Glubokii Boy
-
Posts
1,984 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Posts posted by Glubokii Boy
-
-
What a beatiful morning....
-
On 10/14/2021 at 1:11 PM, Zimtstern said:
Together with its aged game design but still very high pricing that could make you cry I dont see why this game is so praised.
Combat mission has its flaws but what other tactical games handle these things better in your oppinion ?
I can think of NONE
...
-
A scenario covering this is already avaliable - carious at malinava -
Made by George Mc i belive...Its a very good scenario.
-
1 minute ago, Bulletpoint said:
For performance, it's better to use dappled contour lines. Each manual elevation point reduces perfomance, so the fewer the better.
Did they not change this in a patch a few years ago ? I kmow it used to be this way but is it still ?
-
Skillful use of the elevation tool can indeed make a huge difference in the quality of the scenario. Imo it is not only HOW you design the elevation changes on the map but also WHERE...
Some of the more skillful scenario designers are able to provide the player with both great challanges as well as oppertunities simply by using the elevation tool. Even some subtle changes to the elevation in the right places can have a huge impact on gameplay and tactics...
Playing on such well designed maps is indeed great fun compared to playing on more or less flat maps...
-
I would say that pretty much the entire Normandy theatre is open for a redo....Many things have been improved or added since the first Normandy game got released.
To name a few IIRC...
- Flamethrowers
- updates to handheld AT weapons
- Doubeling the number of AI groups and AI order slots
- Triggers
- The later modules and the vehicle pack added a pretty impressive amount of new equipment (and formations i belive).
These changes/improvements will allow for a very different set of scenarios compared to the original release even if they cover more or less the same topics..
I hope to see much more from Normandy...
-
Commanderski...
PM sent
-
31 minutes ago, Khalerick said:
I do submit with confidence that they could have rubbed a couple nickels together to get the oil for an extra 1,000 tanks in the grace periods of 1940/1941.
As far as i understand it the problem in 41, 42 was not that the fuel and other supplies did not exist...The problem was that they could not get it to where it was needed...the front. The railsystem was not capable of handeling this. The number of trucks were far to few. Fuel, ammo and spare parts did not arrive in sufficient numbers...Neither did reinforcements i belive. If we say that the germans fielded to many different tanks and fighting vehicles ...thats NOTHING ! compared to the ridicolous amount of different trucks that were used supplying the forward units. Keeping these truck running was a nightmare !
-
25 minutes ago, slysniper said:
But 1000 more PzIII and Iv"s then might have made a difference.
I belive that more trucks, trains and a functioning railsystem from the get go in Barbarossa would have made far greater difference when it comes to reaching Moscow. It was not the russians that slowed or held up the german advance. It was the lack of logistics and flank security.
If the german armour had not been forced to halt their advance time and time again to wait for supplies and the infantry they would have performed far better then what they did historically even without those 1000 extra tanks.
-
1 hour ago, Khalerick said:
The unsexy answer is that a 1,000 more basic PzIII's in 1941 would have had infinitely more influence than 5,000 more PzIV's in 1944, because in 1941 there was an hint of winnability still left in the war. I think that winnability evaporated the moment they invaded Russia because they did not, in fact, have those additional tanks.
If you can't fuel them what good would they do ?
-
53 minutes ago, Probus said:
Let's keep this one tanks.
Ok...sorry !
-
7 hours ago, danfrodo said:
And was Russia going to invade germany??
- A germany weakened by a war against Brittain (with her allies)...Yes i belive they would.
- Had Germany not invaded Poland and started the war...Maybe not.
-
26 minutes ago, IanL said:
This is all very interesting and I do love learning more about cool hardware etc. but in the end I don't think it would have made a huge difference. I have been following the World War 2 YouTube channel. It is a great high level accounting of the timelines and major events. What has been clear for "months" now is that the Germans are going to run out of resources: men, material and fuel. There is just no two ways about it. Their logistics are a mess and they pretty much started out that way.
They never had enough trucks, had too many different kinds of trucks. They never had enough horses. They just did not have logistical support for the armies they did have. Streamlining tank design and production would not have been enough. They needed to solve their fuel shortages, their truck shortages etc and on and on.
A really great example popped up in either this last episode or the one before. After they captured the major oil fields from the Soviets they held them for, I think it was 5 months. The plan was to deny the Soviets oil and use the fields to help alleviate the German fuel shortages. They never got them up to normal production and nearly all of the oil they did produce was consumed by the southern army group so it never helped with the German wide shortage (mind you it didn't drain it further) and the Soviets just expanded production further away and by the time the Germans were being pushed out of the fields they did capture the Soviet oil production was at record highs. Total failure.
So, even if they got cool a new tank design that was better they still would have had to abandon too many of them because they could not supply their armies with enough fuel.
I agree with this fully...
Clearly the germans were not ready to take on the russians when they launched Barbarossa. Their logistical capabilities were no where near addaquate. The shortage of motorized infantry would prove disastorous. The limited mobility of the artillery. Lack of this...lack of that...They were not ready !
But what else could they do ? Time was not on their side. Their enemies would only grow stronger and stronger. Ignoring to attack russia would hardly work either. That was exactelly what Stalin wanted. For the germans and western powers to destroy themsself while the russians were uparming at full speed waiting to march west at a suitable time.
They pretty much had to attack russia i belive...and they had to do it NOW ! The time would never be better...
-
3 minutes ago, Vergeltungswaffe said:
The heavies actually performed fairly well, but the Germans were always so hellbent on attacking or counterattacking with their armor.
If they had husbanded it and used it defensively to a much greater degree, the advances on both sides would have been slower and more costly, but the Germans very helpfully served their best units up to be sliced and diced on offense.
I wounder how the Ferdinand would have performed as a defensive tool if it had not been wasted in some ill suited offensive actions.
-
And pretty much not in the early parts either...Atleast not ones Barbarossa got on the way...
-
20 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:
The Russians also produced heavy tanks. But the difference is that they were able to keep producing them and fuelling them.
Would something like 3 Pz IVs have required less fuel ? In the later parts of the war the germans could not fuel...anything (at a required level).
-
22 minutes ago, Redwolf said:
The whole Tiger family was not worth it.
The Tiger 1 was sort of a panic respons...was it not ? They needed something to deal with the russian T34 and KV series and they needed it fast. Since the flak 88 performed so good against these russian heavies why not make a tank big enough to be able to support a simular gun ?
-
1 hour ago, chuckdyke said:
Anything they couldn't mass produce. That leaves us with only the Panther of which they could have made a heavier version like they did on the allied side with the Jumbo Sherman.
For the last year of the war i wounder if i would not have prefered to have a higher number of Jagd Panthers delivered compared to a new updated turreted version made in smaller numbers.
-
6 minutes ago, kohlenklau said:
We can find out when we have some fun down at the testing range...
The fun has begun
I did a quick test with the T70 against 20mm and 37mm AA
- The 37mm could defeat it pretty well
- the 20 mm needed to be within 500 meters, preferably 300
-
48 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
Nothing they can do.....The weapons, armour etc. of these vehicles will be whatever those of the underlying vehicle are, in this case a T-70 I believe.
Yepp...that has been my understanding also....Was hoping for some kind of a workaround but i guess not.
These modded early tanks might become somewhat more difficult to knock out compared to RL...But i guess that using anything heavier then a 37mm it might not matter all that much...
But 20mm and 37mm might be struggeling...(unless the '44, '45 ammo will be more potent ?
)
-
I guess that this will be hoping for to much...But are you guys able to do anything about the armour values of these 'modified' tanks ?
-
10 hours ago, kohlenklau said:
What gun did the BT have? If 45mm, then the "host mdr" could be the T-70 again.
Yepp, 45mm.
There was also an infantry support version i belive with a 76mm.
-
56 minutes ago, kohlenklau said:
I couldn't wait on Moscow and just climbed up there and sawed the top 2 off...couldn't find the third one yet.
What !!!
"What is this ? Personal initiativ !!! How dare you ? Where is Beria ?"
Apart from that...Very nice work ! Will you be able to produce a BT tank also using simular techics ?
-
1 hour ago, kohlenklau said:
yeah, yeah, yeah, first I got to fill out the STAVKA form 10-3 and you know how long those take to get approved!!!
Are you hinting that the russian burocracy may not have been a marvel of efficiency
Tank Battle of Lisow ready for play testing
in Combat Mission Red Thunder
Posted