roqf77

good points john i just ment offficaly it was a nickname someone was quoting official documents and found very few fireflys refered to i was just saying they wouldnt. and the vc and the 2c were the most popular conversions. but you are right.

well im not arguing i havnt read much on it only that when they originaly changed to the 75mm in north africa the tank crews demanded the 6 pounder back due to its inferior at performence. plus a cromwell tank crew a friend of my grandads stressed to me it was a better weapon ive read it was a rebored 6 pounder originaly therefore it must of been at least L43 probably L 50. plus the 57mm 6 pounder was a better at gun and had a he shell by 44 if the 75mm was so inedaquate why change the gun on a cruiser tank that primarly will be encountering armour? (i believe you may be right so please dont get offended just ive spoke to my grandad and a few of his friends and that what they said)

Actualy that is the oqf 75mm not the rsf 75mm as i was told it used the same ammunition but it was stressed to me by the crew of the tank that it was not the same gun. i will search for the web page but i found one that had a ministry of defence file from sep 44 that said a ratio of 36% of medium/cruiser tanks were fireflys by august44. that does not include churchill's though as it was considered a infantry tank. Plus firefly's were never refered to as such they were only denoted by a c at the end of there name and this was only with two marks of the firefly all other conversions were not marked as engineers were ordered to convert as many as they could.

ministry of defence that is

from what i know speaking to somebody in a cromwell tank in ww2 err not sure what unit it was one of my grandads friends, he said it was better than the sherman he was in previous. He said it was faster around 40mph but it may of been restricted to 32mph for reliability purposes i remember something about a speed restrictor anyway. its gun used 75mm ammo for the sherman but was not the 75mm on the sherman it was a 6 pounder enlarged to 75mm so it would of been a L 50 75mm it did have more firepower than the sherman. it was also smaller so it wasnt as tough but it was harder to hit. it may of only replaced recce tanks intialy but it was the most common tank by august 44. and did replace the 75mm shermans by the end of the war i was told. He told me that it was overall a superior tank to the 75mm shermans and 76mm but he said he would of rather been in a firefly. incidentaly 36% of all medium/ cruiser tanks were fireflys by august 44 according to mod documents i found on the internet i will try and leave the web address if i find it again.

actualy the 75mm on the cromwell was a re bored 6 pounder so it would of been atleast a l43 more likely l 50 75mm, or a new gun but ive been told it was definatly not the 75mm in the sherman it just used the same round. not arguing with you but i was told by one of my grandads friend that his sherman was replaced by a cromwell and he was not in the 7th i dont think.

well other than the improved consistency the values are different. on beyond overlord the 17pdr at 100m penetrates about 170mm on afrika korp it penetrates about 207mm of coure it depends on the round.

true plus a large number of shermans did not have the l38 75mm. numbers were produced with 76mm and 17 pounder guns. in fact the british i believe had more of these that 75mm versions as the sherman was being replaced by the cromwell. the tiger is still a much better tank though, its just a little of a myth the british army still relied heavily on the sherman in normandy because they did not. Even in italy the m10 basicly a sherman with better gun was used alot more because of the increase in firepower. The sherman didnt have to armed with the 75mm their were other version. But of course none of them were as good as the tiger four fireflys on a tiger and it wouldnt stand a chance.

i personaly would like to see the ai improved a bit. firstly with infantry instead of having to baby sit your troops around the map instead control a group select a point on the map and they automaticaly find suitable cover. rather than where ever the point is on the map, a move to and find cover order. similar concept with tanks too so it is easier to move them in groups.

Not neccisarily, i certainly agree that if the germans had been more organised it would of been a much harder fight but the canadians were using the british ddt tanks and they were more careful releasing them from gold and sword beach only 2 sank the rest made it. so it is likely the canadians did the same and would of had direct tank support. especialy as only a hand ful were knocked out by the beach defenders. not saying they would neccisarily succseed in the face of direct tank support but it was only the american beaches that didnt have any. plus it is also a mute point rommel himself did honestly belive that the attacks at normandy were a diversion, so if he had placed his units closer to the beaches they would of been close to calaise im no expert on french geography but that could of been worse.

hmmm well in russia as corvidae has said in a situation like that it could of been acheived. Although on a smaller scale anti tank guns by the british proved very effective at places like gazala and el alamein where rommel himself lost lots of tanks to realy only a handful of medium to small anti tank guns in an location where flanking would of been much easier. perhaps this is where he got the idea?

dunno i found brits at anzio much easier than fru infact i cant do fru i find it much harder than playing say blenheim blunder. if that is any help, i think it also differs to people's style of play.

depends on the mission your forces and which side you are on. spreading forces is easier with the allies as you have more forces to spread. this is more difficult for the germans, as you generaly have less troops. i think its best to look at the map, and figure a main force but keep a couple of secondary forces covering your flanks. but if you play as the germans be careful you may not have enough tanks to do this

true plus it has to be noted that the p3's and panzer 4's early ones any way were not paticurly good them selves. the 50mm and short 75mm gun. did not have a very effective gun itself nor well armoured.

true but if you did happen to end up facing a tiger or panther with a sherman 75mm you would be in a bit of trouble. and in the case of the americans where this was there main tank it would of happend ore than occasionaly.

the sea's around ireland are property of the european union. id give tham back before you get slapped witha lawsuit

the point is gjk that a tank commander would only know there experience, in a board game you would know before hand because you read the rules. in combat mission you dont know excactly how effective weapons are against what generaly speaking until they get hit by them, more like real life i understand what your saying i just put it to vague i just mean no tc knew how good a tiger was until they were unfortunate enough to meet one in combat. and they would find out the hard way, rather than knowing before hand.

yeah i saw footage where te camera man fell over cuz he got shot and died. gos to show a camera is no match for a stg 44

well i see what you mean but you can take the game more seriously as in a way it is more realisic monty wouldnt of gone oh no the tiger has a strength 8 cannon and the armour of that tank is only 6. it would be if it was me for f**K sake back off. i mean you know not to move a sherman out in front of a tiger at long range cuz you know the results through seeing them not just by understanding the rules its a more realistic representation than a board game. i find from having played warhammer 40k when i was younger, i spend more time thinking about tactics but less about trying to make the rules go in your advantage

plus the cromwell was uks most numerous tank from 6 june 44 we realy only had alot of shermans in italy we actualy had more fireflys by may 45 than 75 mm shermans and more cromwells than both together from d-day

no no i live in the uk it was during the day so daytime tv is just repeats and i think it was telewest cable which i even worse. he he shame about them not changing gameplay cuz i noticed mistakes with the cromwell and churchill cuz they had 6 pounder convesions to the 75mm so they had longer barrels so they were more poerful, plus a few marks of the cromwell they had on there never saw combat

actualy sorry about the crap typing but i was enthralled by an episope of quincy. ill type better next time i promise

how where do get / learn about making mods for combat mission, ive been playing it for well nearly a year and i want to try something not graphics or sound but gameplay