Guest Big Time Software Posted September 7, 1999 Share Posted September 7, 1999 Well, Fionn might have had to learn some CM lessons the hard way, but he is not out of the fight yet! Stay tuned as even more funky things are on the way after Turn 17! Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Galanti Posted September 8, 1999 Share Posted September 8, 1999 From Turn 18: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I've played ahead and I think I can confidently state that the next two turns have greatly affected our force structures. Losses have been heavy in terms of tanks. Extremely heavy and desperate action has been needed.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You're such a tease. That's not very nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 8, 1999 Share Posted September 8, 1999 You'll all be happy to know Turns 19 and 20 are finished and have been sent to Pat so you'll find out what happened soon enough.. Hint: Cue aero engines.... reeeeeeeennn... cue bomb whistle.. BANG.. cue tank explosions . ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Galanti Posted September 8, 1999 Share Posted September 8, 1999 Heh, that's kinda what I expected, but I didn't want to mention anything that you might not know about yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PatB_TGN Posted September 8, 1999 Share Posted September 8, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> You'll all be happy to know Turns 19 and 20 are finished and have been sent to Pat so you'll find out what happened soon enough.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Just to let you know, this almost catches him up with Martin. Not quite *grin* -Patrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dano6 Posted September 8, 1999 Share Posted September 8, 1999 So when should we be looking for them to be posted????? (Those 2 or 3 days between posts was almost too much) dano6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 8, 1999 Share Posted September 8, 1999 Well dano6 I personally am going to adopt a posture of blaming Pat for everything that goes wrong or any delays that occur. Forget the fact that I'm about 4 days late with the AARs, it's all Pats fault I tell you . ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 8, 1999 Share Posted September 8, 1999 Well dano6 I personally am going to adopt a posture of blaming Pat for everything that goes wrong or any delays that occur. Forget the fact that I'm about 4 days late with the AARs, it's all Pats fault I tell you . I've been working on another couple of AT/FOW-like articles so that's been taking a little while too but I'm sure you'll like the results. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Marks Posted September 9, 1999 Share Posted September 9, 1999 Fionn, maybe this will cheer you up a little..... Pick one from column A and one from Column B: Column A--Railway Gun, Company of SS PZGrdrs Column B--4 King Tigers, one V-2 Rocket Think on the bright side. At least you weren't sitting inside that Panther. On a more serious note, what is the effective range of the long 75 on your PzIV, and does your infantry have any panzerfauts or panzerschreks? If so, about how many? I see that low ammo was going to be a factor for your Panther if it survived. Will low ammo be a factor with any of your infantry? Thanks. Larry [This message has been edited by Larry Marks (edited 09-09-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCrawler Posted September 9, 1999 Share Posted September 9, 1999 Turn 19 - Ack! Airplanes bad! Airplanes + 500/1000 lb bombs worse! ------------------ Jon Johnson Steel Lightning Productions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted September 9, 1999 Share Posted September 9, 1999 Airplanes + 500 + 8 MGs + no AAA defenses + an eagle eye and dead on aim = worse than worse Sorry Fionn! Had to show all the kiddies why they shouldn't play with airplanes in open fields! Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 10, 1999 Share Posted September 10, 1999 Larry, It's funny you should say that SINCE I had renamed the tank commander of that Panther as "von Kelly" so, in-game I WAS riding in that tank . Oh, and I'll take column B please. 4 King Tigers always seem to give me the edge in firepower I so like to have Ncrawler : Well Turn 20 just went up. It got another tank and over the next two turns kills another 3 vehicles and damages more :-( Eventually I end up losing about 20 men to this plane. Next time I want to be the allies. This materialschlacht makes for a really relaxing game.. "Oh, so the Germans have broken through have they send? Send one... no, make that two, squadrons for CAS, 24 Shermans, a battalion of infantry and umm... a regiment of artillery. That'll teach the Germans to make company-sized probes towards our defensive lines. Fade out.. Cue Maniacal Laughter." This is how I am envisioning Martin is looking right now. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted September 10, 1999 Share Posted September 10, 1999 Sounds like this aircraft was supposed to represent a P-47 from Steve's description. Fionn, I know it wasn't a good moment for you, but from our perspective the CAS knocking out your Panther was pretty neat - the coolest screen shots so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted September 10, 1999 Share Posted September 10, 1999 How aircraft were ground-attack aircraft in WW2? It seems that Martin's plane's pilot is pretty darn good. I'll ask Steve, also. DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PatB_TGN Posted September 10, 1999 Share Posted September 10, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>How aircraft were ground-attack aircraft in WW2? It seems that Martin's plane's pilot is pretty darn good.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This really depends on the situation. The main reason Martin's airstrike was so lethal is the lack of AA defense for the Germans. The airstrike came in, popped the Panther, then climbed away. All the while, the pilot is looking for Flak or ground fire. If the pilot registers no counter air (Flak), then he's inclided to come back for a strafe or two or three... The pilot is an opportunist. As for how historical this is? Pretty much on the money. The Panther was stationary and out in the open. Such a Juicy Target, indeed! -Patrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 10, 1999 Share Posted September 10, 1999 Pat is right.. Let me paint you a picture: A lone Panther is sitting in the open during the middle of a battle. The Allied pilot flies over once or twice getting his runs just right.. There is NO AAA at all so he simply lines his run up perfectly, drops the bomb and SPLAT goes my Panther. Next turn the StuG is spotted (I think I was unlucky with that although it MAY need a tweak in the AI to make it less likely to be spotted... we're still tweaking things here and there to get them to work more realistically.) and taken out. Why was it taken out? Well it was sitting still so once it was spotted it was bound to die. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted September 10, 1999 Share Posted September 10, 1999 There's something I don't get about this entire air attack. There has been only 1 airplane attacking so far, a P-47 right? At least that is the way it sound to me reading the above statements. Assuming the above to be true for the moment. How many different bomb loadouts did the P-47 have. It is a fighter, after all (well perhaps we should call it a fighter bomber), so I'm thinking that it probably could only carry 1 larger bomb (mayber 500 lb. max?), or perhaps 2 smaller ones under the wings (say 2x 250 lb.). Other loadouts against tanks would probably be several rockets under each wing. Given this, let's assume it was 2 smaller bombs. Now I'll grant you that whether a 250 lb. bomb hits the Panther/Stug, or a 500 lb. slams home, the result is pretty much going to be the same; i.e. dead tank. My question is if we assume for the moment the plane was carrying 2 bombs, did the P-47, or any other aircraft of the day in the allied arsenal for that matter, have the ability to only drop one of them at a time? I have always been under the impression that when the pilot hit the bomb release in aircraft of this era that all bombs were dropped at the same time, not selectively one at a time. Or am I totally mistaken? If I'm right, how did the single P-47 kill the Stug (with assumed bomb hit) when it had already bombed the Panther? Was it a strafing run w/ it's 50. cal machineguns that managed to penetrate the roof/upper armour of the Stug? I guess I would like to understand better just exactly what happened in this devasting arial attack by a single allied plane. While I suppose it is entirely possible, to lose 2 tanks to a single allied aircraft seems somewhat amiss to me. Of course, my assumptions/facts may be all screwed up too. Regards, Mike D aka Mikester A fools wisdom knows no bounds other than the infinite space between his ears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 10, 1999 Share Posted September 10, 1999 A P-47 could release a portion of its bombs at one time and then another portion later. This is what happened in the scenario IMO. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted September 10, 1999 Share Posted September 10, 1999 Was this common for most allied aircraft, or a peculiar trait (nasty one in this case) of the P-47? Just curious. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted September 10, 1999 Share Posted September 10, 1999 I'm not so sure about the release bombs separately issue, but I know that a P-47 could carry 2000lb of bombs. A 500lb bomb under each wing would've been no problem. I'm pretty sure they could even carry a 1000lb bomb under each wing. Problem was a full bomb loadout would preclude them from carrying extra fuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 10, 1999 Share Posted September 10, 1999 I think it was pretty common for aircraft. Airplanes had to be able to drop their centreline load separately from the wing bombloads since they often carried fuel tanks in place of bombs in the centreline and didn't want to jettison bombs with the fuel tank. It's quite similar to the way many planes had multiple firing studs so that pilots could select to fire either centreline guns, wing-mounted guns or ALL guns at will. At least this is my understanding and I've never questioned it before since it seemed so reasonable. Perhaps someone can give a definitive answer one way or the other? ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted September 10, 1999 Share Posted September 10, 1999 Fionn, I guess that would seem to make sense. Although I would still question being able to drop one bomb from under one wing w/o dropping the other one vs. dropping both from the wings and maybe still having one under the belly. Especially in the case of a 500 pounder under each wing, if you only dropped one of them it would put the plane into a pretty definite roll to the side where the other bomb is still hanging under the wing. The pilot could likely correct for this by temporarily holding the stick over to kick the aileron's far enough to compensate and relevel the aircraft. But I somehow doubt they would make standard practice of doing such things as flying in such a manner is generally not recommended. So me still thinks they would have dropped both bombs from under the wings simultaneously, not just one at a time. Regards, Mike D [This message has been edited by Mike D (edited 09-10-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 11, 1999 Share Posted September 11, 1999 Mike D, Yes, that's exactly what I mean. Note that I talked about wing bombloads and centreline bombload. If the P-47 could caryy 2000 lbs it would probably be in the form of 2 x 500 lbers (one under each wing) and 1 x 1000 lb bomb under the centreline. Obviously if you drop bombs from under wing you must drop them from the other. I was talking about choosing between ALL wing-borne bombs and the centre-line bombs. Steve and Charles will have to give the definitive answer on this though I guess. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted September 11, 1999 Share Posted September 11, 1999 Fionn, I understand better now what you are saying. I guess I was thinking of the case where perhaps the plane didn't have the center bomb under the fuselage and just had the two under the wings (i.e was carrying a drop tank, etc.). How many different bomb loadout configurations were there for the P-47? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted September 11, 1999 Share Posted September 11, 1999 It is most likely that having the plane drop one bomb at a time is not realistic. Charles is going to check this out, but we suspect that bombs will have to be dropped at once. This should make Fionn quite happy as the German player in the future Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts