Bone_Vulture

Just to be sure: are we talking of stationary targets here? If so, then the initial argument is correct. But firing on a moving target... I'd find it probable that the rounds could miss even after the target has been "zeroed".

I'd like to add another angle to the discussion: assaulting a tank with a grenade requires quite disciplined action: you need to chuck the grenade inside the tank, between the threads or between panels. The point is - a tank probably can't be harmed id a grenade is thrown at it. In comparison, assaulting with a molotov is vastly easier. You only need to get relatively close to the tank, so the thrown molotov will both hit a critical spot and shatter. Yes, I know the CM animation is an abstraction, but there's a clear difference in the difficulty between assaulting with these two weapons. Perhaps in future releases grenade assaults would only take place if A) The assaulting team is not supressed in any way The team is of at least regular experience. This way, the skill and risk taking related to the grenade assault would be simulated better.

Judging by what I have read, most likely it were the penal companies that were thrown into the fire. I reefuse to believe that they were told bluntly to "defuse mines by walking on them" - more likely they were sent as the first wave to assault fortified enemy positions.

Two slightly different tanks. According to the excel chart, the Ferdinand is available from July '43, and the Elephant from April '44. No other discernible differences except an MG added to the Elephant.

Signature changed accordingly. I found the line to be a bit morbid, remembering the movie "JFK", but 'twas very witty indeed. [EDIT] Oh yeah, and remember that the weight is on "comedy".... Anti-"comedy". That's "comedy" as in "is that a 88/L71 or are you just happy to see me?". [ April 19, 2004, 03:58 PM: Message edited by: Bone_Vulture ]

*Whips out a Tokarev* Whaaat! I will not hear this counter-revolutionary disinformation! The antitank rifle of the Great Patriotic Army of United Workers will penetrate the front of any German armor. If not the first shot, then the second! UUUURRRRAAAAAA!! :mad:

HAHAHA

Well, it's the basis of propaganda. Probably had a better impact on troop morale than distributing a leaflet that states, "meet this fascist tank and you're pretty much toast. Run away, comrade!".

So, technically so this diagram states, "comrades! We can take out the fascist Ferdinand when the magic AT gun rounds bombard it from all sides at the same time!"

"Top penetration - no serious damage"

Allow players to manually aim the tank/artillery guns. Someone actually suggested this some time ago.

I hink the guns were hauled with the same heavy transports like the rest of the big guns (like the German halftrack tow vehicle, can't remember the designation). The gun mounting is a bít half-assed in CM, anyway. Compare the penetration to any other German heavy gun, like the 88/L71 ot 75/L70. You'll notice the same proportions.

A single hint: Quit whining about the infantry. They were downgraded to realistic, from the CM:BO übermensch that could assault an MG nest over open ground without a drop of sweat.

I just realized you can also find shirt descriptions of FO vehicles here.

Hmm... I think the stealth skill grants the squads an all-round improvement in quiet movement, although it doesn't matter if they're rushing or assaulting. But when maneuvering carefully (move or move to contact), I'm certain the squads produce less sound or visual contacts to the enemy.

Here's another suggestion: in future releases, if the molotov potency cannot be altered then how about trimming the squad AI, so that they'd never try to use molotovs on buttoned armor and such, when a hand grenade might work better.

Again... I'd like to see that happen in CM without the infantry getting chopped to pieces in seconds. Well, you can kinda protect your vehicles by setting them close to forests or other good soft cover, so your MG's and such can open fire on all forces trying to approach the vehicle.

It all falls to the question of what is good for reality, and what is good for CM.

You were incredibly fortunate, lighting something up with a molotov... Normally I'm lucky if I set up a couple of brush fires with a freakin' napalm rocket barrage in very dry conditions.

:confused: :confused:

Even though using the withdraw command might panic or break your squads, they will head to waypoint you've given, unless they become pinned and choose to crawl towards nearest cover. Also, pinned troops will jump up and run when a withdraw order is given, which is quite useful.

Were the guns padlocked, or why was there some other reason you didn't embark them during setup? :confused: Oh yeah, and operating soft-ish vehicles anywhere near where heavy artillery is falling is just begging for trouble. I once landed a 152mm shell from my ISU-152 next to a pair of my opponent's armored cars. Knocked them both out solid. The clue: infantry might survive the bombardment, even if it means losing half their manpower or more, but vehicles that are knocked out become 100% worthless.

Perhaps the Molotov entity was built from the code of a mortar smoke round, with all the original damage figures remaining.

I'm trying to figure the benefits of a tracked FO vs. radio spotter riding a halftrack... Well ok, if the spotter is targeted only by small arms, an armored transport will be beneficial. Otherwise, it's just a massive target for all the hostile AT assets. Just think trying to remain stationary for 3-5 turns while enemy tanks are on the loose.

Infantry smoke would indeed be useful, but it'd make my life a bit too easy. Since lack of LOS is an impenetrable barrier against direct fire, it'd be like a tiny force field for static squads' protection.