Beta AAR turn 3 Now Up at CMHQ!!!! oh and Gladiator ROCKED!!!!

[Guest Madmatt]

Run, dont walk to your local theater and plunk down the $37.50 or so for a ticket and sit back and emerse yourself into the Roman Empire circa 180AD. The opening battle between the Roman Legions and the German Barbarians is worth the admission alone!

Awesome movie and almost 3 hours long to boot! Lots of incredible scenes (rendered with computers no doubt) of Rome, the Coliseum and huge masses of troops and people. Just all around an great movie!

Now then, For today we have Fionn's After Action Report Turn 3!!! Fionn says this may be one of his best AAR's yet written, so take him to the task and check it out yourself.

Madmatt...

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

If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ!

And if it's NOT on CMHQ then its just GOT to be on CMHQ-ANNEX...

CMHQ http://combathq.thegamers.net

CMHQ-Annex http://cmhq.tzo.com

Both now proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing

[BFCElvis]

Matt,

I have been following this AAR more than any other since the Alpha AAR. But did I miss something or is Bill not posting his side?

Fionn,

I really dig the way you compose and AAR.

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

"Tryin to be so so bad is bad enough, don't make me laugh by talkin tough" EC

[Guest Madmatt]

You are correct. This AAR is only from Fionn's point of view. Now if Bil wants to post his own comments then that would be great!

UPDATE, I have posted a POTD for today as of 14:35pm...Pretty nice one too, check it out.

Madmatt

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

If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ!

And if it's NOT on CMHQ then its just GOT to be on CMHQ-ANNEX...

CMHQ http://combathq.thegamers.net

CMHQ-Annex http://cmhq.tzo.com

Both now proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing

[Guest Ol' Blood & Guts]

DAMN! That PzIVH texture is AWESOME!

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

"Why don't we say that we took this one chance, and fought!"

"Stupid humans. Hahahahahahaha!"

--from the film Battlefield Earth

[SS_PanzerLeader]

Just went and saw gLaDiaToR myself

Awesome movie Worth the whole 20 bucks

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

SS_PanzerLeader.......out

[Guest Ol' Blood & Guts]

Gawd! Where do you all live?

The local theater here in town is $2.

The bigger and better one in the next town is only $6. Was just $5.50 recently.

I'll probably go see either U-571 or Gladiator tomorrow.

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

"Why don't we say that we took this one chance, and fought!"

"Stupid humans. Hahahahahahaha!"

--from the film Battlefield Earth

[Guest Madmatt]

8 bucks per adult ticket here. They raised the price 50 cents (from 7.50) when Episode 1:Star Wars came out last year...

There are some smaller theaters and alternative cinemas that are slightly less expensive but not by much...

Madmatt

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

If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ!

And if it's NOT on CMHQ then its just GOT to be on CMHQ-ANNEX...

CMHQ http://combathq.thegamers.net

CMHQ-Annex http://cmhq.tzo.com

Both now proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing

[Mark IV]

Now THAT is a damn TANK.

I have been waiting for this POTD... while your flashy Panthers and Tigers were still hogging resources, frying engines and trannies, and collapsing bridges, this baby was out winning the battles.

Only T-34 rates the respect due the PzKpfwIV as a workhorse war-fighter, IMHO. This brung the Panzertruppe to the party, and the late war, johann-come-lately mutant freaks never got close to the mileage and the victories that the Mk IV racked up.

Panther cultists have a superior tank, to be sure, but they didn't really get 'em right till '44. And Mark IVs continued to serve after the war, as late as the 1967 war in Syrian service.

A fine POTD.

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV:

This brung the Panzertruppe to the party, and the late war, johann-come-lately mutant freaks never got close to the mileage and the victories that the Mk IV racked up.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You sure feel strongly about this

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV:

And Mark IVs continued to serve after the war, as late as the 1967 war in Syrian service.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but they continued to lose their wars during this time. Some connection, maybe?

Only joking. I actually saw Stuarts on TV during a coup in Ecuador in the early 80s and Shermans in the Lebanese civil war - these things were just like the energizer bunnies. And today I saw a C-54 coming into Coventry airport. Cool! There is a freight airline running half a dozen of them out of Coventry.

Now where were we?

Oh yes, great POTD, great textures, great work BTS and thanks Madmatt for supplying us with these.

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

Andreas

[This message has been edited by Germanboy (edited 05-06-2000).]

[Mark IV]

This tank doesn't get the pop cult status of the Tiger and the Panther, though it deserves special recognition. To GIs, every tank was a Tiger, every gun an 88, every German soldier was SS.

I like to see the PzKpfwIV get it's due (they should have picked an animal marketing name). People forget that this tank was synonymous with "Panzer" while the later super-tanks were still on the drawing boards, and that they did the bulk of the fighting in WWII.

They were also used after the war by Bulgaria, Finland, Egypt, Spain, Syria, Jordan and Turkey.

Panthers also were re-used by various armies throughout the 1950s, including Israel.

More than a few MP40s and K98s were used by the victorious People's Army of North Vietnam (among many others), so I don't think any stigma of defeat remained attached to German weapon systems. All of mine work well (no MP, unfortunately).

[Bil Hardenberger]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I have been following this AAR more than any other since the Alpha AAR. But did I miss something or is Bill not posting his side?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think Fionn is doing an admirable job on this battle's AAR, and any comments from me would be like adding a mustache to the Mona Lisa

Seriously, I expect I will comment on this forum as the AAR plays out.

Bil

[Guest Gunnerdream]

I would never want to nit-pick such an incredibly detailed and beautiful POTD, but shouldn't there be a machine gun snout sticking out of the front of that tank right where that little eye looking thing is?

Please feel free to flame me heartily if I am mistaken.

Gunnerdream...floating down through the clouds...

[Guest Madmatt]

Sorry Gunner but the models aren't THAT detailed yet...

You have to remember that the textures themselves are just painted skins that get draped across a blank model of the vehicle. The blank model is built with a number of faces or polygons. The higer the amount of polygons the more detail the structure of the vehicle can be but also the more horspower required by your video card. In order to put protruding MG barrels into vehicles would require additional texture 'faces' or polygons and not worth the effort and eventual CPU hit.

Now there are some vehciles that do have the MG's modeled but those are MG carriers and scout cars (usally vehciles where the MG is the main gun) and are 'manned' weapons, i.e there is a gunner visible in the vehicle as opposed to being hidden inside a tank hull.

Madmatt

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

If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ!

And if it's NOT on CMHQ then its just GOT to be on CMHQ-ANNEX...

CMHQ http://combathq.thegamers.net

CMHQ-Annex http://cmhq.tzo.com

Both now proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing

[This message has been edited by Madmatt (edited 05-07-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Madmatt (edited 05-07-2000).]

[All American]

What about the stug in CE. Doesn't that have a MG on it?

All American

[Username]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV:

I like to see the PzKpfwIV get it's due

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It usually got its due when anything bigger than an antitank rifle punched a hole in its weak turret front armor.

Give me a stugIII instead or even better a JgdPnzIV. I dont know if the game models vehicle height correctly (its a non linear function..) but the taller you are the more so you are hit (and of course seen). Very few weapon systems can be hit for many times before falling out. The Mark IV was not one of them. In 1942/early 1943 in very experienced hands it was certainly racking up some kills. But when facing more and more mobile 85mm russian weapons and sherman 76mm and 17pdr, it was a has been.

Lewis

[Chris Jenkins]

I've seen it twice, already. GLADITOR! I thought Richard Harris was a great Marcus Arelius. Did anyone else notice the German in the beginning? When the horse rides in to camp, the German barbarian shouts "Du bist der Hunde!" Then, shortly thereafter: "Verfluchte Hunde!" This means "You are dogs! Cursed Dogs!" Awesome movie.

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

Allahu Ackbar!

[Guest Gunnerdream]

Madmatt,

Thanks for the rapid reply!

I understand the need to keep things simple.

May I humbly assume for purposes of combat and firepower that the bow machinegun is actually factored into the game, just not shown?

I bow to you in sycophantic delerium, and at the risk of enraging the ever vigilant Mr. Penguin, I include the following to ensure that the above is meant in good humour.

Gunnerdream...floating down through the clouds...

[Mark IV]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>it was a has been<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ich bin verwundet! Devilish riposte.

Your research reveals that later weapon systems tend to outperform earlier weapon systems, and this insight shall guide me in the future.

I would certainly rather take a Pershing into battle than a Sherman (or, for that matter, a PzKpfwIV). Shall we then discount the Sherman's role in winning the war in the West?

[Guest Madmatt]

Ok, let me add a few comments to this little Topic-de-Jour...

Vehicle Height: Username, Yes CM does take this into consideration. Bring up a INFO WINDOW and you will see a entry called Silhoutte (gotta mush mush when you do the fandango! Thunderbolts of lightning very very frightning me..Galelio..Gal??? Err sorry... If your not a Queen fan then you will have no idea what that was!) Anyway, this is a function of the vehicles height and factors into LOS. The more squat a unit the harder it is to see and hit, and conscequently the more difficulty it has seeing things.

All American, now about the StuG and its external MG. If you remember I said INTERNAL mg's are not shown. The remote gun on the StuG III is on the roof and changes the actual profile (shape) of the unit. The bow MG's dont change the actual 'look' of a tank so they arent shown animated as such (other than what you will see in the awesome textures!), except in units when the mg is the primary weapon. A Bren carrier for example...

Gunnerdream, get back in line with the other sycophants!

Yes, bow mg's are IN the game (just don't have their barrels drawn). Sometimes I wonder if you guys actually PLAY the demo! Haven't you even seen in CE multiple tracer lines coming out of a Sherman? Usually you will get one in the same direction as the turret (the co-ax mg) and another in the general direction of the hull (bow mounted). The vehicles that have three mg's sometimes look like moving fireworks displays with all the fire they spew out!

Madmatt

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

If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ!

And if it's NOT on CMHQ then its just GOT to be on CMHQ-ANNEX...

CMHQ http://combathq.thegamers.net

CMHQ-Annex http://cmhq.tzo.com

Both now proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing

[This message has been edited by Madmatt (edited 05-07-2000).]

[Username]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV:

Your research reveals that later weapon systems tend to outperform earlier weapon systems, and this insight shall guide me in the future.

B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

??? StugIII is a later weapon system????

I think the Mark IV should have been discontinued in mid 1944 and production diverted to JgdPnzIV both L48 and L70. In the defensive situation that prevaled after the summer of 1944 they would have been a better investment.

As for vehicle height: I am making a point that it is a nonlinear advantage. So a vehicle lets say that is 50 percent greater in height of another vehicle is not 50 percent more likely to get hit. Its much worse (depending on the velocity of the weapon firing at it).

Whats nice about a high velocity weapon like the panther L70 is that it is very forgiving to bad estimations at guessing range. Due to its "flat" trajectory. A weapon like the sherman 75mm with bad estimations in range results in alot of the shots going over or striking short.

I dont know if BTS just takes the square dimensions of each vehicle or weighs them somehow.

Lewis

[Guest Ol' Blood & Guts]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lewis:

??? StugIII is a later weapon system????<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The StuG III is based on the PzKpfw MkIII chassis, is it not? The StuG IIIG was the last version of the StuG III series and it produced from Dec '42 to March '45. The StuG IIIF was very similar to the G model which was produced from March to Dec '42. They fitted the side armor to the F models as well, later on.

By the way, have the StuGIII textures changed since the Beta Demo?

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

"Why don't we say that we took this one chance, and fought!"

"Stupid humans. Hahahahahahaha!"

--from the film Battlefield Earth

[This message has been edited by Ol' Blood & Guts (edited 05-07-2000).]

[Guest Madmatt]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

By the way, have the StuGIII textures changed since the Beta Demo?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

YES!

Madmatt

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

If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ!

And if it's NOT on CMHQ then its just GOT to be on CMHQ-ANNEX...

CMHQ http://combathq.thegamers.net

CMHQ-Annex http://cmhq.tzo.com

Both now proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing

[Mark IV]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Username:

??? StugIII is a later weapon system????<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Technically it is, though that really wasn't the point. Mk IV Ausf. A went into production in 1937; StuG III was still in pre-production at that time, and the combat versions (hardened armor) didn't go into production until 1940. They both got their long guns in March '42.

It didn't occur to me that someone would prefer half of a tank over a Mk IV; most folks glom right onto the Cats.

Emphasis on defensive operations might favor low-profile assault guns, but the MkIV earned its laurels in both attack and defense (to be fair, so did StuG III, which is also unsung in pop history). But turrets are so darned handy in mobile assaults. Maybe that's why they used both vehicles together?

[Username]

Lets not get the sturmartillerie debate started again.

Does anyone know if there were any Panzer IV aces? I know StuGs, Tigers, Panthers had them.

But the Mark IV was really a "light" tank in the second half of 44/early45. It always had a good main weapon in AP and HE performance with the L48 till the heavy soviet armor and US jumbos showed up.

I would rather have three JagdPnzIVL70 at that stage then 5 Panzer IV. I would even take 4 JgdPnzIVL48s.

Lewis

[Mark IV]

Well, Gladiator certainly does Rock (!!!!!!!!).

Just got back. Paid in the low 2-figure range, too. Worth every ducat.