atiff

ATRs in the real world could have some significant effects, even in mid war. Jack Radey (he of Korsun Pocket fame) often mentions German tank commanders getting topped by ATR shots at vision blocks, etc. He has numbers like a company (can't remember Mk or year) losing 30% (or something) of it's tank commanders to ATR in an extended (multi-day) battle. Admittedly, this is mighty good shooting, but if Jack says it is fact I tend to believe him.

That's called "making a sacrifice", mate, part of the deal you signed (or will sign) up for. "For better or worse...."

What he said

Hi all, Seeing some of the CMAK screenies on Boots & Tracks got me wondering; how many German halftracks were used in Egypt and Libya? (ie, under Rommel's DAK) Does anyone know of specific numbers in the Panzer divisions, for example? I have not read a lot of books on North Africa, mostly the New Zealand histories, and can't remember mention of any halftracks. Obviously a lot of movement was done with trucks.

I'm still amused that the Germans called the M3 the "Pilot" for a while.

Actually, I just meant having battles set in Greece between Commonwealth and German forces, not substituting for actual Greek units.

Despite the fact that there will be no actual Greece setting, you can probably still fake battles from the campaign using Commonwealth forces with the scenario editor.

Yep, when they get to big, I start losing interest.

I'm pretty sure (NZ Div CO) Fryberg was against Jock Columns as well. He resisted many times the use of parts of the NZ Division away from the whole. This stemmed from the charter he had been provided with by th NZ Government. And that brings up a whole other topic we probably shouldn't go into here....

Also, you could fake some Greek battles if the editor allows you to have Italian-type landscapes in 1941. For example, one of the NZ Battalions (21st or 22nd, I think) held up the German advance at Platamon for almost two days (although they were lucky the Germans couldn't use their tanks in a significant fashion). Following that there were the Pinios gorge battles, probably some good stuff there.

I'd like to see some scenarios featuring the not-so-common nationalities and force. OK, so sue me, I'm a Kiwi, but things involving NZ, South African, Polish or Free French troops would be nice to see. Or maybe a couple of semi-historical SAS type raids of Axis rear areas.

Jeez, ungrateful aren't they? You give us this out of the kindness of your heart and get hassled. Well, phhhbbbttt to them Anyway, nice pics, keep 'em coming

I never said it was a perfect solution....

Yes, it looks like fires. Notice the very black thing just over the ridge, to the left of the PzII commander - looks a little like a burning vehicle to me.

If you are making a scenario, you can get artillery to fall in a "wide" pattern rather than the standard "narrow and deep" pattern by adjusting the friendly map edges to North/South rather than East/West.

But isn't *effective* firepower delivered on the target the multiple of Firepower and Exposure (or something like that)? The firepower you see on the targeting tool is based solely on range, I thought. In that case, you are seeing the effects of hard and soft cover, it is all thrown together as "exposure". Notice, for example, the Pine and Woods numbers (60% and 57% repsectively). Now, Pines is meant to be trees and little undergrowth, while Woods is meant to be trees with lots of undergrowth. You would imagine that it is a LOT easier to find *something* to hide behind in Woods, but for the most part the amount of hard cover (trees) is the same between Woods and Pines. This you only get a little more benefit in Woods, as the extra stuff is all "soft" cover. Also notice the difference between Open and Brush (3%) and Pines and Woods (3%). Seems like in both cases, the difference is additional bits of soft cover (giving 3% more cover, ie not much cvoer when you are hiding behind something with no stopping power). (so Brush is Woods without the trees) Does that make sense to anyone else? It seems to make sense to me.

Hi all, Been looking around and just can't find it. Can anyone tell me what Bi'r means?

That all seems pretty reasonable to me, Rob. Looks like you have found your answer.

Close, but not quite.... What Rob means is, if you have a +100% battle, how does that compare to a battle with a lower +X% and an AI Experience handicap (ie, +1, +2 or +3, defined on the last screen before going into the battle)

Yeah, out of loyalty I had to make a comment there, so I dared them all to download the CMBO demo and try it. Well, it's worth a try....

If it was a QB, you ahve to wait until the fifth file (ie, always change after a View+Plot turn; see Fuerte's comments about five posts up)

Too rich for me. My problem is not willingness for PBEM or lack of opponents, it is lack of RL time. Currently have three PBEM on the go, and that is about all I ahve time for.

I third it! Despite my post above, I have had Fast & Trust working, just not against another person (I solo tested vs myself). Will be remedying that shortly....