Jump to content
Battlefront is now Slitherine ×

White Phosphorus

Members
  • Posts

    194
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by White Phosphorus

  1. Originally posted by Panzer76:

    No, in CM it is automatically assumed that the AFV at all times have the correct ammo loaded. There is no penalty involved when changing targets without having fired the shot. Maybe we will see this modeled in CM3.

    In 1.01 I have seen tanks unload He at hard targets as a first shot. Then unload AP on the same exact target. For consecutive shots.
  2. Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

    keke,

    And yes, there were Soviet officials who wanted to attack the Nazis, but that is also irrelevant.

    Steve

    Tukachevski was one of them, and he was resposible for developing the offensive doctrine, he also got PURGED! If Stalin was so bent on conquering Europe, why would he kill all those Generals that would help him get it? Hitler groomed his army for offense, Stalin butchered it.

    Even if the Soviets did consider to attack Germany, who isn't to say that it was a preemtive strike against German aggression. Stalin was aware of German troop concentrations before the attack, he just missed the date of it. By a year or so.

  3. Some good quotes there.

    " We are pledged to destroy Fascism. German fascism is no worse than any other Fascism. The only country in the world which recognises and destroys Fascism in any disguise is Russia – but it is not a matter of nationality, you know. Nationality is not important to us. We did not hare Germans – or Italians or Chinese or Negroes. Oh no. We do not think Russians are better than other people, except perhaps that Russians have a system which seeks to destroy Fascism. We will make Russia strong and secure – not to impose our will on other peoples but to defend men against Fascism wherever it shows itself. Russia must first be made strong and secure. That is a good sense. That is logic. We have nothing against capitalist democracy, except perhaps that it turns Fascist so easily when something goes wrong with the machinery.’

    The bold part sure gets thrown around alot nowadays.

  4. Originally posted by Bertram:

    "just executing them" would be to the advantage of the side whose units where captured at the moment. Captured units give twice the points (I believe, more anyway) of killed ones, so it would be a usufull tactic to shoot your own troops once captured by the enemy.

    Well if the enemy has enough firepower and ammunition to hunt down captured individual squads, you are pretty screwed anyways.

    If you ask me, not being able to fire near them is just as gamey as purposely killing them. Because both issues revolve around POINTS. And since when has combat mission been about POINTS. This game is about tactics and realism. I am quite surprised that in this case tactics have been sacrificed for the sake of POINTS.

  5. Well diesels have glow plugs in them to make starting easy, although on cold mornings the battery has to do some work, but it's not a big problem. The real problem is that Diesel oil is too heavy, and has a nasty tendency to congeal in cold weather. You've got to put more j-4 in it as the temperature goes down.

  6. Originally posted by wwb_99:

    The problem is, Beckman, that IRL there were such things as positions nearly unhittable from direct fire. Therefore CMBB should simulate such positions, which it does quite well.

    How to defeat such positions? Use alternate tactics. Like targeting your DF HE on the hill slope just in front of the position, keeping thier heads down. Suppressing them with MG fire. Or call in indirect fire on the position to take out the fieldpiece.

    In any case, it is not a bug. It is a good deployment.

    WWB

    But it is not simulated. The game does not know that such a position exists. The Tac AI doesn't know that such a position exists, and the computer opponent doesn't know that such a position exists. And if you trust the game tools, you will not know that such a position exists either. Various positions are simulated and explained through special tags and exposure/tohit ratings, but in this case the game completely ignores the fact that the gun is in a special position. And continues to operate as if the gun is out in the open.
  7. This happens in CMBB already. I like to check the kills after every battle. And I noticed that often times an individual squad from the same platoon in the same ambush position firing at pretty much the same enemy will score 2x 3x 4x and even 5x as many kills then the other squads that were right next to them the entire time.

    Same thing with tanks. In one scenario with the Nash horns on a ridge, I swarmed them with T-34s. And one tank took out all 3 of them, then scored 46 enemy casualties and a mortar. The next best tank had something like 16 casualties under his belt. All tanks were running around in a big mob.

  8. If it isn't a bug, then why isn't the TacAI aware of it, or the game engine, or the computer AI. The game thinks, and tells you that everything is fine when it isn't. I mean it gives you LOS and good exposure ratings, virtual tankers don't mind being blown up repeatedly even though they run for the hills when facing enemy armor in a bad situation, the computer doesn't attempt to do anything to prevent it's tanks from being destroyed, it continues to waste ammo.

  9. They seem to treat it like it's tungsten. They refuse to fire it at targets even at 40m range, instead opting for HE. And when they run out of HE they go for AP. At that range a single canister round could save 10 HE rounds which can be used at both long and short ranges, but tankers consider it to be less valuable then canister.

    At first I thought that maybe it is because I'm firing it at entrenched troops. But I ran a test where I gave the tanks nothing but canister and the infantry either got very upset after the first round, or got killed. So why do tanks go through their entire ammo load before going for the easy way?

  10. Originally posted by coe:

    Here's one, so I had a veteran StuG IIIB

    hiding behind a house....and a buttoned up KV-1

    comes up the road and by it, in fact it stops

    right in front of the StuG and the StuG lets him

    have it at I believe it was 10 meters

    No damage...it was a flank shot too. the KV

    turns and polishes him off

    actually have you noticed, point blank shots sometimes are less effective than shots that are lets say from 200 yards out? any reason why?

    The metal of the shell is not strong enough to withstand the kinetic energy of a point-blank shot and shatters. You will notice that some T-34 models have this problem. The penetration figures for close range are lower.
×
×
  • Create New...