nik mond

Hey guys watch this US army training video it compares the mp40 thompson and M3. The M3 wins in accuracy this should clear things up;)

Could it be the ghost of General Stuart of haunted tank fame? Oh wait this is a Grant tank. The ghost of 19th-century Confederate general J.E.B. Stuart, who is sent by the spirit of Alexander the Great to act as a guardian over his two namesakes, Lieutenant Jeb Stuart (named in the early stories as Jeb Stuart Smith, but eventually just shortened to Jeb Stuart) and the Light Tank M3 Stuart that Jeb commands.

The Finn mod complete with stugs with logs strapped to the side.

Just curious if any of these sherman M4A3-105 mm are there. There is a scenario where these were used that I would like to recreate someday. thanks

This looks promising. They are actually going to throw in a non-supernatural tank battle. http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/interview/624 PB: Well. Outside of all the supernatural material -- of which there's a lot -- there are two solid tank battle confrontations, done in a way that I don't think I've seen on film before, even looking at movies like "Kelly's Heroes" or "Battle Of The Bulge". We have one wonderful depot sequence with a lot of hardware...experimental German ground vehicles, a flying wing. All actual machinery that was deployed in the field at the time, but has never been seen onscreen. And a significant part of the film takes place on the "Gustav", one of a pair of monster guns...the largest railroad cannons in the world that the Germans built. The armor nuts are going to love this movie. We have a wonderful producer in Germany, a big World War 2 enthusiast, who's helping us -- informally, at this juncture -- to get together hardware for the film.

I have a very trivial question about the QB maps. Do you have more options for choosing time of daylight for a QB? I did not like the dusk, dawn, night, day, options in CMSF and prefer an exact time of day simply because day equates to peak zenith in the afore mentioned game.

OK so you can have multiple skins for soldiers, but the same capability does not apply for vehicles. 1 skin per vehicle. Thanks for clearing that up.

Painting skins for uniforms and vehicles I believe is going to be very accessable using the extractor like in CMSF. Just a matter of someone putting their talents to task. There were a couple of different cam patterns in Normandy. most photographs I've seen had the same vehicles in the same formation having the uniformity of the same cam pattern.

Seems like a good thread to ask the following. Can new infantry teams be composed and added? I suspect these tables are not accessable either. And in follow up, is there a requirement to unpak anything for modding? thanks

All patronizing aside, cutting of the lateral trunk lines is an indisputable fact as you stated. The Signal Corps would however succeed in maintaining a minimum service, even after the wire was cut by re-establishing communication nodes west of where they were abandoned. But 12th AG HQ was way out of position to begin with. General Bradley did not have a satisfactory personal presence. Monty managed to show up on Hodges door step each morning after taking command. Whereas Bradley would talk by wire or motorcade from Paris. As an AG commander he was caught flat footed.

How Omar Bradley was able to overcome this debacle (Hurtgeon Forest) plus the tactical surprise of the Battle of the Bulge and still become Army CoS is a bit of a mystery. Yes thats been the topic of discussion on a few historical forums. History is subjectively kind to Omar Bradley. It is common knowledge you may agree Bradley had his 1st and 9th placed under Montgomery's command when the Bulge occurred. Officially recorded for logistical reasons. Historical texts record Bradley's HQ was so far away from his divisions he could not effectively command them; which was quite apparent when the Bulge commenced. That, and the Hurtgeon debacle this would not have sat well with "higher". Its what sources you choose to believe. Its controversial, and this isn't the right place to debate it, so I'll leave it to an open mind. Its not alternate history, its subjective vs objective interpretations of history.

I read it was expected the Airborne units might see as high as 90% casualties, which tells me they were written off:eek: Luckily they were resourceful enough not to let that happen to themselves. One division, can't remember which, suffered 20% casualties as a whole but had to be beached after the invasion because all its rifle companies suffered in excess of 80% casualties. Casualty rates became blended going into the Fall 1944. Bradley blindly signed off on having GI's requisitioned like bullets. Hence the term G.I.= general issue (came out before the Hurtgeon I know). GI's would drop like flies and be back filled from a corps level manpower pool of new arrivals without anyone keeping count. When someone noticed US casualties were equal in numbers to entire brigades being annhilated but not noticed due to this backfill policy, Ike had Bradley sacked. Edit: I should say this is one contributing factor for Ike raking Bradley over the coals, and having him replaced by Monty. Course the Bulge came next.

too funny watching how unsuccessful using helicopters in the demo is. A rocket actually pecked one while it was in the air and down it came. They are done well, physics and model wise, but it is Korea and heliborne assaults were probably not even a concept. Still I always choose them cause they are just so darn fun to scoot troops around in this game.

Depends on Terrain. Squadies have to keep LOS with each other on the move. Especially in WW2. So in built up areas or in brush this would appear to be somewhat in keeping with reality.

Same for me exactly. But after hitting play and waiting for it to fail after several tries it did latch on. And never did it again after that. Keep trying, and don't buffer too many mouse clicks on the play button.

I like these pumpkin launchers SdKfz 233. Fast on a road. And you might get one lucky shot on a Sherman flank.

Typically the MG stays with the vehicle. The C6 GPMG if fired remotely from below. It can be used in the support of dismounted troops but is typically manned in defence of the vehicle while it is mounted and travelling from A to B. The Nyala has a better resistance to mine strikes than the LAV so it is primarily used to transport infantry in areas where road mines could be prevalent. Also numerous grenade launchers are co-located on the gun stack. I have never seen the ports actually used although they are there.

just awsome. Glad to hear the mapmaker has more stuff added to it.

Good advice on keeping units in their C2. I never use max assault (yet). Most my observations above are from making Quick battle maps and setting up AI routines for Quick battles. Then testing with small to large battles of varying units.

Im going to answer my own question above and post another don't do this for the AI. First if you attach a lone squad/unit out of C2 to an AI group the time delay will affect the orders. I stuck a jeep from another HQ into the A5 group above. It was moving to objective with much delay and missed the dismount order because group A5 had already reached said objective and were proceeding to the next. Problem 2. I noticed US groups are not being split and the AI tends to lumps them as 1 massive group, even though multiple groups and plans are set up. Yet with syrian forces the AI has no problem assigning them to multiple AI groups. Likely this is do to the small formations of the syrians and the huge battle group hiarchy of the US HQ designation. just a guess right now. This poses a problem when the units get separated due to knock out dismounts during movement. I noticed these large US formations were only doing 4-5 movement orders out of 10 lets say. Then would stop. Well its because the ground troops left behind from knock out vehicles are still part of the Group. The A1 group lets say. The AI seems to move to location maintaining interval. So if units are split up 1 km apart the movement to the next order is not executed. This is a problem, maybe short jumps in AI moves might be a quick fix. Or better the Quick battles that users make are likley better played as blueforce US vs or red vs red syrian. Bottom line don't play red syrian vs AI blue US especially for a defensive scenario. The enemy US forces may stop in their tracks. These are my observations on the AI routines for GB maps, the causes are only my guess. I'm still a noob. Maybe I'm doing something wrong.

Rake had a good point about ditches and swales, especially for plowed fields. I made plowed fields in mod maps in CMSF, they look great from a distance but up close the troughs look as though the plow was the size of a mack truck. It would be great if the map engine is ever enhanced to have a smaller grid representstion. Smaller grid squares with a .5 pitch per elevation grade of what it is now.

Any way to change the time of day defaults for quick battles. Dusk dawn is too dark And Day is just plain fug. I prefer 16:30 which gives a nice hue. Is this in an ini file somewhere by chance. I tried a search but kept getting a minimum word error which is a bug. I appreciate the responses. Thanks.

Not sure If I get your meaning, I have set multiple Group orders ( 3 actually) in a QB. And the AI has divided his force into these 3 different setups and they went in 3 different directions following the order plots. I take it then the AI randomly divides this without regard to force order or combined arms etc.

I got that down. I wasn't very clear in my question. But figured out the problem in creating a QB map is you have to actually plot setup squares before order 1. Whereas in a scenario you can skip the AI set up squares and go straight into order 1 order 2 etc. because in a scenario the opposing force places in the red zones. But in a QB the opfor sets up in the yellow squares. Anyways all good now. Thanks.

How do you know which AI enemy units are going to belong to what group for a random/user setup quick battle. I set up an enemy AI routine for 2 groups. Selected a quick battle on this map and watched as the AI force followed group 1. Since the player can pick his own force by parameters what determines this force to be split into groups. I took a look at existing QB's and they are using different groups. thanks