KanaljeFätter
-
Posts
29 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by KanaljeFätter
-
-
oh, Gautrek: good idea with the CMMOS mod how-to! :eek:
-
I second that.. even with my 10MB/sec :eek: connection, it can take a minute or two for the bigger ones to DL.. and when you're getting lots of mods, you have to manually start it every other minute for meybe half an hour... what a pain
-
is the act of stuffing grenades into vulnerable spots on tanks when next to it modelled in the game, or is the effect 'basically' the same at 40m as at 5m? (except of course for a range modifier like the one used in firepower calculations) Or do the squads at 5m still toss the grenades game-mechanics-wise?
-
it was also the term used for the Scandinavian volunteer divisions (SS Nordland and others)
-
I don't think the Canadians knew any of that... That seems obvious to me.. Why on Earth would they sacrifice these troops if they knew it would end in disaster? the answer is they must have been unaware of that...
-
...A tutorial that can be hard for us europeans to go through (with the tutorial in pdf on the CD) if you don't have a Visa/MC or an american bank account to pay for the real manual
:mad: -
Well they had already learned their most important lesson from the Dieppe raid: DON'T do amphibious assaults against cities. The Canadians are probably still reeling from that disasterOriginally posted by: sgtgoody (esq)The interesting thing is that as much as the U.S. fought being involved in the Med to begin with it did serve one extreemly useful purpose. It allowed the Allies to practice assaulting an enemy shoreline in an area that wouldn't lose them the war. Could you imagine the carnage that would have resulted had the allies landed in Normandy before experiencing North Africa, Sicily, and the Italian landings?
-
they have a different sets of weapons in the squads; and PzGrenadiers for example will have flamethrowers etc. Some types have more SMGs, some more LMGs etc. And the likelihood of a squad having the various infantry AT weapons (like panzerfaust) also varies...
-
thanks for the reply. Me being a relative newcomer (especially to modding
), I wasn't quite sure how to go about this. And it is quite a mess that the game has shared bmps (though less so than CMBO), but I guess that was unavoidable. *hopes that CM:AK will improve on this* Thanks again
-
how about CMx2? with a better name though, please
? BTW that LSD isn't to complicated (especially compared to designer drugs :eek: ) Hell, I could probably make something of it in my garage, with just a 13 year old's chemistry set 
. Consider that these kinds of drugs were developed by the US military in the 50s (for 'improving' their soldiers LOL), about the same time as PVC and other rather simple polymeric plastics... -
hmm.. why can't CDV distribute the guide in Europe? They already messed up BIG TIME screwing up the manual :mad: and let Battlefront do the cleaning after that mess.. I sincerely dislike CDV, almost as much as I like Battlefront
-
err I meant rid of
-
get right of Getright perhaps?
-
The CMMOS mod for CMBB of the Pz 38(T)A made by JorgeMC is nice - on the PZ 38(T)A. However, the turret part is apparently shared by the Pz38(T)E - and ONLY the turret part... this means you get a Pz 38(T)E that has a dunkelgrau body and a sandy light grey turret; looks stoopid :eek: . If someone could mention this to JorgeMC (who has, apart from this little blooper, done a great job on the '38), I would much appreciate it. Perhaps someone could make a mod for the E type that makes it look less stupid with the A type turret? It's not that I'm lazy, I just plain don't have the computer skills for this sort of thing
-
I agree, it looks very promising :eek: .. not to criticize, but for a mech attack, perhaps cut the rough terrain slightly, as Brigadier suggested? vehicles can struggle against inf if there is a lot of ambush sites etc.. this could also be a strength though
. And this map could look real good as a Northern Italy map as well (perhaps with slight modifications, but nothing big). Looks very promising indeed (NOTHING like a QB ), looking forward to playing it -
Depends on where and by who.. My experience in this is from my time in the Danish army(which has a tendency to 'make up' its own terms because of our dumb tankersOriginally posted by PzKpfw 1:More commonly refered to as APFSDS-DU
), and we do not use depleted uranium, and thats probably why its excluded from our use of the general term 'sabot'. And APDU is shorter too , and field manuals are crammed bad enough as is. But APFSDS-DU is the accepted international term I guess..
-
APDU = Armor Piercing Depleted Uranium
It was used by the Americans during Desert Storm... Uranium is extremely heavy, carrying a lot of kinetic energy with less loss to friction, and is soft so it 'melts' through almost like HEAT. Plus you can experience poisoning effects from uranium dust on penetration (though it won't kill like, say, plutonium dust would).
-
heh, what about APDU? don't think they had that in WW2 lolWe might also add HESH and APFSDS just for completeness, although no rounds of either type saw service during WW2.
-
hmm hasn't HEAT been left out? I'm no grog but HEAT is important to this day, so here goes (correct, clarify and expound etc. if need be): High Explosive Anti Tank shells contain a shaped charge that focus a beam of superheated plasma onto the armor plate, melting through. HEAT penetrations are total show-stoppers for AFVs and their crews. (I know I wouldn't like being sprayed with plasma
). HEAT can have (some) trouble with FHA and skirts; skirts trigger the plasma ray which depends on tight focus to melt through, and it will lose focus in the gap between skirt and armor. The experimental reactive armor has no effect on HEAT however, and importantly, NEITHER DOES sloping (except for increasing the depth to penetration). HEAT is used in many modern infantry AT weapons, and in modern AFV shells (alongside a host of others like Sabot and APDU) -
OM(F)G pleeeeeze don't disrespect the graphics!! Have you compared this game to other tactical wargames? The CM games are incredible leaps forward in graphics. That being said, the trees etc. displayed are modelled indirectly, so when you see a tree, the unit sees "60% Line of Sight deterioration due to trees"The locked unit view does not give me a good indication because of the graphic quality
-
well, don't forget Germany and Russia
-
I'm playing with the v1.02 (CDV) and I DID get 100% :eek: Maybe the 1.03 is involved? I reproduced yours exactly. Oh and the date was july '44 if that could somehow impact things.. :confused:
-
yes, okay, to a certain degree (and please don't argue as to how large a degree) they were replacing panzers in the late war. But.. am I the only one around here who also plays in the early and mid-war periods? :confused: Your charts are all '44ish and by then the war was already decided..
And the (at least partial) shift to turretless AFV's by the krauts was necessitated by bombing raids etc. rather than a voluntary choice. But the maint point we should be making - instead of nitpicking numbers - is that the designers of CM:AK NEED to incorporate an improved computer selection! CM:AK is the PERfect opportunity for making those kinds of tweaks. After all, it's can't be THAT huge a change to make -
yeah but the units can often see quite a bit more than you can in shoulder view..
), I wasn't quite sure how to go about this. And it is quite a mess that the game has shared bmps 
. Consider that these kinds of drugs were developed by the US military in the 50s (for 'improving' their soldiers LOL), about the same time as PVC and other rather simple polymeric plastics...
Why Waffengrenadier?
in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
Posted
and you get the full paper manual as well, without having to pay extra and wait weeks as I did