Lethaface

To add to the nice litle discussion above. I dont own many books about the eastern front, nor claim to be a grog. Have been extra interested in Military hardware since young age though, and soon after especially the German WWII weapons have had my specific interest. So I did do some homework, but forgive me for any obvious wrong information I might hold for true. I think both sides in this discussion hold a point. I can believe that what Kip say is true, that the June 44 Army was the strongest Army ever fielded by Germany. Especially in terms of hardware. It's not difficult for me to believe they fielded (some) fully equipped and not undersized armies. That it had more manpower as before. But those don't mean all of their divisions were at full strength. In contrary, after such heavy losses and loss of production capacity between 1941 and 1944 it's not possible to believe most of their units were at full strength. I read the memoires of a dutch volunteer for the Waffen SS. He was employed from 1941 till 1945 at the eastern front serving in the Wiking division. He got wounded 3 times and served in Infantry and later as a radio man in a Panther (see also, however in dutch: Henk Kistemaker 5 SS Pantserdivisie Wiking ). He was at the end of his life when he wrote it, so not all is chronologically totally clear, but it does pose an interesting view inside the head on an Waffen SS soldier. I'll use it to explain my views on this subject. From his memoires I read that after the second time he was wounded, he got called back for duty in the east. He was trained extensively in Germany and Poland at the end of 1943 and the earlier part of 1944. There was no mention of poorly trained troops send into combat. However he did tell about how in the beginning (for him 1941) the Waffen SS was a pure 100% volunteer army with very though criteria. Later these criteria started to loosen up, while in the end (1944-5?) even men were 'forced' to volunteer. Luftwaffe officers being added to Panzer divisions, etc. The new troops were thoroughly trained however according to this source. When we look at morale however, I think there was a HUGE difference between 1941 and 1944. That goes for both Allies and Axis forces. In 1941 the Axis (germany only at that time) must have felt invincible, while in 1944 soldiers should at least have some worries about the end victory. Its the other way around for the allied forces. Even though news from the rest of the world will be kept from soldiers as much as possible. Fighting on 2 fronts and being stuck in Russia since 1941 apart from loosing Africa, can't be something to be positive about. So I can believe that even though Germany fielded it's strongest armies, in Hardware AND quality soldiers, in 1944, the gross of the German forces had suffered a heavy morale blow since 1941. They are already outnumbered in any form at both fronts. Morale is one of the most important things in War IMHO. In my opinion German morale in 1941 was much and much higher then in 1944. On the Macro level the USSR hardware and strategic decisions became much better, while German became worse as Hitler took control of German forces more and more. This caused a tremendous amount of losses for German troops, often unnecesary. (stalingrad is a good example). Even though Germany still inflicted more losses then they took, I can understand that if the enemy outnumbers you twice, it seems as if there just "aren't enough MG rounds to take all of them". We also might take into account that the number of Soviet tanks, artillery and Aircraft was much greater then 2:1 when compared with German forces. In his memoires the SS'er talked about how it didn't matter if they destroyed 40 T34 as another 30 would show up the next day. Finally the overstretched supply lines can make it happen Germany's best army ever get's rolled over by masses of soviets. It did actually Hence I can agree that the full potential of the German Army to accomplish victory's against enemy forces, is severely worse in 1944. The 1941 forces were much more fit to fulfill their task. As Germany still had the initiative they could use their newly invented 'blitz krieg' strategy were german forces used superior tactics and adequate hardware to overwhelm the enemy. Due to big mistakes at highest command level the blitz failed. A blitzkrieg cant take 3 years. I think even Hitler would have never wanted to fight a war of attrition against USSR or even USA, let alone both. If you would place all 1941 armies with 1944 Hardware in 1944, I doubt that would have changed history. However putting 1944's hardware in 1941 might have make me type this in german. I guess you could say that the Quality of German armies at the tactical level is highest in 1944, so the full equipped army created in 1944 was the best army of the war. But in 1941 German troops were mostly better equipped, trained and experienced as other troops of other nations. They had, unlike later, high morale and and were (till then) supported by excellent strategic decisions. THE 1941 German army was the best of the war. So, I do agree with both Something else; One thing the Dutch Waffen SS soldier told over and over again, was the very bad quality of soviet T34 tank crew. First the T34 tanks looked like they were finished in a hurry, with armor plates skewedly welded to the tanks. This in contrast to the neatly welded/whatever German tanks. Soviet T34 crew behaved as like they had been picked up from any street, put in a tank and send to the front. He claimed many times they slaughtered a lot of T34's with minimal casulaties, even under 900m distance just because of ignorant behaviour among enemy tanks. I think the lack of radios might also explain this. He was most scared of enemy Pak's, especially the "Ratsjbum" (76,2 MM Divisional AT gun if im correct). Another thing he kept telling is that how amazed and (ironic) happy he was about how enemy aircraft would attack columns of vehicles from the side (hitting 1,2 vehicles max), instead of attacking its length (hitting many vehicles in the convoy). He really wondered why they did. Forgive me for all those off topic characters, as Im dutch Ok thats enough for now, im callin it a day. [ December 18, 2007, 04:49 PM: Message edited by: Lethaface ]

Problem with modding and BFC is, while there is only 1 charles, there are many customers.. Probably every unit intended to be included in CMx2 WWII would already been made by modders at the time it CMx2 WWII finished. Finished also as in the motive for many to buy CMx2. So I completely understand BFC's perspective. Not to say I wouldn't like the idea posted by civdiv. However if I look into current CM:SF and the different versions of for example T-72's and M1A1's, i'm not worried at all about not having enough choice

Actually, the 'deploy' command also is shown 'pressed' and 'not-pressed' like a simpel traditional button, a checkbox. If it's pressed, the squad is deployed. If not pressed, it's not deployed. Offcourse, you need to have the squad and the proper command panel selected to see it, apart from the tripod/* mounting

To be fair, I must agree with steve and others here. I don't really have problems with vehicle movement. There is an occasional flaw, but don't real drivers make them too? Maybe in big RT tcp/ip battles it is true that micro managing vehicle paths can be a bitch simply because there isn't time to give any order exept for 'move there as fast as possible'. However in SP or PBEM there is always time to plot a nice little course for our vehicles If you dont have that time, you'd better lay down that sim / warplaying habit of yours. (as I should lay down mine ) Now that is something really valuable... To change that given waypoint or delete that mistakenly clicked waypoint. Furthermore, it can't be to hard to code, at least for deleting waypoints (deep and agonizing shame will hit me if it turns out to be already possible to delete any last waypoint ) Hope to see it in 1.07 (assuming 1.06 will be the quickie fix)

In my opinion the problem here is the lack of AI using cover adequately... I can understand that this is hard, if not impossible, to code correctly. A slight abstraction in using cover in semi open areas while being prone, is not un-argueable. this seems to be in place at the moment, but perhaps it's values could be tweaked a little bit as to give a more satisfying result, when compared to Real Life situations. The idea to make some random soldiers be like 'union road workers' - or whatever goverment paycheck non-do'ers are supposed to keep up their name to , does appeal to me. I've been informed that, although the rate of fire fight particpating soldiers has increased firmly since WWII, there are a lot of soldiers not actively firing during modern day firefights.

A Very (Good) Playable game Made Much More Playable. Thats my opinion 'bout 1.05 PS i'm dutch so don't take this as a 'hostile' comment! Thats not allowed for you non-dutchmen, as I have read... waiting for 1.06 low wall fix though, cant even properly play one of the new scenario's Apart from that I didn't see any other bugs I can remember and aren't posted b4 Ach... I guess it's easy to be pleased as a dutchmen... Happy Christmas@BFC and everyone else

Anyone that has problems with this: You might consider re-adjusting your monitor/videocard. This option was perfectly visible to me from the first time i needed to deploy/button up in CM:SF (6 months ago?)... Apart from that, units deploying do have status 'deploying' (& aiming, firing, spotting, hiding, etc ) in lower left corner text. Happy to be of service

I do enjoy MOUT in SF. Must admit I play RT and... you just know those times when you have to save a game I just re-load at those times when the smoke makes my grunts go trippin. They actually seem to behave better when they know they'll have to go again and again Funny, I would do exactly the same except for the advance with the "brave" stryker. I use infantry advances instead. Using one squad at a time on assault to adjacent buildings, has proven best for me. With MG's on the roofs and inf in most adjacent buildings + AFV's around, MOUT can be really rewarding (Mind the few blood bath's due to beforementioned tripping) Can't stand to pound those poor (civilian) buildings with sustained Paladin barrages though... Seems to do the trick much quicker... And isn't that how any war was really won?... Gamey?? Perhaps... well, its a game after all, isn't it?

Why you just dont complain about CMx2 WWII already? :confused:

C&C Red Alert had rather cool Russian-English voices, as I remember Avermetiff Agghnouledget Ive been waiting for other games to implement them for years

I had similar probs with the first mission (among others) as well, vehicles from outside the compound would not fire at enemys in the compound by themselves. Since i play RT i'll pause to direct fire manually, but thats another "not-optimal" AI routine i guess. The infantry problems seems similar to me, they seem not to realise they are walking in a war zone indeed. However, in my experience soldiers in cover or prone at larger distance are relatively safe from enemy small arms fire. Ill try the scenario you mentioned, and keep you informed. Probably gonna be a big slaughter

Note: I've never have been under fire from live rounds, and never hope to do so In my opinion the accuracy is quite ok... I *think?* i've seen much variance in accuracy when comparing ak47 fire from unconventional troops to fire from well trained us soldiers with scope's on their rifle's. Their seems to be difference between reserve and regular, Rep. Guards & Special forces. Trying to hit a few men running in the field at few hundred M. with ur Syrian reserve HMG, can be quite a bitch :mad: At point blank range off course even that Mujadeen on opium can shoot a squad to pieces from any window. At 50-200 meters I can imagine it's not hard to hit someone totally exposed and slowly moving. But if the target's arent exposing themselves for any second longer then necesary, it would be much harder to hit them. In game, there are however many missions I finished having very few to none casualties. I use a lot of suppressing fire at suspected enemy positions and advance under overwatch whenever i can. I look for houses with doorways wiht such placing that I know my soldiers can go in without doing silly. Sometimes the level design makes it harder to keep them from doing silly. Infantry moving to a position come under fire and hit the ground 4 meters in front of some cover, crawling in cirkels untill half gets shot and half reaches the corner. They get stuck under fire in a doorway, etc. Using certain commands (assault) this can be avoided a bit. I would welcome some more ability for soldiers to seek cover, finding action spots that provide most cover (and against known enemies). When I would be under fire I'd crawl/run/jump, whatever it takes, off to the nearest place of cover. If I know there is OPFOR in the vicinity, I would never stand still exposed to all sides. In game infantry sometimes seem to have a little dead wish themselves. Whether it be the "deathcrawl" or just showing of your face while staring in any barrel; infantry can be too slow to get to cover ingame. Luckily for me I can still enjoy playing the game , and I think it'll stay on my HD for long. I hope 1.05 fixes something which give infantry some more brains and handling speed at certain points. Big Support to BFC who keep working to improve this game. DISCLAIMER: Everything above is just my opinion, if I wrote anything like a 'fact', that's because I can't be bothered by nuancing myself too many times

yes

Lol @ * ... When joining battlefront earlier this year, for ToW, I never imagined getting the same urge to write a long nuanced statement, as I always had in my discussions with friends and fellow "hang on the street" youth about Israel, Palestine and USA... However, this topic made me... Luckily for you I'm going for a long 3,5 weeks holiday to the far (far) east ( approx 27C now) and smoking my last joint for some time at the moment. So, I will just keep this statement very un-nuanced, as I like to do sometimes to get rid of stress Disclaimer: Im no fan-boy; I never liked CMx1 (never got further then the demo). In my short stay here I must say that the BFC staff shows up more then I ever saw on any other forum Everybody got their own opinion, thats fine. Dont try to force others into your opinion, because that is Fundamentelist in true fashion In my opinion CMSF was enjoyable from the start in RT singleplay. RT tcp ip was also nice, however some crashes here and there. Had a few nice PBEM games, however in some noticed some serious movement bugs. I'll be trying that out in 1.04 next month. 1.04 has greatly increased my sys performance. Also I must add that in the short time i could try it out, the gameplay seemed smoother, both sides more active, etc (killed of the americans in Allahs fist @22 tanks lost). I cant place it exactly, but must say that I CAN PROVE BFC is actively working on a nice, although buggy released, game. Thats not an opinion Like truppenfuhrer said; i'm not really bothered by those minor glitches, as long as they dont have a big influence on the total game. There are probably some left which will say hello now end then, but for me the game is 100% playable. With the support from BFC, I actually only want to be in the Tactics board If one wants to achieve something through criticm, it better be constructive criticism. Cuz that negative one, that one don't work. Enjoy yourself, what ever you doing Cheers

Sonar, I think this is not the right forum for you to spread these thoughts. Your first post was a normal question... After that U turn to some activist style of posts... I, like most others here (I THINK ) , do play this game. I enjoy it too, to detonate a nice roadbom next to one of them yankee vehicles and see it blow up in a BIG BOOM ... I too, do enjoy placing a Javelin on one of those bearded terrorists heads.... If any1 feels upset i like to do this, its THEIR problem. If other people do things i dont like, but dont harm other persons, I usually just dont even look that way... Maybe a good piece of advise for you? I also feel lucky to live in a country without war, and will probably never join any army unless my country would be invaded... Q: Do I have a reason why I play games in which acts take place that would be less apprecitable to witness from first hand? A: thats non of your business. I do play them, I enjoy them, end of story... If u dont enjoy them, why bother others that do? Im not saying u should play them, please dont tell me what I shouldn't do... (deleting some lines that cross a thin red line)... Q: Do I know what Sonar does in his life? A: No Q: Do I want to know what Sonar does in his life? A: Not particularly, no Q: Does Sonar have a point about some people possibly being offended by this game A: Yes Q: Since I own and play this game, will I now lay it down? A: No Q: Net result of Sonar Propaganda A: ZERO Q: What is Sonar doing on a forum where people discuss a game they like, but which Sonar doesnt. A: ??? Just busting your balls here, hehehe Sonar, enjoy the game

I must agree with Becket here; ive seen many misses and many non fatal rounds. Ofc a RPG-29 is mostly fatal when hit, but not always... Furthermore, they not allways hit, even not in SpecialForces hands. Altough they seem to be more accurate in their (SF) hands, which seems logical, due to their training RPG7 on the other hand is a total gamble; hit/miss and if hit: KO/DAMAGED/FINE are random in % of chance... In my experience at least

Yes, looks better + some nasty bugs been fixed I must add to that, I was already enjoying the game, so now even more. Been playing campaign, sp battles (mostly rts, few wego), rts mp and now started some pbem's.. I must say I enjoy all of them, even though the crashes in mp rts, lame AI in wego SP and various other minor bugs... Im sure battlefront will try its best to resolve them all and introduce new features... Offtopic; I'm new to the CM series. I c a lot of old CMx1 players being dissapointed, i'm actually curious why, except for the too soon release. Maybe it's just different then what they were used to, played for years and got addicted to ... Hehe, I Played a CMx1 demo once but wasn't really thrilled, probably due to my dislike of turnbased games till now...

New to CM, only have ToW from battlefront > and got my ass kicked online RT. (2 draws, 1 time the 25mm bushmaster wacked all my bmp1's ) Havin a great time so far though.

I must agree, the only time I found someone to play cmsf he already had an appointment to play cmbb An ingame lobby would seriously help in this matter.

Got DVD yesterday in Holland $#!&%# sticker made me destroy the plastic wrapper Anyway, its not about the plastic on the outside so i don't really care.

Actually I won this scenario 3rd time after having a little thought... First two times just tried to go head on... But I decided to do what they did originally, try to flank them from behind... So, I rushed my tanks forward in line position. All but one crommwell were taken out, but that last one hit it good. Direct kill I think it also took out them other 2 tigers from back, or it was with help of reinforcements... Anyway; Check out Wittman's story, at viller-bocage he destroyed quite a number of tanks (40 something i think) b4 his own tiger was destroyed... He came out and escaped, only to be shot another day from behind by an english men... And die... Why u think the allies had this tiger fobia if they could take it out with a few shots? Actually, most Tigers (I & II's) were destroyed by Air & a lack of fuel/ammo; only a minority by allied tanks...

MMMM offcourse the game has it's flaws, but i'm actually quite impressed with the lOS/LOF thingy... If you have ever looked through a camera lens, you would know that the human eye is not comparable to flat represenations of the reality.. Ur eyes dont work with pixels or 2x etc zoom... U can never know what exactly does your soldiers / tanks see, from the screen alone... (like other also explained before ) The code that calculates this all does quite good calculation IMHO... Like tanks can sometimes see enemy's (with known position) from further away then inf (due to optics) but infantry are better general spotters... And bushes etc. do provide los cover... However with an optic zoomed in into a bush where a ATG is hiding will probably show something (barrel, carriage sticking out/ seeing things THROUGH the bushes)... And therefore units in bushes are possible to be discovered. If a bush would work like a concrete wall, you'll never be able to hide inside it and especially fire trough it. Thats the funny thing... The chances of you BEING SEEN in the bush, however, are much lower then the chance u can see through the bush.. But it's never impossible... I think that there could be some more bushes and denser forests, but we probably will need bigger maps. That's something I would love though, 8x8 or bigger maps for this game... Daydreaming here lol... Conclusion: I enjoy it as it is a lot... It's not perfect, but hey what is perfect in this world... Offcourse i't is possible you come into LOS & LOF of an enemy, and he shoots you to crap without u even noticing where it is from... Welcome to the world... I've had these too, but the enemy was allways in a position that made this quite possible... Just scout scout scout and try to check out on this enemy through another route... And when he does come into los/lof, it's his demise I never really played CM since it's turned based... I like turns in games like Total War but I need some sort of Real Time action for my pleasure... However been playing Sudden Strike (on of my fav's), to name one and with the use of logical tactics i'm playing at hardest level and progressing steady... Of course it's difficult now and then, it better be otherwise it would have been finished & deinstalled already ... Have fun all, also the ones that aren't having any... Go find another game thats more of your liking; comments are good, positive criticism is good, but repeated same criticism with only flaming / spitting gal as purpose isn't usefull... We know your point (now), please go tell your dogg or write a book orso... Out.

Indeed, i tried exact same tactics with the PzIII's. However they were repeatedly killed by sherman 76W's even when coming from behind. They just hit it without doing any serious damage, then the sherman turrets rotates and destroy them with 1 shot... So much from them PzIII's. The Stugs at least have 75MM with decent barrel size so they deal a lot more penetration, effective enough for me to take out the shermans along with the Pak's... Good luck, and ofc, have fun!

You actually may be right, i noticed on several occasions that enemy tanks which were hit by for example panzer fausts werent really doing anything anymore. However, most of the time i also disabled their turret (thus switching to other targets) with another weapon so i wasn't sure what happened to them (firing bow machine gun or not). If they only disable crew, it seems quite realistic to me since hollow charges make a 'plasma' burst (steel (alloy) between liquid & solid form) through the armor causing havoc to the crew but not necesarily causing hardware mailfunction. However in a real life battle you would quickly notice the tank right in front of you not loading any shells/moving the turret, while in TOW you have many opposing tanks and tanks/inf/art under your own command so you might not be able to monitor them all closely individually... Perhaps it should be clear when a tanks crew is disabled beyond succesfull firing even a machinegun. Even though, this is a tricky subject; perhaps the reality is simulated 'perfect' already but we just can't notice (in time)... Il try to investigate further

I got some instant kills with the PanzerSchrek (belonging to elite fallschirm jaeger's) against lighter vehicles like m8's. One time i got a bazooka in the side of a JagdPanther effectively disabling the tracks. However i'm dissapointed by panzerfausts (1944 model) With a 15cm Hollow Charge it should penetrate shermans with relative ease, especially the earlier versions. However only got a engine hit once; the rest did nothing or missed .. > I think it's historical correct that most hand held AT Weapons can't penetrate heavier tanks from front. Going for the tracks or from behind is what I heard a common used practice. I thought that the 15cm PanzerFaust would be an expeption to this, but i'm not sure.