Jump to content

Lt. Beavis

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Lt. Beavis

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  • Birthday 08/13/1979

Contact Methods

  • Website URL


  • Location
  • Interests
    poop and stuff
  • Occupation
    He-Man Script Writer
  1. Ahh, that would be because a lot of stuff labeled metal isn't true metal...lots of kick ass traditional type stuff coming out of Europe and the American Underground...Seven Witches, Distant Thunder, Jag Panzer, Paragon, Iced Earth, Gamma Ray, Blind Guardian to name a VERY few. Great stuff! No radio play though...at least here. Let me guess? Cumberland County Civic Center, Portland, March 30th, 1989? I was there. I got stomped on so much I had foot prints on my jeans the next day...nice pit... No argument here. Mord. </font>
  2. A little off topic, but the video got me thinking... How would the newest gen Bradley hold up to a hit over the frontal arc from an AT-4? Is that a death sentence for the guys inside? Or can the standard armor package handle something like that? I imagine that RPG hits probably wouldn't disable it from the front, at least without some effort... but the AT-4 is rather more powerful. Do the Abrams and Bradleys have any active or passive defense systems for top attack weapons like the Javelin?
  3. I set up a quick battle with the AI as a defender, playing German SS Mech v.s. Guards Mech. The AI picked forces for both sides. I ended up with a sharpshooter, and placed him in the top level of a 2 level heavy building. During the battle, he took a shot at an OT-34... there was no other combat in the area at the time. I heard the sound of the shot hitting, a scream, and the hatch closed. Naturally, I assumed the TC was killed or wounded. My AT gun KOed the tank a couple turns later. However, at the end of the game, I checked the kill stats for the sharpshooter and he didn't have a
  4. A while ago, while playing CMBO against the AI in a random scenario, I blew up a Hetzer with an 81 mm off board. I wasn't deliberately aiming for it, just the crunchies around the thing. Quite a surprise to see it blunder into the barrage and then blow up after a top penetration. But a welcome one
  5. I don't think most people are arguing that the fear factor is a bad idea. The implementation is just a bit flawed, that's all. If 5 tanks on a large hill, most of them hull down, is a bad situation, what would be the situation where they'd actually take at least one shot? His T34s were in a textbook position, and they abandon it without even firing a shot? I don't think that's very sensible. And what exactly would they do, having left the hill? Hide behind it all during the game and do nothing?
  6. In the original example, it's absolutely wrong that the T34s didn't fire their chambered round. All of them should have at least taken a shot. They had height advantage, and they were hull-down. There is no reason for them not to take their shots at the Panther, for they stood to obtain top deck penetrations. In addition, the higher elevation negates the front glacis slope of the Panther. The Panther is the one at a disadvantage in this scenario, not the T34s.
  7. I usually don't play scenarios, just quick battles. My response to Bone_Vulture goes over fanaticism and morale influences, so you can read my viewpoint concerning them there. I think that when fanaticism is triggered, or when a unit has a +2 morale bonus, the implementation of effects stemming from those situations is a bit off.
  8. I agree. Suppression in general should require a fair amount of effort, especially dealing with a full squad. The game seems pretty reasonable when it comes to suppressing a full squad most of the time, although they too can exhibit super unsuppressed, unkillable, returning fire madness. Mostly though, it seems that platoon HQs are far more likely to go Rambo. An apt description, for Rambo also never gets suppressed by enemy fire or killed
  9. This is the general situation I'm talking about. Multiple squads targeting one HQ unit, which remains unsuppressed and returning fire. They were helped out a great deal by the trench in which they were residing, true. But I have seen this happen where the unit in question is occupying open ground, rocky terrain, all kinds of places. Non-fortified places.
  10. I have thought about this, and I believe that the problem involves fanaticism/morale bonuses and the resultant effect that a person sees in the game. I am in total agreement with the fanaticism possibility, or morale bonuses. They should be in the game. I am thinking, though, that all of the incoming fire I direct at a group of fanatics will cause a particular event to occur (see below, #1). Here, fanatic means suicidal, uncaring, merciless, totally devoted to the cause. Death is perfectly acceptable. I think a group of non-fanatics with high experience and morale bonuses will
  11. I would like to know if this little bit of..."charm" factor in CMBO and CMBB is going to be eliminated in the next game engine. There is a consistent bias in favor of platoon HQs within the game. They don't suppress as easily as other units, and it is harder to kill them. Sometimes. This phenomenon does not happen ALWAYS. But it happens often enough to become annoying. Regularly, against the AI, I see the following general happenings: 1) All other enemy units are dead or far away 2) Enemy platoon HQ is the only opposition in the area that is unbroken 3) It takes an inc
  • Create New...