Bazookas/PanzerFausts

[Guest Big Time Software]

Howard, I too would like to see a Panzerschreck team be able to run (from a gameplay standpoint as the Germans), but I am not convinced that this is practical either. As for the speed of the HMG team, the tripod is the least of their concerns. It wasn't that heavy and was carried on the back of one man dedicated to that task. What slows down the team is the ammo, just like the PS team. For the same reason an MG42 gunner can run with a squad, but must "walk" with a HMG squad, the "tube" man must walk with his ammo bearer. The difference is a combo of bulk and weight.

Having said all of this, in theory pretty much any individual can run with even a heavy bulky load. But is it the same speed as someone running with a normal load? No. Can he run as far before tiring? No. Can he run as many times in a set period of time (like 10 minutes)? No. Can he overcome small obsticles with the same ease and agility? No. So should a man weighed down by an large, bulky load be allowed to travel at the same speed as someone who isn't? NO.

Since CM's movement system is not set up to be subtle in terms of movement speed and weariness, we need to categorize units as either able to move fast or on average NOT able to move fast. The Bazooka made the cut (barely), but the PIAT and PS teams did not. We are keeping an open mind, but do not feel there is reason to make the PS teams move fast.

Steve

[This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 12-07-99).]

[howardb]

Steve I understand that you have to draw the line somewhere considering some of the limitations to the system and I respect that, it's not like it's ruining my gaming expirience or anything.

We do use the Carl Gustav in the Norwegian Army and the guys that are trained with it follow the rest of the infantry quite easily. Of course they can't climb, sprint, run as far etc like the rest but for small distances they're almost as fast as the rest. All this + that the Carl Gustav is heavier makes up my mind about this. Again it all depends on how the movements are modelled in the game.

[This message has been edited by howardb (edited 12-07-99).]

[Guest Charles]

As a compromise, couldn't you let the guys with the schrecks run for a turn or two, but then become easily fatigued and not be able to run for several turns after that?

In my experience running through airports with heavy suitcases (sorry, can't say I've actually run with a panzerschreck, but how many of us have?), its fairly easy to run for short distances even with very heavy and bulky objects. However, you get tired quickly, and it takes a long time to recover before you can do it again. How about it?

------------------

Not THE Charles from BTS

[Guest Mike]

My experience with miolitary equipment is 20 years old now, but IIRC it's perfectly possible to run with, say, a MG tripod (FN-MAG in this case). You just get tired faster.

My recent experience with running and military equipment relates to an earlier period - it's easy to run in chain mail with a shield, sword, axe, helmet, etc. Again you just get tired faster than you would if you were not encumbered.

In fact unless the load is REALLY heavy running shouldn't be an issue - but fatigue should be.

IMO CM includes a model for fatigue, and the effects of running with heavy and/or cumbersome loads should be represented in this area, not by a blanket prohibition on running for the troops involved.

As for effectiveness - last night 3 Pz-Schreks in CE managed to miss a single Sherman 6 times (total between them) at 100-110m range. I've decided not to rely on them too much!

[MikeT]

I just posted to the wermacht mailing list a question about running will carrying either a PanzerSchreck or PanzerFaust. When I get an answer of any use I will pass it on.

I made an earlier post about the Wermacht modify captured vehicles to serve as tank hunter vehicles. JonS asked if I had gotten this mixed up with the Nebelwerfer rockets.

While I checked my Encyclopedia of German Tanks, which is sort of my bible on German vehicles. What I was referring to is that they fielded what they called Panzerjager Bren. The pic shows 9 vehicles each armed with three 8.8cm Raketpanzerbuchse 43 or 54 rocket-launchers plus around 4 PF models 30 or 60. They were assigned to 3rd PG Division. Some vehicles were also modified with a single 37mm PaK L/45 on a pedestal. It seems that the Germans captured many Bren after Dunkirk.

Oh, the official name was:

Gepanzerter Maschinengewehr Trager Bren 731(e)

Cheers

Mike

[Guest Lokesa]

Mike are you in the SCA? I used to be part of the medievil mayhem society, great fun. I quit when the group I was part of began incorporating rules for magic (I was just in it for the smashing heads part )

[Guest JonS]

My apologies Mike T.

Was there any word on how these vehicles were intended to be used?

I can think of two options - option A: (very unlikely I think) the weapons were fired from the vehicle, and as such acted like a rocket powered tank hunter.

Option B: the vehicle was basically a battlefield taxi to get the guys near to a position quickly, and they'd walk from there.

I'm about to head off and do a search here, but any info you have would be great.

Thanks

Jon

------------------

Quo Fas et Vino du Femme

[Guest Big Time Software]

Yes, the fatigue model would have you believe that it would be easy to allow running for short distances, then being forced to move slowly. However, this isn't the case. Code sometimes doesn't work the way it looks like it should Call it a design limitation in that we can't make this happen. However, we do have on The Other List an item about improving the fatigue model to include more subtle treatment on a unit by unit basis. But until then, we have to go with a hard cut off. Not totally realistic, but as someone else said above "why are you running around in the first place"

As far as the Bren thing goes, I have no idea why the Germans didn't make as many of these as they possibly could! They had 3 PS tubes mounted over the engine housing and were intended to be fired from the vehicle. With the small size of the Bren (they used mostly MK1s from the looks of it), and three rockets at the ready, this MUST have been a devistating little bugger. The precursor to the modern TOW type vehicles of today. The Brens also had a half dozen or more Panzerfausts stored in the vehicle too, so a crew member (or nearby infantry) could get out and pop off a shot if they didn't want to get the vehicle caught out in the open.

Steve

[Mikeathome]

I confess - yes I'm "in" the SCA - small world huh?!

As for "why would you run" with a Pz-schrek or MG? Why, to get somewhere fast of course!!

Let's say you have to cross this street, see, and there's some form of enemy at the end shooting at anythign that moves. Now you can just sort of saunter over all care free and Sunday-afternoon-stroll type, or you could try something that will actually get you there alive. IMO a short sprint would be jut the thing.

Mike

Sorry to here it's not possible now, pleased to hear it's on the list of things to fix.

[Fionn]

JonS,

You misinterpreted what I said, I am NOT saying Howard's real life experience is irrelevant. I ACCEPT that the guy carrying the schreck could run (which is what Howard was saying). I DON'T accept that the guy with the carrying case could run. it just seems far too cumbersome to me. It is THAT aspect I asked him to go and look up since he had no real life experience of it (and BTW the Carl Gustav's case etc is smaller than the schreck case from what I've seen so the Gustav experience wouldn't count for the carrier.)

So, as you can see you misrepresented me.

Rune,

EXACTLY !!! Trust me, I WANT to prove the schreck guys can run but if some guy on some forum asks, "hey, why can they run?" I think everyone would want BTS to be able to give a better answer than "Well, Howard said he could run with a Gustav and they're kinda the same so we just figured they could run you know?"

I'd like to hear more about your "case being broken into two portions" thing. That sounds like something that would reduce cumbersomeness which I've said is the problem IMO.

Panzerfaust,

1. Which museum, I wanna go .

2. We're not saying you couldn't run with the schreck, we're saying that the guy carrying the AMMO mightn't have been able to run. There's a difference.. Did you get to see and hold the carrying case for the rounds?

Steve,

Knowing my fascination with all things German and AT-related.. Is there any chance of having the AT-Bren released in an add-on or something?

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[MikeT]

Gentlement, I posted on the Wermacht list last night questions about running with a PF and got three answers. Two might assist in the game design. If I get more responses I will post them. I had earlier mentioned the game to the Heer reenactors and a few were aware of the game.

1)

Mike,

I think I Downloaded the Demo for that game a Week ago, And I Think

(Since I have to Run, Carry and Fire one on the Field) the MG-42 Team

Is way way to slow, My Team and I can easly keep up with all of our squad.

And We dont always have the Laffete Mount too.

And when I was Street Fighting, It took 2 Turns for 3 Panzer-Grenadiers

that where 1 foot away from a Allied .30 Cal Machine gun Team, For both

of to die.

I Would suggest making it a none turn Game, and Adding actual Real

Numbers to the Squads, instead of a "Icon" Number.

Just a Few thoughts!

Gunther Tiebel

12th SS Panzer

Grenadier Division "Hj"

2nd response)

It is more than possible to run with a 'schreck. You won't run far, or

fast

for that matter but you can run. The faust is much easier to run with

as is the American bazooka. The main problem is the weight(obviously)

but what is

not usually taken into account is the bulk of the 'schreck. It is large

and

unwieldy so when running with it you must plan a little ahead or you

will end

up planting yourself into a wall or some such and that is just to damn

embarassing to think about!

Gary

Now back to me, about the Bren, the impression I have about this is that the Brens were captured at Dunkirk and were used by local Heer units for some years before D-Day. It seems to me that the vehicles were probably well run by that time and most likely few were still in running condition. I doubt if Churchill would have approved any parts resupply request from the nut in Berlin so German mechanics were most likely doing what all GIs do, scavenge for parts as needed. The pic shown only had 9 vehicles. So I am resonably sure that only 9 were available at D-Day and immediately after it. By the time of Battle of the Bulge most of them were gone.

JonS, sir no apologies needed. No offense take here. My book outlined no tactical use for the mod'ed Brens. I had always assumed that the Brens served as a carrier for weapons and that the troops would dismount for their ambush attacks. I hadn't thought, as BTS suggested, that the attacks would be carried out from the Bren or that the PS were fixed to the Bren.

Mike

"Quando omni flunkus moritati"

- Motto of Possum Lodge

[Guest rune]

Fionn,

From what I have gathered in my quest, I found the following. the rounds were carried in a backpack arrangement, the carrying case that breaks down was the way they were shipped to the front. Someone is trying to find a picture of the back pack arrangement.

The bren conversion only was used ont he Eastern front. [CM2?]. There were supposedly units in the defense of Berlin that has 6 schrecks mounted on them, but that is NOT confirmed. The arrangement kinda looks like the TOW array on modern vehicles.

[Fionn]

MikeT,

Well both those responses actually do jibe with what BTS and I have been saying.

1. The MG guy.. Note how he talks about leaving the tripod behind.. Well in that case he can run just the same as the LMG42 two-man teams in CM.. That's what he's transforming himself into.

Also it's the ammo that did most of the slowing down. I'm presuming they aren't running with 300 to 400 rounds of MG42 ammo each.. No wonder they can sprint

2. Note the schreck guy saying they can't run as fast as the others. In CM you either run fast or walk, unfortunately there isn't an option for "run kinda fast". It might be something to think of for CM2 though.

Also note that he talks about how cumbersome the tube is.. The weight of the tube and ammo isn't going to be the problem really. It's going to be the cumbersome nature which is what he kinda mentions.

3. Actually I remember those Brens. I think one of my books shows a group of them in either North Africa or Normandy.. I'm going to go and have a little search... I know I've seen them before but I'd totally forgotten I had until they were mentioned here.

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[howardb]

Fionn:

You're still wrong and you can preech about this until you get blue in the face and you'll still be wrong. Why? I tell you why because 16 kg's isn't much for normal sized men. Neither is 20 and if you get to put in a backpack like Rune says you can even run faster than the guy holding the tube.

It doesn't bother me the fact that the guy in the game doesn't run it's the arrogant way you're telling us they can't (even when some of us have real life expirience with similar systems). Now I don't see myself as a Rambo or anything but 16 kg's hah.. anyday.

[Fionn]

Howardb,

It CONSTANTLY amazes me how many people can't understand that there is NOTHING wrong with saying "bring me some proof".

Your sticking to your guns would be funny if it wasn't so atrociously blinkered.

Read what I write carefully this time.

1. Does the Gustav use the same carrying system for rounds as the schreck ?

2. How much does the number 2 in a Gustav team carry and how?

3. How does THAT mans load compare to the schreck?

I see NOTHING arrogant in simply saying that you need to PROVE (as in present facts) before I will change my mind.

So far you haven't given ANY evidence about how the carrying system for the Gustav and schreck are similar or different. Have you seen the length of a faust round? have you seen the carrying case?

You know, you've proven that you run slowly with a Gustav. I'm wonderfully happy for you BUT that proves NOTHING about the ammo carrier.

Probably your going to misread this or something and try to misrepresent me or something but at this stage I don't care.

If you can't understand that people are quite justified in holding their opinions in the ABSENCE OF PROOF to the contrary then you have problems.

FWIW I don't know you, it sounds like I wouldn't care to know you and I'm not willing to rely on just your say so for things.

If you can supply me with a comparison between the weight and dimensions of the gustav shell carrier and the schreck shells carrier etc THEN we will have a basis for discussion.

Simply saying "The gustav ammo carrier can run slowly THEREFORE the schreck ammo carrier could run" is total nonsense.

By your logic I could say "The Bazooka team can run, therefore the PIAT and schreck teams can run." After all the schreck was based on the bazooka so it is logical to assume that the schreck could run if the weapon it was based on could isn't it?

If you take ONE piece of information away with you from this discussion I think it should be the absolute necessity to PROVE your point if you're looking for a change in a game (or in a persons opinions).

If you don't prove your point don't expect your opinion to prevail BUT also don't cry foul and start complaingin and name-tossing simply because someone, in the absence of you proving your point, others choose to hold their opinions.

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[This message has been edited by Fionn (edited 12-08-99).]

[Moon]

Hey guys, no need to start shouting

I think it's quite clear that a guy carrying 20kg+ CAN run. But - he can do so for short distances only, shorter at least than a guy carrying nothing. Have them both run for 1000 meters and see who's faster. You'll realise that the longer they run, the slower the guy carrying the ammo is going to get.

Since CM1 is not capable of simulating "kinda fast running that slows down over time", but only "walk" or "run", BTS has to draw the line somewhere. After a long discussion which I had the luck to attend, the line has been drawn between the bazooka on the fast side and the Panzerschreck on the other.

From what I remember about the discussion back then, the decisive argument was the comparison between a PIAT team (and I think everybody agrees that these can't run) and the other light anti-tank weapons. If I recall correctly, both the Panzerschreck and the PIAT have very similar weights (57 pounds?) when you add in the ammo loadouts.

[This message has been edited by Moon (edited 12-08-99).]

[Guest Charles]

Guys, guys...before this gets out of hand, let's step back and take a couple of deep breaths. There is no reason for anyone to get personal over this. This is only a game, after all.

From my own personal observations of this discussion, it seems to me that Fionn is frustrated because he feels Howardb is ignoring his request for direct evidence that German soldiers in WWII were able to run with Panzershrecks. In the absence of such proof, Howardb is relying on his personal experience with a similar weapons system to argue that this could be done. As a military historian, Fionn rejects this approach, because it is not based on historical, primary source material--the most reliable type of historical evidence.

This, I believe, is the main bone of contention (please correct me if I am wrong). I can also appreciate Fionn's desire for this type of proof. My point, however, is that while primary source material is the most reliable type of evidence, it is not the ONLY type of evidence. Howardb is using evidence in the form of an analogy, based upon his personal experience. While not as reliable as direct evidence in the form of primary source material, it is still evidence. This type of evidence is used all the time in the legal system, i.e. circumstantial evidence. Instead of totally rejecting this evidence, the jury is instructed to "weigh the evidence for what you believe it is worth."

In a sense, I guess I am siding with Howardb (not necessarily on the merits of his argument), but in the sense that his evidence is as valid as Fionn's, and is therefore entitled to be heard. Whether his evidence is as reliable as the type of evidence Fionn wants is an entirely separate issue. IOW, while howardb's evidence should be heard and respected, people are also free to consider it "for what they believe it is worth."

I hope this helps to clarify the issue and perhaps settle some of the animosity that appears to have developed in this thread. Howardb and Fionn, if I have misrepresented either of you in any way, please let me know and I will try and correct it.

----------

Not THE Charles from BTS

[This message has been edited by Charles (edited 12-08-99).]

[Guest JonS]

In the spirit of Charles post - Howard, could you extend your analogy a bit please? Was the ammo carrier (carriers?) able to keep up while you were legging it with the CG tube?

Regards

Jon

------------------

Quo Fas et Vino du Femme

[howardb]

JonS:

The guy hauling the ammo had two plastic containers with 3 shot a piece and he moved just as quick as the guy with the Carl Gustav (I even think I read somewhere that usually the CG-team has 3 men, one aiming, one loader which has 2x3 rounds ammo and a ammo hauler with 2x3 rounds ammo but I'm not saying this is right because I don't remember it clearly). I remember one time we had prepared an ambush site with 3 CG teams, one 50 cal. and 4 rifle squads w/MG3's. That was just fun but when we was moving back to base they didn't drive us. All those weapons was very heavy to carry and we even switched weapons between us occasionally. But not being able to run for small distances with the CG or ammo, forget about it. One guy even said he could start carrying the CG and we could switch when he got tired, well he carried it all the way to camp through 60km of hills and swamp. (this is all from what I remember).

In the Norwegian Army all the men in the infantry should have training with all the squad weapons available that means MG3 (mg42), Carl Gustav, LAW (M-72), Cal.50 MG etc. I haven't shot live rounds with a Carl Gustav myself but under movement we always carried the equipment (to the joy of the officers i reckon) we're using. No live ammo for the Gustav I admit but we had blank rounds with the same weight in the plastic containers. Usually the guys in the support companies were driven but that's not the case in recruit period. The 50 cal. MG was the worst, we all dreaded it's weight even the tripod was a pain.

As for Fionn I don't have to prove anything for you, in fact let me turn the question around. Why don't you prove that the Shreck teams can't run? You haven't proven that they can't, have you? Just because you say something doesn't automatically make it right does it?

5 Shreck rounds is rougly 16 kg's and it's even been mentioned that you could carry it on your back. I don't feel an urge to prove anything for you I'm just saying that the Shreck units are moving way to slow taken my expirience with similar systems and i'm sticking with that. I don't even remember the weight of the CG rounds in the first place.

Now don't you think it's quite irrelevant wheather you would want to know me or not? Who do you think you are anyway?

[Scott C]

Howard, you said:

As for Fionn I don't have to prove anything for you, in fact let me turn the question around. Why don't you prove that the Shreck teams can't run? You haven't proven that they can't, have you? Just because you say something doesn't automatically make it right does it?

Well, there is a crucial difference between your position and Fionn's that you need to consider. That is, Fionn's position is the one currently held by BTS after discussion of the issue, and is what is currently in the game. In this context, there is always a presumption in favor of the status quo, since BTS's best guess is in there and changing it will take time. This is the reason you have a greater need to present direct evidence than does Fionn.

[Fionn]

I'm not going to get involved with Howardb's provocations in the previous point.

I'll just make a couple of points regarding what Charles said and then talk about methodology and the nature of proof a little (it'd probably make an interesting article for the right magazine).

Charles, as you state, there are many kinds of evidence. There are also different qualities of evidence and levels of trustworthiness.

The CG is a different weapons system with different characteristics to the Panzerschreck. That they are similar is without a doubt. On the other hand the bazooka and Piat are similar YET they are very different and have different characteristics whilst being similar.

Howardb is offering somewhat unclear anecdotal evidence of his experiences with the CG. This does NOT characterise good, solid evidence upon which to change the behaviour of the schrecks in the game. Now, if he could come up with this evidence for schrecks he'd have a point BUT as I've pointed out two man-portable AT systems which are superficially similar can be VERY different when we get down to the details.

When I put this to Howardb not only did he not detail how similar the CG was to the schreck he didn't even deal with the issue in any detail except for some sweeping statements which don't constitute proof.

As Charles has so well stated a certain "quality" of evidence is needed and Howard's bald statements and assertions don't meet the standard for a change IMO.

If he would simply start dealing with the schreck in detail then the quality of his evidence would increase.

His whole discussion is based on a number of flawed assumptions:

1. What goes for the CG will also apply to the schreck. This is simply not correct.

2. He is comparing the running of CG ammo carriers with that of the schreck ammo carrier when it is obvious that:

a) he is unaware of the precise carrying system used for the schreck.

he has stated that he is unaware of the weight of the CG rounds.

So Howard is stating that an ammo carrier carrying 6 rounds of unknown weight seemed to run, although not run as fast as others and that THIS conclusively proves that schreck ammo carriers carrying 5 rounds of a specific weight which may be more or may be less than the load carried but the CG carriers by means of a case of which he knows very little could run.

Howardb, There are FAR too many unknown variables there for you to make the kinds of statements you are making.

Maybe you are right BUT my point is that the "proof" you have presented is nothing of the sort. Methodologies are important and the burden of proof is upon you if you want to change something.

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

Edited to remove a misreading of something Howard said.

[This message has been edited by Fionn (edited 12-08-99).]

[Guest JonS]

Actually Fionn, you need to re-read Howards post. He clearly says that each person carried 2x3 rounds (ie 6 each). So if it was a two man crew the weapon had 6 rounds, and if it was a 3 man crew there were 12 rounds. So, in essence, the CG crews were more encumbered.

------------------

Quo Fas et Vino du Femme

[Fionn]

Gees, I had a whole big thing here about how I know Howard might take offence cause I'm telling him he hasn't reached the level of proof necessary when he thinks he has but I lost it in a crash.

Howard, I'm not getting personal on you at all (although I have been somewhat exasperated that you don't seem to understand what I'm saying) I'm merely telling you that you aren't providing the researched, referenced, comparative and empirical data necessary in the industry.

I've done what they call "Historical Consultancy" to 3 big wargames in the recent year which involved doing the whole data research, correction of errors etc etc thing we've got going here.

I ended up presenting a list of 30 books for one game. I had an Excel chart and I had to colour-code changes I made to data along with a colour code whihc allowed people to see, at a glance, how many of my sources agreed on making this specific change. I had to justify many changes, even when we were talking a millimetre here or there, with quoted passages from renowned books in the genre.

I've done the merry-go-round of producers, developers and researchers all; of whom need to be convinced that the change is needed to correct an error. They would NEVER accept a change because " I saw a guy running with a similar weapon". That just doesn't hack it.

The PIAT and bazooka are similar to the untrained eye BUT they are hugely different weapons in detail. Same for the CG and schreck. You NEED to go and see what some of the good researchers in this thread have done. They said things like "Ok, I'll go and look for images of men running with schrecks." Or "I'll look for the ammo carriers running." or "I'll find data about the carrying case" etc/

THEY are on the right track.

I know it might be hard to be told you are wrong but if you simply accept this as a learning experience and learn that a more reference, evidence-based approach is necessary then you'll have learnt a good lesson which will probably stand you in good stead elsewhere.

Remember, methodologies, showing a paper trail and being able to demonstrate painstaking research, comparative and irrefutable empirical evidence along with the references from which all of these were culled are what you need to present and observe.

Probably you won't take this post well but at least my conscience will be clear insofar as I'll have said it and been as reasonable and honest as I can. I'm sorry you feel upset but I've only ever promised to tell it like I see it and sometimes that means disagreeing with people. It's up to them how to deal with it (my advice to you is to simply realise I'm disagreeing with you and to think I may just have a point).

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[Guest Mike]

Fionn wrote:

"The PIAT and bazooka are similar to the untrained eye"

Really??!!

However, attempted humour to one side, and remember thsi opinion is worth exactly what yuo pay me for it, I'd suggest that BTS's logic is at fault.

Humans can run, unless something prevents them. IMO this is the default situation.

Therefore it should be for BTS to show that something prevents running for some proveable, repeatable reason.

Fionn's contention that there needs to be proof of 'schrek teams running can probably be met in a short period of time by someone with access to Whermacht film archives. Unfortunately such resources are limited in New Zealand, but I'm willing to seriously look at any offers to travel anywhere to do the work

Mike

[Moon]

See, I said - don't shout. When people start shouting, nobody is listening. So quiet now and listen:

a guy carrying 20 kg can run for some distance before he has to stop and take some breath.

a guy carrying 40 kg can run for a shorter distance before he has to stop.

a guy carrying an M4 Sherman on his shoulders cannot run.

I guess we all can agree on that

Now, all of the above will slow down the longer they run, with the guys carrying heavier loads slowing down faster. After 1 km, the guy carrying nothing will still be going well, while the one with 20kg on his shoulder will more or less get down to a crawl.

However, CM doesn't simulate that (scroll up for Steve's post about that). It can only simulate "walk" or "run", but not "run but get slower with time". So there has to be a line drawn somewhere (yes, I'm repeating myself, but I guess I have since nobody listened the first time around). After careful evaluation of equipment and its weight, the line has been drawn by BTS between the bazooka and the Panzerschreck.

Part of the reasoning was that a guy with a PIAT definitely cannot run. Looking at the stats of a PIAT and a Panzerschreck, and adding in the ammo for these, it has been found out that actually both teams carry the same weight, i.e. 57 pounds, while a bazooka is much lighter even with more ammo.

Hence - bazookas can run, while Panzerschrecks and PIATS cannot.

This does NOT mean, however, that Panzerschrecks cannot sprint for a few meters (say, across a street) - but as mentioned above, CM cannot simulate this currently.

Bottom line: look at RUN and WALK as average speeds.

I hope this ends (or at least calms) this discussion before it boils over or Steve closes it down.

[This message has been edited by Moon (edited 12-08-99).]