Jack Carr

Prinz Eugen posts: -------------------------------------------------- Now that you think of it; IRL the IV F gave T-34s, some formidable AFVs a spanking. In CM, the same IV is vulnerable to a Stuart, a little reconnaissance tank. After this, tell me that there isn't fixing to do ( or somefink ) on the part of BTS ! -------------------------------------------------- Amen brother! Something is wrong. Marlow posts: -------------------------------------------------- Since I am often on the Stuart end of M IV - Stuart fight, I must say that I am surprized that you all are bad mouthing the M IV. From my experience, going head to head with a M IV is almost always a bad idea. If you are losing to Stuarts in a strait up fight, you are doing something wrong. -------------------------------------------------- Can you give us an idea of what we might be doing wrong? I often see Panzer MKIV's get penetrated frontally by Stuart's. I see it happen all the time. I've been talked down from the ledge before on tank accuracy but I'm not hallucinating that my MKIV has been knocked out by a Stuart. It really happens. Marlow you said you ran tests with Stuart's and MKIV's. Could you give details on the testing. For example, at what range are you testing? I have no regrets when I get knocked out by a Stuart from a side or rear shot, when that happens then I'm doing something wrong, but when I get knocked out frontally by a reconnaisance tank I just kinda scratch my head and change my battle plans. And while we're on the subject, I have lost Tiger I's to Stuart's frontally as well, more than once. "Front Penetration at Weak Point". Those words haunt me in my sleep.

Why are there so many CMBO fanatics? I mean look at this forum. It's amazing! What draws you to the game? Are you a WWII buff? Are you simply a gamer that knows a good game when you see one? A little more in depth than, "How old are you?" I'm thinking this may get moved to a different part of the forum. If so I apologize in advance.

Redwolf posts: -------------------------------------------------- Optics not at all modeld in CMBO. Hit probablities of moving shooter against standing target and vice versa plain broken, announced to be CMBB-corrected in a recent thread. -------------------------------------------------- I'm glad to hear that this is the case. I know that luck in any given scenario is a factor but I have seen some things that I just shook my head and laughed. Michael Dorosh posts: -------------------------------------------------- Does CMBO really "limit engagement range", or does it simply accurately reflect the closed in terrain found in Western Europe? -------------------------------------------------- Good point. I'm reading a book right now that many of you I'm sure would enjoy. "The Panzers and the Battle of Normandy". Available from RZM. It goes into pretty good detail about the units that were there, especially armor. First hand accounts of battles. If you read this book you get a better understanding of how tanks like Tiger and Panther got knocked around by Shermans and Cromwells. Alot of it had to do with the terrain. There were many engagements which took place at relatively close range. The book goes into detail about how certain German counter-attacks were broken up by ambushes with well placed tanks nd anti-tank guns. Good book. It goes into detail on the physical number of tanks available to each German unit present in the Normandy area. Day by day first hand accounts. Great stuff. How many days till CMBB!!!!

Neither here nor there about your original post but I do like to use the mkIV simply because from a historical perspective, it was one of the most numerous German AFV's on the battlefield. I don't know about anyone else but I try to keep it historically accurate when I can.

Redwolf brings up a good point here. The key words are "pair them". That is certainly good advice when it comes to mkIV's. Pair them up with another vehicle and their effectiveness/survivability will increase. More so against the AI then a human opponent but you gotta figure that two guns firing at a target are better than one.

The panzer mkIV in CMBO has to be concerned with every enemy vehicle short of a half track. M5A1 Stuarts and Greyhounds take on the mkIV frontally and win most of the time due to their high rate of fire. In my opinion the mkIv has to be used in the same manner as the German tank destroyers. I usually hold them back and hide them until I can almost be guaranteed of getting in the first two shots at the enemy armored target. If you look at the specs on this tank it appears as though the turret is the weak link. If I were the attacker, the mkIV's would be at the rear of my attacking force. Panther and Tiger breed would go in first. As you say, nothing wrong with the main cannon but the armor deficiency becomes obvious very quickly.

If you ever get a chance to see a documentary entitled, "Why Hitler Lost the War", don't pass it up. The documentary speculates that Hitler initially won the war and then with his bumbling, mind changing, moronic doctrines then lost it. After Poland had been defeated, no one really doubted the outcome of that conflict, the French army was considered one of the finest fighting forces in the world. "Thank God for the French Army", was the mindset in Great Britain after Poland fell. The French turned out to be no more than speedbumps for the panzers. If Hitler had followed through with his air war on the British air fields and then followed that up with Operation SeaLion, there is no longer a war on two fronts. Even the British High Command when asked today would Hitler have succeeded if he invaded Great Britain? Several British commanders answer this question in the documentary by answering with a resounding "Yes, he would have". The British had nothing ready for the likes of an invasion by the Reich. Attempting to keep to the original topic, I like to oversimplify the question posed. The German army of 1939-1945 held off the armed might of the rest of the mechanized world for five years before succumbing to defeat. It can be argued that for two of those years, they were winning! Hitler simply bit off more than his Army could chew. His bumbling, bad decisions, horrific war crime policies, etc. certainly didn't help his men in the field. Good question. Interesting responses. You really could talk about this one for a while.

35

The Germans.

I reckon I'm gonna be in for at least two copies for PC. God Bless and goodnight.

900MHZ kit machine AMD Athlon processor - 256 MB RAM - 64MB Radeon video card - Altec Lansing Speaker system - 19" Sony Trinitron Flat monitor - 50X CD-ROM drive. No problems at all running CM:BO full of mods. Almost every vehicle, terrain, building, and even skyscapes are modded. Hope that this is enough to run CM:BB, but if it isn't I will definitely drop the money down to buy a system that has enough horsepower to do it.

Please feel free to give me your parameter preferences for Quick Battle scenarios. Historically ,except in rare situations, didn't the Allies usually have a numerical superiority in men and equipment? When I set up a Quick Battle I like to give the Allies +25% to +50% setting. Quite frankly, I just feel that this gives the game a more historically accurate perspective. Of course there were situations like the Battle of the Bulge but for the most part didn't the Allies generally have numerical superiority from D-Day on? For those of you who play using Quick Battles, I would like to know what the parameters are that you usually select (If there is a usually). Thanks....

This stuff looks great! Die hard WWII fanatics like myself love this kind of attention to detail. Especially like the Elefant. One of my favorite WWII tank destroyer's. German uniforms are also extremely impressive. Keep up the good work and many thanks.

Does anyone know of a good source of information on Allied PIAT/Bazooka. I seem to have very good experiences when commanding these units even against heavy German armour at distances between 100m - 150m. THe Panzerschreck units don't even compare when it comes to accuracy.

My experiences have been the same with the British 95mm. The German heavy tanks are just no match for it. I can see the Firefly being effective because the muzzle velcoity was pretty good but the 95mm seems to fare just as well with a muzzle velocity that is less than the Allied short barrelled 75mm. Perhaps its the type of ammo used? I have never read anything on this weapon system. Does anyone know a good source of info on it?

Sparky Rat.....Are you joking! It's just a game....No kidding! If its just a game then why bother? Why bother having a discussion forum? Don't post and run. Kinda makes it sound like you're whining. People are discussing their experiences with the game. That's what the forum is for.

Gun accuracy is frustrating in CMBO. Many times I have had a friendly tank/tank destroyer waiting in ambush for an enemy vehicle to roll into its line of fire only to miss 3 to 5 times and then get whacked with the first shot by the enemy tank. These engagements are usually within 200 meters. The other day I had a StugIII waiting in ambush behind a building and an M7 Priest moved right into its killing lane. This Priest is a gonner I thought, as I watched the Stug miss 3 times as the Priest turned its chasis and smoked the StugIII. All at 150 meters and flat terrain! The StugIII was not distracted by other enemy units, there were no other enemy units around. I just laughed and shut the game off. Now I'm seeing posts about tanks moving fast and scoring hits on moving enemy vehicles from a long distance? Hey, I love this game, but isn't something wrong? :confused: New screenshots of CMBB look great. Really looking forward to it.

jgdpzr - Thanks for the feedback. I play as the Allies quite a bit. I hope my post did not come across as someone who is a whining sympathizer who only plays Axis. When I play as the Allies my Shermans hit early and often. Who knows...Maybe, I'm all wet on this one.

Redwolf - LOS tool? Are you referring to the percentile chance to hit when using LOS? If so for any of the three targets engaged it was 60% or better. I let the Tiger stay with the first target that appeared. Unfounded comments? What are you trying to say? The tank missed five times in a row. If you don't believe me you are faring much better than I when it comes to German tank accuracy. Regardless of what the percentile chance to hit is in the LOS readout. Unless the tanks are at point blank range (within 50 meters), it has been my experience that the Allied tanks are more accurate. There shells ricochet more often but they hit more often as well.

If you get a chance pick up the book that this movie was based on. I believe the authors name is Willi Heinrich. The movie is good. The book is also good. A little different than the movie but what else is new.

I have been playing CMBO for quite some time and in my opinion it is the best WWII game on the market. I am a bit perplexed at something I have noticed since purchasing the game however. The Allied tanks are far more accurate than their Axis counterparts. Regardless of the tank that you are using. Does anyone else find this to be the case? Just to give an example, I recently played a game in which a Tiger I late model went up against no less than three M4A3EZ8's. The Tiger fired and missed five times and was eventually knocked out because of such pitiful marksmanship. This is a common experience when I play the game. Apparently the folks at BATTLEFRONT feel the Germans just can't shoot a lick. The Tiger crew was veteran and the Sherman crews were regular. The Tiger was waiting in ambush overlooking an open terrain area with no obstruction. Five misses in a row! I am sure that many of you that play this game are well read to some degree about the conflict. I have read in several sources that the optics on the German guns were second to none. Five misses on a target that was within 200 meters! That veteran Tiger crew deserved to be taken out.