Bone_Vulture

... What? :confused:

Not bad, not bad at all... Although those greater reaches of rocky terrain might look a bit odd in little patches, in randomly generated maps.

Oh yeah, and Sergei: Be sure to send screenshots once the battle is over.. I'd like to see what those maps look like after some heated action.

Cry us a river.

Don't brag, you're not the only one. Also, some tanks seem to bog when traversing steep hills.

Sergei - I don't think the CM command system is that flexible. Sure, you can plan ahead, and even fine tune your commands a bit (shifting waypoints), but I find the most difficult problem to be timing. There should be a "wait for go" order, meaning that when traversing the waypoints, the ordered squad would stop at a given location, and not move 'til given "the go". This way you could set up a long string of waypoints, and still be insured that your troops will not walk by themselves to enemy fortifications if the rest of your troops are delayed due to enemy actions.

You mean... 63 tanks that all have no chance of penetrating Panther front armor?

Behold the beauty of the Finnish pasture.

Fine, fine. Since in CM a squad can never competely run out of ammo, a score like that is possible.

I'm sure a 12 men squad carries more than 147 bullets. </font>

Quite unbelievable... But I've witnessed the computer committing equally suicidal stunts before.

I take it you were playing against the computer?

So you're honestly saying that a weakened, out-of-command jaeger team in a foxhole could've withstood fire from over dozen russkie rifle teams simultaneously? Somehow I'm still more or less sceptical...

I'm sure! A single jaeger squad lacks the ammo to kill even a hundred enemy troopers. Or were the Russians armed with pine cones?

Do you mean "tank cannons" or "all cannons"? If "all cannons" then you are wrong. German infantry was using sIG-33 150mm gun. Phew... Russian infantry had only 76mm as a main arty. </font>

In CM:BO, my 37mm flak managed to take a Sherman Jumbo out after firing a ton of ineffective AP rounds... I think the tank crew bailed since the the tracks and the main gun were blown to hell.

They only throw molotovs at vehicles, and even then the results are usually less than commendable. So your situation is not much worse.

Certain flame tanks have the "burns easily" vulnerability. I don't think this was the case with KV's? :confused:

Ok, so you demonstrated the efficiency of the overwatch tactic.

Screenshots would be nice...

Like I mentioned, the total "punch" that a round possesses is a combination of it's impact velocity, diameter and mass. Obviously there are also some secondary factors like the shape of the round, it's hardness value and impact angle. What comes to wind resistance, the most important issue is the theoretical effective range of the gun. Is the round potent within the range that the gun can aim and hit targets on? The grogs can answer this one. I do not know how related the guns are exactly - my best bet is that the engineers had the design of the 75L/48 model, calculated how much more strength the new gun was supposed to have, and then worked down on the old model, reinforcing the structure to handle greater combustion pressure, and so on.

True dat. Although I might be just paranoid, but penetrating 88mm seems more lethal (the HE factor?).

Personally, I think it was an economical issue. Since Germany was running out of tungsten fast, there was a demand for a tank gun that could penetrate all enemy armor with minimal ammunition expenses. I do not quite know what you mean by the "exponential factor of wind resistance", though. If two tank rounds of varying caliber weigh the same amount (a longer round or different alloy) and have the same velocity, the round with the smaller caliber is likely to penetrate better. Of course, there is a certain minimum for this trend, as the round must have a certain carrying volume for the HE warhead, otherwise it's just a dead slug (not as fatal to the tank crew even when penetrating). [EDIT] About your first question: what exactly do you mean by "related"? [ November 28, 2003, 02:31 PM: Message edited by: Bone_Vulture ]

What the hell is a "Fünffelschnoptzel" anyway...?

I can answer the latter question. MTC makes your AFV stop as soon as it spots a new enemy. Depending on the threat, the AFV might open fire, or hit the reverse to get out of harm's way. Either way, all movement commands are cancelled the moment an enemy is spotted. With hunt command, the AFV will stop and fire if it spots new threats, and actively crawl towards the destination designated by the hunt command if it loses LOS to the target, or manages to destroy it.