M. Bates Posted March 25, 2001 Share Posted March 25, 2001 Why does everyone rush to explain why Combat Mission's AI is doing the right thing even when it blatantly is not? It could just be - shock horror - that CM got it wrong and that AP should have been used!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoePrivate Posted March 25, 2001 Share Posted March 25, 2001 Originally posted by Scipio: Good points, BUT - concerning the 76mm AT - I guess after one or two or maybe three unsuccessfull attempts to take out a tank with normal AP it's really time to try a tungsten-shell. I can sympathize with that, though my experience is the TacAI is all too willing to expend its tungsten, sometimes to my regret! You should realize also at that range the tungsten will easily penetrate the turret but probably not the sloped glacis. I setup a quick test in the editor, 76mm AT w/5T vs a Panther, range 450m. I ran it 10 times, in each case the AT gun fired an AP shell first followed by tungsten, never varied so I don't see a problem at all with tungsten. Perhaps there were other variables you weren't aware of in your example? I have seen the same as you with HC however. I haven't quite figured out yet exactly what conditions must apply before they fire it, seeming to prefer HE in all the cases I have seen in play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Instincti Posted March 25, 2001 Share Posted March 25, 2001 My blasted Churchill CS tank just got a flank shot from 50m away on a panther - instead of firing a C it used HE - cause the shell just did nothing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtweasle Posted March 25, 2001 Share Posted March 25, 2001 Does'nt explain not using the Tungsten rounds after firing AP , but was wondering; Do the tanks in CM have a round up? I'm wondering if on the occasion they have HE up, they might be firing it instead of unloading it manually. Oh, Mr. Bates sorry I rushed into this thought. The horror, the horror. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted March 26, 2001 Share Posted March 26, 2001 The way the AI decides to use tungsten is rather quirky. It works right most of the time, but sometimes it leaves you shaking your head. There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to it. It does work much better than it used to, though that isn't saying a lot considering that it used to not work at all. And I wouldn't take too seriously the opinions of people who rarely play anything but Germans. That's like Michael Jordan talking about football. ------------------ What a bunch of horsecrap. -Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scipio Posted March 26, 2001 Author Share Posted March 26, 2001 Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B: The way the AI decides to use tungsten is rather quirky. It works right most of the time, but sometimes it leaves you shaking your head. There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to it. It does work much better than it used to, though that isn't saying a lot considering that it used to not work at all. And I wouldn't take too seriously the opinions of people who rarely play anything but Germans. That's like Michael Jordan talking about football. Okay, I made some tests, and yes, it seems to be 'Idiotic Gunners'. Not always, but sometimes it happens. Well...if I look around how some people act in the real life, it can be seen as realistic that we must have idiotic gunners, too. ------------------ Keine Gefangenen! Visit my Combat Mission Sound Mods site! Scipiobase Join the Blitzkrieg Wargaming Club Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigmac@work Posted March 27, 2001 Share Posted March 27, 2001 That was funny WWB! Tanks, shmanks, I want to get back to Pamela Anderson! I qualify on all but the tattoo part Kingfish. Unfortunately, I've seen the movie and have gathered that it takes 2540mm's to penetrate her... Ok, Ok, sorry, you can get back to your tank penetration discussion... ------------------ All CM All the time! Check out the Dogs of War CM Players Community Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Posted March 27, 2001 Share Posted March 27, 2001 And I wouldn't take too seriously the opinions of people who rarely play anything but Germans. I wouldn't take people who play all-allied most of the time too seriously either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted March 27, 2001 Share Posted March 27, 2001 Originally posted by Tiger: I wouldn't take people who play all-allied most of the time too seriously either Slander!! I play Germans only a little less often than Allies. 60/40 maybe. Playing the same side all the time = YAWN. ------------------ What a bunch of horsecrap. -Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Posted March 27, 2001 Share Posted March 27, 2001 yeah we know you're really an all-allied player just trying to fool us. If you guys got your way you'd have tank-penetrating tungsten bullets in your infantry rifles and tungsten artillery shells, tungsten-laced smoke rounds, and tungsten bayonets you could stick into the tanks. -Tiger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Fox Posted March 28, 2001 Share Posted March 28, 2001 I wouldn't take people who think Sherman 105s fired tungsten ammo too seriously either. Especially when they don't make a distinction between tungsten and HEAT and go off half cocked "BTS there is no bug, please don't fix or somefink"...hehe..chortle... Sherman 105s shouldn't be getting any tungsten until very late (if at all), as the initial meager tungsten production was alloted to the TD units, not inf support tanks. ------------------ "Stand to your glasses steady, This world is a world of lies, Here's a toast to the dead already, And here's to the next man to die." -hymn of the "Double Reds" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts