Simon Fox Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 It seems like no one has bothered to go and check out those links kindly provided by David the eager Searchonaut especially the "I know what I see" individuals. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Yeah, I know that is what Kwazydog said, and I'm not disputing what is "supposed" to be happening, but I also see a shockwave, and an explosion, and collaterial damage that save for the fact that it is "supposed" to be collasping, otherwise all secondary indications are it is actually exploding.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So do you feel this shockwave and explosion? I think not. If you bothered to check out those links you would find it is a graphical representation of the building collapsing. In order to get the game out before the end of the next millenium a few shortcuts had to made. So the foxhole graphic is also the crater graphic and the graphic for the cloud of dust which issues from a collapsing building is the same as an explosion etc etc. Do you notice in real life when a building collapses? Do you notice in the game? Good, that is the purpose of the graphic. If nothing happened other than an instant metamorphosis from building to rubble. I am sure there would be bleating too. Rest assured, as Dan says, for CM2 there will be an improvement. But for the moment you'll just have to live with it. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Same as the issue with knockedout armor hulls which are not "supposed" to stop small arms fire. While that is what they are not "supposed" to do, never the less I've seen them do it, and in one instance that stands out in my mind saving me an MG42 HMG, quite effectively.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sent the movie file to Matt have you? I can hardly wait... <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Manuals and rules not withstanding, all I know is what I see taking place.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No need for suspension of disbelief when you go to a movie then ------------------ Muddying the waters as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
engy Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Silver Stars: my big problem with collapsing buildings is the fact that it invariably leads to people shelling entire towns into rubble for no reason. ...snipped... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Read any good account of Operation Market-Garden, specifically about Col. Frost's(I think) paratroops trapped in Arnhem. The Germans ordered their Tiger tanks, IIRC, to "shell each house floor by floor until they completely collapsed". As you can expect, it wasn't a healthy enviroment for the British paras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jasper Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Clearly the "being inside a building as it collapses is hazardous to your health" crowd have never seen the original Blues Brothers movie. 'nuf said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 engy wrote: > The Germans ordered their Tiger tanks, IIRC, to "shell each house floor by floor until they completely collapsed". Yup, and that's what broke the British defence. Before that they were hanging on, but contrary to popular belief, even the strongest buildings don't last long in the face of direct HE fire. Another interesting angle – I can't remember whether I heard this here or read it in Cornelius Ryan's book (maybe both) – I think the Germans would fire AP to make a hole in the wall, and then put HE through afterwards. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilhammer Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Vehicles do not block LOS or fire. However, I have had MG fire miss intended infantry targets and then heard the bullets bounce off of the AFV. Remember, CM firsts determines IF a hit or csualty is called, and then calculates the impact point and any collateral damage of misses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 The only problem with the CM system is that it is overly easy and predictable. It is certainly the case that buildings are an unhealthy place to be when their are guns around. CM reflects that. It would be nice (will be nice?) if there could be a greater amount of variablity in what happens when you shell a building, but the net effect is spot on. You never defend a village or town from inside the town itself. You are just giving the bad guys a reference point to where you are. Jeff Heidman [This message has been edited by Jeff Heidman (edited 01-18-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Michael Dorosh wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>When I was a kid, some guy about a mile away from my house did this because he was losing his house in a divorce. You could feel the blast very firmly in our house - we thought someone had driven a truck up the front lawn and into a wall! But when we drove over to check on the house, it was pretty much intact - just lots of flames.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Interesting Michael you should write about that. On January 1st this year, in Hillcrest Heights, a suburb of DC, a gas leak house explosion took place wherein the damage was so extensive that the Fire investigators have stated the cause may never be fully determined. The Fire Marshal has condemned no less than a full dozen nearby residences as uninhabitable due to collateral damage, and vehicles up to several homes away were totally destroyed and set ablaze. I guess each explosion is different, as one might figure they would be. The film is available if anyone wants it, call Channel 4 (NBC), news in Washington, DC. Simon Fox wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>It seems like no one has bothered to go and check out those links kindly provided by David the eager Searchonaut especially the "I know what I see" individuals.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Presumptions can lead to misunderstandings Simon. Your presumption that "no one" has bothered to check out the links, presumes your the only one who did. Interesting presumption. In fact checking out the graphics is only part of the concern expressed. Perhaps in your excitement to demonstrate your knowledge of CM, your presumption missed the point that the question is how much collateral damage could be expected from a collapsing building, as opposed to an exploding building. To highlight that as Offwhite said; Offwhite wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Although I disagree with Flipper, it should be pointed out that in his original post he refers to infantry/tanks outside the destroyed building taking damage.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Simon Fox wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>especially the "I know what I see" individuals.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> As opposed to the "I know what I know individuals?" Simon Fox wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>So do you feel this shockwave and explosion? I think not. If you bothered to check out those links you would find it is a graphical representation of the building collapsing.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No, I don't "feel" the shockwave or explosion. Did I write that I felt the shockwave or explosion, or did you "feel" that is what I wrote?" Simon Fox wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Do you notice in real life when a building collapses? Do you notice in the game? Good, that is the purpose of the graphic.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I suppose I could ask how many building collapses have you personally attended, but I will presume you do know the difference between an explosion and a collapse. Suffice it to say, my presumption that the concern about collateral damage being the main point of concern, was apparently in error. Simon Fox wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Sent the movie file to Matt have you? I can hardly wait...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Guess you'll have to do just that my good man, because when these instances took place, I presumed, that since that is what would happen in real world physics, that CM was just being realistic and following what was real. It was only later in this forum I learned that when an armor unit is knocked out, it performs an instant metamorphosis as you put it, into a non-physical mirage suspending the law of physics. Simon Fox wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> No need for suspension of disbelief when you go to a movie then. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Only when I read some of these threads, or hear that bullets can pass through a knocked out armor hull. Wilhammer wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Vehicles do not block LOS or fire. However, I have had MG fire miss intended infantry targets and then heard the bullets bounce off of the AFV. Remember, CM firsts determines IF a hit or casualty is called, and then calculates the impact point and any collateral damage of misses.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thank you Wilhammer for what is the most rational explanation of what may be taking place, and not presuming or asserting that I was simply fabricating the report of it. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) [This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-18-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flipper Posted January 19, 2001 Author Share Posted January 19, 2001 my case in point was a hetzer that was parked next to the building the shell that collapsed the building came on a parallel angle from where the tank was parked it just strikes me as odd that the gun should be taken out i've seen this more than once too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordfluffers Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Flipper: well a "collapsing building" should'nt knock out a gun or kill infantry.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Flipper do you walk around with a force field surrounding you! Of course a collapsing building could knock out troops and equipment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordfluffers Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Silver Stars: my big problem with collapsing buildings is the fact that it invariably leads to people shelling entire towns into rubble for no reason. I don't know how realistic this is, but i don't think a platoon of sherman 75s would expend a healthy chunk of thier HE ammo on merely reducing an entire town or village into rubble... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If I was a Sherman platoon commander, had plenty of HE and knew the enemy to be occupying the town ahead, I would destroy every defensible building possible (at least the closest buildings). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banshee Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: You never defend a village or town from inside the town itself. You are just giving the bad guys a reference point to where you are. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I believe the german doctorine was that you defend a village in the middle not at it's edges (so they wouldnt be exposed to direct fire), the american doctorine was to not defend inside the villages at all but in the surrounding terrain. ------------------ Veni, vidi, panzerschrecki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patboivin Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Flipper: well a "collapsing building" should'nt knock out a gun or kill infantry.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Flipper, This game is partly "Advanced Squad Leader computerized" -- in ASL buildings converted to rubble caused collateral damage in their vicinity. I agree that those nuclear explosions look like a bit much sometimes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Fox Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Presumptions can lead to misunderstandings Simon. Your presumption that "no one" has bothered to check out the links, presumes your the only one who did.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I used the word presume, did I? No. The appearance of incomprehension can be ascribed to a number of possible causes, that being the most likely but certainly not the only. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Perhaps in your excitement to demonstrate your knowledge of CM, your presumption missed the point that the question is how much collateral damage could be expected from a collapsing building, as opposed to an exploding building.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You presume too much. I had no intention to impart or demonstrate knowledge, that was David's purpose, quite the obverse. Do buildings explode in CM? If not, the question is moot, surely? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>As opposed to the "I know what I know individuals?"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> How trite. Scrutiny adverse? No as opposed to the "Not fixated upon one explanation for everything individuals" <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>No, I don't "feel" the shockwave or explosion. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Good. Then how do you "know" that's what it is? I certainly "knew" you didn't say you did. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Suffice it to say, my presumption that the concern about collateral damage being the main point of concern, was apparently in error.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> A tenuous connection at best but no in this presumption at least you were correct that this was one of the main points of concern, though above you are presuming "the question is how much collateral damage could be expected from a collapsing building, as opposed to an exploding building." Perhaps you could be a little clearer so I can keep up with these presumptions of yours. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Guess you'll have to do just that my good man, because when these instances took place, I presumed, that since that is what would happen in real world physics, that CM was just being realistic and following what was real.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You need to be careful Bruno, after all "Presumptions can lead to misunderstandings". <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Only when I read some of these threads, or hear that bullets can pass through a knocked out armor hull.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Or the fact that 3 men on the screen are 8 or 10 or 12? Or 1 man is 2 or 4 or 6? ------------------ Muddying the waters as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 Simon Fox wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>You need to be careful Bruno, after all "Presumptions can lead to misunderstandings".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hehe, okay. Touche! That's as good as a hidden AT gun my MkIV didn't see. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 Flipper wrote: > my case in point was a hetzer that was parked next to the building the shell that collapsed the building came on a parallel angle from where the tank was parked it just strikes me as odd that the gun should be taken out i've seen this more than once too. As discussed in the first thread I linked to, what you assume to be the cause may not be the cause. You see a building collapse and something nearby takes damage, but this does not mean the collapse itself has caused the damage. For example, the explosion which caused the collapse may have taken out the Hetzer's gun, or another simultaneous explosion, or something completely different. And always remember that what you see is dependent upon what your units see. It's not at all unrealistic to suggest that an enemy squad could be right next to your Hetzer without you knowing it. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Degrees of Frost Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Flipper: my case in point was a hetzer that was parked next to the building the shell that collapsed the building came on a parallel angle from where the tank was parked it just strikes me as odd that the gun should be taken out i've seen this more than once too.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I have to agree with David's post above. A number of times I have had a tank parked next to a building which is being targeted by an enemy tank and had my TC incapacitated or my tank's gun damaged by the blast of the enemies shell hitting the building. Trying to work out "a parallel angle from" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Stars Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 all right, all right dammit, you win...... I retract my statement and have seen the error of my ways......hell, I admit i do the same damn thing and wax every building in LOS.....but i still like the idea of randomizing the building going whoosh so it doesn't seem like your just tagging down hit points. I guess i was thinking along the lines of an armored column just wants to move and doesn't spend too much time blowing building up. but then again, at this scale you pretty much know Guyos de Bados are ahead of you, so nuke La Rochelle, or Ste. Mere Le Kaboom, or whatever...... P.S. let it be known that Silver-Stars can eat crow with the best of 'em.... ------------------ "Life is pain. Anyone saying otherwise is selling something." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polar Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 It's amazing how several tons of rubble falling on a gun barrel, MG will foul the ballistics. Why is it that if the tank can't move from under the rubble, and can't see through the rubble to shoot anything, and the tank crew can't lift the hatch that has tons of rubble on top of it that BTS counts it as "out of action"!!! That's BS!!! And why can't I use half tracks in a tug-boat fashion to aim my hetzer that is stuck in the mud?!?!?!?! This blows. Joe ------------------ "I had no shoes and I cried, then I met a man who had no socks." - Fred Mertz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head Mahone Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 Ahh man here is a perfect example of the crappy side of a message board. And Flipper your topic AND your message SUCKS! I just cant see how people can bitch and whine about an INCREDIBLE game such as CM! If you guys don't like CM then go back to playing those other "piece o' shyte" strategy games. Leave the good ones like CM to those who understand and appreciate it....... -Head PS Piss OFF Flipper! ------------------ "No man ever won a war by dieing for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." -General George S. Patton, Jr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Space Thing Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Head Mahone: Ahh man here is a perfect example of the crappy side of a message board. -Head PS Piss OFF Flipper! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Could this be a conscious attempt to get a message thread locked? "I'll never forget it. The first Space Thing that I came across took me by surprise, but the second one was just pure pleasure!" HELEN OF TROY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Head Mahone: Ahh man here is a perfect example of the crappy side of a message board. And Flipper your topic AND your message SUCKS! I just cant see how people can bitch and whine about an INCREDIBLE game such as CM! If you guys don't like CM then go back to playing those other "piece o' shyte" strategy games. Leave the good ones like CM to those who understand and appreciate it....... -Head PS Piss OFF Flipper! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It is precisely *because* people like CM so much that they go to the trouble of posting here. Like != slavish devotion. You seem confused. Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken: engy wrote: > The Germans ordered their Tiger tanks, IIRC, to "shell each house floor by floor until they completely collapsed". Yup, and that's what broke the British defence. Before that they were hanging on, but contrary to popular belief, even the strongest buildings don't last long in the face of direct HE fire. Another interesting angle – I can't remember whether I heard this here or read it in Cornelius Ryan's book (maybe both) – I think the Germans would fire AP to make a hole in the wall, and then put HE through afterwards. David<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I read bout that VERY tactic in Hell Has No Hereos about a DD Sherm and its crew as they advanced thru France After D-Day. They spoke of a routine that included firing AP at brick walls to punch a hole and then load HE and blast it thru the hole and in NO time they could flatten any size building. -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 Head Mahone wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If you guys don't like CM then go back to playing those other "piece o' shyte" strategy games. Leave the good ones like CM to those who understand and appreciate it.......<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> In a bit of a snit are we? Hmm, no one's opinions, ideas, or concerns, matter besides that of Head Mahone's. Gee, we never thought of that. What a unique perspective. Possibly if the heady writings of others do trouble you so much, I would think it would be you who would primarily benefit from a self imposed excommunication. Perhaps then in your absence, you could hone your skills with the thesaurus enabling an ability to communicate using vocal gestures that resemble something of a higher caliber than those exhibited during Pavlov's Behavioral Modification experiments. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) [This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-19-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head Mahone Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bruno Weiss: Head Mahone wrote: In a bit of a snit are we? Hmm, no one's opinions, ideas, or concerns, matter besides that of Head Mahone's. Gee, we never thought of that. What a unique perspective. Possibly if the heady writings of others do trouble you so much, I would think it would be you who would primarily benefit from a self imposed excommunication. Perhaps then in your absence, you could hone your skills with the thesaurus enabling an ability to communicate using vocal gestures that resemble something of a higher caliber than those exhibited during Pavlov's Behavioral Modification experiments. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ohh my dear Bruno, you are such a prissy little bitch...... -Head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 And you such a mental giant. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts