sand digger

There is a danger in reading much at all into such reports, simpy because it is not known how much artillery fire was directed at tanks in the first place. You would also need to know what a tank loss actually was. One that was irrepairable? I'd guess that most tanks disabled by HE fire could be repaired because the hull etc would usually be left intact.

Yeh its part of our convict heritage to collect things that others don't take good care of. But apparently the kiwis are even better at it than we are

IIRC the Aussie quarter master returns of 1942 showed that German and Italian ammo was available and being used.

Thanks all, sounds like its worth a go when playing German in that era then. Nothing else seems to work, the 88 excluded, while other towed AT guns usually can't get close and survive long enough. IIRC there is a photo around of a MkIV in the '41 Tobruk area with its turret blown completely off by HE, so they say.

Is this modelled? The tables show only HE armour penetration figures. Its particularly relevant during that period when the Matilda shrugged off German AP and Mk III's and IV's used reverse gear a lot whenever one lumbered into sight. I was thinking that a 150mm HE dropped on a Matilda would shake it up a bit. But would it? According to CMAK.

Hmmm, they have a point, don't they

Thanks BFC for the great and continuing support

Well we could continue the 'Brens Were Not Used as Assault Weapons Because it WAS NOT in the Book and They Had a Tri/Bi-Pod' proposition. If anyone could be bothered, except those to who The Book is Everything

The [Tab] View Locked to Unit ones, brilliant Doing a hot insertion with carrier borne infantry, a manic Stuart recce 'ooh look at all those German tanks' scorching across the desert, 'clang bang' hey they're shooting at us, and hitting. Love it

Playing against the AI as in the demo is really only an introduction. Playing against a real human being by PBEM takes the game to another level. I'm a fussy picky bastard but this game gets me going [ November 14, 2004, 04:35 AM: Message edited by: sand digger ]

PBEM QB's mostly, particularly desert stuff. Can't beat playing against a human opponent, the AI sucks and you get slack playing against it. Like QB's because the puter is pretty good at doing that stuff, good terrain variety.

Yeh, the single use characteristic of some earlier British gun equipment is a real PITA. AP against infantry is not terribly effective

Ah, didn't realise that some actually didn't have MG's fitted originally, will have to keep an eye on that. I assume that its possible to check armament when purchasing.

This is peculiar, I just realised that the favourite value for money Brit tank is MG less in CMAK. What is the go here, did the indiginies steal them, are they an optional extra or what?????

Agree Redwolf.

Using them as scout vehicles has potential, do some of that borg spotting. One of the many great things about this game, there is always something to learn and develop

Just started paying attention to what these carriers do when sitting around within LOS of the ememy. They don't seem to do anything with their gun but I could be mistaken, will have to pay closer attention. Anyway, what is the go with these armoured gokarts, they have a gun, what are the ways to get them involved in the action? Besides doing a last minute flag rush or using them as AT rifle fire magnets

Another problem with attacking infantry is that they often and quickly turn to rubbish once fired on. Start crawling around instead of the normal 'fight or flight' reaction. Funny that the defenders react in a much more resolute fashion. The game is too mechanically modelled in this regard. For those who refer to WW1 style massacres it should be remembered that such 'massacres' invariably occurred when advancing over many yards of open ground for a considerable period of time, while under continuous heavy fire. Not the quick, short range stuff that is being discussed here.

This game is pretty vicious on those attacking at close range across open ground. You can do all the right things in attack and still get effectively obliterated. CMAK defenders invariably are ace shots, have nerves of steel and take no account of their own likely fate. Or so it seems

Agreed. Using QB maps also seems to be a fairer way for two human players, the luck of the draw.

Try firing for just one hour continuous with an air cooled MG, any air cooled MG

Ultra reliable and capable of continuous fire. http://www.nwha.org/news_2Q2001/news_page4.html

Good question Koenig, I wondered about that too because those I play against don't seem to regard high ground as a priority. Whereas I do, and still get beat, well when playing British in their sans HE era

'Overmodelled' is perhaps too simplistic a comment but the rate of casualties in time seems excessive in certain circumstances. Particularly considering the reaction gap ie the time which may elapse before a player may react to a fresh threat, a gap which the TacAI cannot be expected to cover. If you attack across open ground in the game you can get virtually wiped out or effectively immobilised in seconds. In the real thing it of course varies immensely. But the time frames were usually minutes, at least several, and sometimes a lot more before an attack was stopped. It also seems, unlike the game, that casualties did not dramatically increase as the attacking force got close to the defence, distances roughly around 50 meters or less. There is some sense in that, the defence can become rattled and less effective as it faces imminent death and their bullets are no more lethal at 30 meters than at 100. It also seemed to happen with some regularity that it was no easier to hit a closing target at say 30meters than it was to hit the same target at 100 meters. These are all impressions, impressions which are hard to convey in few words because of the infinite circumstances that may apply in such situations. And as far as I know there has never been a study made of the subject. [ September 29, 2004, 04:26 AM: Message edited by: sand digger ]

Spears, I sometimes feel the same way. If there is open ground for your infantry to cross and you can't blow the hell out of the enemy at the same time then it seems inevitable. Even one enemy MG can effectively wreck such an attack. The casualty rate so suffered is excessively modelled in this game when compared with the real thing it seems. On MacArthur, as far as I know he kept a big distance between himself and any place where the action was. The colourful quote, if it was actually made by him, is just that and no more