Tux
-
Posts
704 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Tux
-
-
Your point being that all of those weapons (of war remember) were just as deadly in Africa as anywhere else? That is 100% true, and not a soul on this board would argue with you. During the heat of individual conflicts the action would probably very closely resemble that anywhere else in the world, and that is also true. After all, regardless of people's feelings towards each other, at the end of the day they're each fighting for their respective objectives and their lives.Originally posted by CousinPeePee:The facts are there.
Flamethrowers, heavy artillery, mechanized infantry, bayonet charges.
You call that a walk in the park? Do you actually think that in the middle of an attack you would stop shooting the enemy and let them all go?
The point is that there is too much fantasy associated with this theatre being somehow noble. Think about Tobruk - do you really think that they would let scouts who entered the wire get out alive?
Give me a break.
The difference that I think people are trying to point out here is that in situations when the blanket 'combat emotions' that govern people's actions during a fight (read 'when they are under direct threat of death') were absent, there was far less innate animosity between your average axis/ allied soldier in North Africa than there was on the majority of other fronts. The fact that neither side, in general, fostered any particular racial hatred towards the other, and the fact that both sides were in a constant struggle to survive against an indiscriminately harsh environment provides some rationale for this.
To address one of your examples; once a tank is knocked out and the crew start bailing, they are no longer a significant mortal threat to nearby infantry. Provided nothing else is firing upon them, I think those 'nearby infantry' could just as well be expected to lower their weapons and take the crew prisoner as to shoot them in cold blood. I disagree that they should necessarily feel any particular hatred towards them. Undoubtedly they sometimes did, but not nearly as often as they would on the Eastern Front, where the bailing crew were no longer a threat, but they were 'subhuman bolshevik/ fascist animals who deserved nothing more than death', regardless.
You'll notice that I haven't provided any evidence for my argument, since it appears to count for nothing through the majority of this thread. Hopefully the rationale will make an impact though.
-
Hi all,is there anyone out there who'd be willing to type a brief description/ comparison of all the available Panther variants in game? I think I get a few of their differences, such as hull MGs and shot-trap removal, but I can't see the difference between some...
Thanks in advance for any info. :cool:
P.S. Steve, if you read this, don't worry; I haven't just received a platoon of Panthers in any of our games.
-
All sorted - he hadn't updated properly!
Thanks for the help.
-
All sorted - he hadn't updated properly!
Thanks for the help.
-
Hmmm. The thing is this is a completely new game. As far as I know it was started in 1.03 as well. I'll see what I can do though, thanks.
-
Aye, 'tis the Anthology. Thanks for the heads up.
-
Ok thanks Jo. I'll ask him and see if any of those could be the problem.
-
Hi all.
Can anyone help me get CMAK 1.03 to work? I'm trying to start a PBEM game with a friend but 1.01 (which runs without the disc) says he's using a different version (1.03). I try to install 1.03 and it won't let me play without the disc. When I put the disc in it says in the bottom right corner of the main menu screen that it's v1.03 but still says my friend is using a different version. Does anyone know how to install it so it'll work properly?
Thanks in advance for any help.
-
Hi all.
Can anyone help me get CMAK 1.03 to work? I'm trying to start a PBEM game with a friend but 1.01 (which runs without the disc) says he's using a different version (1.03). I try to install 1.03 and it won't let me play without the disc. When I put the disc in it says in the bottom right corner of the main menu screen that it's v1.03 but still says my friend is using a different version. Does anyone know how to install it so it'll work properly?
Thanks in advance for any help.
[ May 12, 2007, 02:19 PM: Message edited by: Tux ]
-
Ah, of course. But still... bloody hell!
-
Good grief! That's ridiculous, lol! I take it whoever spotted that originally had ground reports of its location to go on?
On a side note it must take a ridiculously powerful hit to 'decapitate' a Tiger?!
-
Cheers JonS and michael kenny. It took me a worrying amount of time to work out I needed to flip either the photo or the diagram to make any sense of them, but that's very useful. I'm pretty certain I can see the spot on the photo where the diagram says 007 is, but I can't see it myself...
Ah well, not to worry - I can take people's word for it.
-
Hi all.
As you can see I comment very rarely on these forums, although I do browse them a lot. Until now I've always felt that I have had nothing to offer, since my knowledge of the WWII ground war is vastly inferior to most of yours, and I come here to learn about aspects I do not understand, driven by my love for CM and my increasing fascination with the subject in general. When it comes to the air war and aircraft recognition however, I'm a bit more knowledgable.
The aircraft that I originally considered possible candidates for this case were the Spitfire, Typhoon, P-51, P-47, Bf 109 and Fw 190, which will have comprised the vast majority of single-engined aircraft roaming the skies of Northern France in early August 1944.
Apart from a brief week's operations over Normandy after 8th June, the RAF's entire complement of Tempests were tasked with defending southern England from the V1 threat, and they didn't re-enter the skies over the continent until 25th August. Hurricanes of all marks had long since been reassigned to secondary service in Europe, and were not to be found scooting about alone, at low level, over heavily-contested areas of France.
I think the Bf 109, Fw 190, Mustang and Typhoon can all be safely discounted straight away. Multiple differences in appearance can be demonstrated between this machine and either German type. The aircraft has too many curves to be a Mustang and appears to have a high-backed fuselage, ruling out a Typhoon.
To my eye the wing looks like a Spitfire's, but I think the wing in this photograph is the wrong place to look for a distinction between a Thud and a Spitfire. The aircraft is clearly in a bank, as evidenced by the visible step of the cockpit canopy towards the nose and also by the angled line of the wing leading edge in relation to the axis of the fuselage. The wing's exact planform is therefore difficult to ascertain. Add this to the fact that the photo is hideously blurred, and I think you could argue forever about whether the wing belongs to a Thunderbolt or a Spit.
The length of the nose ahead of the wing leading edge is also misleading. The nose in the photograph looks short, but only if you measure to the end of the bright section of the fuselage. We have no way of telling whether the darker section ahead of that is part of the engine cowling, or is caused by the blur of the propeller, or otherwise.
The tailplane of the aircraft appears to start ahead of the fin. That would make it a Spitfire. The leading edge of the tailplane appears to curve rearwards. That would make it a Spitfire. Again however, the poor quality of the image means that this can't be relied upon.
At first glance the rear fuselage is not arched enough to be that of a T-Bolt, but, again, it is extremely difficult to tell, as is the angle of bank and therefore the depth of the fuselage.
Finally, the step of the cockpit canopy is clearly visible and is clearly located above the rear half of the wing, even allowing for distortion due to the bank. The windscreen of a razorback Jug C or D is located approximately 1/3 of the way back from the wing leading edge. That of a Spitfire is located approximately 2/3 of the way back.
Basically, In my opinion this aircraft is a Merlin-engined Spitfire (it's DEFINITELY too short-nosed to be a XIV), but I can only say that I am 75% certain. For some reason, every time I come back and look at it I immeditely think "Spitfire", and I have learned to trust my instincts in this respect. I'm afraid that's all I can say. If it is a Spifire then it could be a dedicated PR machine, such as a Mk XI, but it could just as well be a vanilla V or IX, since it's impossible really to tell what it's doing.
Can someone describe more accurately which hulk is the wreck of Wittmann's Tiger? I'm buggered if I can tell the difference between little dark blobs on the ground...
Panther variants
in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
Posted
That's excellent, all of you, thanks. That wasn't a jot more than I bargained for Jason, it's very very useful, thankyou.
Excellent; so now I understand that as well. I'm learning fast!
Lol, it might be tough to persuade myself to take Gs if earlier models are available though...