[Tiger accuracy]

A re-post of a message from an earlier discussion, but it adds some tangential value to this thread.

Badger posted:

I can ONLY speak to the sighting telescope mounted in the M4A2E8 Sherman (76mm) that I qualified on. It was a circa early 50's critter with a reticule pattern in the sight,. This sight had NO magnification capability. It had the vertical bar down the center with horizontal lines for range (marked on each line in yards) that became increasingly tighter together as the range decreased. It also had additional horizontal markings for lateral displacement and fire correction that were graduated in mils. I believe there's 6400 mils in 360 degrees. There was a hand traverse wheel (gunner's right hand) marked with mils also for the same fine corrections so that we could look down and move the gun laterally without having to look through telescope. There was a small black cross for engaging at targets under 1,000 yards and zeroing the master weapon to adjust for parallax. We zeroed the actual gun at 1,000 yards to the telescope's cross by bore sighting (literally looking down the barrel through an open breach) with pieces of "thread" taped to the end of the barrel in a cross pattern. Why zero for parallax at under 1,000 yards. Well, remember the type of armored warfare and equipment of that era. A period map study for Northern Europe (see footnote) concluded that the average range that a tank could see another tank from any random point was 322 yards. The probability that a tank could see 1000 yards at any random point in Northern Europe was less than .05 (less than 5%). It was concluded that tank engagements in Europe was controlled by the terrain - thus limiting tank engagement ranges to less than 800 yards. In fact, the actual range that most encounters took place was 330 yards.

It is only my opinion as an old Sherman gunner that the many of the up close engagements of tanks within the Combat Mission series, tend to be a bit gamey and the accuracy/hit ratio is far too low when engaging targets at less then 1,000 yards, but it's still a fantastic piece of entertainment software and I love every minute of it.

Regards,

Badger

[The Battle for Alam Halfa ridge]

I found this particularly interesting.

It should be pointed out here that the Grant tank, in spite of the disadvantages already mentioned, was the only tank then in the Desert of any real value against the German PzKw III and IV. With its short-barrelled 75 mm gun in the side mounting it could be very effective against these German tanks at about 1,000 yards range. The other tanks, Valentine, Stuart and Crusader with 2 pdr or equivalent guns were of value in a harassing role, but no use in a "slugging match."

It mirrors the kind of problems I had when going up against Grants with PZIII's in CMAK.

Thanks for the link...

Regards,

Badger

[Anti-tank minefield duds?]

Thanks for the feedback and clarification guys.....

Regards,

Badger

[Anti-tank minefield duds?]

A question in regards to anti-tank minefields.....

An anti-tank minefield is placed covering a narrow road and it's edges easily extend beyond both sides of the road. A tracked heavy vehicle (assault gun) comes down the road at high speed (appeared to be FAST move). It drives right over the minefield center flag and keeps going with no damage.

Does this imply that minefields have some kind of software variable built into the code that causes vehicles to sometimes not hit one, or is there something else involved here that I've never seen before in CMBO, CMBB or CMAK?

Thanks for the feedback.

Regards,

Badger

[tank platoons]

A repost from a similar CMBB thread,,,

Here's what my Regiment looked like.

Circa 1960-68

Sherman Tank Regiment (Canada)

4 Tanks per Troop (5 man crews)

4 Troops per Squadron

3 Squadrons per Regiment

plus an "A" and "B" echlon consisting of everything from jeeps to 3/4 ton trucks to deuce-and-one-halfs to support fighting elements.

All in all, about 50-60 Shermans (with maint tanks, plus their support cadre.

Hope this helps a bit...

Regards,

Badger

Regards,

Badger

[Long range optics]

Originally posted by Tero:

Originally posted by Moon:

Short-range acquisition is in fact simulated in CM, and I am sure that it is partly responsible for some of the odd "why won't my unit fire" incidents sometimes reported on the board.

I think "why won't my units hit" are more common.

I agree....

I still believe there's some serious code anomalies in the gunnery/damage coding once engagements get down under 25-50 meters. I noticed it first in CMBB and it seems to be carried forward in CMAK.

Just my opinion, but I still enjoy it as a piece of entertainment software and don't view any of these games as real weapons simulations.

Regards,

Badger

Sherman (M4A2E8) & Centurion

Group 3 Gunner (RCAC)

Group 2 Driver Mechanic Tracked (RCAC)

Group 2 Signaler (RCAC)

CC and Troop Leader Instructor

[ January 02, 2004, 07:43 AM: Message edited by: BadgerDog ]

[Consequences of "Front Upper Hull Penetration"?]

This is just my opinion, but I think there's some serious damage modeling flaws as it relates to Grant M3 tanks. They remind me of the early KV1's in CMBB and are virtually indestructible even at 10-20 meters. It's an unfortunate anomaly which I hope is addressed in a future patch as it contributes to unbalanced game play.

I have a movie file from a PBEM match (large 2 Mb) that I'd be happy to send anyone who emails a request. Bottom line... at 16-70 meters with multiple side lower hull penetrations at full 90 degree broadside (and a miss... how does a tank master weapon miss at 16 meters?) ... three PZIII's (50mm/L42) didn't even appear to dent three Grants, which calmly traversed there turrets and blew away the PZIII's.

It sure creates strange game play balance. Kind of reminds me of those Russian KV1's in CMBB. Given that range and side armour thickness exposed on the M3's, I would have thought they'd have been toast..... play the movie for yourself and check the penetration tables and distances... let me know what do you think.

Regards,

Badger

badger@tacticalgamer.com

[Shermans Don't Explode??!!]

As an old Sherman crewman, I find this topic disturbing....

Regards,

Badger

Trained on Sherman (M4A2E8) & Centurion

Group 3 Gunner (RCAC)

Group 2 Driver Mechanic Tracked (RCAC)

Group 2 Signaler (RCAC)

CC and Trooper Leader Instructor

[Enhanced Tracers?]

I've been having a hard time seeing the tracers in CMAK, especially since they've reduced the ability to see some target lines when being fire upon.

I've been trying to find the mod that improves the visibility of tracers, but haven't been able to locate it.

Can someone provide me a link for something that's compatible in CMAK?

Thanks

Regards,

Badger

[Gridded terrain for CMAK?]

Ok, need some help here....

I see several versions of different kinds of gridded and hex terrain for CMAK.

Which download at CMODS is the closest thing to Captain Wacky's old CMBB work, which was excellent and I really got used to using in CMBB.

I have the registered final version of CMAK, so I need the BMP set for it.

Thanks for everyone's feedback...

Regards,

Badger

[Long Overdue and a little rushed but NEW MODS NOW ON CMHQ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!]

Am I to assume from this title that this particular mod is ONLY for CMBO and not CMAK?

MB_GEM_CMBO_FlaKtrack_Pack.zip

Regards,

Badger

[Any Canadians get CMAK yet?]

Arrived in Toronto (Stouffville) today....

Regards,

Badger

[Any Canadians get CMAK yet?]

Ordered mine on Wednesday; November 19; 2003 at 2:31 PM.... haven't seen anything yet here in Toronto ...

I think we're being punished...

Regards,

Badger

[It's shipping]

Originally posted by stalingrd:

Really quick delivery to Seattle

Ordered Wednesday night, got it today (Monday)

Good job on sending it priority mail, 2-3 days anywhere in the US. (don't count sunday of course)

Ugh!... ordered mine on Wednesday; November 19; 2003 at 2:31 PM.... haven't seen anything yet...

I think we're being punished...

Regards,

Badger

[It's shipping]

Originally posted by Madmatt:

Shipment confirmation emails are something the warehouse began doing a few months ago.

Madmatt

Hmmm.. I got an order receipt confirmation, but not a shipment confirmation. Are they one and the same?

Ordered it the day it was released, but haven't seen it yet here in Toronto.

Regards,

Badger

[ December 06, 2003, 04:51 PM: Message edited by: BadgerDog ]

[Looking for new infantry tactics]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

I can see new possibilities opening up for gamey jeep rush tactics.

Michael

Recce jeeps are gamey? No way!!!!

Regards,

Badger

[It's shipping]

Originally posted by Madmatt:

Pre-orders are always the first to ship out and they are indeed on their way even now.

Madmatt

Thanks Matt ....

Looking forward to some Xmas holiday fun....

Regards,

Badger

ps: Does anyone know if a common CMBB/CMAK registered owner can start either game with the CD from either game in the drive? Sure would be convenient when playing multiple PBEM games from both releases.

[ December 04, 2003, 08:08 AM: Message edited by: BadgerDog ]

[Not a game?]

Is Playnet (WWIIOL) still in Chapter 11?

Regards,

Badger

[Turn Rates]

FYI........

Old thread - Why are tanks turning so slow?

Originally posted by flamingknives:

Many WWII era tanks could not neutral steer, that is run both tracks in opposite directions. Instead, they braked one track whilst running the other - this slows things down quite a bit. The Tiger (PzKw VI) is notable as being the first that could.

Originally posted by MikeyD:

I've found 'move-and-turn' instead of 'pivot-in-place' goes more smoothly.

Originally posted by redwolf:

Mattias, it is not a bug. On turns in fast speed the TacAI automatically rewrites the movement path to have more radius. So you end up with different waypoints that you plotted.

Originally posted by BadgerDog:

These are good observations. The Sherman (M4A2E8) had no "pivot turn" or as some call it "neutral turn" capability. As a Sherman driver, I'd have to perform a move forward followed by a hard tiller bar action (left or right) to get her to turn. It wasn't a turn in place, but rather an actual turn while moving forward or backward, so there was always a displacement of the position you were in to get the Sherman pointed in a different direction. It was very slow if all the Crew Commander wanted me to do was turn 90 degrees, but stay in the same spot as a fire position. It was a damn pain in the A&& to have to rock forward and backward over at least a minute or more, just to get the bow around.

When moving at high speeds and cranking the tiller bar for a hard left or right, it was much faster, but the turn radius was wide and often there was an overshoot, which really ticked off some Crew Commanders because frequently he'd end up in a fire position that wasn't what he wanted. So, he'd have to get the driver to start "jockeying" (see above stationary turn) into the correct facing position.

Don't know of this helps, but I do find CMBB's turning code pretty close to real life.

Regards,

Badger

[Alright ya refreshen' monkey's, v1.03 patch is now up!]

Originally posted by Joques:

Is everybody busily trying to find fault with v1.03, or is or game simply as perfect as it can possibly be?

I like it....

Of course I was happy with v1.02 and even v1.01.

Perhaps I'm just too easy to please....

Maybe I should become more cynical and demand more for my $50 bucks worth of entertainment.

IMHO, it's probably the best money I've spent in years on software gaming entertainment. It's definitely returned the highest level of personal enjoyment for me. Thanks BFC.....

Regards,

Badger

[ June 12, 2003, 08:05 AM: Message edited by: BadgerDog ]

[Well, so long fellas. . .]

Originally posted by Vader's Jester:

My wife has ran into some serious medical issues , and it has kept me away from the PC as I wish to spend more time with her.

You certainly have your life priorities in proper order. (Big Salute)

Please accept my best wishes for her to experience a rapid recovery.

I will miss reading your many excellent posts.

Regards,

Badger

[Andrew Fox...and others...did you know that WW II REALLY HAPPENED?]

Originally posted by Engel:

That SMG carried by the guy on the right looks like a Sten, judging by the barrel shape. Airdrops by the SOE?

Absolutely..... I'd recognize her anywhere. Spent a lot of nights sleeping beside our Sherman hugging that piece of kit.

It was the first SMG that I qualified and carried it as a Sherman crew personal weapon until it was replaced by the 9mm Sterling SMG. It was the cheapest machined piece of weaponry I ever used. I believe it was made that way for its mass production appeal and speed of manufacture. I understand a LOT were exported for use by various allied forces and resistance units, which is one of the reasons it was made in 9mm so they could steal Axis ammo destined for their own SMGs. On the 35 yard range we would spray and pray as its accuracy was dismal. We were often cautioned about dropping it when loaded, since even with the safety on, it easily came off and there was a possibility that the Sten would hit on it's butt end and it would fire automatically as the bolt jerked backward then forward.

The Sterling was better, but still a long way from the modern SMG technology.

Regards,

Badger

[Panther bogging?]

Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq):

You always have a chance to bog. It not only represents getting stuck but also mechanical breakdown.

That's interesting, I didn't know that .....

Maybe that explains why I had a Half Track "bog" immobile on flat open terrain on a sunny dry day. It might have been a "breakdown", but it would be nice if the software at least gave a message to delineate this so I can beat on the "B" Echelon mechanics.

It couldn't be any worse then the Centurion tank where we often joked about 4 hours of maintenance for 1 hour of driving, just to keep the critter serviceable.

Regards,

Badger

[New Nvidia drivers out that seem to work.]

Need some advice....

I just upgraded my Nvidia graphics card drivers to the latest version 43.45.

Now, CMBB runs like a slide show. With the previous version (v41.09) on exactly the same hardware configuration below, it ran very smooth for all map scrolling, even on the highest detail settings for smoke etc.

Should I try the new drivers mentioned in this thread?

Intel® Pentium® 4 processor 1.70 GHz

Intel® D850GB Motherboard with 300 Watt Power Supply

512 MB RDRAM 800MHz RAMBUS Memory(4 DIMMS x 128MB)

VisionTek (128 Mb) GeForce 4 Ti4600 AGP Graphics Card

VisionTek Graphics Driver XP Version 6.14.01.4345

Windows XP Professional SP1 (Patched) (DirectX v9.0)

Regards,

Badger

[Will some of the FUN be put back ??]

CMBB isn't fun? :eek:

So, what does that make me if I am having fun with it? :confused:

I think I better make a pilgrimage to the mountain top and re-evaluate what I'm doing wrong.

Regards,

Badger