Kauz Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 The 88mm not being able to getting transported and then being established seems a little weird. Despite the fact that it was possible in CMBB (8minutes i think), we have to keep following things/facts in mind: A. the 88mm was a "fire brigade" always trying to move and establish at points were tanks were trying to break through. Such a scenario i wanted to create is now not possible anymore. B. It is well known that the 88mm was able to fire and fight without establishing the cruciform mount. Just being still on wheels. The developer could establish this mode as "semi-deployed" (similar to heavy machine guns). Some footage of this you can watch for example in following link at video-minutes 0:52;1:02;1:03;1:10;1:11;1:35: C. The most important thing: "Time to change from traveling to firing position . . . .2,5 min with 6-man crew (approx. ) Time to change from firing to traveling position_ . 3,5 min with 6-man crew (approx. )" This you can find in following allied manual "pdf" on page 9 of 185: http://www.lexpev.nl/downloads/tme9369agerman88mmgun.pdf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poesel Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 IIRC this was discussed here in a lengthy thread and the answer was: no, not gonna happen because of several valid reasons. Search for it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kauz Posted April 25, 2014 Author Share Posted April 25, 2014 well....did not found it in this forum so far....and i can not think of the "valid" reasons... but it is not important....why they say it is not gonna be....if the once say they do not want to do the "work"...they won´t anyway.... so i would establish this thread as a wish thread..... the more people sign in and say they want it too....it may be come one time... but if i think about how long the (reduced) round based TCP/IP need to rejoin the game-system then i do not have any big hope. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wadepm Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Nashorn... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kauz Posted April 25, 2014 Author Share Posted April 25, 2014 Nashorn... Nashorn? :confused: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Kauz, I for one would be more than willing to support your cause. (Kauz...cause...get it?) My father-in-law commanded a battery of 88's. He says you are absolutely correct in your assertion. It could be done. Now, whether or not BFC chooses to "let it be done" is another matter entirely. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fizou Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I would also hope that this, at one point, will be possible. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUCASWILLEN05 Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 BF would need to include heavy prime movers. I suspect the 88 would require a considerable period of time to deploy and limber up. But,givven the time available in a game it coul be done in theory a least. Whether this is actually a practical option in game terms is however another question. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kauz Posted April 25, 2014 Author Share Posted April 25, 2014 ... I suspect the 88 would require a considerable period of time to deploy and limber up. ... . C. The most important thing: "Time to change from traveling to firing position . . . .2,5 min with 6-man crew (approx. ) Time to change from firing to traveling position_ . 3,5 min with 6-man crew (approx. )" This you can find in following allied manual "pdf" on page 9 of 185: http://www.lexpev.nl/downloads/tme93...man88mmgun.pdf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazing 88's Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Love my 88's, as you can tell by my username. I would appreciate for this to happen at some point yes, yes I would. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUCASWILLEN05 Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 C. The most important thing: "Time to change from traveling to firing position . . . .2,5 min with 6-man crew (approx. ) Time to change from firing to traveling position_ . 3,5 min with 6-man crew (approx. )" This you can find in following allied manual "pdf" on page 9 of 185: http://www.lexpev.nl/downloads/tme93...man88mmgun.pdf Quite some time if you have to do it under fire. No reason we should not have the option though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kauz Posted April 25, 2014 Author Share Posted April 25, 2014 Try to imagine following "classical" situation: german task: German positions are under massive attacks of soviets. Prevent russian troops/tanks from breaking through till the german reinforcement (the 88mm battery) arrived as "fire brigade". Search a good position for the battery.... if possible 1000-2000 meters away from enemy tanks ...build them up (2,5min) and **** the russian tanks to hell. Russian task: Break through at all costs to disintergrate the german line and do not give the german reinforcements/defenders the chance to build up/form a new defending line (in this case the 88mm battery ) .... Once i tried a dogfight of a 88mm battery vs. a numbre of IS2- in more than 1000-1500 meters. The 88mm were entrenched in scenario editors big crates and in the so called "trench" of the developer. The hiding and cover of both thing did not prevent the IS-2 to shoot and hit the german 88m gun shields and took them out. Not only that the trench and crates did not create hiding/protection power.....the IS2s shot like fire and forget weapons and my battery were killed.... Accuracy were not only a matter of a accurate gun, precise ammo, good designed and calibrated optics...it was also a matter of trained/skilled gunners. His main task were to first find and identify an enemy and then find/ estimate the right distance. Most time they had to do 1-3 shots before they could define the right distance and produce a hit especially against well hidden and entrenched targets. The IS2- guy were real gods in this way and the trenches useless....god help the guns and infs ....the developes won´t do it 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AttorneyAtWar Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Try to imagine following "classical" situation: german task: German positions are under massive attacks of soviets. Prevent russian troops/tanks from breaking through till the german reinforcement (the 88mm battery) arrived as "fire brigade". Search a good position for the battery.... if possible 1000-2000 meters away from enemy tanks ...build them up (2,5min) and **** the russian tanks to hell. Russian task: Break through at all costs to disintergrate the german line and do not give the german reinforcements/defenders the chance to build up/form a new defending line (in this case the 88mm battery ) .... Once i tried a dogfight of a 88mm battery vs. a numbre of IS2- in more than 1000-1500 meters. The 88mm were entrenched in scenario editors big crates and in the so called "trench" of the developer. The hiding and cover of both thing did not prevent the IS-2 to shoot and hit the german 88m gun shields and took them out. Not only that the trench and crates did not create hiding/protection power.....the IS2s shot like fire and forget weapons and my battery were killed.... Accuracy were not only a matter of a accurate gun, precise ammo, good designed and calibrated optics...it was also a matter of trained/skilled gunners. His main task were to first find and identify an enemy and then find/ estimate the right distance. The IS2- guy were real gods in this way and the trenches useless....god help the guns and infs the developes won´t do it 88's are a huge target even in a trench/fortification, and a 122mm shell is a big shell so I don't understand how you are surprised by that result. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kauz Posted April 25, 2014 Author Share Posted April 25, 2014 88's are a huge target even in a trench/fortification, and a 122mm shell is a big shell so I don't understand how you are surprised by that result. if you google the 88mm ....what you will see....no matter if videos or pictures....? You will find a lot of these guns being established or firing in direct fire without being entrenched. It can be propaganda....it can be a random thing....it can be the fact that they just arrived as "fire brigrade" to stop an enemy tank attack .... Last thing they are more motivated to do in case they believe that they are even in secure without entrenchement. And why they should be sure about that....?! Answer: Quite simple.....They were at a high distance 800-2500 meters (most time 1000-1500meters) so they know that the enemy has problems to spot them...identify them....and estimate the right distance.... Not counting the accuracy of the gun....the enemy lost a lot of time before he is even able to achieve his first hits against the gun. Because he does not know the right distance!!! In this time the 88mm (because of the high rate of fire) already destroyed most tanks ...not to say that it is not only skill or high rate of fire ....it is more like that the tanks are big, easy to spot and have well known dimensions. Knowing the dimensions makes it in general much easier for german guns/optics to find the right distance to the target. In my case the 88mm were additionaly entrenched in the deepest crate of the scenario editor and in the so called "trench" of the game.....both seem not helping to reduce spotting ability of the tanks and reducing their chances to hit or find the right distance.... quite dissappointing But back to the main topic..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 There's a scenario in CMBN basegame involving 88s. 'A Delaying Action'. It involves two pairs of 88s. One pair placed on the roadway, immediately spotted and easily dealt with. The second pair (*spoiler alert*) is set back into a copse of trees in a keyhole position. Something of a nightmare to get LOF on and deal with. 88 is like any other weapon in the game, if you get overconfident in its abilities your opponent is going to hand you your head. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 C. The most important thing: "Time to change from traveling to firing position . . . .2,5 min with 6-man crew (approx. ) Time to change from firing to traveling position_ . 3,5 min with 6-man crew (approx. )" And according to someone who was "there", 88's often operated with an eight (8) man crew. So theoretically, at least, the turnaround time could be even less. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saferight Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 There's a scenario in CMBN basegame involving 88s. 'A Delaying Action'. It involves two pairs of 88s. One pair placed on the roadway, immediately spotted and easily dealt with. The second pair (*spoiler alert*) is set back into a copse of trees in a keyhole position. Something of a nightmare to get LOF on and deal with. 88 is like any other weapon in the game, if you get overconfident in its abilities your opponent is going to hand you your head. that was a awesome scenario MIkey D. Although the inclusion of the 57's for the Americans made me scared that panzers of some sort were coming to slap my ass. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Although the inclusion of the 57's for the Americans made me scared that panzers of some sort were coming to slap my ass. That was deliberate... because I am evil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Volksgrenadier Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 if you google the 88mm ....what you will see....no matter if videos or pictures....? You will find a lot of these guns being established or firing in direct fire without being entrenched. It can be propaganda....it can be a random thing....it can be the fact that they just arrived as "fire brigrade" to stop an enemy tank attack .... Last thing they are more motivated to do in case they believe that they are even in secure without entrenchement. And why they should be sure about that....?! Answer: Quite simple.....They were at a high distance 800-2500 meters (most time 1000-1500meters) so they know that the enemy has problems to spot them...identify them....and estimate the right distance.... Not counting the accuracy of the gun....the enemy lost a lot of time before he is even able to achieve his first hits against the gun. Because he does not know the right distance!!! In this time the 88mm (because of the high rate of fire) already destroyed most tanks ...not to say that it is not only skill or high rate of fire ....it is more like that the tanks are big, easy to spot and have well known dimensions. Knowing the dimensions makes it in general much easier for german guns/optics to find the right distance to the target. In my case the 88mm were additionaly entrenched in the deepest crate of the scenario editor and in the so called "trench" of the game.....both seem not helping to reduce spotting ability of the tanks and reducing their chances to hit or find the right distance.... quite dissappointing But back to the main topic..... Exactly. What makes it so ridiculous is that Combat Mission is advertised with modeling of the optics! But that the precise optics of the soviet tank only goes up to 800 m does not matter at all... But it can't be said there was no system, behind it: the German MG42 has the same power as any other HMG, the Panther is brittle like a china plate, a Stuka dive bomber has not a better accuracy than any ordinary flyover bomber and the angled plates of the Sdkfz's are penetrable as if they were vertically angled. Attract customers with simulation attributes, but then please the masses with artificially balancing the models... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 Exactly. What makes it so ridiculous is that Combat Mission is advertised with modeling of the optics! But that the precise optics of the soviet tank only goes up to 800 m does not matter at all... But it can't be said there was no system, behind it: the German MG42 has the same power as any other HMG, the Panther is brittle like a china plate, a Stuka dive bomber has not a better accuracy than any ordinary flyover bomber and the angled plates of the Sdkfz's are penetrable as if they were vertically angled. Attract customers with simulation attributes, but then please the masses with artificially balancing the models... Ooo look everyone! A troll. An ignorant one, at that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kauz Posted April 26, 2014 Author Share Posted April 26, 2014 Ooo look everyone! A troll. An ignorant one, at that. troll? in which way? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skwabie Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 But it can't be said there was no system, behind it: the German MG42 has the same power as any other HMG, the Panther is brittle like a china plate, a Stuka dive bomber has not a better accuracy than any ordinary flyover bomber and the angled plates of the Sdkfz's are penetrable as if they were vertically angled. Attract customers with simulation attributes, but then please the masses with artificially balancing the models... Not exactly the words I'd use but just say if ya stay with BF's modern games you're golden!.. Not agreeing the comparisons listed there (I have others tho) but I do agree the wehrmacht is mostly under represented these days for the nation behind it was no more so no one really stand up and debate for it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
76mm Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 ...but I do agree the wehrmacht is mostly under represented these days for the nation behind it was no more so no one really stand up and debate for it. Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but as far as I can tell you're suggesting that the German troops (including of course the vaunted SS!) modeled more weakly than they should be because there are no Nazis (ie, "the nation behind it") to tell Battlefront how it should be....really?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 troll? in which way? Spouting misleading misunderstandings (to be charitable) in an attempt to get a rise. Ignorance excuses it. Agendas don't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kauz Posted April 26, 2014 Author Share Posted April 26, 2014 Spouting misleading misunderstandings (to be charitable) in an attempt to get a rise. Ignorance excuses it. Agendas don't. either it is my english or yours....i really do not understand what you are trying to tell me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.