DerKommissar

I always liked the hull-mg on this one. Can someone more versed in USSR vehicles please tell me what this is supposed to be?

I started out playing on Real Time. As a veteran of pause-able real time games, I liked the ability to pause and give orders at intervals of my choosing. It also felt much faster than WEGO. This being said, I could pause 20 times in a minute -- if I wanted to get something /right/. The reason I play on WEGO now is that I can dedicate my time to watching the action. Zoom in on something I may have missed or re-watch a sick hit.

This last panel reminds me of the 'nade spam that could render a squad combat-ineffective, by a sneaky german on the other side of the hedgerow. As a general rule, I tried to encounter germans at short range, because my squads had semi-auto rifles, tommy guns, and plenty a BAR. Get too close, though -- and get your taters mashed.

It's the old graphics versus content dilemma. Do you want a beautiful tech demo that has 2 hours of content? Or a 2d game that has inexhaustible units and campaigns? Or something, in-between? Different strokes for different folks and there are plenty of examples of "bad graphics" games being incredibly successful. Even in the same genre, I prefer CM over Graviteam games. Graviteam games are prettier, but are generally made up of a few samey campaigns.

I usually refer to these to learn panzer operations. The pictures help.

I pity the 3 crewmen that are stuck in that tiny turret with the breach and munitions. Sherman's probably my favourite tank of the war, especially the ones with cast hulls. Really shows off their sweet, sweet, curves. I REALLY dig this design. A real american monster, massive silhouette, 7 crew, 2 cannons and 4 MGs. Enough to make Orks green with envy. Despite a limited production run, it served in the deserts, the arctics and the jungles.

Armoured (?) Fighting (?) Vehicle (?)

I think I encountered the same issue in BN with some sort of allied mortar. It still did what I wanted it to do, though.

I always thought the ridiculous negative score was some sort of inside-joke. Another great post.

Looks like a fun game. Curious about the tank combat. This being said, I'm always cautious about all these multiplayer-only games that come out. Can't really play them if the servers are down or if the community is dead. Unless they introduce good bots, I'll wait for a steam sale.

I beg to differ: A 60s French military would rock, but we need a 60s CM first. I'm glad they're adding FF to FI, and hope they add them to Normandy (xD).

I didn't see the arc, so I re-did them. Good to know. Maybe it was a face command. What about Hide?

I've only used this technique while playing WEGO. It worked well enough, but I re-gave the target-arc order every turn. Does a single target arc order persist over multiple turns?

Reminded me of the parachute regiment campaign. The bocage and I had a love/hate relationship. But, those light mortars were invaluable. Good editing on the AAR!

India has a sizable tank fleet. I always found the Arjun to be a cool MBT. Got that German design, rifled 120mm main gun and can shoot plenty of various ammunition (even a special Israeli ATGM). Weighs almost 60 tons and can shrug off point blank 125mm APSDFS rounds. It also, apparently, has a lower ground pressure than a T-72. Still having development trials, from what I hear, though.

Speaking of French units in CM. Are there any Free French planned for the CMFI expansion? They also fought in Normandy. I was reading up on Operation Torch and decided that France is underrepresented in WW2 games.

I do not really know how accurate BS is, as it never happened (thankfully). However, I do remember playing a Cold War mod (not THE cold war mod) for Call to Arms, where all the soldiers were in NBC gear. It was just flavour and I generally don't like Call to Arms, especially their business model. However, I am getting hopelessly off-topic: NBC, where is it? Considering that BS pits two NBC capitals of the world against each other, I would assume it to be a concern. I hear that NBC training is a pain, and mandatory. Fallout from tactical nukes, viral agents and good old Willie Pete, lingering around the battlefield. It would certainly bring a whole new layer of gameplay. Maybe add it to Shock Force 2, as well? I understand that that's not a focus of CM, and that's fine. Just having dark dreams of decontamination teams, HAZMAT vehicles, squads vanishing in ghost towns, and abandoned AFVs littering "the zone." You'd eventually stop worrying and love the bomb.

Here it is: the M-50 "Ontos", the USMC's tank destroyer. They did not destroy tanks, but preformed very well as close support -- busting fortifactions. This thing was perfect for Vietnam, and could even cross the flimsiest of pontoons. I really dig the two .50s strapped to the recoil-less gun tubes. Much to my disappointment, they are only for ranging. Just to stir up controversy and possibly break my own silly rules: here's the M56 "Scorpion". It's an 90mm SPG for the Airborne. Is it an AFV? Is it not an AFV? You tell me. How did this ASU-76 get here?

LOL, Quebec... I apologize for derailing this thread:

I'll admit. At first, I was certain @Saint_Fuller was right. Until I looked at the Wikipedia picture for the T-40. I noticed that aside from the lack of headlights and water shield -- its lower hull was slightly different. I thought it was some modification or prototype. T-40 was rather unique in its design and it was difficult to find anything even close to resembling it. Then, I looked over to the right... what's that? Lower hull looks like yours. Is it a T-30? After a close inspection -- the road-wheels are different! Bamboozled again.

I assume the roads have improved in Ukraine, since Kursk. I think the entire concept of the Stryker is that it is mostly meant for highways. There are plenty of other vehicles that can handle the less-kept country roads. Wheeled vehicles have more ground pressure, and are inherently worse traversing soft ground. You are absolutely correct that it applies to BTRs and BRDMs. BRDMs even have weird belly-wheels installed, specifically to alleviate this problem. Wheeled vehicles should be traversing roads, and tracks can handle off-road. It takes two to tango.

I always saw the Stryker as a well-armed, well-armoured, truck. They seem to be designed to take advantage of 21st century road systems. On road, a wheeled vehicle can get a much better liter per kilometer than a tracked one. More range means more strategic mobility. A Stryker can zoom back and forth with passengers, supplies and wounded. No tracks means less maintenance, which saves time and money. They've got lots of room for stuff and make a tall target. Yet, they're quiet and fast -- perfect for dropping infantry off and getting out before contact. If you want an off-road Stryker, just use one of these:

That is a really good point. Then, they had to manufacture the MG34 along-side the MG42, during the raids on German industry. Judging from the quality of 1945 manufactured small arms, I suspect they did not have enough MGs to mount on anything and everything -- like the Americans did.

Could this be happening?