demoss Posted November 9, 2002 Share Posted November 9, 2002 </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> I consider the difference between 14% and 23% to be pretty darn significant, myself. I don't have CMBB inf ront of me, is that maybe for tall pine? Anyway, this is a nice problem of number turning until you find what the audience may find appealing. It means that the foxhole in woods will absorb of 40% of the firepower that would go to the gun in just woods, only 60% reaching the gun. But turning the numbers it means that the gun in a foxhole in woods is only 10% better than a gun only in woods. </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimcorrigan Posted November 11, 2002 Share Posted November 11, 2002 Hey Rosen, Although I don't profess to be an expert in either CMBO or BB, I often find it easy to use simple tactics to outsmart Soviet attacks or defenses - in the early engagements in the packaged game. However, I found that many of my tactics were only really limited to the scope of the scenario itself. In long, drawn out engagements, my tactics would be much more conservative and in my opinion, much less effective. I guess in many of the smaller scenarios, the quality of the German units and armour really do provide the German side with visible superiority. However, moving into the later engagements, with limited supplies and battered units, you'll find that being the Germans will quickly become a liability. As soon as that "quality control" trickles down, you'll find that wearing a flat brimmed helmet will be much more challenging than you originally anticipated. Jim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tha_Field_Marshall Posted November 11, 2002 Share Posted November 11, 2002 One russian advantage I didnt see mentioned is that russian tanks have better off road performance in adverse weather than German tanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts