General Jack Ripper
-
Posts
2,326 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
21
Posts posted by General Jack Ripper
-
-
On 3/31/2020 at 7:37 AM, usgubgub said:
frequently moving into obvious enemy kill zones,
They may be obvious to YOU, but if the unit in question has no contact markers then it is not obvious to THEM.
Please feel free to enclose some screenshots or video of the incident in question.
-
If the SMG ammo disappears from the unit's inventory, they will almost never pick up the SMG, probably because they don't want to pick up a weapon they have no ammo for.
The guy with the pistol will pick up the SMG because he at least has a few rounds available, thus making the SMG 'useful' for him.
On 4/1/2020 at 2:35 PM, Erwin said:Yes. I regularly use crews with pistols as medics as then they will PU SMG's as well as other weapons.
Vehicle Crews and XO teams make for great medics. I once had a US Co XO Team armed with a Thompson, a BAR, an M1919A6, a Garand, and a Bazooka.
Made me feel like I had Rambo on my team!
-
On 3/7/2020 at 1:27 PM, umlaut said:
Once again:
The issue is this: They dont even see the effing tank!I would like to state to the community, please include more than 30 seconds of video when complaining about things. Either make a longer video, or give a complete text description of what happened, and why you think it happened. If possible, re-load a save game, and try again to see if the result is different.
Try taking off the cover arc and running the turn again. Try moving a shorter distance using quick, and giving a face command. Then, include all of these results into a longer video so we can all see a more complete picture of context.
Posting 30 seconds of video, and saying "ugh, this doesn't look right! wtf!!!!" doesn't help anything at all.
-
On 4/3/2020 at 4:30 AM, Aragorn2002 said:
Personally I don't like to see them the on-map artillery list. Too much overkill. Such guns easily bring down a whole building.
As opposed to the Sturmtiger which is already in CMFB? Is that too much overkill and should be removed?
I've never seen someone argue for withholding a unit before.
-
On 4/2/2020 at 10:59 PM, BluecherForward said:
I notice that you make no criticism of the comments above that make jokes about the systematic - and officially permitted - raping of an entire female population - including children.
I see none of these jokes you mention.
Are you off your meds?
-
On 4/2/2020 at 10:59 PM, BluecherForward said:
The point of my original post was twofold - that films of the use of heavy artillery weapons in the streets of Berlin were pure propaganda produced after the battle was over and - secondly - that people need to be careful about glorifying the communist "liberators."
Asking for an artillery piece to be included in a game is not in any way related to your supposed second point.
-
Superficial similarities mean nothing around here.
-
Just finished 'The Savior Generals' by Victor Davis Hanson.
It never occurred to me much before how the divergence of political opinion from military reality can so quickly destroy what would otherwise be a successful military action, in the case of Tecumseh Sherman.
I also really enjoyed the part about Matthew Ridgeway, being a general I know little about, and now feel keen to correct that shortcoming.
...and I feel a kind of kindred spirit in Belisarius. I think he and I would have been friends, of a sort. The ability to simply throw the book out the window and do what's best to win is a skill few commanders posses, and even if they posses it, they rarely exercise it in light of outside considerations.
-
On 2/24/2020 at 12:52 PM, Ales Dvorak said:
Recently when? He last visited forum on dec.19th. Usually he is almost daily poster.
Emrys had recently had some health problems.
Hope he's okay.
-
On 3/14/2020 at 8:55 AM, John Kettler said:
And that's how I got your mother to propose to me!
Regards,John Kettler
I got a real scalp massage once. Can confirm gif is accurate.
-
On 3/9/2020 at 7:44 PM, Erwin said:
Problem with many/at least some scenarios is that there isn't enuff time for that.
I don't know what metric scenario designers use when determining the time available in a scenario, but I wish they'd get a new one.
-
Well, we can forget whatever I said in the briefing, because I don't think things are going to work out the way I thought they would.
- Do not use the plan as a script.
I'm now fairly certain whatever changes were made to wooden bunkers have rendered them immune to anything short of direct fire 75mm. I've expended both 81mm mortars and 75mm off-map artillery against them, to no effect.
Looks like we're doing this one the hard way:
Sorry for the wait.
-
On 11/17/2019 at 8:47 AM, BornGinger said:
Does anyone on the forum know anything about the fire rate with which the AI calls in artillery?
I've been playing for years, and I don't have a clue.
The AI does seem to prefer short or quick barrages, but that could just be the fact I don't really present any large targets for them to shoot at.
-
On 3/4/2020 at 10:47 AM, danfrodo said:
And why does this always have to degenerate into personal criticisms or conspiracy theories? They are a small team and simply can't do it all. Are there actually people here that never worked on teams that had limited resources and had to prioritize? Had to choose what to do and what to delay?
It's inevitable when people are passionate about a subject.
If anything, it should be taken as a compliment that Combat Mission is a good enough game for people to get their panties in a twist about it.
Dispassionate mediocrity is the final death knell for a game franchise. -
On 3/3/2020 at 8:53 AM, Sublime said:
ah bless all your black poisoned dwarf hearts =D
*raises glass*
-
On 3/5/2020 at 7:32 PM, Bud Backer said:
I know. Glib, but psychology is a part of warfare, perhaps not as much as tactics or logistics, or artillery but important nonetheless.
On 3/5/2020 at 8:56 PM, Erwin said:Another example was setting up an ambush that was painful for the oppo (even if it also ended up hurting you as well in terms of losses).
In my battle against BletchleyGeek, I endeavored to use psychology to cover what turned out the be a significant shortage of bodies. I was outnumbered 3:1 but managed to get him to agree to a ceasefire that granted me a Minor Victory. All because I shoveled bullets, shells, and bodies onto the ramparts in an effort to convince him he couldn't win.
If he'd refused the ceasefire I would have been forced to surrender, or at least fight a diminishing set of skirmishes while he stomped my guts out.
-
On 1/28/2020 at 7:06 PM, Bud Backer said:
For the curious, I've enclosed the final screen from the game, and some other tidbits and comments.
Congratulations, Bud.
It seems to me all you needed was a little motivation from the gallery in order to get stuck in and win.
-
23 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Egads. By that definition people have been waiting for 20 years for Space Lobsters of Doom!
Yeah. And?
Throw us a bone here Steve! Where are my neon colored laser-based space crustaceans?
Sheesh, it's like you care nothing for your real customers.
-
On 2/12/2020 at 2:49 PM, MOS:96B2P said:
My in game ranges are: Bazooka 90 meters (12 AS). Panzershreck 120 meters (15 AS).
I see you like to risk those longer ranged shots.
My understanding is that if the tank fills your entire sight picture, then it's impossible to miss. Like the side of a barn.
-
On 2/18/2020 at 4:14 PM, Aquila-SmartWargames said:
I would not think twice about buying this and hope that it will be indeed considered at some point.
It wouldn't even need to be a full title, a forces expansion pack added to the top of Red Thunder or Final Blitzkrieg (basically just porting some OOB's and equipment from one title to the other), to allow scenario designers to make hypothetical scenarios would be welcome.
-
On 2/9/2020 at 3:48 PM, civdiv said:
So serious question here. Why did the Sherman not ever receive (to my knowledge) sloped side armor. Is there a real reason why this never happened? I mean six inches of slope (30 degrees) would have resulted in an armor benefit of around 30%.
You are not supposed to get shot in the side on purpose.
On 2/10/2020 at 4:33 PM, BluecherForward said:Here's a link to that same guy doing a briefing on the Sherman tank:
I don't know how to post the whole video as danfrodo did above.
Gotcha.
The Sherman was designed with an armor basis intended to be immune to the 37mm PaK38 AT gun from all possible aspects (that being the standard issue German at gun in 1941 when the tank was designed). The side armor is thick enough to achieve this design specification without needing to be sloped in order to meet it's overall weight requirements. Later versions of the Sherman had reinforcing armor pieces welded over the ammo storage in the hull side, but generally speaking, you want that internal volume when your overall ETO command is asking for an ammo capacity of 90 rounds in each tank so you don't need to modify your design to make sloped armor. It's much easier to weld extra plates on at the factory instead of re-casting or re-welding the entire hull.
I think the biggest consideration people need to keep in mind about the Sherman is that it was effectively a pre-war design, that was modified many times, but still in 1945 it was a pre-war design. Design of the M3 medium tank was finished on February 1st, 1941, and the order to design and build the M4 medium tank was given at the same time. The only real requirements for M4 was to be shorter in height than M3, to retain the M3 hull and chassis to the utmost extent, to have armor basis to defeat the existing AT Guns fielded by the Germans and Japanese, the addition of some type of AA protection (.50 cal), and the mounting of the 75mm main armament of the M3 in a larger rotating turret.
This wasn't a tank that had a carefully considered design process stretching for a year or two, the Sherman went from T6 Prototype to M4 production tank in about five months.
-
On 2/19/2020 at 8:39 AM, Bulletpoint said:
When I play PBEM and I see my opponent's infantry off in the distance walking along at a snail's pace, I know I'm going to win. Haven't been wrong about that yet, and I don't even play meeting engagements where it's a footrace to get to the objectives.
If it's not a footrace, then the speed of movement has no correlation to success.
Maybe you should play more capable opponents, or maybe your opponent shouldn't be moving his infantry in an easily viewable fashion.
Either way, using the Move command is not an indicator of failure.
You've got some strange sticking points.
-
Now, to the topic at hand.
I think a game focusing on the Africa Korps would be really nice.
Yep, that's about it.
-
21 minutes ago, BluecherForward said:
However, the most important were the raw materials. Aviation fuel. In 1941 r. the home production covered only 4% of the needs. Allied shipments are nearly 51% of the aviation fuel used in the Great Patriotic War, nearly 53% of gun powder and explosives. Non-ferrous metals – the help from the West is nearly 82% of copper, 90% of aluminum, 75% of nickel, 50% of lead. Without those raw materials the wartime industry is flat on it's belly.
It has been mentioned, occasionally, that the British would have lost the Battle of Britain without American aviation fuel.
One thing to remember is that the United States was the single largest producer of petroleum products in the world during WW2 by a HUGE (we're talking something along the lines of five or six to one) margin, and the largest producer of refined petroleum products as well, especially aviation fuel, gasoline, diesel, bunker oil, etc.
If oil was the most important operational resource, then being on America's side was the single best guarantee of operational and logistical success. You can fight without it, but you probably wouldn't win without it.
Infantry not using nearest entrance to buildings
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted
This. For the love of god.