Jump to content

WOOOOHOOO!!! I GOT IT!!!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 334
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I got my game today too...best grafical unit i found was the 128mm at gun...AWESOME....

As german player, it feels like to play with the us boys in cm:bo. One of my "scout and shoot" panters knocked out 2 JS-2`s 2 122mm and one 152mm assault guns, not bad for the first try.

Did i mention, that i only lost one panther out of my platoon against 16 JSII mixed with 122mm and bigger assault guns. So, no ueber russian tanks...

Played a real, real hugh Kursk scenario. Around over 100 Tanks involved, aprox. 76 were destroyed with only 5-6 "brewed up". A bit few for my understanding.

Now i leave...will see how many tanks i can kill with one shoot out of my Sturmmoerser.. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[And with all the commotion and clatter of heightened voices and hasty scurrying around something grey and heavy peers from behind a particularly damp shadow upon an empty spot which could be filled nicely with a brightly coloured box containing certain discs and printed instructions]

Bother.

I suppose I might be disappointed if it did arrive, and it hasn't, so I won't think about it too much.

Carry on, enjoy yourselves. Don't mind me...

Bother.

Yeknod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent point Andreas (still got some Lagavulin left!)

If the choice is put on the extra vehicles with the intent of patching the shared bmps or leaving them out because of space restrictions on the CD, well I am extremely happy that it is being done in the way they chose.

The easier approach would have just to say the hell with it, these weren't very common anyway so why bother? Fortunately for us, the easy way is not the BFC way so we will have a better and more inclusive game.

BDH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by barrold713:

Excellent point Andreas (still got some Lagavulin left!)

If the choice is put on the extra vehicles with the intent of patching the shared bmps or leaving them out because of space restrictions on the CD, well I am extremely happy that it is being done in the way they chose.

The easier approach would have just to say the hell with it, these weren't very common anyway so why bother? Fortunately for us, the easy way is not the BFC way so we will have a better and more inclusive game.

BDH

Hehe. I think the MOD SQUAD would have been disappointed if CMBB {The Full Version} had been a "PERFECT" release in every way, don't you?

Now at least they can get their teeth stuck into some graphics/insignia mods and stop moaning, eh?

Urahhh!!

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

KwazyDog, Andreas, etc.,

I believe there may be a fundamental problem with

the likelihood of K-kill given a penetration. Why?

The overpenetration model is valid for AP shot, possibly valid for HEAT, and emphatically not valid

for AP shell.

I understand what's being modeled by the first, the effect of remaining energy after penetrating the armor. This area has been extensively studied and is pretty well understood. Should be after a century plus. The argument for it seems fundamentally sound.

HEAT penetration is a much more recent problem, and combat firings have shown it can be iffy in the extreme. For example, a bracket can divert or disrupt the jet, thus defeating an otherwise sure kill. I've seen the analyses and post combat photos from the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. Likewise, the M-72 LAW should have eaten the PT-76s alive when they attacked the Special Forces at Lang Vei, Vietnam. Unfortunately, the flotation chambers for the amphibious recon tanks acted as spaced armor, making the tank almost LAW proof, barring a hit on the tiny turret or a critical part of the running gear. The LAW devoured T-54s at An Loc, though. Those tanks had no buoyancy chambers.

I have no idea how CMBB models behind armor effects and/or heat rise for HEAT penetrations. I distinctly recall a column in AFV-G2 magazine in which a German AT veteran from the Eastern Front described how the 88s used to fire MT airburst to strip tank descents so that 88 HEAT could be used on the otherwise well shielded tanks.

This brings us to AP shell. My issue? The claim made is not supported by either logic or combat experience. We know that for a given gun, the AP shell will penetrate worse than the AP shot, for the good and simple reason that the AP shell is lighter, more affected by drag since it lacks some momentum, and thus delivers less KE upon impact, which means it can't go as deep as its solid sibling. Why use AP shell? British Operational Research teams analyzing combat in the Western Desert found that an AP shell which got even halfway into the fighting compartment generally destroyed the tank beyond repair (K-kill) and savaged the crew. Overall conclusions? AP shot yielded a repairable tank and minimal crew losses. AP shell destroyed the tank outright and generally put the crew out of commission at the same time.

If the likelihood of K-kill is indeed tied to overpenetration for all cases, then I respectfully submit, code issues permitting, that this matter be

taken up with Rexford et al. and patched ASAP, for it is both logically and factually incorrect. AP shells which pierce the armor at all should, assuming they fuze, be turning many more tanks into blazing hulks and their crews into something sad and unsightly than the long range engagement results reported seem to suggest is occurring.

It goes without saying that the ability to inflict K-kills goes directly to the heart of things in operations, since a damaged tank is repairable, but a K-kill may or may not be replaced in the next battle.

Regards,

John Kettler

[ September 21, 2002, 01:55 AM: Message edited by: John Kettler ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, although I have no idea of what you are talking about or if what you are suggesting is modelled, but Ill run it past Charles. smile.gif We are talking about the chances of an internal ammo explosion here, arent we, as that is all I was referring to?

Guys, currently several vehicles are represented by similar models. We will be updating as many as possible though (not all, but many), so this should keep most people happy smile.gif . It was either do this which will add to the tactical scope of the game or remove them altoghther, which I for one really didnt want to do. There is already over half dozen ready for the first patch which you guys should see in a week or so.

Dan

[ September 21, 2002, 02:05 AM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...