Barkhorn1x Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 Originally posted by M Hofbauer: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Barkhorn1x: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by RMC: And a Hummel don't duel. That looks more like a Marder III (Czech 38t chassis), so it can duel - but only if it hits first - after that it's toast. Barkhorn. </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMC Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 LOL. Hummel, Schmummel. I saw one somewhere in a screenshot recently and it brought back memories of a 1/15th scale model reviewed in a Military Modelling magazine I had as a kid. Made me wonder how one gets to use a Hummel in ToW and whether they have a good animation for putting in aiming stakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtweasle Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 Originally posted by RMC: .. Made me wonder how one gets to use a Hummel in ToW and whether they have a good animation for putting in aiming stakes. Off-Board 15cm Arty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vergeltungswaffe Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 I insist on a Sturmtiger, so we can enjoy the effects on an individual basis, rather than just lifting entire battalions off the ground. By the way, how far WILL the bodies fly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Hofbauer Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 at Barkhorn... Originally posted by RMC: LOL. Hummel, Schmummel. Shmummel doesnt have a Shmuzzle break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComradeP Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 Kind of funny, my initial post stated that the "Nashorn" wouldn't be happy, but I edited it to Hummel due to the lack of the 2 bars the Nashorn gun uses to stabilise itself. I was wrong with editing it perhaps, but the Nashorn isn't correctly modelled if it is a Nashorn. The main gun needs the 2 bars for support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMC Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 Thought that was just the travel lock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Hofbauer Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 Originally posted by ComradeP: Kind of funny, my initial post stated that the "Nashorn" wouldn't be happy, but I edited it to Hummel due to the lack of the 2 bars the Nashorn gun uses to stabilise itself. I was wrong with editing it perhaps, but the Nashorn isn't correctly modelled if it is a Nashorn. The main gun needs the 2 bars for support. what the hell are you babbling about, comradeP ? :confused: I fear for you! a) nowhere did you talk about a Nashorn OR Hummel before... :confused: b)what do you mean by "2 bars"? Mars/Snickers, for more OOOMPH ? the support beams / support frame is NOT a definite recognition feature of the Nashorn vs the Hummel. both vehicles sometimes had it and sometimes didnt. c) as I said, go by the shmuzzle break, thats a better recognition feature. together with shmarrel thickness its usually easy to tell them apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMC Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 Originally posted by Dirtweasle: Off-Board 15cm Arty? Well, yeah. But they made the model. So it can be and be shot at as a direct fire asset? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Hofbauer Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 Originally posted by RMC: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Dirtweasle: Off-Board 15cm Arty? Well, yeah. But they made the model. So it can be and be shot at as a direct fire asset? </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMC Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 Yeah, but I want to see a battery of them emplace themselves, set out their aiming stakes, align the battery and get comms with their FDC. If that's not in, I ain't buying this game and BFC can go to hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 Originally posted by RMC: Yeah, but I want to see a battery of them emplace themselves, set out their aiming stakes, align the battery and get comms with their FDC. If that's not in, I ain't buying this game and BFC can go to hell. What if you found out there are flail tanks, though? Don't dig yourself in too deep here.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMC Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 Super size me. I want flail tanks AND emplaced Hummel batteries. And SS cuff titles. And early war helmet decals. And US camouflage uniforms in the Bocage. And Dinky Toys Ju-87s with little metal bombs you can put a cap in and drop.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren J Pierson Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 Originally posted by RMC: And Dinky Toys Ju-87s with little metal bombs you can put a cap in and drop.... Talk about a trip down memory lane! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComradeP Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 what the hell are you babbling about, comradeP ? [Confused] I fear for you! a) nowhere did you talk about a Nashorn OR Hummel before... [Confused] b)what do you mean by "2 bars"? Mars/Snickers, for more OOOMPH ? [Wink] the support beams / support frame is NOT a definite recognition feature of the Nashorn vs the Hummel. both vehicles sometimes had it and sometimes didnt. c) as I said, go by the shmuzzle break, thats a better recognition feature. together with shmarrel thickness its usually easy to tell them apart. a: You fail to notice that the issue has been brought up in another thread, where I called the vehicle a Hummel. I don't know how you actually missed that post, as you visit the forums often. b: English is not my first language, and if I would translate the Dutch word for "support beam" to English, the result could be either "bar" or "support beam." Support beam isn't entirely correct either, as the gun used the beams as stabilisers, not primarily for support. There's a big difference between stabilisation and support. c: All of the pictures of Nashorns that I have seen had the 2 "support beams" hence I identify Nashorns by that feature. I didn't look at the muzzle break (or the lack thereof). hmmm using the Hummel in the melee environment of ToW (that we've seen so far) will be like running into a bank with a grenade in your hand and threaten "either you surrender or I'm gonna blow both of us up" I don't think so, it will just be a 150mm support gun, like the 75mm French support piece and the Polish howitzers, except that it will be mobile. The (I)SU 122&152 series, and vehicles like the Sturmpanzer IV will presumably fullfill that function, even though they are not intended to be artillery support pieces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Hofbauer Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 Originally posted by RMC: Yeah, but I want to see a battery of them...yeah, the whole. er, six of them...!?! :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 I think it's safe to say that if a Hummel (item featured is definitely a Nashorn; note 88 L/71 tube mit muzzle brake) finds itself in that kind of direct fire engagement something has gone wrong in a big way, as in a major armored breakthrough deep into divisional rear. Unless it bogged or something, the Nashorn commander screwed up badly as well, for that was designed as a long range tank killer and should've pulled out long since, though naturally it would be much closer to the front lines normally than would the Hummel. Travel locks are intended to protect sensitive traverse and elevation gear from dynamic shock generated during vehicle movement, especially cross country. This is a major issue for big, heavy guns. Regards, John Kettler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComradeP Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 and should've pulled out long since The same can be said about the Elefant in one of the other screenshots. The Elefant might have been stuck, but the Nashorn commanders made a serious tactical error (by the way: are they actually engaging something, they all face the same direction whilst they are being flanked?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolColJ Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 water looks sweet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Hofbauer Posted August 14, 2006 Share Posted August 14, 2006 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by RMC: Yeah, but I want to see a battery of them emplace themselves, set out their aiming stakes, align the battery and get comms with their FDC. If that's not in, I ain't buying this game and BFC can go to hell. What if you found out there are flail tanks, though? Don't dig yourself in too deep here.... </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Hofbauer Posted August 15, 2006 Share Posted August 15, 2006 easy there, tovarish, Originally posted by ComradeP: in another thread, where I called the vehicle a Hummel. well, we're in THIS thread now. you're only adding to the confusion (see how confused poor RMC already is, he would usually never mistake a Nashorn for the Shmummel) if you go on about things you might or might not have said or said then later edited or never said then deleted or deleted then said someday somewhere else... :confused: I don't know how you actually missed that post, as you visit the forums often.oh but thats why Im so confused, see? dont worry, though, my increased presence is -unfortunately - only a transient phenomenon...(but I'll be back ! ) c: All of the pictures of Nashorns that I have seen which obviously weren't too many... look again...look closer... </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> hmmm using the Hummel in the melee environment of ToW (that we've seen so far) will be like running into a bank with a grenade in your hand and threaten "either you surrender or I'm gonna blow both of us up" I don't think so, it will just be a 150mm support gun, </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mace Posted August 15, 2006 Share Posted August 15, 2006 Originally posted by ComradeP: Kind of funny, my initial post stated that the "Nashorn" wouldn't be happy, but I edited it to Hummel due to the lack of the 2 bars the Nashorn gun uses to stabilise itself. I was wrong with editing it perhaps, but the Nashorn isn't correctly modelled if it is a Nashorn. The main gun needs the 2 bars for support. The two bars were travel locks rather than stabilisers. Both the Nashorn and Hummel had them, but I think later models of both had these removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComradeP Posted August 15, 2006 Share Posted August 15, 2006 which obviously weren't too many... It seems that every single book I have shows the Nashorn with travel locks/stabilisers/whatever you want to call them. I have been lied to by various authors! There was one picture that reminded me of Spanish 16th century musketry (confusion is my trademark?) as the stabilisers (in this case: true stabilisers, custom welded by maintenance personel) were so long that they always reached the ground, this basically creating an 88 on a bipod, which looked strange to say the least. According to the comments, it did improve accuracy, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeauCoupDinkyDau Posted August 15, 2006 Share Posted August 15, 2006 That's because 90% of all AVF photos you have seen are taken in non-combat conditions; so the travel locks being in place are prudent at that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComradeP Posted August 15, 2006 Share Posted August 15, 2006 Presumably, that is the case. By the way: it would be nice to see the effect of a Hummel firing at a bunch of infantrymen at a range of 100 meters. I would assume that the various limbs of the infantrymen will scatter all over the map. Luckily, the "Strummpanzer" will also deliver such effects (well, without the huge amount of gore, that is). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts