undead reindeer cavalry
-
Posts
1,224 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by undead reindeer cavalry
-
-
Bone, use scenario editor. insert a forest. place a MG42 into the treeline. now insert a platoon of infantry 200-400 meters away from the treeline. now run the scenario and Advance the platoon towards the treeline, 60 meters by a turn. if you somehow manage to lose, i will accept your challenge
-
none of the abstracted things matter. it's not like the infantry platoon would be hiding or pinned down. they are actually advancing.Originally posted by Denwad:What you see isn't whats actually there. Lot's of it is abstracted.
now i don't mean to say that the MG42 should kill them by the very second. it should just pin them down. all of them. now if they try to mass advance in that horrible situation, half of them should be cut to half.
[/QB]
-
nah, i have already tested it enough with scenario editorOriginally posted by Bone_Vulture:Would you like to put your claim to a test?
one simply can't lose.
-
must be. i am unable to lose if i simply Advance (about 60 meters per minute) a platoon towards a MG.Originally posted by Bone_Vulture:What the hell are you talking about? Did you somehow manage to import the CM:BO infantry to CM:BB? :confused:
anyone standing up on open ground should die. MG fire should pin down anyone on the LOF.
-
the jamming of MGs bothers me a lot because a) infantry is almost invulnerable to MG fire, and
infantry is almost invulnerable to MG fire.a wide open field with no cover. 50 enemy combatants with rifles at 200 meters. me at the treeline with AK-47. they will go down.
now, give me MG-42 with tripod and they will just Advance and disarm me.
-
in good weather conditions i plot both run & walk commands. first run about 100 meters, then walk about 40 meters. repeat without a pause. squads won't get tired. you have to alter the running distance if you need to advance up a hill or so.
i consider both run & move commands rather dangerous though. they make the squads very vulnerable to indirect fire. if they fall under artillery fire they break easily, which cripples them solely to a fire support role.
if there is any reasonable chance that enemy has artillery, i usually run & move only forward squads (scouts).
my main forces use advance a lot. they need machineguns, mortars, ATRs and such with them anyway, so speed is not such an issue really.
esp soviet rockets make move&run commands almost useless.
my opinions may be biased, as i play battles that focus on infantry instead of armor.
-
actually, after having thought about this half a minute more, i would like to see you put up a scenario that DOES display your point. i think it may be "pretty" hard. as once you get to the company level, which i think is a requirement, it becomes obvious that the key element is the proper use of mortars & such.
EDIT: but if you are able to put up such a scenario i am very glad to welcome it. i agree with your theory in principle, especially in the context in which majority of the players say one should never advance infantry over open terrain. their view is more in error than yours. my personal opinion is that terrain (as cover etc) is generally over rated, both for infantry & armor.
[ February 05, 2004, 07:59 PM: Message edited by: undead reindeer cavalry ]
-
i forgot to comment on this.Originally posted by JasonC:Get one scattered? Sure.
if you simply use "advance" instead of "move", the platoon will not get scattered. the squads will not get routed or broken.
-
i ment it more like "lose with a platoon".Originally posted by JasonC:URC - "lose" a full platoon? No. Get one scattered? Sure.
to use "move" instead of "advance" is always an error when you are under fire and it is not related to this scenario.Try just giving a group select "move" order
in your scenario it has nothing to do with the tactics. it only has to do with using "advance" instead of "move".With incorrect tactics the typical outcome in open ground
the use of "move" instead of "advance".What is the fundamental cause of this?if you simply advance at the MG, stopping a squad for a breath when it starts to tire, you can not lose or even get serious casulties. if your squads fire at the MG it is very likely to surrender well before you reach the house.
you have a point, but your scenario isn't fit to display it.
-
are there really players who somehow manage to lose a platoon against a single MG? if so, i'd like to hear how on earth they managed to do it. i think it's almost impossible.
-
IS2 has unreal ability to miss stationary targets even on a 100-200 meter range. perhaps it's only imaginary as i haven't made any tests, but i doubt it.Originally posted by stikkypixie:There real thing i find annoying is there lack of accuracy, i mean the IS2 well capable of taking out an panther or a tiger at range (in my CMBB experience at least) but it has to hit the damn things first :mad:
-
it's my impression as well. i wonder if anyone has made any tests regarding all this?Originally posted by Crank_GS:But what drives me nuts is that Soviet armor, while certainly tougher than US armor, is clumsy, slow to respond and very unweildy. Is this what you guys find too?
-
oh god, what a ruiner. are you 100% sure?Originally posted by Panzer76:So, the % of the different parts on different AFVs means nothing.
what a flaw in the engine. i wish i wouldn't have found out about this.
-
Edit: ok, i just noticed the J in the topic
-
with antitank rifles shoot at all ranges. you may get a gun hit or immobilize the tank.Originally posted by Adamo:What do you guys think is an effective range for these weapons? Is 100 meters too far away to take out a tank, etc....
with schrecks shoot at all ranges, except if the target is moving. if the target is moving i wouldn't shoot on ranges longer than some 60 meters.
-
my main PBEM opponent is precisely of that type. it's no fun in the long run. first you plan for hours and then you watch him waste his tanks one after another. ugh. what a let down. absolutely no satisfaction. some examples follow.
i have managed to get a jagdpanther into a good hull-down position. with great planning i manage to get the flanks secured with my limited resources. now, what does my opponent do? well, what do you know, he drives his 8 shermans, one by one, in front of the jagdpanther. snack, crackle, pop. oh god. how frustrating. i wasted hours in planning the way to secure the flanks and this idiot just drives his shermans into the jagdpanther's LOF one by one. why on earth didn't he try to flank or something! in gods name, what was he thinking?? getting a really special lucky shot??
another example. i am facing a horde of IS-2s and ISU-152s with just a couple of StuGs and a single PAK. the PAK is in the most obvious of all places possible and i spend hours in planning the strategy for the stugs. but what is this? what is this?!?! he drives ALL his tanks right into the LOF of the single PAK and they all get wasted, one by one. 3-4 tanks / turn. they don't manage to return a single shot. god have mercy on my distress!
i would go on but my brains hurt too much.
-
infantry needs a lot of reworking.
at the moment small realistic battles really suffer because the infantry is such an abstract amoeba-like mass. infantry squads feel like a group of chimps running amok.
please focus on infantry.
-
the demo was repulsive.
-
woah, those trees look pretty! what mod is that?
merry xmas
-
4 green tigers in a 1000 point meeting engagement is gamey and lame, so your opponent deserves to be taugh a lesson in humilation.
buy two 76mm artillery or mortar spotters, something like 4 M5 halftracks and 8 trucks, 3 pioneer platoons and 10-15 tank hunter teams and flamethrowers.
first lay out a huge smoke with those spotters, then rush the smoked tigers with that legion of halftracks and trucks (note that one can carry both a pioneer platoon and a tank hunter team / flamethrower).
it's ugly but works very well. you can spread your tank killers all over the map very fast. M5s and trucks are just too fast for slow tiger turrets in the middle of all that smoke. before you know it the tigers are reversing in horror.
pioneers, tank hunter teams and flamethrowers make tigers pop like they were eggs.
-
1. vehicles need to block LOS & LOF.
2. "move on road to point X" command.
3. ability to set units to keep their position in relation to other units.
4. art spotters can specify the number of shells to be fired.
5. dragons teeth. frozen lakes.
6. ability to choose sides freely. e.g. Germans vs Germans.
-
saw CMAK in a store yesterday (man i was surprised!) but didn't buy it so no piccies :\
no east front = no buy.
-
grrr, would have been very irritating indeed :mad:Originally posted by Joachim:Hmmm. Re c):
2.) Potential use to irritate enemy. Any pile of logs will be targetted by Soviets!
heh, perhaps, but doesn't seem too likely.4.) Concrete might work vs HEAT. Similar effects as porcelain (the material used in china and in modern MBT armor)???
-
i think these mods were local work. here's a great page about Finnish stugs: http://www.andreaslarka.net/sturmi.htmlOriginally posted by MikeyD:Though I've not seen an official report on this I'm of the opinion that a good deal of the 'concrete' applique armor on the Stug III was done at the factory - or at least as a 'standard' German overhaul procedure. I've seen concrete Stug photos from practically every theater and the technigue and overall finish just looks too consistent to be local.
ok, that's what i thought. i wasn't sure if there were 3D mods as well as texure mods.About log/concrete mods. I'd KILL to be able to mod them but these features are just too '3-D' to be doable just by repainting the textures. As it is you can barely do a section of spare track links believably!
one simply can't lose.
infantry is almost invulnerable to MG fire.
Tank Machine Guns and jamming
in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
Posted