Jump to content

EightInchArty

Members
  • Posts

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Posts posted by EightInchArty

  1. Can't understand, why write a review of game genre, you have no intrest of. This fella is more at home with C&C IV; The death of Mouse, than HC strategy and tactics. Don't these people have decent assistant staff, to have a review writer for strategy games, that has played more than one game of RISK?

    If you don't play the games like Steel Panthers, Combat Mission, Strategic Command or Pacific War, (NOT a complete list, not by a long shot) How are you able to say this is load of... and this is very good? You don't have a perspective.

    The point is, that these reviews are written to potential customers that, in case of game like CM, are strategy game fans. Writer therefore should be one as well. After all, I don't go around badmouthing Unreal Turnament 2003, just becouse I haven't got slightes intrest of the game.

    Hope nobody buyes ad-space from these people.

  2. Germans were most impressed about the mobility of T-34. Wide tracks and good transmission.

    Stories goes around of times and times again germans anchoring their defences to "un-passable" terrain, only to find out, that T-34 could attack from semi frozen marshland, that would have bogged Mk IV down to turret ring.

    Wasn't the suspension desingned by american named Christie?

    In talks about M4 vs T-34, I can say that what M4 loses in crosscountry ability it wins in commander. Until the 3-man turret arrived in '43, the T-34's running in to ambush were usually gutted.

  3. Played early, (Dec 1941) QB vs AI as ruskies. Got a meeting Engagement, 1000pts Comb. Arms.

    I got 4 tanks; 2 T-34, 1 KV-1, a support (76mm) version of T-26 and comppany of inf. By turn 2 the KV-1 was bogged and immobilized by snow, turn 3 T-26 took a hit from Pz II and was out, but the T-34's were ruling the battlefield. Between them (as computer surendered by turn 15) they got 4 Pz II's, 2 Pz (38)t's, a Pz IV and nearly 120 inf kills (inc. arty FO and a mortar. All other units got something around 12 inf kills.

  4. Originally posted by Karl_Smasher:

    The history channel goof up alot. According to 'Weapons Testing Ground at Kummersdorf'

    by Wolfgang Fleischer, the Tiger was immune to the standard soviet 76mm from all directions and ranges.

    It depends on too many facts to be reliable. AT rifles were able to penetrate vision blocks and gunnery optics of Tiger tank and thats where you aimed. Same goes to AT- guns. You can aim the thing where you want to, if you are half deasent gunner, so pure armor mm- reading vs gun penetration is academic at best.

    [ October 14, 2002, 07:40 PM: Message edited by: EightInchArty ]

  5. The famous 76.2L52 was a true multipurpose gun; Artillery, AA, AT and Tank Gun. In fact SU 76's were served as SP-Artillery or SP- AT guns as needed.

    Germans found them superior to their Pak 50 guns and captured AT pieces were used widely until arival of superior Pak 75 gun. According of Franz Kurowski's Panzer Aces, the gun was lethal to almost every tank in arsenal at ranges closer than 500m, and could kill Pz III at 1000m.

×
×
  • Create New...