Jump to content

sand digger

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About sand digger

  • Rank
    Senior Member


  • Location
    Brisbane, Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. As far as cease firing or surrendering goes, Hitler's usual 'fight to the end' instructions are ignored? You want realistic............
  2. Off topic much? WTF has a historical discussion on certain events in WW2 got to do with the OP's query? Absolutely nothing you selfish pricks.
  3. To continue my rant, it was the Allies who favoured the use of tanks and other mechanical assistance for the infantry, including tanks converted to carry them, in WW1. Not the Germans who had the same problem as any infantry which was basically a limit to human endurance where transport and other mechanical go forward assistance was not provided. Having a fancy name like 'stormtrooper' made no difference actually, all armies had their attack specialists and shock troops by whatever name and they all could only go forward on foot for a limited time. The relevance of all this is very much se
  4. The quote that follows was not from a German and it was made and put into practice in WW1, not WW2. All arms in WW1? Yes and the quote is still applicable today. the true role of infantry was not to expend itself upon heroic physical effort, not to wither away under merciless machine-gun fire, not to impale itself on hostile bayonets, but on the contrary, to advance under the maximum possible protection of the maximum possible array of mechanical resources, in the form of guns, machine-guns, tanks, mortars and aeroplanes; to advance with as little impediment as possible; to be relieved as
  5. Geez, the German fanboism is strong here, everyone else must have been stupid by default too.
  6. Lol at the comment re Cents not doing any tank -v- tank action in Korea. The T34 was mince meat for the Cent's 20 pounder gun, plenty of records of that including lifting T34 turrets off with HE. Basically we had post war UN tanks -v- WW2 veterans used by amateurs, the outcome was predictable and nothing much to get excited about.
  7. Fixed, will leave this in case someone else has a similar problem. Misplaced exe file was the key, for some reason it was not grouped with the other files mentioned, a search found it, a click and the download started.
  8. Activation was OK but then the problem seems to involve a failure to unzip the files, one setup file and five brz files. Message goes something like 'Compressed (zipped) folders were unable to create the specified directory (D:\CMRedThunder). Ensure that the directory does not already exist and that the path entered is valid'. That's where the procedure came to an abrupt halt. Anti virus does not seem to be the problem although there should be an exe file there somewhere shouldn't there? Can't find one anyway. Have done a couple of un and reinstals, same old. I'm lost and very frustrated.
  9. Yeh, variations of speed of movement would have to factored in and I agree that the AI would be more involved which I guess is part of the idea eg for that minute in WEGO when you sit back and curse your idiots for acting dumb. Or when you are concentrating on watching the left flank while those on the unsupervised right take continuous fire until they panic and run when your intention was merely to move them safely as far as that was possible.. Academic discussion I suppose but one that I find interesting.
  10. Probably been suggested before but I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds what's available in the present Movement menu often to be inappropriate for what is trying to be achieved. More appropriate to civilian movement than to military personnel. The entire present Movement menu could be replaced with order type commands eg Move to Sighting, Move to Contact, Move to Engage which respectively would mean stop moving when enemy sighted, stop when enemy contacted and engage him, and, engage the enemy while continuing to move. These sorts of orders would reduce the amount of micromanaging and
  11. Wondering what an off topic post is when the topic itself is off topic, hmmmm.
  12. Looking at this video reminded me of the high/low feature, 1.00 on. It gets a bit ridiculous IMHO. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEOg4m_sLVo
  13. Can see your reason for suggesting that but it seems a bit picky and not relevant most times.
  14. Thanks womble, it was a useful feature which could make a heck of a difference to a game and allow some smart tactical manouvering to disable and then kill a big panzer.
  15. Reminded of this feature that was used in a Russian WW2 game a few years ago, when firing at a tank you have a choice of hitting it high or low. Very handy against a big cat if the AT gun is not going to penetrate heavy armour but can damage tracks and render the target immobile. Does CMRT have it?
  • Create New...