Patrick Moore
-
Posts
88 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Patrick Moore
-
-
Wow! very nice StugIVOriginally posted by Flesh:Did somebody say StugIV?
I've seen pics of StuH42s with and without muzzle brakes. Was there a dominant version between the two? just curious...
[ June 25, 2003, 08:31 PM: Message edited by: Patrick Moore ]
-
Did you get a chance to draw a line-of-sight to the KV before your PzIII was KO'd? I think that would be telling...
-
Hear hear! You have my vote!Originally posted by MikeyD:You guys aren't reaching far enough back. Peloponnesian War, 450-ish B.C.! Great sea battles, Hoplite infantry formations, Sythian horsemen. It would be spectacular!
Or come forward a couple hundred years, Rome vs Hannibal. Rome got their butt kicked BAD on several occassions by him!
-
I think I'm too concerned with my 'digital soldiers' well being I'm a lousy player at this game and I bet the excellent armchair generals know the balance between when to save and and when to sacrifice their troops.
Reminds me of the proverb of the Spartan mother saying to her lad as he was leaving for battle: "Return carrying your shield; or carried on it!"
-
shows how little i know about the vehicles in CMBO and CMBB! lol (I heard the germans have a heavy tank, codename "Tiger," in the game!)Originally posted by laxx:i doan think the 4MG half-track is featured in CMBO.
thanks
Well, this thread definitely piqued my interest in this vehicle for my next CMBB QB!
-
Yeah, the M16GMC is quite a piece! Some bloke on this forum said it was nicknamed the "meatgrinder" or "meatchopper."
Darn! I didn't know it was in CMBO/CMBB. I'll have to give it a spin in my next QB!
-
Halo
Age of Empires II
The Settlers of Catan boardgame
Diplomacy (boardgame...when I'm able to grab 6 other folks...about once/year!)
-
I would like to see the ability for a battle designer to mod vehicle/guns performance/operational status. I have read accounts of specific battles where, for instance, an AFV/gun is present but has mechanical problems (slow speeds only, only HE for ammo, immobile AFV, No ammo for main gun, turret/gun cannot rotate, etc.)
Pardon my ignorance, but I've only played around a tiny bit with the battlemaker in CMBO/CMBB and I don't recall seeing this feature.
-
I mentioned it earlier this week in the General Forum!Originally posted by MikeyD:...nobody's mentioned it on the forum yet!
According to the Battlefront.com news page it's been on store shelves for more than a week now. An ADV enterprise, it looks to be. Hopefully it'll help reel in a few extra fish for CMBB and CMAK.
Looking at the screenshots in the linked game review I'm all nostalgic now. Remember shockwaves from explosions? I'm starting to tear-up!
And I'm sure someone mentioned it before moi b/c I'm always the last to find out about these things!
-
I asked a similar question about a month ago and got some good answers. You should be able to find the thread here:Originally posted by Patton21:50 percent of the time that my heavy tanks come under fire from ligh armor they get their guns damaged, this makes the tank usless. I dont understand why this happens. I flak gun should not be able to damage a heavy tanks gun. Whats up with this.
http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=007397#000000
or just do a search for 'gun damage'
-
PUNT! Thanks for the info, Tom W and JonS!Originally posted by aka_tom_w:I am wondering about that myself
Martin (Moon) posted it once
I printed it out now I have lost both the link and the hard copy print out.
anyone?
-tom w [/QB]
-
I would like to see the CMAK/CMX2 subject index listed alphabetically and not by sections as in CMBB.
As one who does not get to play CMBB too often on occassion it can be difficult to find a specific topic in the game manual.
I like the move by scenario designers to list the map size and total points! Please keep this going in CMAK.
[ June 10, 2003, 02:23 PM: Message edited by: Patrick Moore ]
-
punt
good info!
-
Ahh...thank you!Originally posted by redwolf:It stands for a hit on the actual gun, the mantlet, the coax MG port or the gun optics.
-
I was playing a game and my STUGIIIG received multiple "gun hits" from a Soviet 45mm AT gun at ~400 yards with no discernable effect (the gun worked fine, the veteran crew was not bothered by the hits).
probably a dumb question but what is a "gun hit" in CMBB? That is when an AFV is hit by a shell the result says "gun hit." Is it merely a hit on the AFV's gun mantlet/barrel? The book gives nice descriptions about 'spalling', partial penetration, etc. but I couldn't find anything regarding "gun hit" in the book or on a search at this forum.
just curious...
Thanks in advance.
-
I hear ya, man!Originally posted by dalem:I understand what foamy is asking for. I haven't bothered to play BB in a month or so, not much at all before that. Part of it is burnout, part of it is my abominable luck with AFV, but part of it is that the game is simply too much work as it stands for folks like me (and maybe Foamy). Doesn't mean I'm an arcade player, nor a simpleton, nor crying for going all the way back to BO. It means I'm not having fun with the current incarnation.
That's all.
-dale
I asked for a feature that (IMHO!!) would make the game more "fun and playable;" an accessible OOB during the battle. Just a simple list/chart of what units are on the map and their status (broken, tired, alert, etc.) to keep track of all the units in a battle and I got "run outta town like a common pygmy!"
Many folks objected to this as being too unrealistic for CMBB. The only two responses I can think of
1) it is a feature that doesn't have to be used by the player (why have variable scale of FOW...no FOW is unrealistic!)
2) it would make the game more accessible for the casual players.
I guess what I'm trying to say is to keep all the realism and detail in the game but make it scalable(sp.) for us "tactic/SA-challenged" gamers!
Again, these are my humble opinions. Thanks for reading. I love this game and their are moments that make my jaw drop out of amazement of some cool graphics or battle events. Because of such moments I KNOW that I will buy CMAK regardless of how it appears on the market!
-
I like this idea, Cpl Dodge!Originally posted by Cpl Dodge:I'd like to see them expand multiplayer gaming to include 3 or more players (2v1, 2v2, 3v3) rather than just 2 players. Each player would have their own units to control, and FOW would hide friendly units controlled by another player on the same side.
I am thinking of an operation where you have two commanders that are supposed to assault the enemy from opposite positions. In real life often friendly units were not in direct sight of each other, but could communicate through radio contact. Simulating that would bring in friendly fire situations, more realistic misidentification of units, and would be fun for two people to learn how to play together.
PBEM games would take longer, but I think it would be worth it.
Do you know if this as been considered before?
-
Amazing! The description from Superhero's link reminded me of the Monty Python bit of Swamp Castle: "...but the fourth prototype"
The first prototype was completed in December 1941 and was rushed into the defense of Moscow. In its first action during a dense winter fog, the rear turret accidentally fired into the center turret. The resulting explosion completely destroyed the vehicle. The second prototype was completed in January 1942, and was sent to the Leningrad front. This one had indicators installed to show whe another turret was in the line of fire. In its initial attack on the Germans, the tank broke in half when crossing a ravine. A spark ignited the leaking flamethrower fuel and the resulting explosion completely destroyed the vehicle. The third prototype, shown here, had a reinforced hull and was also sent to the Leningrad front in early 1942. It did manage to shoot down three German aircraft. In its first ground engagement, the KV-VI was firing on German positions when coincidentally all of the guns fired from the 3 O'Clock position a the same time. The tremendous recoil tipped the tank into a ditch and the severe jostling set off the 152mm ammunition, which completely destroyed the vehicle. After these failures, Stalin cancelled the project, and many of the design team members spent the rest of their lives in the Gulags of Sibera. The KV-VI was nicknamed "Stalin's Orchestra" by the few Germans that encountered it because of the variety of weapons it deployed.
-
IIRC, someone stated in the forum that the J version was the dominant version in terms of production numbers. I just did a quick look at Achtung Panzer site...they state the following (If i read them correctly the 8600 number does not includes the Panzer IV variants such as Wirbelwind, Jagdpanzer IV, etc.):Originally posted by Jaws:The PZ IV-J is still my favourite as it was in CMBO and I hope it will be in CMAK also.
The reason of this post is that there still is no mod for this tank and that strange because in CMBO there were lot's of them.
Am I the only one who is still fighting with the PZ IV-J?? And if so, why lost this vehicle its popularity??
Are there other vehicles I’ve completely missed with the same capabilities and the same production numbers as the PZ IV-J?
"From October of 1937 to May of 1945, approximately 8600 Panzerkampfwagen IV tanks (armed with long and short barrel guns) were produced (10 different variants).
[Panzer IVJ]production did not cease until March 1945 with 2970 produced solely by Nibelungenwerke and in small number by Vomag."
I don't play many QB purchase battles but I assume the J should be pretty cheap at the end of the war.
[ April 30, 2003, 10:17 PM: Message edited by: Patrick Moore ]
-
Punt
There is a valid argument for high unit density provided by many veterans of CM, but I'm in your camp and simply like small battles. For moi it is the personal investment in my troops and the ease of keeping track of fewer units. (there is a related thread titled "how many units can you keep track of..(?)")
-
punt!
I remember someone on this forum talking about military studies (U.S.?) of distances that infantry could spot and identify targets...anything of that nature would help
-
Aye aye, sir! Considering I only get to play CMBB about ~5 hours/week check this forum for my chart around the year 2009!Originally posted by redwolf:You need to run hotseat games against yourself and make a web page table for the rest of us
I don't think anybody did that for CMBB. There are huge numbers of variables, like facing of unit, general visibilty (air), terrain vivibility (trees, brushes), supression of viewing unit, whether the unit has binoculars or in the case of vehicles how good optics, exposure and speed of observed unit, whether the target is a split or combined squad. I think but I am not sure that the more men an infantry unit has and the slower it moves the more angle it scans. Obviously the whole equotation starts with new variables from scratch for firing units.
So you better start now, you are up for a two-year exercise
Thanks for the reply. I'll have to play around with hotseat tip you mentioned to determine my spotting questions.
-
Thanks for the reply. Yeah, i've heard of the "Borg Spotting" problem.Originally posted by Tweety:While you wait for a more knowledgeable person to show up here is my short explanation.
Identification is obviously dependent on the quality of the LOS. (is it nigh/day/raining, long way off, obscured by trees and such and quality of the spotting unit and I believe lenght of spotting as well.
The spotting itself is a bit more controversial. As it is now say if a AT rifle is hiding 1000 metres away from your tank, that tank is not going to see him. However if another unit of yours is closer to the AT rifle and is in a position to spot it, the tank will immidiatly be aware of it despite it not normally being able to see it. This happens if the spotter and the tank have no radio. Please note, the tank does have LOS to it but it would not realisticly notice it. That's the "Borg Spotting" you've been hearing about.
The request is that future engines allow for units radio-ing in the position of spotted units or units responding to firefights with units they don't actually notice. All this with an appropriate delay.
That is the short of it.
I'm not an expert on spotting but there have been many instances where I thought my units were safe (e.g. arty spotter HIDING in woods spotted by russians at 500m range!) Then the "Borg spotting" comes into effect and they are wiped out! amazing.
My interest is in how the CMBB engine decides how one unit can see another unit. Any info would be appreciated! Thanks.
-
I see there is discussion about spotting going on in the CMBB forum so I decided to repost my question here.
I'm looking for any information on how the CMBB engine handles spotting and identification of enemy units.
posted April 21, 2003 10:56 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does anyone know where I can find some information about probabilities of units successfuly spotting/being spotted in CMBB? I did a search on the forum but came up empty...
Thanks!
Fallschirmjager or Fallschrimjager?
in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
Posted