38cm RW61 auf Sturmmorser Tiger

[JAK]

Wheeew....say that three times fast! My question is will this vehical be included in CM2? While they weren't produced in mass, I think they would be a very interesting vehical for the 45 time frame. Imagine being down range from that beast

Thanx,

JAK

"Hold still you sod, these bullets cost money!"red devil-Arnhem

[jgdpzr]

Certainly an interesting vehicle. But with a reload time of approximately 10 minutes (IIRC), it wouldn't get to fire too many rounds during a game. 'Course, with that kind of firepower, it wouldn't need to.

I think there has been significant discussion about this beast, but I don't remember what the last words on it were.

[Guest Babra]

The last words were, (and I'm paraphrasing now), "yeah.... right..."

Don't hold your breath.

[Redwolf]

The thing fires a water bomb (that one that is usually used against submarines) with 125 kg TNT, built for a shooting range of 5600m. Besides the long loading time, loading is done from the outside, which is quite impossible under fire. No way this can be useful in CM.

Let us talk about vehicles with the 150 mm infantry gun instead.

[Stacheldraht]

Aw, come on, the Sturmtiger is a favorite of many AFV fans. Please include it, BTS. Thanks.

Martin, I don't think, iirc (have to check my references), it was reloaded from the outside, rather the ammunition supply was, via crane.

[Olle Petersson]

It shouldn't be very hard to include it...

... as off map artillery!

Cheers

Olle

[Jarmo]

I guess it could be used in operations.

One shot for each battle..

--

Off map artillery with 1 shot/15 minutes?

Sounds.... practical...

[ 04-26-2001: Message edited by: Jarmo ]

[Stacheldraht]

You know, everybody needn't be so darned practical Why not have fun? A lot of players enjoy hypothetical battles and experimenting with the different vehicles. In some regards, it's almost like playing with toy soldiers and tanks when you were a kid. I for one derive a certain pleasure from just "driving" the tanks around and watching them fire. Before you label me a cretin, I fully appreciate the tactical subtlety of the game, and it's my main reason for playing

Yes, realism and historical accuracy are a big part of CM's appeal, but not the only part. If it were, we may as well never play QB's

[Barticus]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Martin Cracauer:

The thing fires a water bomb <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

WOW, a 38 cm water bomb, bet you could put out one hell of a fire with that baby!

[Thomm]

Hmmm.

Guess that thing would need its own AI. Otherwise it would be very easy to waste its limited number of shots possible in the timeframe of a CM battle.

[Redwolf]

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

Martin, I don't think, iirc (have to check my references), it was reloaded from the outside, rather the ammunition supply was, via crane.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are right, the crane isn't for loading the gun. Sorry about that.

[Stacheldraht]

Hi Martin, I checked three books, and all were inconclusive about the exact details of the loading procedure. Limited ammo was stowed on board, but one book said the crane was used (through the large open slot on the superstructure roof) to help maneuver the round into the breech.

[Snake Eyes]

There has been much discussion concerning this vehicle on the Forum. I don't recall BTS making any final statement concerning its inclusion or exclusion yet. It was on the original list of vehicles for CM but was dropped due to the release schedule.

One SturmTiger prototype was involved in the Polish Home Army's Uprising in Warsaw during August 12-28, 1944. A total of 18 SturmTigers were built and as far as can be determined all but the aforementioned prototype served on the Western front. Seven were invloved in the Ardennes Offensive. It has been reported that a single SturmTiger rocket destroyed three Shermans.

The SturmTiger carried a total of 14 rockets for its 38cm Raketenwerfer 61 L/5.4. It took 8-10 minutes to reload from inside the vehicle. Many SturmTigers were abandoned by their crews due to a shortage of ammunition.

[ 04-26-2001: Message edited by: Snake Eyes ]

[André]

Hi

Check out this page for many WW2 videos, including a Sturmtiger firing its rocket! http://www.geocities.com/wittmann63/

Heinz

[ 04-26-2001: Message edited by: Heinz 25th PzReg ]

[PeterNZer]

see pics on

http://www.jagdtiger.de

Redarding the loading procedure:

I'll check my sources when I get home and post the info later tonight.

cheers.

[Snake Eyes]

The following is the loading procedure:

1. Lower the weapon to zero degrees.

2. Open the breech.

3. Place the shell onto the loading tray assisted by a fighting compartment, roof mounted trolley.

4. With the aid of a special loading tool, the four crew members (commander, gunner, and the two loaders), push the shell into the breech, stopping when the foremost guide ring touched the first of nine riflings.

5. Bring the spring-loaded bolt down to hold the shell in place.

6. Place the igniter in a socket on the breech lock.

7. Using a hand crank, close the breech.

8. Make the required traverse and elevation adjustments.

9. Ignite the ignition cartridge to fire the weapon.

[ 04-26-2001: Message edited by: Snake Eyes ]

[UniversalWolf]

I think it would be colossally funny to have a vehicle in this game that had a huge gun but took ten turns to reload.

This brings me to another question: has anybody successfully made a new 3D model for CM?

Just to qualify, I'm thinking about buying the full version of CM, but for now I'm still using the demo. I'm working from a limited frame of reference.

[Redwolf]

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

I think it would be colossally funny to have a vehicle in this game that had a huge gun but took ten turns to reload.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm afraid that BTS is so much after this kind of fun stuff. Not to say anything bad about them or you, but it's a fact. They want to get the most fun from application of historical tacics (my interpretation).

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>This brings me to another question: has anybody successfully made a new 3D model for CM?

Just to qualify, I'm thinking about buying the full version of CM, but for now I'm still using the demo. I'm working from a limited frame of reference.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The geometry of the 3D models is hardcoded into the program executable, as is the performance data.

Buy the game, you won't regret it. Using the Hummel, big arty or flamethrowers to blow up stuff is fun you are probably open for, and fun that can still be part of a balanced game.

[Stacheldraht]

Snake Eyes, thanks for the details.

[UniversalWolf]

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

Not to say anything bad about them or you, but it's a fact. They want to get the most fun from application of historical tacics (my interpretation).

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Isn't the SturmTiger reasonably historical though? I mean, it existed, and was used in combat, and had a reputation...it's not like asking for an Abrahms or an Imperial Probe Driod or something.

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

The geometry of the 3D models is hardcoded into the program executable, as is the performance data.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmm...I wouldn't mind the stock vehicle data being hard-coded if there were a way to add new models. Then I could make a SturmTiger and BTS would have a new feature added to their simulation without any extra time or effort on their part. I hope they consider the option of 3rd party model addability for CM2.

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

Buy the game, you won't regret it. Using the Hummel, big arty or flamethrowers to blow up stuff is fun you are probably open for, and fun that can still be part of a balanced game.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're probably right!

[Redwolf]

The Sturmtiger is as historical as 1800 planes airstrikes and railroad guns are. The latter were used, but they are strategical weapons that a) the local "normal" forces commander had no control over and in the rare case they were used unbalanced the battle in a major way.

As far as I can tell, the same is true for the Sturmtiger. I would like to see actucal combat reports, anyone has some?

Regarding new 3D models, this is not desired, BTS reserves the right to extend the game. That way, it should be ensured that extensions can still be sold.

As much as I liked to fiddle with deeper CMBO modifications, all I can say is that for now that should be preferrable for me/us. To sell future CM games, there has to be enough new stuff in it. The graphics system can be extended as the graphic cards grow up, but the basic mechanisms of CMBO leave only a few holes that can be filled with current computer mechanisms. So, to sell future CMBO games, BTS will for a major part have to rely on people's desire to get new units, for money.

Look at the graphics mods and on SP:WW2, not to speak of Linux and FreeBSD. The manpower that an internet community can throw at a goal can outright flatten what a company can do. You cannot compete with them.

[UniversalWolf]

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

To sell future CM games, there has to be enough new stuff in it. The graphics system can be extended as the graphic cards grow up, but the basic mechanisms of CMBO leave only a few holes that can be filled with current computer mechanisms. So, to sell future CMBO games, BTS will for a major part have to rely on people's desire to get new units, for money.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow, I couldn't disagree more with this statement and I think the past few years in computer gaming have proven it utterly false. I'm thinking of all the first-person shooters, flight sims, real-time tactical sims, and every other kind of game I can think of that allows for easy 3rd party modification - I don't think any of them have lost money by doing so. In fact, lots of 3rd party modifications are a strong selling point for any game.

What people primarily pay for in a sequel is the implementation of improvements to the mechanics of the game, not new units (although they may pay for new units too). You seem to be saying Combat Mission can't be improved as far as the interface and simulation mechanics are concerned, but the sheer number of suggestions people have made on these forums seems to argue strongly against that. You should ask yourself whether you'd rather pay for unlimited units in CMBO as it exists now, or for all the new non-unit features that will likely be included in CM2. Adding new units would have a similar - but more profound and powerful - effect to adding new textures to the tanks and terrain: it would improve and expand the experience of playing CM, but wouldn't diminish the desire for for a new, technically-enhanced version.

Finally, if the opinion of BTS is accurately represented by your statement, I would be inclined not to support them as a company.

[ 04-27-2001: Message edited by: UniversalWolf ]

[Redwolf]

For the record, I agree with you, I was just expressing what I thing BTS' reasons are. I am involved in OpenSource software projects myself, hence my opinion how capable such organizations are.

Regarding mechanics improvements, I don't see that many suggestions that are practical. Practical includes that the TacAI must be able to act on the feature in reasonable ways, for many that is very difficult.

If I was BTS, I would wait until one major competitor has a similar game on market and then open Combat Mission a bit more. That may damage CM3 sales, but it will do much more damage to the competitor. Also, if things continue as they appear to be, CM2/3 will sell so much that a loss of sales due to third-party work is acceptable for the increased market share.

[Stacheldraht]

I too find it a bit odd, or at least unfortunate, that BTS doesn't open CM up to substantial modification as so many games do with great success. As UniversalWolf notes so well, that's a major selling point for many games and helps build sales and community support. I know when I buy games, I intentionally gravitate towards those that are relatively open source, viewing my purchase as the adult equivalent of a buying a set of legos or building blocks. It's a game system, not just a game. There's great potential value in something like that, both in terms of replay value and the chance for fans to create wonderful additions and alterations to the game.

I'm guessing, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that since BTS doesn't have the resources to readily create a game primarily built around an upgraded engine (along the lines of what id does with the Quake series), they want to keep the game architecture closed so they'll be the only ones who can provide new units and rules, things which would be relatively easier for them to implement and profit from with a new game.

[ 04-27-2001: Message edited by: Stacheldraht ]

[ 04-27-2001: Message edited by: Stacheldraht ]

[Redwolf]

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

I'm guessing, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that since BTS doesn't have the resources to readily create a game primarily built around an upgraded engine (along the lines of what id does with the Quake series), they want to keep the game architecture closed so they'll be the only ones who can provide new units and rules, things which would be relatively easier for them to implement and profit from with a new game.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The question is: should we have a problem with that?

For me the issue of loadable new units (geometry and data) is not very important, I would rather see some mechanism problems fixed, no openness except OpenSource would help here.

I think that overall the idsoftware example applies quite well, however we are now at the time of Doom1 with its quite primitive extension possibilities, not Quake.

As long as this is as such, I will assume that Combat Mission will sooner or later be open enough and BTS should make as much money as possible from it, as it will not be opend enough that we can work on the mechanics (which would require OpenSource or a very aggressive architeture of dynamically loadable code) and we need Charles for that, still free from pressure from a stupid distributor.