Mattias Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 Thanks for posting the review over at Boots & Tracks Bill, informative and entertaining. Just the thing to ease the last weeks of waiting So, was that one of the surprise features we saw? The tank overrunning infantry I mean. I don’t recall it being mentioned after a long debate some time back and I got the impression it was given an official NO at that time. Guess there is more to discover along the road M. [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 04-26-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 No, that picture was just a tank which was positioned over the top of a infantry squad that was prone. There is no infantry over-runs BUT vehicles can try and over run AT guns. When that occurs there is a chance that the crews will flee the gun, but then there is also a chance that the crew may calmly wait until the vehicle is a few meters out and blast him back to hell too! Madmatt ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! combathq.thegamers.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 Quoted from the AAR "Twisting my Sherman to the right, I grind the panicked attackers beneath my treads. Bloody, I know, but I had no choice. They were upon him and it was kill or be killed!" Sounds like an infantry killing to me! ------------------ Visit my webpage! http://cm4mac.tripod.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Captain Foobar Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 oops, I started a thread on this too.... So whats the word then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crossfire Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 Whats that webpage again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 Wild Bill's Raiders site ------------------ Visit my webpage! http://cm4mac.tripod.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorak Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 I believe you guys are reading a little too much into the AAR. The AAR does sum up the actions he took, but you have to add a little color to make it interesting. Like the diffrence in saying " We entered the house and close assulted them" and... "We stormed the house and Joe and Mike had to wrestle two Germans before they finally fell to thier knives." Just my take on things. Grain of salt and all that. TTFN Lorak ------------------ http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Captain Foobar Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 Lorak, read the AAR on Wild Bill's Raider site. It is a DIRECT quote, nothing added at all. We need a clarification, as to infantry casualties cuased by over-run, as was plainly stated to be the case in that article. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Now under assault by charging Volksgrenadiers with panzerfausts, the Sherman wheels and fires at point-blank range. One German squad panics. It is all I need! Twisting my Sherman to the right, I grind the panicked attackers beneath my treads. Bloody, I know, but I had no choice. They were upon him and it was kill or be killed! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> [This message has been edited by Captain Foobar (edited 04-26-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorak Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 I have read it Foobar. It was up there yesterday. All I'm saying is that you can't run over people with tanks. Has been stated plenty of times. If I'm not mistaken Matt had that same picture posted on his site a few weeks ago, which caused this same discussion. I'm just saying that you have to take into account that some actions,commentary, get added to AAR's to make them more colorful and fun to read. TTFN Lorak ------------------ http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 So if Fionn wrote in an AAR that "the white phosphorus rounds were abundant as my Churchill AVRE crashed over the dead bodies that were visible, barely avoiding the 12 man graphical squad who were drenched in visible blood from the tough fighting on the beach landings" you would take that as artistic license? I know I'm exagerating but ya... We have a valid point. ------------------ Visit my webpage! http://cm4mac.tripod.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 I can state absolutely and categorically that Bill was merely using a little artistic licence to make things more exciting to read. Tanks and other vehicles CANNOT kill infantry by running over them. Bill was just making it all a little more exciting to read ( just as Lorak surmised). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 Okay thats the answer we were looking for. ------------------ Visit my webpage! http://cm4mac.tripod.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 Fionn, I understand that in CM you will not be able to crush infantry beneath your tracks (or wheels for that matter). What I do not understand is why. I recently saw a set of instructions to Tiger crews which specifically told the crews to drive over infantry whenever possible. It specifically stated that this was an MG ammo conservation measure. So,if the Germans trained their tank crews to do this, why can't we do it in the game? I'd really like the detailed reasoning behind this decision. Regards, John Kettler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KwazyDog Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 I know Russian (I *think* ) tankers were also trained to grind up fox holes with their vehicles. In reality though, if I was a tanker I wouldnt want to get anywhere near infantry, so I dont know how common this really would have been on the battlefield. It only takes well placed grenade to take a track of a tank, and after youve been trying to squash the infantry under your tracks I wouldnt want to be getting out of my tank near them Im not sure what Steve and Charles will say, but my best guess is that it happened so rarely that it wasnt worth modelling I must admit, Ive read a lot of real AAR's in the last 6 months, and Ive never once seen it mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eridani Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 I know I'm not going to get an official answer to this... but did anyone else notice the image doctoring of the the photo's? http://wbr.thegamers.net/articles/cmpics/FF16-tankdeath.jpg on both sides of the sherman there are clear blot outs... makes me wonder. any guesses as to what could be there that we're not suppossed to see? -EridanMan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 Hey, I got an idea guys! Why don't you open up another topic which has been covered about a THOUSAND FREAKING TIMES and ignore what we THE ONES WHO WOULD KNOW have to say about it!!! Oh, thats right, you just did... Tanks DO NOT run over infantry in CM. Did it happen in real life? Sure and so did a stovepiped cannon round exploding and killing the entire crew of a tank. Is is modeled NO. I would HIGHLY reccomend you do a search on 'Infantry Overuns' as its been covered so much I am begining to think its a Beatles song... Madmatt ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! combathq.thegamers.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 Sounds like a plan Madmatt! ------------------ Visit my webpage! http://cm4mac.tripod.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eridani Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 I'm not saying anything about the overruns... I know they aren't in... What I am saying is that those images are clearly doctored, which means that there is something underneath that we're not suppossed to see... and I'm very curious as to what that might be... VERY curious come on... I know I'm not the only one here who shook their christmas presents before christmas morning -EridanMan [This message has been edited by Eridani (edited 04-26-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 No its not doctored at all! Its a prone german with a tank on top. I didnt say that graphics couldnt do that, I just said that its not modeled as an actual overrun/squish thing... Madmatt p.s. oh wait a minute, I see what picture you are talking about now...Bill was probably covereing up some unfinished textured stuff...That game build he was using is rather old, just look at the fire for proof! Doh! I am gonna hit Bill with a trout next time I see him!!! ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! combathq.thegamers.net [This message has been edited by Madmatt (edited 04-26-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 The short answer of why we don't have an infantry overrun feature for squads is because a squad is up to 12 men. Try running over 12 men with a tank and see how many you get 1-3 tops. These kind of casualties happen anyway because the unit basically breaks when a tank moves "over" it, and thus the damage from an overrun attack is done. Extra casualties would make overrun attacks too powerfull. Plus, as KwazyDog and others have said, overrun attacks are more a part of Hollywood rather than History. Yes they happened, but it seems people think they should happen ALL the time. Wrong Team weapons (AT, HMG, etc.) are treated differently. These units will, most likely, abandon their weapons and head for the hills. The difference between the two is that a team is centered around a single, immobile (practically in such cases) weapon system instead of 8-12 individual men running around. Steve Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eridani Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 hmmm... position is a little suspicious just to be an unfinished texture... I mean, what vehicle is that small? Sure it could be an infantry picture, but they are have been done for a while (at least my understanding)... Nope, sorry Madmatt, can't say I buy it You just happen to be too much one of "them" involved in the cover up and your coming to get me! The thought police are coming to silence me! hehehehehe The truth is out there (sorry, lame X-Files reference) -EridanMan [This message has been edited by Eridani (edited 04-26-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KwazyDog Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 'at least my understanding' Sorry Eridani, your understanding is wrong All infantry have been redone by Steve himself recently, and for a beta or two there some of the troops were looking a little odd due to their unfinished textures... Hehe, on my system at the moment I have a building side in place of a tree, but thats my fault It makes you feel like to have a lot better cover in a forest though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 It looks to me like one of two possibilities Eridani. 1. There were US infantry in the two coloured out areas and Bill wanted to remove them for dramatic effect OR 2. This was midway between the changeover from old infantry uniforms to new uniforms.. Check out the Gamesdomain preview from about 3 months ago to check out the funky rainbow-coloured tanks we've all being playing with while waiting for their textures to be finalised . Do we show you pics of those vehicles? No. Is it a conspiracy? No. Why don't we show them? Simple, we like nice photos 9and rainbow-coloured tanks do not a nice photo make IMO) AND there are lots of people who are too stupid to do a little thinking and realise that all games have unfinished textures when they're beta and it means nothing that a couple of tanks look weird a few weeks before release. Let's face it, that pic would look pretty ****ty if you had a few rainbow-coloured US infantry marring the picture wouldn't it? For the record ALL the infantry textures have been totally reworked within the past 3 weeks or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goanna Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 I'm with Eridani, we should call Scull and Mull. It's gotta be them blotting out radical rainbow hippy infantry using that death ray thingy that Fionn thought up! ------------------ desert rat wannabe [This message has been edited by Goanna (edited 04-26-2000).] [This message has been edited by Goanna (edited 04-26-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eridani Posted April 27, 2000 Share Posted April 27, 2000 Come on guys, Where's your paranoid conspiracy theories? arn't they all out to get us? its the thought police I tell you actually, after the game is released I'd love to see pictures of these so-called rainbow men, I just think it'd look kinda funny. Shame he didn't leave them in. hehehe -EridanMan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts