Puff the Magic Dragon

KwazyDog Are you talking about the 7.62x51mm? This is the modern NATO rifle ammo. I'm not sure if can be compared with the 7.92x33mm. BTW, I guess my bum is not really interested if the bullet walks through or sticks in it, but maybe the bum behind me? Well, I just wonder what a firepower the Soviet PPSch-41 will have: The PPSch-41: ammo = 71 rounds 7.62x25mm, bullet weight 5.5g Vo = 500 m/s cadence = 1000 rounds/min (!!!) A firepower of 50-60 per MP? Goodbye Fritz! :eek: Usually described as the best MP of WWII, even the Germans prefered it if they had enough ammo for it.

Iron Chef Sakai - the MP-44 had also a 'relativ small' recoil.

Hugo Schmeisser

This is my impression, too. BTW, I have forgotten The MP-40 ammo: 9x19mm, bullet weight 8g The MP-44 ammo: 7.92x33mm, bullet weight 6.95g This is also a bit smaller, but with the higher speed a much higher kinetic power (seen from an amateurs point of view, of course). [ February 08, 2002, 06:50 PM: Message edited by: Puff the Magic Dragon ]

I wonder why the MP-44 has a smaller firepower value (34) then the MP-40 (36). I think the MP-40 should have significant smaller value, even on short range. The MP-40: caliber = 9mm Vo = 380 m/s cadence = 400 rounds/min ammo = 32 rounds The MP-40 is in several sources described as relative unreliable. Problems with gunlock (early models) and especially the ammo feeding (I hope it's the right term) that was never solved. The MP-44: caliber : 7.92mm Vo = 685 m/s cadence = 500 rounds/min ammo = 30 rounds The MP-44 is described as very reliable and precise, and the soldiers were very contented with it. Well, I don't know what is all included in the CM firepower value, but it appears to me that the MP-40 is a bit overpowered? Okay, it has a slightly bigger caliber - of course I have not tested if a 7.92 makes significant bigger hole in my bum then a 9 mm - but is it the only important criteria? Of course I'm no expert, but I'm sure someone here knows more about it. [ February 08, 2002, 06:25 PM: Message edited by: Puff the Magic Dragon ]

Some history. 1939 were all 13 German Cavalry Regiments disbanded and assigned to the Recon units til 1941, but already from 1942 more an more in normal Infantry role. Later the earlier Cavalry units were splitted from the recon units to build the Fusilier Battalions. The transport role of horses is out the CM scope, and the Recon role in princip, too. But I would like to see Krad units.

Steve, I had the previleg to be spend my military service in a 120mm mortar unit. It is LOUD!!! :eek: Karch, this is not a question of 'want', it's more a thing of 'how to'. A quick guide. 1) Gun/Mortar battery goes in position. 2) All guns are exactly parallel aligned. 3) The FO gives a fire order. 4) One shell is fired. 5) The FO gives a correction order. 6) Step 4-5 until the fire goes to the right place. 7) Now the FO is able to give the 'real' fire order. - Even if during step 3-6 only one gun is fireing, all guns follow the orders of the FO. So the whole battery will fire to the same target zone with always the same dispersion. This is just the way it is practiced. It is not possible to say 'Delta One a degree more left, Delta Six a degree more right' to increase the dispersion. Regarding the 'blind' fire by map, well, I must speculate, but at least I have never heard of an unguided artillery barrage without LOS by the FO. FO means here: any unit that was able/allowed to guide artillery fire, not necessarily a trained FO. Except the target zone was prepared before the battle, in CM terms this means a TRP. Please correct me when I'm wrong! [ February 08, 2002, 06:34 PM: Message edited by: Puff the Magic Dragon ]

Slapdragon Please consider to change your callsign. It should be 'Slaptroll'. [ February 08, 2002, 09:56 AM: Message edited by: Puff the Magic Dragon ]

Steve ...back to work :confused: I thought this is your work! Anyway, thanks that you have shared your time with us [ February 07, 2002, 04:07 PM: Message edited by: Puff the Magic Dragon ]

Xerxes Interessting story. But as you said by yourself, the player must know how to use a FT, and it's difficult to use them. Another point is, is the scenario made to 'support' FTs, or has the player purchased pioneers in a QB, was forced to purchase FTs with them and ends up with two wasted FTs, cause the map given him no chance to make a sensefull use of them, so they were wasted somewhere? This could explain the tendency in the poll to see the FT as a useless weapon. At least this could be solved when Steve can realize his compromiss, so the player is not longer forced to purchase FTs together with the pioneers. :cool: [ February 07, 2002, 03:52 PM: Message edited by: Puff the Magic Dragon ]

Rodimzew No one but newbies buy NWs. IMO, they are much to dangerous for the own troops, especially when fired blind they spread over the whole map! The chance to hit own troops is as high as the chance to hit enemy troops. BTW, Steve - I wonder why a blind fired barrage (doesn't matter which artillery) comes down with greater disperse. This seems to be completly unrealistic. To cause this effect, each barrel needs a slightly different target zone, but what I have seen in the army, a target order is always given for the whole battery*. So, the 'blind barrage' would come in with the same disperse as a 'LOS barrage'. Instead a bigger disperse, it goes to the wrong place. Indictee, what can you say for your defense? *(exept they prepare a 'target marker', of course)

Major BooBoo The 'Stuka zu Fuß' ('Stuka on feet'), also called 'Heulende Kuh' ('howling cow') was the name of the SdKfz251 with 6 heavy 'Wurfrahmen' for 28/32cm Nebelwerfer.

Andreas - Erwin Rommel says in his early book 'Infantrie greift an' ('Infantry attacks') that artillery of light and medium caliber is very ineffective against dug in infantry. This was one of his first impressions as Leutnant in WW One. BTW, the BW want to abolish the 120mm. The old barrels are worn out, they have no money for new barrels, and in general they reconsider the further need of this weapon. About the 'unwounded dead soldiers' - AFAIK, a big explosion simply rupture the lung, the soldier looks unwounded, cause he is drowned in his own blood. But I imagine this effect is caused by the real big Nebelwerfers: 32cm (39,8kg explosives), 28cm (49,9kg explosives), 30cm (44,66kg explosives) :eek:

34 people had already an opinion bumb

I've read the 15cm Nebelwerfer rocket is filled with 'only' 2500g explosives. I have really no idea about this things, but it sounds to be not very much, compared to the big blast. I was unable to find out how much explosives a 15cm artillery shell contains. Sombody knows this and more about the question in general?

For the poor MAC users on the PC I a) go to the scenario editor, place the 'project unit' on the map and place the camera. Then I switch to the Windows-Destop with the ESC key I change the graphic and save it directly as BMP into CM BMP directory c) I switch back to CM. I press the GO button in the 3d preview, then reload the 3D preview and see: the textures are updated. Tiger with an extra button we could spare seconds - SECONDS!!!

Well, I guess it doesn't make a serious difference, I'm just curious. As I said, the Jäger is a spezialist for city, wood and other covered terraine. I wonder if it was only a question of training, or also of equipment. I have no information about the equipment of Jäger troops, so I can't yet compare it with the regular infantry or GJ, but I have ordered some OOB data sheets about Jäger and GJ from the Nafziger Collection. Steve has based his platoon OOB (at least partially) on them. The most important thing about GJ is just their mountain training/equipment, but both is outside the CM scope.

Thanks Jason, this mostly matches with my current source ('Die deutsche Gebirgstruppe 1939-45, Roland Kaltenegger, Universitas 1989, Germany). The most battles in 45 were fought vs Russian forces in Austria. So the orignal question is still to answer. BTW, did 'Jäger' forces fought on the CM:BO front?

Tiger nice to see you return Someone had an interesting thing developed, he made mono colored bmps, with the filenumbers on it, so it's easy to identify them directly on the model. Do somone remember who have it? Steve I guess all what Paw means is the possibility to check the textures better then it can be done now. How about a 'reload textures' hotkey, integrated in the scenario editor (or something similar)?

Do somebody know how it works? It doesn't seem to be the same calculation like in a battle.

Lord This has been discussed in the original Flamethrower threat. To give the short answer : because the FT was slow, and it was difficult and dangerous to use. I personally (and I have brought up this thing some time ago ) will be contented when the FT can run a short distance to get into cover - what will be modeled in CMBB, as Steve said, and when the QB purchase of FTs will be optional, as Steve has proposed. :cool: [ February 05, 2002, 01:32 PM: Message edited by: Puff the Magic Dragon ]

I wonder why they are in CM:BO!? Don't get me wrong, they are an excellent troop, I'm a great fan of them. And I don't have a problem with it, I'm just interested. Truth is, they were very very rare on the (CM:BO) Western Front - I know only one battle with them in the French/Italian Alps. But this was a real alpine frontline, which isn't modeled in CM anyway. I wonder if this is not a simple misspelling, and they are 'Jäger' troops. For the uninitiated, the 'Jäger' is an infantry formation, specialist in housefighting and similar difficult terraine. This would also explaine the large number of MPs, the typical close combat weapon. (BTW, I was in 'Jäger Battalion 66' during my military service )

Steve Mh, I see the problem with an extra non-FT platoon - things looks much easier without programmers knowledge . I agree, it would be better to have only non-FT engineer platoons. The FT is as team still available, so everyone can purchase them anyway if he feels the need. This would reflect their nature as a 'weapon for special moments' best. -roadblocks and barbed wire : you are right, it is secondary. Just a question, can they be damaged by artillery fire in CMBB? -charges : :cool: :cool: :cool:

Steve I agree with most of your last post, except the purchase. As you said yourself, if the FT will be at the front or not depents on the mission. Because the player has even in QBs at least a raw idea about his mission & the terraine, he can decide if FTs are sensefull or not. I don't think that it is the same situation for MGs. Of course, sometimes they were left in the camps, too, but I assume not very often, while the FT was only used when it really was needed (just because it was indeed so difficult and hazardous to use as you always said). Speaking as a person without internal engine knowledge, I think it is not difficult to do, you would only need to add one more platoon type. It would be realistic. And it would be (for me) one less reason why I shouldn't purchase pioneers. When we talk about engineers already (yes, I must confess, I'm a fan ), their special jobs were -clear minefields : modeled in CM, bud I assume the least used features of all. I also don't think it is a very realistic feature. Mine clearing is an extremly dangerous job that needs patience. I don't think it was usually done under fire. (Correct me if I'm wrong) -clear pathes (blow roadblocks & cut barbed wire) : I wonder if this will be modeled in CMBB. I hope it will. -blow things away : a difficult question. Engineers had a lot of explosives. It was surely used different then a simply thrown charge. Will there be any changes? Question - what is the blast value of a charge? -build bridges : can be ignored, absolutly out of the CM time frame To make it short, would be nice if the engineers could show more of their 'natural' abilitys. Otherwise they are just another infantry unit. Bad Slapdragon! I assertively spoken about QB purchase, and you come up with scenario design. Pfui Pfui

Bucket I have heard rumours that Madmatt himself is responsible for the sounds in CMBB. We can be sure that he will do much better work then Scipio ever did. Otherwise he should be tarred and feathered