Jump to content

Bone_Vulture

Members
  • Posts

    1,250
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Posts posted by Bone_Vulture

  1. 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?

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. Originally posted by JasonC:

    I think you'd find it hard to reproduce that outcome in CM. The Finns would do a better job with "hand grenades".

    Or satchel charges. tongue.gif

    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.

  5. Originally posted by GRUMLIN:

    No you numpty, I want to know the recommendations of grogs who use this board! I can google with the best of them, but won't know as much about if a place has an awesome tank collection or three buttons and a tin cup.

    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!". :rolleyes:
  6. Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

    You're lazier than you thought - as I don't see evidence that anyone is "riled". Apologies if I've given that impression; its really a matter of semantics more than anything else.

    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.

  7. 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.

×
×
  • Create New...