patolino

I like the 75mm assault halftrack for some reason. Granted, you'll need to be quite careful when exposing it, but on the other hand I've found the gun to be pretty effective nutcracker for cases where infantry alone would have trouble. Working in pairs is even better. And anyway, if a HT becomes a sieve it's still less expensive than exposing and risking the destruction of a real tank.

Wot? Why not "Silmien välliin"? Seriously, my vote would go to the Prokofjiev (I think) piece playing in the soundtrack for Alexander Nevsky at the time of the Teutonic Knights' charge. Not being a classical music grog I can't tell the proper name, but I love that piece. Would be topical too!

Another guided weapon used operationally with some success was the Henschel Hs-293. I recall I was absolutely stunned when I read about these babies the first time :eek: -- no wonder the German scientists were employed on both sides of the curtain after the war.

But in the matches between Finns and Russians these will have to be replaced by vodka canisters airdropped by accident between the lines. And it will be gamey to shoot them full of holes just to deny access to the other side!

Ran across that interesting beast (3xMG151 on a 251) in a SP:WaW scenario... anyone have more information on it? Quick googling doesn't give much.

Review in Dutch? You asked for it... here's a review in Finnish! Although not said so directly, it seems that the review was made recently (i.e., boxed set). Summary: complaints about user interface, graphics (no mention about mods tho!) and walls you can walk through, praise for the general idea, varying missions and realism of combined arms usage. (btw a review in a Finnish magazine 2 years ago by someone who ordered the game by mail gave 95%, obviously then the review was made by someone who got it )

Agree completely with other posters, BA and KV. However I have a nagging feeling I've seen this picture somewhere before, probably in some of the books I've read as a kid from my grandpa's library. Either v. Tippelskirch's WW2 history or Carell's Barbarossa. Does anyone have either on their shelves?

You will find all the information you need in this document.

That particular one (MT-507) is here. Oh, you haven't heard of the flooded underground factories under Berlin have you? Full of them. Also you should visit the Volksjäger salt mine assembly lines It's right near the Maus regiment training grounds Seriously, there's one I know of 190 at Hendon (London) but it is a super-ugly two-seater trainer version. Snif... the only way I could look at it was from the front so that the engine cowling hid that boxy monstruosity of a cockpit.

Heh, that's a familiar place... I agree with Tero, while KV is large it was not an order of magnitude larger than T34. But for some reason I got a very chilly feeling when looking at the ISU-152 in that museum. It looked much bigger and meaner than anything else there. Almost *sinister* Brr.

This seems to be one of those cases where the 3rd Reich skipped its intelligence homework (not that it surprises anyone). After all, KV saw test use in the Winter War. One would suppose them to have at least some sort of spying network inside their main ideological enemy's borders, too, but apparently not... Anyway, should provide loads of fun for early days of CMBB timeline...

Snow grogs? Someone of those should explain what are the conditions when snow makes that crunching sound under your feet vs. the conditions when it stays silent. And then ponder on the tactical implications during night attacks Are corduroy pants made of that textile that is not smooth but has sort of grooves in it? Ghastly things. But anyway, your body gives off heat for one. And even in the winter dark materials will absorb heat from the sunlight. You can actually feel pretty comfortable in moderate cold like -15 to -20 cent if you stay in a spot where the air stays still and keep soaking those bright day rays with dark clothing.

Interesting point about snow melting faster in the sun than in the trees...Something to consider for CM II? Or needless chrome? </font>

Ok I'll jump the bandwagon. Will motorcycles be modeled? Especially those german ones with the MG-equipped sidecar? Those should be fun to blow into bits

Ok I'll jump the bandwagon. Will motorcycles be modeled? Especially those german ones with the MG-equipped sidecar? Those should be fun to blow into bits

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by tero: Yes. Except the Finnish army managed to large stocks of captured and out-of-production vehicles in service for 20 years after the war and and captured out-of-production weapons in service for 50 years after the war. <hr></blockquote> Just out of curiosity, Tero, when did they stop the production of "Emma" (Degtyarev LMG for non-Finns)? I recall we took a few out of storage for some fresh air a couple of times when I was in the army in '91. They were in perfect condition still, too bad we were not allowed to do full auto on our shooting range so no firing experiences of them. Just taking to parts, cleaning and dummy fire exercises Not sure now if they were borrowed materiel or bought after war? NB for non-finns: of course most of the training was with a modern assault rifle, but learning Emma, Suomi-kp and Ukko-Pekka rifle (is that a Moisin-Nagant copy or what?) was considered "good to know" just in case. It was actually a lot of fun to compare them to RK-62. Gotta love Suomi/m31, that cute little thing

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by tero: Yes. Except the Finnish army managed to large stocks of captured and out-of-production vehicles in service for 20 years after the war and and captured out-of-production weapons in service for 50 years after the war. <hr></blockquote> Just out of curiosity, Tero, when did they stop the production of "Emma" (Degtyarev LMG for non-Finns)? I recall we took a few out of storage for some fresh air a couple of times when I was in the army in '91. They were in perfect condition still, too bad we were not allowed to do full auto on our shooting range so no firing experiences of them. Just taking to parts, cleaning and dummy fire exercises Not sure now if they were borrowed materiel or bought after war? NB for non-finns: of course most of the training was with a modern assault rifle, but learning Emma, Suomi-kp and Ukko-Pekka rifle (is that a Moisin-Nagant copy or what?) was considered "good to know" just in case. It was actually a lot of fun to compare them to RK-62. Gotta love Suomi/m31, that cute little thing

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redeker: I seem to recall reading/hearing somewhere that T-34's were issued with a large hammer as standard equipment to "encourage" the gearshift lever when needed. Can anyone confirm or deny this story? <hr></blockquote> I recall reading about this in Paul Carell's Operation Barbarossa (or maybe that other book of his), but can't recall him quoting any sources on that. Well, it's not a scientific study anyway.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Jonah: On it you will find an 'in-game' shot of a KV-1s on a city street. <hr></blockquote> OH MAN! :eek: REAL city buildings! Must... control... drooling...

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gyrene: swinging mighty trees like golf clubs and sending the Russian tanks back to where they came from. Gyrene<hr></blockquote> True, but there's no hope of getting this into CMBB. BTS needs to do an engine rewrite first, because the current engine doesn't do terrain modification on the fly.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MikeT: BTS has long stated that to take over a captured vehicle during a battle is out, same for capture arty.<hr></blockquote> Which is all wrong, of course! Überfinns would do that all the time. When I was visiting the Parola armour museum a couple of years ago, I stopped by and listened when a tank veteran was expaining how they used a captured, immobile T-26 in the Winter War -- after politely asking the former owners to vacate the vehicle -- to knock out other, still advancing 26's. Unfortunately, I cannot remember his name anymore. Then there's the case of one Vilho Rättö, who captured an abandoned 45mm AT gun, and single-handedly knocked out four Soviet tanks. As the men who had abandoned the gun had removed the sights, he aimed the gun by looking through the barrel (yes, the distances were short, 300 m or so if my memory serves me right). He got the Mannerheim cross for that (only 2nd class though), being the first ordinary grunt to receive it. (if any of the resident Finns has that book on Mannerheim cross knights on his shelf, could you check the distance & which tanks they were?) Of course, if a gun (or MG) has been abandoned due to HE shelling and the resultant damage makes it unbattleworthy, it's easy to see why it wouldn't be manned by its captors. But how about that Ami 57mm AT gun lying around whose conscript crew my veteran SMG squads directed elsewhere? It's brand spanking new -- just needs some green paint on the shield to cover the 9mm hit marks!

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by KwazyDog: Oh, and all vehicles on that list are unique vehicles...a finnish stug looks pretty much like a German one except for colouring and makings, hehe. Dan<hr></blockquote> ...which makes them sooo beautiful... just look at these babies: Bubi Liisa Marjatta Hopefully someone will mod them if they're not included already on the CD :cool:

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Andrew Hedges: Indeed, I would recommend that CM add a new battle type for QB's: Kitchen Patrol. <hr></blockquote> Actually, it's no joke when an encircled unit loses its field kitchen in the middle of a winter campaign -- you can ask Vinogradov about that one... Any chance of soup cannon batteries in CM:BB?

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Big Time Software: Maneuver Theory misapplied... If they had executed things a bit better, and the Germans had screwed up things a bit more, the disaster of Stalingrad would have probably been twice as bad for the Germans. [ 12-14-2001: Message edited by: Big Time Software ]<hr></blockquote> Manstein argues in his "Verlorene Siege" chap. 13 that the Soviets could have crushed the entire southern wing of the German army at that time, had they been able to concentrate enough strength and mobility in one place. Instead, the Germans managed to counter the attacks Soviets spread from Kursk to Voroshilovgrad even with their meager reserves and stabilize the front in March 1943, managing to retake Kharkov and Belogorod in the end. Destruction of the German southern flank in early 1943 would have certainly changed the course of the war quite dramatically (something similar to Bagration 1 1/2 years later I suppose). Any comments on how realistic this would have been? Manstein certainly seems to have considered it a very real risk.

Most resources I've come across make the obligatory reference to 'superior German optics' when talking about Panzer tactics, especially at the Eastern Front. Now, the problem is, they also stop there -- if lucky, they mention that a Tiger had a TZF 9b or c, while a Panther had a TZF 12 something, the Germans changed from binocular to monocular sights in the middle of the war, and if you're really really lucky, they stick in a sketch of the markings the gunner would see on the scope. Now, what I'd like to know (mostly for general knowledge's sake) is: - what was the exact procedure the gunner used to acquire the target and compute the distance? - what exactly did the different scopes look like when you peek through them? - what optics did TC, driver, MG operator, whoever... have? - what was that superiority bit, ie. what was the gear Soviets, Amis and Brits were using? Any website or book references would be appreciated!