birdstrike
-
Posts
1,100 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by birdstrike
-
-
I guess, mortars would do the trick for me. Even the US 60mm are VERY effective vs. entrenched guns and they come in devcent numbers with every company. IMHO artillery is too slow and way too expensive for the allies to be used solely to knock out guns. The only problem is that the 2in are lacking ammo, so I second the suggestion to use 1-2 3in mortars (maybe in combination with a universal carrier).
For spotting AT guns, scouting with infantry is probably best, but you'd need definitely around 50 turns. Otherwise I'd use disposable scout-cars or maybe a Churchill - front armor could well survive a hit from a 75mm.
-
Bunnies with gunsOriginally posted by Rollstoy:Female mercenary snipers from North Korea!
-
You're cruel. Hope you know that.
-
As long as you spare us the details of what you intend to do, there should be no point in doing so.Originally posted by (fgm) falco:Re: Battlefront.com
Fair enough, but does that mean I have to excuse myself every time I want to go to the bathroom too...???
-
'kay, Thanks.Originally posted by Battlefront.com:Yes, emplaced units should be able to have an additional attribute to simulate being camouflaged. Building shadows and more subtle stuff like that... dunno... we'll just have to see. Those things are not so easily defined and/or simulated.
Steve
-
Giving players the option to choose the width and depth of maps could be an easy way to improve random map sizes.
As for the flanking... maybe we will see something like a "shadow zone" at the flanks, were terrain is visible, but impenetrable, and where (only)the defender may set up additional stationary units that may get activated when the attacker moves into range.
-
Has there already been given any thought as to how camo-tactics and concealment will be implied in the game?
Like using camo nets or building shadows for improved concealment (e.g. against air raids)?
-
My guess would be that the Japanese intended to use them the same way the Brits would have, i.e., not to target individual planes, but to try to break up formations. I'd reckon they might be distracting if you were trying to set up a bomb run with a squadron of Dauntlesses.Originally posted by Michael Emrys:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by stoat:
These were terribly inaccurate...
</font>
-
It's a´ll a matter of size.
The Navy's SM-2 AAMs can be used against aircraft and (to some degree) ships alike -
but then again those things are BIG (almost 15ft) and weigh almost a ton, which makes them unlikely to be used in ground combat.
-
Did take you some time to figure out what to write in your post huh?
-
If you're talking about QBs, you chould check whether you have set the rarity to "none".
-
It's unlikely there will ever be an editor to change the units' stats. And it wouldn't be all to good for PBEMs and such, I reckon.
As for the "high" penetration values, I recommend playing the allied side sometimes.
I have repeatedly seen whole platoons of Shermans brewed up by a single German Tiger or Panther, without the Shermans so much as scratching the paint of the cats.
I had a Sherman fire several times at Tiger from less than 100 meters, without penetration.
I have seen shots of M10s and Fireflies bouncing off all kinds of German tanks.
-
Aw, d*mn. I was pretty sure I read that this was included. Must be seeing things again.Originally posted by YankeeDog:Unless I misunderstood it, BFC has already stated that moving vehicles will not provide cover, at least in the first CMX2 release -- to difficult and costly (in processing cycles) to code.
-
As long as they don't start throwing satchel packs or grenades at their own tank...Originally posted by undead reindeer cavalry:something like the "follow vehicle" command in CMx1?
-
It just crossed my mind that if we get the new option of moving infantry in cover behind advancing vehicles, I guess there will be a need for a special movement order for this.
For one I wouldn't want my tank to charge forward and leave the infantry behind unprotected.
And secondly, if I order the tank to move forward with the "hunting" command (or whatever its sucessor will be called
) and the tank stops to attack a target, it would be very unfortunate if the infantry would just move on.Or is this likely to be covered by the introduction of a convoy movement?
-
If you refer to this one here:
It seems to me as if they have been ramming each other (for lack of visibility when buttoned up?)
(Reminds me of the "ramming thread"
)Correct me if I'm wrong, but it doesn't seem as if they were driving at a very high speed when it happened. However the momentum of the enormous mass seems to have been sufficient to render them totally useless anyway.
-
I wouldn't like to see the classic overkill as seen in current CMAK been removed. Unless the target brews up or totally disintigrates, there's no way to know what damage was caused by the hit. But IMHO some sort of shoot and scoot for infantry AT units seems a good idea, maybe with some sort of option to determine the number of rounds to shoot at the target, or a certain amount of time for the attack until the unit retreats. At least give them the option to withdraw after a confirmed kill.
I can't think of any real soldiers, firing at a Tiger with a bazooka, then sticking around a minute or two for another attack or to see if the cat's dead. It's not just because the tank could blast them to bits but also because of nearby enemy infantry, and I assume after one ot two shots, whether they hit or not, they would try to get the heck out of there ASAP.
-
Yes, there are only units as far as the AI is concerned, no "players" or "nations". Those units just happen to be of a certain nationality. ; )
You can see how it works, if you select "unrestricted" for the nationality in a Quickbattle. You can choose any unit of any nation of this particular side (axis or allies).
Don't forget to select "allow human" for unit selection.
-
God, I've been waiting for something like this ever since I started playing simulations and FPS.
Would be awesome to have something like this in the game, but probably too difficult to code?
I can almost see dozens of AI controlled tanks and guns, trying to traverse towards a target and getting virtually stuck at walls and trees, just because the AI can't undertand what's happening.
-
And since you need new Sherman BMPs anyway, I would recommend to get the ones from CMMods, though the stock graphics are quite good, the mods are even better. :cool:
-
I'd say in the end it comes to infantry.
I remeber this recent QB where the Germans had an AT pillbox right on top of a hill, overlooking the whole area. I had already lost a Greyhond and had only two HMCs left which where hiding behind a ridge. The only chance to take the bunker out was to use infantry in dirext assault. I tried to use whatever cover was available as much as possible (including cover created by minimal elevation differences) to get them as close to the bunker as I could. But there was still some 150-200 meters open ground to cover. My squads had already taken heavy losses from enemy infantry and there was still some Germans around taking me under fire from heck knows where. decided to use half-squads for the final assault, first because more targets meant an increased chance that at least some could get through and second because fewer men per unit also reduced the chance of being hit by incoming fire for individual men in said unit. I used any support weapon possible to supress detected German positions and had my squads approach in a kind of half circle from both sides of the bunker. In the end, all units that were moving on the right flank where killed either by the bunker or by small arms fire from nearby dug in German infantry. But some of the guys on the left really managed to get around the bunker. Howver it took them several minutes to take it out, resulting in additional losses through some counterattacking Germans. It was a real mess. In the end I lost the battle because I didn't have enough infantry left to drive the remaining Germans out of their holes.
-
While we're at it, does anyone know if BF intends to give other units than FOs the ability to call in artillery strikes? Like HQs or even vehicles?
-
Whatever keeps CMMods going keeps us going.
Keep the ads - heck, have more ads if you can make some money with it and buy yourself something nice.
-
Have you checked what language version you got?
If you're running the German version, for example, all game files are in a seperate folder named "run" inside the Combat Mission folder.
Check your install path to see if you got this "run" folder.
If do find it, then the files of the patch should be copied into the "run" folder and not in your main folder.
.50 cal machinegun armour piercing
in Combat Mission: Afrika Korps
Posted
When shooting at a vehicle with the .50 zoom in on the target and you should hear the bullets either penetrating or bouncing off the armor.
And I can confirm that it is very effective against medium tanks when aimed at their weak armor.
Had a Sherman kill a PzIV once in the Perano scenario. The Sherman came to a stop ~15m right on the left side of the obviously surprised German tank, but it refused to fire it's main gun. I cursed at first, but then I realized that the commander was firing with his flexible .50 which he deemed to be sufficient. And really, the first salvo must have already caused a casualty, because the PzIV did not even try to turn its turret at my tank, and after the 3rd or 4th salvo the crew bailed, only to be chased down by my tank in a stylish "drive-by-shooting" before the turn ended.
End of story: one abandoned PzIV with all crew killed, used 75-mm rounds: none.