Jump to content

bruno2016

Members
  • Content Count

    51
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About bruno2016

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hi. I have been playing all WW2 modules incl. CMBN/RT against the AI. will be glad to be your opponent
  2. Yes my bad 10-12 mm. and the late superstructure added on top of the 251/9 as i said was a good protection from the side. and yes none of them were immune to small arms when using the weapon. my point actually was, in the front CA, all 3 shields give an equivalent protection. Why then make the MG gunner more vulnerable?
  3. It would be good that some of the CM developers or designers join these chats. Wld clarify many things we all just assume at the EOD
  4. Interesting. The only difference i see between the 75mm or 20 mm gun shield with the fromt MG shield is the side (to some extent) or all around protection. The thickness is still 8 mm or so, at keast not more than the MG shield. so why, thru the front covered arc, wld MG gunners be more vulnerable? i really question the design behind the AI
  5. Btw Georges, u mention pbem. Am looking for an opponent in any of the CM games. Wld u be interested?
  6. It works really. I thought of that but cldnt see really how this gave protection. At which distance do u put them from threat?
  7. Hehe yes, we can cope with that. Probably as a vet of ASL for decades i am too much influenced by the omniscience of the player materialuzed by endless dice roll to know if the guy got a flu and then does he sneeze or not lol. HT: dont bring that frustration here plz. I am so annoyed myself. I didnt experience this death rotating craziness u describe but the vulnerability of passengers to small arm fire (their heads arent assumed to be exposed in BU position). A whole debate with a thread opened by others already
  8. Thanks for pointing thos out. Like i just replied to Georges, i think par of this misunderstanding comes from maybe incomplete feedback from the AI on wht really happens with a hit. this is the same with another thread i joined a few years ago about the very strange vulnerability of halftrack or SPW passengers to small arm fires at level angle. I waz replied many times rifle caliber cld penetrate the 8 mm or so armor and therefore wound people ibside. Whereas there was no AI msg about penetration or spalling
  9. I can see we share some common sources 😉 I agree on wht u said. In the cases i faced which prompted me, after several frustrating experiences, to open this thread, often there was no more damage to the tank than just being hit without penetration or spalling or anything like that (unless sthg else happens that the AI does not share with the player, like sparkles, or paint flakes or crew anxiety in the heat of battle). Would be probably beneficial to have more feedback from the AI in the game to avoid assumptions and prejudices...
  10. Fine. I will check this point again on what damages actually occured to the tank (as when its dismounted no info is displayed) which cld explain the crew reaction. To support what u said, in april 45 on the front of the 9th army in the Halbe pocket, a Tiger 2 experienced waffen SS crew bailed out after being hit and having smoke inside the tank. They realized after a few minutes that actually the fire wasnt lethal to them but chaos had happened to others near their tank. They climbed back. See story attached
  11. Interesting video definitely. Check also this link which analyses Nicolas Moran’s presentation: https://www.mathscinotes.com/2015/07/sherman-tank-myths/ One unclear or debatable statemement was about the Shermans used to kill panthers and tigers in italy but not in normandy (for the panthers part). What was the difference? And probably it could only mean on the side. My point was not to say shermans or TDs had paper armor, actually it was even better than box shaped Pz IVs, but to say that even the sloped 80 mm armor was overmatched against an 88 or 75/L70 round. And the crews knew tha
  12. if u put aside the Jumbo, are you saying that Shermans and TD's could easily sustain a front shot from a Tiger or Panther with their crew confident in their asset? My father was a Sherman M4 leader in 44 and 45 in the French 2nd armored division. he told me many detailed accounts of encounters with Panthers (like in Lorraine during the battle of Dompaire for instance). When they knew Panthers were ahead of them, believe me they did not think their front armor weakness was a myth spread in forums when they faced them. they tried to out maneuver them instead and pepper them with phosphorous shel
  13. Sure its not a question of nationality but training, seasoning and trust in your gear. So yes, many German tank crews bailed out like any other unexperimented ones of any other countries (example panzer brigades hastily assembled in sept. '44 with unexperienced crews, with the wrong assumption this could be compensate the quality of their tanks). But u cant deny also that when u are in a well armored AFV u have more confident in your future than not (why so many drivers have big SUV's when they can afford it rather than european size cars, especially women? no worries, not trying t open anothe
×
×
  • Create New...