown / reverse slope I can't quote BTS saying so but I think I remember reading it long ago and it really seems to get me in my games. The velocity and hence trajectory of shell is taken into account when calculating angle of hit. So, those low-velocity (relativly) Shermans get "plunging fire" on my shiny Hetzers and JgIV's (greatly) reducing their effective armor slope. Nailing them when they are all snug and HD on a reverse slope. Makes me very sad.<hr></blockquote> AP shell's H-velocity is 600+, V-velocity is ~10. "plunging angle" is about 1 degree resulting in effective armor thikness is reduced about 1-2%.

Kabul, Avganistan :mad:

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by The Commissar: I don't see why someone decided to say this was a Nazi site. Disclaimer taken from site home page (click the house icon to get to home page). "Предупреждение! Данный сайт посвящен истории Второй Мировой Войны и не пропагандирует идеи нацизма." Which translates to... "Warning! This site is dedicated to the history of the Second World War and does not preach the ideas of fascism."<hr></blockquote> I am ballerina!!! Anyone believes this?

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Wreck: Correction: looks like the cover figures are 11% and 19%. So, the guys in the wood should expect to take 72% higher casualties initially, not 50%.<hr></blockquote> Probability of taking casualties cannot depend linearly on firepower & cover. Also small arms are extreamly effective at very short ranges. So that 72% difference in cover figures may result in 200-300% or even more difference in casualty rate.

Smells like the web site authors have little knoledge of USSR history.

Another quasi-nazi site. http://angriff.narod.ru/fotopage/fotocol190.jpg Caption to the above picture proves my statement. Caption to this http://angriff.narod.ru/fotopage/fotocol.043.jpg picture says that "bolshevik" had thrown grenade at that guys tank. Why bolshevik??? Maybe he was my grandfather? He never been a bolshevik. He did not like bolshevik. He hated bolsheviks. But he had thrown grenades at nazi because he had VERY GOOD REASON TO DO THAT!

Another quasi-nazi site. http://angriff.narod.ru/fotopage/fotocol190.jpg Caption to the above picture proves my statement. Caption to this http://angriff.narod.ru/fotopage/fotocol.043.jpg picture says that "bolshevik" had thrown grenade at that guys tank. Why bolshevik??? Maybe he was my grandfather? He never been a bolshevik. He did not like bolshevik. He hated bolsheviks. But he had thrown grenades at nazi because he had VERY GOOD

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf: That is useless since the checksum would be computed by the computer of the cheater, whence the checksumming routine is as vulnerable to manipulation as the executable itself.<hr></blockquote> 1)Not realy, IMHO games like Starcraft and Diablo are not hacked yet. You cannot paly on Battlenet with cracked exe. 2) Also encrypting movis using both password is good idea. So that person whos PC computes the movie cannot see it.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> hope this time it will work <hr></blockquote> http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gif http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gif http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gif http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gif http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gif http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gif http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gif http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gif http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gif http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gif

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gifhttp://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gifhttp://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gifhttp://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin .gifhttp://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gifhttp://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gifhttp://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gifhttp://www.battlefront.com/discuss/big'>http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gifhttp://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gifhttp://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gifhttp://www.battlefront.com/discuss/big grin.gifhttp://www.battlefront.com/discuss/biggrin.gif

Don't worry guys. I am just learning. <blockquote>quote:</font><hr> <hr></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:</font><hr> <hr></blockquote> [*]new list :cool:

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MyNameW: :confused: :confused: <hr></blockquote> 1121212121212

:confused: :confused:

:cool: :eek: :mad:

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Linda WarChest: You may not be aware that CM1 will not run under WindowsXP if you have a Nividia GeForce Video card. To the best of my knowledge BTS never posted any notice on the Internet or by email that this is the case. In other words, those of us with this configuration cannot play CM1 and are left to run around the Internet like chickens with their heads cut-off trying to find out what the heck is wrong with our systems. I will not buy CM2 until the CM1 problem is resolved ! I already have one version of CM I cannot use, why do I need two ? Regards, Linda<hr></blockquote> Not buying XP because ...

Communication delay in CM results in command delay. But spotting is not affected by it. We can see whatever our units are able to spot. But it is unrealistic. In real world there is always communication delay. What if CM would properly simulate it: 1) Once my unit spotted enemy unit, player doesn't see it instantly, because there is communication delay. Of course unit can still engage enemy. 3) Delay depends on how far is unit from command center. 2) Crews bailed out from KO vehicles are poor in scouting because of communication delay. Indeed, their radio is not accessible anymore. If they are exterminated quickly player does not get any information. 3) Mortar, guns and trucks also suffer from command delay unless there is platoon HQ nearby.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf: [QB] Your opponent uses vehicles crews behind your lines? Great, get them, fat points. Without the high-point crews the game would see a lot more crew action, so I think overall we are better off the way it is. /QB]<hr></blockquote> That is fixed in v1.12. Crews from KO tanks are not good in spotting any more and are often panicked. Also would be great to increase command delay.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf: As very interesting topic, though, it is obviously a big advantage if you are good at getting prisoners. Knock out a 81mm mortar, capture the crew and get 98 points out of it! Who cares about flags anymore?<hr></blockquote> Gamey! That sucks! Would be greate to have "no prisoners" options. No prisoners - no headache.

Problem: I have inf. squad with its "native" dry (no combat modifiers)platoon HQ. There is also company HQ nearby. Compnay HQ has +2 morale, +2 stealth, +2 combat and +2 command. Who will command the battle? Looks like "useless" platoon HQ?!

I think that CMBO does not properly simulate "non-AP" effect of HEs. 150mm HE shell may not be able to penetrate frontal armor of Sherman, but chances that crew will be killed by internal armor flaking are very high. I also carried out my own test: empty Sherman against 150mm IG. I placed Sherman 250m from the gun. Hit: 96%, Kill: none. I ordered Sherman to target area to keep its MGs busy. Also I tryed to keep tank unbuttoned. Not only tank was able to take more than 10direct hits without any damage (even crew was not hit), but also it did not fire at IG from its MGs. :eek:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Porajkl: I also won't buy veteran tanks anymore. They just keep dissapointing me because they don't know how to shoot! I'll just buy regulars and I am satisfied if they cannot hit a tank at 150 meters with first shot. The difference in quality is not as big as is in price.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Veteran crew will never abandon his tank unless it takes casualties. But regular crews may ran away even all of them (including their tank) are in good health

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pvt. Ryan: It should. I once played a QB with three 150mm guns against a mess of Allied armor. Those tanks were immobilized with near misses and brewed up with direct hits. The TDs were knocked out with near misses. At the range at which I opened up with my guns, most of the shots were direct hits. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What kind of ammunition your guns fired? In my case 150mm gun run out off HEAT shells and fired HE shell at Sherman. Even direct hit did not knock out the tank. Moreover: QMBB indicated no kill while I oredered my gun to target Sherman.

Why 150mm HE does not work against Sherman's frontal armor? AFAIK SU-152 could knock out even Ferdinand. And SU-152 did use neither AP nor HEAT ammunition. :confused: