John Kettler Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 I know people have asked why an MG can't be taken from a pillbox, and I certainly can understand why a static mounted MG or AT gun can't be moved. But I don't understand why the crews lack something as fundamental as rifles. I can produce all kinds of pictures of MG crewmen and AT gun crewmen armed with rifles, carbines, etc. So could someone there or elsewhere please explain to me why all these guys have are pistols? In VoT I've had several pillboxes knocked out, but the crews came through intact. With only pistols for weapons, though, they're militarily useless. Please explain the logic behind this decision. Thanks! John Kettler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastables Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by John Kettler: they're militarily useless. Please explain the logic behind this decision. Thanks! John Kettler <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You aready have your reason. No gamey pillbox crew attacks, they are useless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 John, the only time these guys are going to leave their posts is when the structure has been destroyed. In that case, same as for vehicle crews, the pillbox crew is so shell shocked that they're militarily useless regardless of personal weapons. DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobVarak Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 John, Man, you have a lot of issues, don't ya? I'm just giving you a hard time, it's nice to see someone passionate about the game and looking to improve things for all of us. ------------------ Rob Varak Editor Site on Sound: The Web's Premier Site For Musical Discussion www.siteonsound.com [This message has been edited by RobVarak (edited 06-27-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullethead Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 Johnk Kettler said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>With only pistols for weapons, though, they're militarily useless.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I used to think the same, until circumstances forced me to press such crews into the line. Many times in VOT, pillbox crews have played a vital role in stopping the American attack at the very summit of Hill 209, holding the line until the reinforcements arrive. And in a PBEM game recently, a vehicle crew managed to gun down an entire paratrooper squad at a crucial moment. Maybe crews have grenades, too. But in any case, if put them in covered positions where the enemy has to come to them and will only have an LOS to 20m or so, crews usually get off the 1st shot, probably because pistols can be aimed quicker than rifles. And getting off the 1st shot at such close range is usually the deciding factor, because the enemy usually will take casualties, hit the deck, and thus be unable to fire back. So the crew can hit him again. ------------------ -Bullethead It was a common custom at that time, in the more romantic females, to see their soldier husbands and sweethearts as Greek heroes, instead of the whoremongering, drunken clowns most of them were. However, the Greek heroes were probably no better, so it was not so far off the mark--Flashman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 A pistol, militarily useless???!!! Hey Charles!?! Should I show them that picture I sent to you of just how UN-USELESS a pistol can sometimes be in CM??!!! In short, don't under-estimate whats possible with a lucky (and I mean LUCKLY!) pistol shot! Madmatt ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! CMHQ-Annex, The Alternative side of Combat Mission Combat Mission HQ CMHQ-Annex Proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacMogul Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 For the previously mentioned reasons, I think the crews are appropriately armed, but I gotta ask this: Bullethead, how are the Americans getting so far that your crews are becoming a necessary part of your defense? I've played VoT a half dozen times as the Germans, and even in the first few tries the Americans never got past getting a few squads into Plomville. Of course I've only played the AI so far, and never above +25% strength for it (which I only started to do recently to make things more interesting while I patiently wait for my copy of the game to arrive). --Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 Your question is: Bullethead, how are the Americans getting so far that your crews are becoming a necessary part of your defense? And the answer is: I've played VoT a half dozen times as the Germans, and even in the first few tries the Americans never got past getting a few squads into Plomville. Of course I've only played the AI so far, Try VoT against a human and see who becomes king of the mountain ------------------ The dead know only one thing - it is better to be alive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacMogul Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 Kingfish, I'm sure it's much more interesting against flesh and blood, but I was holding out hope that I'd have the full game by now so that I could start PBEMing that. I'm also thinking that double-blind games would be more fun (for me the demo scenarios are really becoming an excercise in efficient killing at this point). I'd ask for a PBEM game of VoT from you, except that I have family in town for the next two weeks that will severly limit my ability to play an extended game. If anyone has the time to "power" PBEM a game on Friday night, I could try it then. Be gentle, it'll be my first time. --Bill [This message has been edited by MacMogul (edited 06-28-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted July 5, 2000 Author Share Posted July 5, 2000 This is another thread I'd really appreciate an official response to, please. Regards, John Kettler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullethead Posted July 5, 2000 Share Posted July 5, 2000 Kingfish said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Bullethead, how are the Americans getting so far that your crews are becoming a necessary part of your defense?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sorry to be lagged on this--didn't notice your reply until John topped this thread just now. Anyway, I think your question answers itself. If you have a lot of crews, then you have a severe shortage of major weapons. And for some reason, the enemy always seems to take advantage of this and press his attack. Never have been able to figure out why this happens. Must be a bug somewhere . ------------------ -Bullethead It was a common custom at that time, in the more romantic females, to see their soldier husbands and sweethearts as Greek heroes, instead of the whoremongering, drunken clowns most of them were. However, the Greek heroes were probably no better, so it was not so far off the mark--Flashman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:USERNAME: Posted July 5, 2000 Share Posted July 5, 2000 John If you do a search you will find a discussion regarding the decision to model the pillboxes/bunkers as immobile vehicles and thats why crews pop out. I see now there are no trenches in the game and feel that foxholes are pretty badly modeled and bunkers misunderstood. Its evident that the designers of the game should stop driving around a weasal in starched cammies and get a shovel and dig some real positions and get some calouses. Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Fox Posted July 5, 2000 Share Posted July 5, 2000 The delights of Lewis's wit aside I am sure John you would get an "official" reply from Steve or Charles if: (A) They had plenty of idle time to kill. ( You asked a question that hadn't been asked by someone else and answered before. I cordially invite you to sample the delights of the search function: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/search.cgi?action=intro&default=1 ------------------ "Pink Floyd, a load of old twaddle"-John Lydon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:USERNAME: Posted July 5, 2000 Share Posted July 5, 2000 Fox Since I am an old sex pistols fan I wont berate you for NOT using the correct possesive form of my name.. Lewis Fields they have eyes Woods they have ears.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snagdad Posted July 5, 2000 Share Posted July 5, 2000 lusername: If you are going to correct other's punctuation you should check your own posts for spelling and grammar. Look at your "weasal" post (while tempting, this is not commenting on the post itself, rather I am trying to point out to you where to look). Try Webster's for how to spell weasel. Also, in your headlong rush for clever palaver I am sure you meant to say "driving around in a weasel in starched cammies" as opposed to "driving around a weasal in starched cammies" which has a totally different meaning. Do you pal around with weasals in starched cammies ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted July 5, 2000 Share Posted July 5, 2000 John, This has been answered dozens of times before, in great detail. Please do a search or accept the quick answers above as they are pretty much right on the mone Lewis, a paraphrase of your usual crap (but spelled better); it is evident that you should stop posting your drivel here and get out into the real world to find yourself a life. That is far more valuable than some calluses you might have. Steve [This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 07-05-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted July 8, 2000 Author Share Posted July 8, 2000 Okay, I've read and read and read some more in the lengthy thread about pillboxes.I am therefore up to speed on pillboxes and bunkers being treated as vehicles, not terrain. I've also read in great detail the reasons why one can't take the HMG voluntarily out of the pillbox and why neither side's allowed to occupy an abandoned pillbox. Got all that. What I have yet to find is an answer on why the crews have only pistols, as opposed to rifles and/or SMGs. I will continue to wade through the thread, but if this issue is adddressed directly, would some kind soul please post the link and save me from having to plow through all 71 items and their subthreads? Also, USERNAME didn't start this thread; I did. Please correct the search engine on this. Thanks for any and all help. Sincerely, John Kettler [This message has been edited by John Kettler (edited 07-07-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Weaver Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 A crew can be this effective in battle. I had to make do with what I had where I had it, and these guys came through in spades. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Weaver Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 Are there plans to issue pistols to bazooka teams, or have they already been equipped with them? I read a thread in which BTS promised to give those plucky grunts some self-defense capability against the angry gangs of black-suited evictees they meet from time to time and I'm just wondering whether that's has been carried out. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted July 8, 2000 Author Share Posted July 8, 2000 Dan, IMPRESSIVE!!! Does the crew have only .45s, or is there an SMG as well? In semishock, John Kettler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts