Sardaukar

It seems I have lot to learn about objectives. No, Germans didn't surrender, but I pushed them all the way to far corner on map. And then I just waited for the time to run out after I occupied the Crossroads. Didn't feel like chasing them, since I lost one tank and was not into giving those schreks and fausts easy shots. No biggie, just baffled me a bit.

Hi, As long-time CMx1 veteran, I finally succumbed and purchased CM:BN. Fired up the tutorial Roadblock scenario and won nicely. But I was surprised that I failed one objective (St. Mary's) even though it was way behind my lines and no Germans around. I'd have thought it was safely my "property" without need of having unit there. I think this is bit counter-intuitive. System where owner of objective is last that passed around would make bit more sense for me. But, I am not complaining too much, game plays well and while UI is not as handy (IMHO) than in CMx1, it's OK.

Oh well, 4 activations a year is not TOO bad. It's not like Ubisoft Silent Hunter 5 which required constant internet connection even for single-play... That one I refused to buy, even when being fan of sub sims. But, hard drive failures happen...and sometimes also critical software errors leading to completer re-installations (of OS too). So, personally I think 4/yr is bit on low side, would prefer something like 6 to be on safe side.

Well, Luftwaffe Detachment Kuhlmey achieved some impressive hits against Soviets on Karelian Isthmus in 1944, supporting Finnish defence with their Ju-87s (dive bomber versions, not tank busting) and FW-190s. But it has been said that their main contribution was to hit Soviet fuel convoys bringing fuel to tank units and to hit pontoon bridges during Battle of Vuosalmi. They had some impressive hits to pontoon bridges and one or two documented hits on Soviet tanks too. But realistically, when you are dropping 500kg or 1000kg bombs, even near miss can often put tank out of action, even if it is not total loss.

BTW, I don't know if it was touched in this topic, but in CMx1, superior optics had quite little effect to hit %. How is CM:BN in this? And was there any meaningful difference between e.g. Sherman and Pz IV? Germans usually valued long-range shooting and usually had quite decent optics for that.

As I posted on that thread too...could always probably use something like RobO's Quick campaign (ROQC) for CMx1 series with CMBN too... Just Excel file to run and maintain your core units when using QB generator. Was quite good fun to do that.

Could always probably use something like RobO's Quick campaign (ROQC) for CMx1 series with CMBN too...

It strikes me odd too. And I am last one to advocate that M1A1HC or even M1A2 should be invulnerable to frontal penetrations. I wonder if it's *map* problem, since I have had it in same scenario in 1.04, 1.06 and in 1.08. Allah's Fist, or whatever, scenario that comes with the game. First I did wonder if it's feature when penetrators pass thru ground and hit the belly of the tank, but in latest case it is impossible...to me at least. Unless it's secret mole ATGM Top hit/belly hit/low glacis hit might been the issue...*if* map and combat calculations were askewed in comparison somehow... Seems not to be too far from deducting the reason considering some posts. When it comes to issue of "shot traps", there are no such things in modern tanks. That is because modern penetrator rounds do not richocet like WW II counterparts. But that is really out of my sphere to debate, never been a tanker but infantry. About only tank design with big conscious effort to eliminate "turret ring hit" is Merkava 3/4.

One of the reasons I really miss those detailed penetration messages from CM1. Like "Turret front hit - Ricochet" or "Turret side penetration -Knocked out"...and even better: "Turret front hit to weak spot-Penetration-Knocked out". Now it is difficult to figure out what happened...and I'm not sure if graphics can be relied to figure the hit locations out.

I’m afraid the “whatevers” matter as to whether they were hit by 125 mm APFSDS or AT-11. Different models have different capabilities and therefore different effectiveness. </font>

Been old player of CM-series since CMBO and sort of before (and was peeved by then BigTimeSoftware announcement they went for 3D instead of my beloved ASL/Steel Panthers view... ) I like how TacAI works now, seems to be reasonable, but then, I play only turn-based, since I actually want to know what happened. These are are probably answered..or not..since BFC forums lack the drive when I was active here. Some things now strike me odd. Hunt command does not Hunt, like in CM-series. It seems to work like Move to Contact in older versions. That's quite ass-backwards. If it was supposed to work like that, why call it Hunt? And why there is no Move to Contact ? That is not real Hunt-command, it seems...where unit continues to move when threat is neutralized ? Game seems to be working fine now...but same thing makes me wonder as with my last attempt with game after patch 1.04... I lost 2 M1A1HCs, both hull down, to Syrian T72whatevers from over 1k distance. I wonder why, they were hits to heaviest armour those tanks had, did look like front turret hits. Fine with me, but strikes me odd.

It is actually also about deforming the cone that is essential to create the penetrating jet (warhead-crushing). Thus, slat armour works even against many HEAT rounds with more advanced trigger mechanism than PG-7, albeit not as well. In some cases, detonating HEAT round further away from armour can actually improve it's penetration, depending on it's designed stand-off distance.

I'd say that there should be double the number of RPGs. 1-18 is way too low ratio.

Somehow I'm not holding my breath...

It also allowed something like single player "Robo's Quick Campaign Rules": http://www.roqc.cdgroup.org/ using Excel sheets. Site seems to be down, tho...

Well..as former FDF officer (Finland, that is), my experience with Tank Commanders I know was that if you cannot fire 2 rounds during 10 secs of exposure, you relegate your loader to be clerk or something. If he cannot load that way, he does not belong inside MBT. It's OK if he cannot keep that as *sustained* ROF, but any reasonably well trained loader (at least in Leo2A4) should be able to reload few rounds in 4-5 secs each...sort of "burst fire".

M3A3 is still based on IFV vehicle that was never designed to withstand weapons that were designed to kill tanks. If Bradley crew starts to think they are MBT, that is what is going to happen.

Reminds me of most embarrassing QB vs AI I have ever had. I bought few Ferdinands/Elephants..and forgot I had set computer to Random unit type. Computer bought something like Soviet Engineer battaillon.... :eek: You can guess the rest... It was like ants eating an elephant...

CMBB and CMAK, regularly.

Your point being? Having your M1s knocked out is by no means impossible. The M1s just have better odds in a duel situation, since it usually takes more hits for a T-72 to knock out an M1 than the other way around. Anybody with experience from professional simulators can tell you that... Cheers Olle </font>

Well... That is in same lieu as when I had 2 M1A1HCs and M1A2 suffer killing penetrations thru *frontal aspect* by fire from T-76MVs and T-72M (2001)s over distance of 1 km. Might be tough for them to produce top penetrations either, since my tanks were higher ground than them. Maybe secret "mole round" that attacks thru the ground.. Except hits were shown as turret front and upper hull...graphically Balancing act ? Since whole game setup is ridiculously slewed towards one side..makes me wonder.

Just got 2 M1A1HCs and M1A2 penetrated and KO'd by Syrian T-62MVs and T-72M(2001)s. That didn't make me wonder per se, but the fact they were all penetrated thru fontal aspect did. No side-shots..straight frontal penetrations in head to head fight over 1k distance. Kind of wonder that. Even AT-11 is not supposed to do that...much less their sabot rounds. So..I'd really like to see hit texts to clarify why they were penetrated.

Ninjas ?

Well..it lasted about 2 battles. Having platoon of Syrian tanks teleport into battle 200 m from your rear kind of took my "suspension of disbelief" away. Maybe that's more of scenario-issue, but still. But at least "game mechanics" are bit better now. Somehow it reminds me of Steel Panthers II though. Someone aptly described it as "boxing match in phone booth". Kind of getting same feeling.

First impression is that 1.04 is big improvement and should have been the state for game release. I even find turn based fun to play now. Good job with 1.04, BFC ! I don't think this game is really up to it, but at least now it's fun to play. [ October 06, 2007, 03:00 AM: Message edited by: Sardaukar ]