Do Tanks Die Too Quickly In CM?

[Tanaka]

The heat is comming up... I can see the flames right in here :cool:

[CMplayer]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stalin's Organ:

And a Daimler took out a MG bunker at 1001 m with it's first shot!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've also recently noticed that Daimlers

are really supernaturally fast at taking out

wooden bunkers, using only AP rounds. That

little armoured car seems to have a very

precision weapon. I'm not sure if this

result is realistic or not. More input

would be interesting.

By way of reference, someone recently

pointed out that Stuarts were good

against bunkers because of the precision

and ROF of the 37mm gun. A Sherman 105

OTOH can get near misses all day, and

the blast won't do anything.

--Rett

[Slapdragon]

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

The heat is comming up... I can see the flames right in here :cool:<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nenhumas flamas ainda. Eu estou picando na gaiola do rato com uma vara. Pesaroso, eu falo " Brazillian " e não português de Lisboa.

[Slapdragon]

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

I've also recently noticed that Daimlers

are really supernaturally fast at taking out

wooden bunkers, using only AP rounds. That

little armoured car seems to have a very

precision weapon. I'm not sure if this

result is realistic or not. More input

would be interesting.

By way of reference, someone recently

pointed out that Stuarts were good

against bunkers because of the precision

and ROF of the 37mm gun. A Sherman 105

OTOH can get near misses all day, and

the blast won't do anything.

--Rett<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Stuarts are good with bunkers, but the wrong sort of bunker is deadly to them. This is not really ahistorical since Stuarts really did provide fire support against bunker openings because the 37mm was thought to be very accurate (which I am not sure was all that true, but the soldiers believed it.).

[Mark IV]

I am betting many of you are familiar with this site:

Tankbooks - Dale Albee's story

FWIW, they were crewing Stuarts and M8s as recon.

"Lucky [sergeant Max Lutcavish] was leading. I think Lucky at that time was the platoon sergeant for Lieutenant [Lex] Obrient. They were going down this road, and the German tank was dug in about 150 yards off the road. And what he did, he let Lucky go by – I’ll say Lutcavish; we always called him Lucky – and he shot at McNulty’s tank.

"The German tank was either a Mark V or a Mark VI. The Mark V, I think, had a high-velocity 75 and that little devil is just about as dangerous as the 88. Your 88, if you stood up, it came up just about to your waist, and the high-velocity 75 was just three to four inches shorter. And it was flat trajectory. But anyhow, he took McNulty’s tank, and it was a flamer, because he hit it right in the gas tank. They say the flames shot up about forty feet. It killed Ezerskis and Jezuit, the driver and the bow gunner, immediately. And Roselle and McNulty got out, but they were burned awful bad. And in the meantime Lucky had swung around. And by this time the German had traversed over and was getting ready to knock him out."

"Lucky’s tank opened up and I think Lucky said that they fired eight times. Three of them went right through the muzzle break so that either way, three inches in would have put it right down the barrel. They emptied everything, the coaxial gun was fired also and they just peppered it. Even the bow gunner down in the front could only shoot to the front, and they had traversed around to the right and he emptied his gun, too.

"While they were firing, either a panzerfaust or a bazooka hit Lucky’s tank right in the butt, and set him on fire, so he’s still firing with his tank on fire.

"They knocked out this tank, and the Germans escaped out of the back hatch. And then Lucky and his crew got out and got away. They later recovered that tank, but McNulty’s was a total loss."

[CMplayer]

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

FWIW, they were crewing Stuarts and M8s as

recon.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Earlier in the same interview you have

them 'leading with armor'. The Stuarts

go first across a field, then go back,

and then tell the infantry to come along.

Well maybe 'leading with armor' is the

wrong term, but they did do some

recon in advance of the infantry at the

beginning. This is not like the received

tactical wisdom on these boards.

Perhaps the difference is the CM battles

take place when contact is imminent,

whereas the interview had to do with

a more humdrum movement, with possibly

little or no expected opposition?

--Rett

[Col Deadmarsh]

Can we get back on topic? Username, SlapDragon, when you finish sparing be sure to turn off the lights and lock the door. :cool:

[Mark IV]

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

Earlier in the same interview you have

them 'leading with armor'. The Stuarts

go first across a field, then go back,

and then tell the infantry to come along.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Was that the first D Company tank to be lost?"

"Dale Albee: I don’t think so. I think we lost some tanks before that. Because Periers was down there, when they had the bombing of St. Lo, that was in that area. We worked from Ste. Mere Eglise across to La Haye du Puits, and there for a while, about two or three days, we were detached from the 90th Division and went to the 8th, and I know they said that we had more casualties under the 8th than we’d had all the time with the 90th. The word we got from the medium companies was that one platoon of tanks and the infantry was supposed to move across this field together. The tanks went across the field, looked around, and there are no infantry. The tanks went back, said all right, get ready, and went across the dang field again, and the infantry wouldn’t go. And tanks cannot move without infantry. This was what they were facing. They were green troops. They came in carrying bedrolls up into the front line. They didn’t know what to do, and they truthfully didn’t have any leadership. And here’s our old tankers used to the 90th. If you said move across, that old infantry was right behind you working with the tank ready to fan out."

[Stalin's Organ]

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

"The German tank was either a Mark V or a Mark VI. The Mark V, I think, had a high-velocity 75 and that little devil is just about as dangerous as the 88. Your 88, if you stood up, it came up just about to your waist, and the high-velocity 75 was just three to four inches shorter. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sounds more like a description of Pak 40 and Pak 38 AT guns than a tank!! What tank comes up to your waist??

[CMplayer]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stalin's Organ:

Sounds more like a description of Pak 40 and Pak 38 AT guns than a tank!! What tank comes up to your waist??<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

uh, maybe he was talking about the shell?

--Rett

[Simon Fox]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stalin's Organ:

Sounds more like a description of Pak 40 and Pak 38 AT guns than a tank!! What tank comes up to your waist??<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>As usual Organ like a kiwi git is wont to do, your twitchy little fingers start pinging away at a reply before your brain has bothered to comprehend what you have read. I suggest you reread the post while committing more than one neuron to the task. This is not the Peng thread you know, though I am sure they appreciate your "clutter".

[Stalin's Organ]

Thank you for your pointlessness Simon.

Perhaps you could actually provide some information to enlighten me if you have the answer, instead of bull**** to entertain me?

[Simon Fox]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stalin's Organ:

Thank you for your pointlessness Simon.

Perhaps you could actually provide some information to enlighten me if you have the answer, instead of bull**** to entertain me?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I decline to state the bleedin' obvious. Work it out yourself, read what CMplayer has to say or on yer bike Mike!

[Stalin's Organ]

Thank you again Simon for your complete lack of point.

I read CMplayer's post before yours, and I wondered why you bothered with your one, since you posted after he did.

[ 07-24-2001: Message edited by: Stalin's Organ ]

[jKMkIII]

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

Listen, playing with armored caskets is your business, but listen, the Sherman my not pack a big punch in gun power, and is a limp wristed faggot when it comes to armor, but it has a gyrostablized, accurate gun, that could hit a 400m away target, especially if he took his time.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What? My Shermans at least seem to have lots of armour. Once my Sherman (don't remember which model, french with 75mm) took 3 hits from Panther from about 200m and survived. But those damn french backed away behind building, just because they lost their gun.

Then other time my Sherman survived frontal shot from PzIV from 30-40m ..and that round bounced off and knocked out another PzIV that was next to one that fired

And sure those Shermans can shoot too.. in recent battle my Sherman (I think it was II, brit with 75mm anyway) fired 2 shots to Panthers side turret and both penetrated, but didn't do any damage Perhaps because it was from 1.6km

Just if I could drive them offroad without bogging

[Geier]

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

Anyway - the 'fire when move' was not usual in WWII, and that's reason enough why it should be changed.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you serious? Where are your sources? Where is your sense of proportion? Why are you so desperate to change something, anything in CM? I don't claim CM to be perfect, I'm just amazed that anyone thinks that their "feel" is enough to warrant a change in it.

It seems to me that what some people really want is a turn editor so they can point, click and drag their shots to hit or miss, to penetrate or not. That way you wouldn't have to deal with that useless data BTS based this game on and you could adjust your turns to suit your "feel" of how things happened in WW2.

I have copyrighted this idea and am seeing some investors later this week.

[Grunto IV]

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

Stuarts...the 37mm was thought to be very accurate it.).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

in asl, the stuart has a '37LL' gun... very accurate.

andy

[Slapdragon]

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

Are you serious? Where are your sources? Where is your sense of proportion? Why are you so desperate to change something, anything in CM? I don't claim CM to be perfect, I'm just amazed that anyone thinks that their "feel" is enough to warrant a change in it.

It seems to me that what some people really want is a turn editor so they can point, click and drag their shots to hit or miss, to penetrate or not. That way you wouldn't have to deal with that useless data BTS based this game on and you could adjust your turns to suit your "feel" of how things happened in WW2.

I have copyrighted this idea and am seeing some investors later this week.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In fairness, I think Scipio oft times does not express himself well in English, but for his benefit, here is a good run down of the process of changing the game from a different list:

1) Does something feel wrong, if so it deserves to be tested to see if it is wrong. Develop a theory of what is wrong.

2) Test It by isolating all variables and just looking at one, and test it enough that the law of large numbers comes into effect and you can be resonably sure what you think is happening is really happening in the game.

3) Compare test results with real world information from a wide variety of sources. Does this test reflect the real world, and if it does not , how does it not?

4) If 2 and 3 are disparate, then propose how things should be changed.

The two biggest errors are that someone proposes a change at step 1 instead of 4, and that they test the wrong variable (such as what happened in the SMG thread) when a completely different thing is causing what they this is happening to happen.

When 4 is proposed, it will also need to get tested as even if the original game is wrong, the new way of doing something may not be any better. There is a finite amount of programming time available at BTS, and they cannot use it just to change for change's sake.

[Geier]

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

In fairness, I think Scipio oft times does not express himself well in English, but for his benefit, here is a good run down of the process of changing the game from a different list:<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good list, thanks. I just hope some people could realize that if they want to be taken seriously when they make demands, they need to prove that what they say is true and accurate. The burden of evidence lies with them.

There are tons of people who like to play CM differently than how I play it. I enjoy it as a pbem with as historical conditions as possible (OOB's, terrain, hairstyles, you name it) and I have little interest in if they are "balanced" or not.

This is not the best way to play CM.

It is how I enjoy to play CM and from what I have read there are people who are only into tcp/ip with time constraints, others who enjoy looking for "optimal" QB buys and so on. This is one of the things which make this game so great and the reason why many of us are still around 20-30 months or 2-3 days after first logging in.

The game is so customizable it's frankly silly, the ones who enjoy Franko's rules are happy, the ones who play without FOW and Really Big Tanks against the AI are happy.

That is why demanding changes in the game parameters is a very serious thing imo. All of a sudden you want to force everyone playing the game (however they play it) to adopt to how you "feel" it should be. I mean, even if based on research according to your model above, changing the parameters needs testing and tweaking and making sure that it doesn't damage some other behaviour. That's what I don't like about these demands.

But I wouldn't be that likable guy you've all learned to love and... woops, wrong life.

Ahem.

I offer not one, but two, solutions for the Problem With Tanks That Hit Stuff While Moving. In your pbem game, prior to setup, do one of the following:

1. Agree not to use the Move order for any AFV in the game, during the game. Make sure that you are playing with Dry conditions or that plenty of roads are available.

2. Use CM as an infantry sim. No AFVs, no problem.

[ 07-24-2001: Message edited by: Geier ]

[Scipio]

oops

[ 07-24-2001: Message edited by: Scipio ]

[New Age Santa]

Tanks die because of bad leadership.

My two cents.

[Username]

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

I will admit this, you are the easiest person to manipulate in the world Lewis.

?)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lets just apply a little Slappisms to the subject. In your posturing as a statistically driven researcher, you give advice such as (example here, gyros):

1) a substantial body of evidence on how US gyros worked

2) better firing range tests using a generic battlefield that isolated your variables

Well, do you have similar data about the consumption of cats in ALL chinese restaurants? Do you feel comfortable from basing everything about Chinese about your limited time around your friend? I would say in the United States, Cat is not either on the menu or served at home mostly.

Why would my wife know anything about what chinese eat? I said she was Asian. You, with your prejugding, assume she is Chinese because she is Asian? You are from down south US arent you? It shows.

But keep trying to deflect the issue with trite stinky fish stories. I think people see you as you are.

Lewis

[MrSpkr]

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

You are from down south US arent you? It shows.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey! Leave us southerners out of your prepubescent little catfight.

[New Age Santa]

oh yeah and who cares what the chinese eat, they have some DAMN good food and it's a completely different culture.

Btw, Username..is your wife Japanese, Vietnamese, Korean..???

Actually the cuisine from Asia is generally fantastic. I had the privelige of dining at a resturant which had almost all the main dishes from most countries in Asia and found them to be quite tasty indeed, cat or not.

But I guess my opinion on food doesn't matter since I'm very open minded about it =P (Hell I wanna try out some monkey brains...mmmm)

[Username]

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

Hey! Leave us southerners out of your prepubescent little catfight.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just making a point. See how charged a remark like that seems to you? Well the same can be said about Slappys "humor". For some reason, people believe its OK to make fun of Asians.

Suppose someone said "Evolution is slow" and I replied "Evolution is as slow as a southerner reading War and Peace outloud with a mouth full of mollassas." How would you feel?

As for my wifes country of origion, why is that of any concern? I dont care about your wives, girlfriends, boyfriends, etc.

Lewis

[ 07-24-2001: Message edited by: Username ]