Bone_Vulture

Some time ago, I remember reading a post on these forums where the writer claimed that the penetrating qualities of a HEAT charge are only achieved, if some sort of metal projectile is driven into the armor with the power of the explosion's jet stream. On the other hand, Wikipedia's take on the Munroe effect seems to suggest that the heat and intensity of the plasma jet alone is enough to penetrate the armor. So, must a HEAT charge be coupled with a "metal head" of some sort to achieve its penetrative qualities, or not?

Time is always the decisive factor in assault battles. Given enough turns, the attacker will slowly grind the defences to dust and will almost without a doubt win. Personally, my decent time setting is about 30 variable turns on a medium map with slightly rugged terrain, and 1000 base points.

This has always intrigued me: did howitzers that were meant for indirect support role have the sights necessary for direct fire ready?

I'd like to add that minor HE shell blasts (meaning less than medium off-screen artillery does) rarely shake infantry squads for long, especially if the blast results in no casualties.

I do not wish to sound snide, but it's a waste to use engineers against such a frail target as a Marder. That tin can can barely withstand a hand grenade, and most of the models don't even have an MG to ward off pesky meat puppets. If your troops enjoy a superior cover contrast (your troops in a building, the tank on an open street), you might want to just set them a cover arc so that they will attempt to target the tank just when it is passing by. If you set the tank as a target manually, be sure to give your troops a run/advance order away from the tank, deeper in to the building. With a proper delay set with a pause command, your troops will attempt to chuck explosives at the tank once or twice, and fail or not, they'll withdraw to safety in the end. Giving a follow order will likely lead to catastrophy, especially if the tank is nimble and wary of contact.

Continuing the second question: Submachineguns are not versatile enough to be a modern infantryman's weapon - considering that the idea behind assault rifles was to find a combination of a bolt action rifle's range and accuracy, and the SMG's firepower. Today, submachineguns are most likely issued to special branches that do not take part in standard frontline maneuvers, like combat divers and military police / counter-saboteur forces.

Sometimes the most simple solutions are also the most effective.

Are we talking of the post-WW1 R-35 here? If the Syrians used horridly outdated equipment like that, they deserved to get their asses kicked.

Or satchel charges. Considering the rest of the molotov discussion, I think the only way to actually witness an MC taking out a tank is to duel against an opponent who tends to make very brash armor maneuvers - it'll likely take a panzer spearheading through urban terrain to have enough Soviet infantry squads in vicinity to attempt and perhaps succeed with molotov assaults.

Harry, if you're looking for lighter division level gaming, Hearts of Iron II is great entertainment. Also probably one of the best games to experiment alternate endings to WW2, although the AI is still no match to a serious war gamer.

You know, because of the conspiracies?

I find it improbable that there are people on this forum that've visited the war museums of Prague. Or maybe there is - I suggest you try a thread with a better title, like "Ne good war museums @ Prague? ONLY EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS PLZ!".

Utilize Google, dammit. Here's a list I found after a minute of browsing. Includes several museums of interest - you'll likely find more specific details with Google.

Well, Jadgtiger wasn't a flop exactly, just overkill for the western front. And it has been discussed before how the nazi masters were obsessed with propaganda-worthy weapons.. Wunderwaffen.

Another reason for me losing: denying Occam's razor. If out of many options there's the most logical and sound tactic, it's usually the right one. .. And yet I opt for riskier, more daring tactics, which again results in needless casualties.

Considering that the "Blitz myth?" thread has already spanned beyond a 120 replies, including numerous long winded posts by JasonC, I'd say that this debate has indeed become heated, or at least warmed up. Also, thank you for your reply. Although I was aware of the old age of the Lewis auto rifle, I never knew it was used as a squad level weapon in WWI.

An example please?

I've ebeen a lazy reader lately, and I still haven't figured out what on Earth has people so riled up about.

Preferably ones that don't require registration.

Solutions: 1) Sacrificial armored car / halftrack assets 2) Insanely deep infantry probe before moving the tanks forth.

By today's standards, I'm stone cold sober.

Just like I said. :cool:

Like it has been discussed before, aggressive recon is critically important in CM.

Actually, the clock starts running for the Battlefront team once they throw the bone. After that, the screams of "are we there yet? Are we there yet?" from a thousand crazy fanboys in the backseat won't stop until the final product is out. ... So I'm confident that the BFC will only start serving teasers once they're confident that they have a reliable release schedule.

I'm not a WW2 wiz, but amongst my close friends whom I play against I tend to be the most enlightened one. Especially when attacking, I sometimes let my ego rise above common sense and take needless risks. And when the manure hits the fan, I try to hammer myself through, burning reinforcements instead of opting for a fresh backup tactic.