Skwabie
-
Posts
603 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Skwabie
-
-
Skwabie wrote "but they are small", as though it makes it easier to hit a tank with a 500 lb bomb in a dive from 10,000 to 3,000 feet. You can't make this crap up. You people are just silliest fanboys imaginable, and are making yourselves look utterly ridiculous.
yep it's a mis-wording on my part but I think you need to calm down..
-
68 SBDs completely unopposed in the air pushed over at 3 giant flattops 300 yards long and over 40 yards wide. They got 12 hits. And that was the biggest outlier success of dive bombing in the entire war, any theater, any mission or opponent.
uh... You're somehow discounting the enormous amount of AAA for any carrier battle group that surpasses any land based flak defense. Not an easy task to face that amount of anti-air for a pilot, at the least it's going to affect his release altitude and accuracy. Apparently by late 1944 it's virtually suicide to fly a prop driven fighter above a US CBG for they've turned into flak hedgehogs due to all the kamikazes.
That and despite carriers are huge targets, they have all the open sea to maneuver, at 30kts. Nothing like a zig-zagging carrier to throw off the pilot's aim, which to him is only pencil size. Tanks are tough and small but comparatively stationary, I can get close enough to see the TC's earphones on my bombing runs. When equipped with high power guns that can go thru some weak parts they're pretty much dead meat, if I RTB without a kill, I hang my head in shame.
-
Mad Mike, many thx for the fast update this tool for RT, a question can i see when load a single map fr campaign the KI ! script, i work moment maps modify (bigger 3.6 x 4.0 km) and update troops allies and german
with full strengh , i have the problem when i go to create campaign come a error message"syntax Error in campaign script line 1" and dont not what here the error is :confused::confused: can not see in editor what wrong is....
PS: ha.. i see the script think have my error found in script thx oncemore for wonderful tool that help me...
yeah with Mike's tool the replayability of campaigns sure increased a lot because you can edit and repack it. At the least it's more return for our investment!
ps the campaign script is sensitive to weird letters ain't it. seems to remember it only accepts numbers and letters, plus the underscore (_), anything else it throws an error...
-
Obviously none o' you here are cowboys. Or the least you'd know is horses stand while sleeping./*whistle*/
-
Right Vanir, thanks for the info. Look forward to more tests of yours! I wonder if the TC's unbutton status mitigate the no cupola spotting deficiency... Also, as a result of your Panther tests, I don't use 'em no more (yes drastic so it's just me).
-
JPz IVs have Jagdpanther-like spotting ability in the game, i.e. horrible
I blame the lack of a cupola.Vanir, are the Panthers in RT still bad, spotting wise?
-
So the tank combat is who shoots and hits first as opposed to 1000m disadvantage duels.
Yep. It is made worse by buttoned tank myopia and the module damages.
Shot outta nowhere -> shot bounces -> but crew panics and TC buttons -> 10 more follow on shots comes, still outta nowhere! -> Destroyed gun, tracks, optics, radio, blah blah blah.
And that is the best scenario in this situation, ofc.
-
Yep use Pz IVs as assault guns for infantry support, in front of Stummels etc. They're not good for front line tank killing duty.
Actually for a lack of IFVs in ww2 they are duly needed in that. The platoon halftracks are better off given a small target cover circle to keep the gunner's head down, so they do not attract small arms fire at all and only serve as battlefield taxis. Except the 251/17s for Plt HQs, those are nice. The gunner's protected in all around armor so it can get close to enemy positions and lay down fire. Also they shoot at aircraft.
-
Thanks for the fast release Mad Mike. Nice to have the campaign decision tree there, sure's gonna help many camp players.
Unpacked the 2 RT campaigns. The new naming works wonderfully!
campaign related: Now we can see Blunting the spear really is no good for single scenario play, most of the redfor is core with no repair and refit for both sides in-between.... so during the camp the more the player destroys in earlier scenarios the less opposition there is to face in the later ones.
-
There's quite a contingent here that is excited about this. I never thought I would enjoy modern combat more than WW2 but CMSF really grew on me.
Same here as still having fun with the contents in CMSF. Reflecting on the price tag the whole base + 3 modules shebang is just $55, same as CMRT which is a single game. Best bang for the buck there is.:cool: Atm I'm modding the canuck's campaign, after that one's finished thinking mayhaps a TF thunder remake. When that is done the 3 default nato camps are worth a serious go through. And then there's the installed single scenarios, community campaign and scenarios. The contents are endless.
-
Skwabie - and you would be wrong. The earliest mark I model - based on British designs incidentally - had only rolled homogenous armor, and the mark II model had only that plus spacing. But the mark III had modular composite armor, and the current mark IV Merkava has a "composite matrix of laminated ceramic steel-nickel alloy" (sloped, modular).
The mark IV appeared in 2003. So for over a decade, the Merkava has had (nearly) state of the art composite armor.
JC I've apparently sold off the mags last time I moved apartment. But it was a rather nice article which went in-depth about Israeli Merks. IIRC even the Merkava IV's composite armor was still not up to par with the latest western design at the time, hence they used heavy sloping and whatnot. But knowing these stuff is still class, I digress.
-
Engine and transmission both up front aren't 'opposite ends', though,
Merkava is not exactly a design success. For one thing it had an annoying problem with heat ripples coming off the forward engine deck distorting the view through the gunner's sight. And to uparmor that big bow you need to do a LOT of uparmoring, its like a manmade mountain.
/OT on
Read an article on a mil magazine that the Merk was really a compromise with the engine up front design. The Israelis lacked good metallurgy to produce decent composite armor, hence put the engine box in front to protect the fighting compartment behind it.
Considering a small and recent nation Israel is I tend to think it says the truth.
/OT off
-
You cannot make that conclusion based on anecdotes.I think bad luck. One of my most memorable moments during play testing was in Studienka. I had several Panthers and PzIVs in a valley and the came under fire from a ISU152 (or it could have been 122 I honestly forget). It was an awesome exchange. From over 1000m the German tanks could not reliably see the Soviets and clearly the Soviets could not see all the German tanks but as I tried to maneuver to see the attackers I area targeted the woods where the shots were coming from. In the end the tanks in the valley never spotted the attackers after a few initial moments but the Knocked out one just by chance. In the end I had to call in a smoke barrage so the tanks in the valley could get out from under the attack. Later I sent other forces to that location and discovered the KO'ed tank I never saw. It turns out there were two of them.
Anyway that was not the point one Panther shrugged off three hits to its front and turret front - the gouge marks were really cool before finally dying to the fourth hit.
I've said this but I'll say it again. The refusal of BFC to publicize their in-game data has made it excruciatingly difficult to assert the vehicle's performance from the user side.
All the posts in this thread are again made by us chasing our tails, since no one has a clear clue. As are all the other armor related threads before this one.
The tenacious guys among us like Vanir have endeavored to do various vigorous tests, but it costs an insurmountable amount of time, and due to the in-depth nature of them, the end results are not easily understood by many.
Another means of reference is CMx1, but as stated before and evidently, much has changed.
This is my major gripe with CMx2 so far: the nontransparent in-game data and mechanisms.
-
^
What's not good about the default Delete key I wonder?
Yes it's a bit far from reach but given the obvious position on the keyboard it's very hard to fat finger that one:rolleyes:
-
BF needs a couple months just to recover from RT. Game development is knackering - esp around launch. So, I would give em some time b4 asking for another game.
Erwin, that is for sure.
Meanwhile as a business I'm sure it's good to know there's more job to do that'll be welcomed by the customers. And just maybe it would be good to have a change of scenery for all the research work.
But yes it's easy to get burnt out when you work on something very hard. Some vacation doesn't hurt.I ofc add myself to the waiting list... CMSF is still fun without the engine upgrades it is like commanding a group of terminators compared to the ww2 tin cans, imagine what all the new goodies can do to the game.
-
Played my first scenario this weekend (name of scenario at end of post) and all through the battle I noticed that my Panthers at longer distances were not able to hit with first shots at stationary tanks, AA and vehicles.
Often they hit only after the third shot, although they had "As/Ace" quality. :eek:
I also noticed that my tanks were unable to hit the AA-guns directly even after the fifth shot was half a metre too high.
A PzIV @200 m against a IS-1: shot roughly 7 rounds left of the turret at the exact same location. The PzIV did not re-aim.
Soviet ISU122, with regular quality, placed in front of trees, with infantry on the tank, could spot my hunting unbuttoned tanks camouflaged in woods first - but contrary to my "Aces" which were unable to hit with first shot, the regular Soviet crews achieved first hits easily.
I also noticed in that battle that a side shot with a 75/L48 @600 m could not penetrate an ISU122.
That my Panthers needed often three shots for the open topped TDs in this battle also just fit into inferior performance in that battle.
That my Panther could not frontally penetrate a JS-1 @~500 m even at fourth try? Extremely strange!
If this tank would have been that superior, why was it's production stopped after only three or four months because it's armor was too weak?
If the JS-1 is already that overmodeled, then I guess the Red Thunder JS-2 is simply undestructable...
Anyone else having similar experiences?
So far I am disappointed with Red Thunder, the modelling in this scenario felt a bit weird.
Name of the scenario:
Angriff
The Panthers and Pz IVs have always been consistently weak for me. However it could also be a run of bad luck. I've also played Angriff, it gives you more tanks than the enemy but of worse quality. I mean the ISU and IS are beasts outclassing your mediums. So gotta set your expectations accordingly.
To vis las vis beat the scenario, simply do not push forward on the right flank worked for me. On the first run I pushed the panthers forward without infantry support and they got decimated by the late arriving ISUs. On second reload, the panther's were placed on the edge of woods they started from, alongside some dismounted infantry. Also you can navigate the other panther platoon in the center to the right via the woods to reinforce it. So I had 6 panthers waiting in ambush and the ISUs all got spotted and destroyed firing only one return shot.
That being said I too did not enjoy it that much. The panzers generally do not spot well on their own so they get popped quite often. (Plus I find ATGMs work better in these dense wooded areas.
) -
After all, Russians at Ogledów managed to kill some KTs frontally with IS-2s, and even burn few of them. I don't know if they penetrated them, or knocked out without penetrating (cracks, spalling, engine malfunction or fire because of shock) - anyway they knocked them out, so it should be possible in game, too.
I always find those tests laughable. The tanks were made when raw materials and facilities were extremely lacking as it were the last days of the war. They are not tanks only look like them. ffs, I could hit the turret front with my toy hammer, and there would be armor spalling on the other side!
-
That would make no sense. The game is set in the same time period as CMBN. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it should be assumed that German armor is using the same values as in CMBN.
akd, was somehow joking... please excuse my dry humor!
-
Didn't the german metal this late in the war suffer from quality problems?
I remember reading a discussion about that here. It was about the Tiger I if I recall correctly, but it might affect the Tiger II as well.
Could be the one I posted here. (Although it later turned into another history grogs afternoon tea session which has nothing to do game wise...)
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=110510&highlight=flaws
However based on OP's observation the manufacture flaws have kicked in massively for CMRT so... gotta beware nothing's what it seems any more:rolleyes:
-
1# 122 AP ... partial penetrated the turret front of Kingtiger(180-185mm/10) beyond 600m
I see this as well, some even full penetrations, at my tests of 1000m range. It is indeed a bit ridiculous. According to Rexford's book best the 122 APs can do is 162mm at that range.
I suppose they made the armor quality extremely bad.
-
This one I attribute to materials, too.
The Germans could not make powertrains to move the things they built. The major reason why they could not is that modern materials to make more powerful engines and transmissions that last some time were not there, and even if they had the knowledge they would most like require alloy components they didn't have access to.
Oh the king tiger in CM sure can move with good hull and turret traverse. It's 2km/h slower than the Tiger I, but on a 500m stint back to back it wins out due to the 180 traverse at the return point. It's gonna matter in a tactical situation.
In a shootout vs the IS-2 none is able to penetrate each other's upper front. But IS-2's turret and lower hull is thinner and projects a larger area therefore more vulnerable.
I've ran some 8 vs 8 shootouts, the exchange ratio is about 1:4. Not exactly close to Abrams vs T-90s' 1:8, but close to Chally 2 vs T-90s.
The major disadvantage of CM's kingtiger I'd say is still that ugly looking 3D model.:mad::mad:
-
They do sacrifice many things for that well rounded armor you know. Mainly tight internal space which results in poor gun depression, low ammo load and physical strain on crews. Uncle of mine tried to sign up for the tank corps. They told him he was too tall. But he was only 1.65m high, that's even short for an Asian...
And yep done some fun test scenarios. IS-2 (late) in game is the IS-2M version (?) that has upper frontal armor at 120mm/60deg so even 88L/71 of the king tiger does not penetrate. Also the turret and lower frontal hull is rather thick. The 75L/70 or the 88L/56 has minimal residue energy after penetrating, requiring many shots to kill it. Long story short, in order to gain an upper hand fighting the IS-2 ya need the King Tiger.
-
Or the difficulty level. You know the basic training/veteran/elite/iron thing.
-
I was extremely lucky for this scenario. Only one vehicle was destroyed by the friendly fire air strikes and the other attacks were near misses, resulting in some immoblizations.
Casualties at the end of this scenario was 3 KIA and 1 Vehicle (light armored recon vehicle) destroyed. I was very happy with the outcome given how badly it could have been.
Are you not the legendary BlackMoria. Thus your result doesn't count:p
After a lotta saves and reloads I managed to get out of the AI area target zone and not hit by those supposedly GBU-10s. However Kornets and RPGs immobiled 2 Bradleys and an abrams as was pushing them too hard. Oh well, can't have them all. Next mission has a feeble 30% repair chance so maybe 1 of them can get back to full health, then again the kameshli scenario provides more units than one needs and is the final one in the campaign, so shouldn't matter:o
with full strengh 
I blame the lack of a cupola.
The PZ IV J
in Combat Mission Red Thunder
Posted
and worse armor quality for the Late!
I still wonder why by setting equipement to "excellent" you get all Tiger I Lates for a heavy panzer battalion....