Chad Harrison Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 I couldnt but help notice that in the demo, the T34/76 had quite a high blast value (around 50 IIRC). The ISU-152 has a blast of around 300 or so. In CMBO, the heaviest hitting 75mm gun, was the sherman, with a blast of 39. The hummell had a blast of a nice 200 IIRC. So, it just seems like CMBB is using a new type of equation to calculate blast values; atleast that is my guess. Can anyone confirm this? If you have the game, does it seem like the blast system is different than CMBO? Im not complaining!, Im just curious. Because if the ISU has a blast of 300 on the old system, um, yes Ill take two (not to mention the Sturmtiger!!!, 2000?) Chad Harrison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer76 Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Seems so, I think the PzIV in CMBB has a higher blast value in CMBB than CMBO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 What you may be seeing is the consequence of the fact that the Soviets used a different explosive in their shells that was more energetic but also more unstable. You may also see more violent brew-ups of Soviet AFVs as another consequence. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted September 21, 2002 Author Share Posted September 21, 2002 Originally posted by Michael emrys: What you may be seeing is the consequence of the fact that the Soviets used a different explosive in their shells that was more energetic but also more unstable. You may also see more violent brew-ups of Soviet AFVs as another consequence. MichaelI think that may also be true. But, I still think that they have changed the scale in some way. Lets go with the Mark IV example. IIRC, the Mark IV's blast in CMBO was 33 (along with the Panther/Hetzer, ect.; am I geek for knowing this off hand? ), could someone please post what the blast value for the Mark IV Model H or J is. Thanks in advance! I just really want to see if the SU-152 is really THAT powerfull in CMBB! I have no idea the realitive HE loadout of a 152mm shell compared to the Germans shell in the Hummel. Chad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted September 21, 2002 Author Share Posted September 21, 2002 Okay, I got my answer, but from another thread. Its the "You Germans have it; now tell us about it" thread: Originally Posted by K_Tiger: The most he explosive factors r higher than in cm:bo...for example: Tigers 88mm he is now around 70. 75mm guns 45-49. Dont know how comparative it is to the cm:bo standards.The Mark VI 'Tiger' had a blast of 58 IIRC in CMBO. Now it has around 70. Looks like the Mark IV's are coming in the upper fourties now. So, they have changed the blast calculations. Any guesses why? Was their a problem with it in CMBO? Or, are we just compensating for the ISU-152 and the Sturmtiger? Chad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Okay, you've almost got me convinced. But, could someone please post comparative figures (CMBO vs. CMBB) on the 81mm mortar and 105mm howitzer? And any others that it isn't too much of a hassle to search out. C'mon, Andreas, here's your big chance. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Originally posted by Chad Harrison: Any guesses why? Was their a problem with it in CMBO? Or, are we just compensating for the ISU-152 and the Sturmtiger?More likely the problem was at the other end of the scale. Something small, like light mortars or small cannons (20mm-37mm), were too powerful in proportion, but there was no way to reduce it, so they made everything else bigger. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted September 21, 2002 Author Share Posted September 21, 2002 Originally posted by Michael emrys: More likely the problem was at the other end of the scale. Something small, like light mortars or small cannons (20mm-37mm), were too powerful in proportion, but there was no way to reduce it, so they made everything else bigger. MichaelId buy that. Makes sense. And if the numbers that KT_Tiger posted are accuarte, we only saw about a 10% increase, or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warmaker Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Yes, bigger explosions against the enemy is better! More I say! More! ... And bring me my Brummbar and Sturmtigers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts