Posted: Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:59 pmPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2007 6:16 pmPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2007 7:49 pm
( Sorry if some one dosen't understand that one. Swedish expression!)
Posted: Tue Aug 28, 2007 9:08 pmPosted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:06 am
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:08 am
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:08 am 
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:10 amPosted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 6:36 pmPosted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 6:51 pm| Quote: |
| Have noticed that the G-43 has dissapeard as well, a shame... |
| Quote: |
| Yeah, but in the BETA there where plenty of Flakpanzers in almost every German BG- |
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:06 pm| Dima wrote: |
|
but it looks like germans used FlakPanzer's were used to cover HQs and strategical points instead of supporting tanx on battlefield. |
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 1:16 pm
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 1:24 pm| Quote: |
| What about Allied Air Superority? The PZ needs help on the field! |
| Quote: |
|
And yes!
The G-43 is gone. Onlt G-41s left. |
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 3:34 pmPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:57 pm Btw what is the name of the new lebisey woods map? i cant find it in the game.
Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:32 pmPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 8:38 am| Quote: |
| my shreck round bounces off front of churchhill tank at 65m (2 times)... it has range of 150 m and 200mm pentration |
| Quote: |
| Moreover, fausts are now ONLY effective against vehicles!? how is that realistic... |
| Quote: |
| could penetrate from 150mm to 200mm of armor depending on version... |
| Quote: |
| Lastly, I had a flame halftrack that flamed a stuart light tank 9 times and not one crew member even wounded... thank God is AI or else my track would been done! |
Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 8:41 am| Quote: |
| i'll test this data set when i'm on exercise in germany comming 2 weeks. |
. when u return u'll have something new based on this.
| Quote: |
| Btw what is the name of the new lebisey woods map? i cant find it in the game. |
Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:40 am| Dima wrote: | ||||
hey buck,
v good choice . when u return u'll have something new based on this.
StPierre...actually that's 4.3 Basly map... neither u nor Atilla hasn't make correct LW:P |
Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 6:12 pm| Buck_Compton wrote: |
|
Concerning the Lebisey Map. I was expecting atilla to do that map. As i'm having a hard time making good gjs maps.
Cheers Buck |
Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 6:58 pmPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 7:32 pm
Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 7:33 pmPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:27 pmPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:33 pmPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:54 amPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 3:37 amPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:16 am| Quote: |
| Dima lots of praise for this mod. |
.
| Quote: |
| i have ordered a special book on AFV german mods because you said the about the Germans not doing so much moding on there panzers info is coming i hope! |
Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 5:42 pmPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 11:32 pm| Dima wrote: |
|
v092 is available.
http://www.closecombatseries.net/CCS/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewto pic&t=4059 |
Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:43 am| Quote: |
| what changes or fixes were there? |
Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:08 am
Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:41 am| Quote: |
| the file is only about 6kb ? |
| Quote: |
| well anyway i get an error when i try to unrar it, seems like the file is damaged for me |
Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 11:48 amPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 7:08 pm
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 5:31 pm
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 5:38 pmPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 7:52 pm
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:16 amPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:36 pm| Quote: |
| not trying to push you Dima but any luck on uploading ti somewhere else ? |
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:58 pm
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:59 pm| Quote: |
| thx for uploading it somewhere else |
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 10:14 am
Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 3:18 amPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 6:06 pmPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 7:00 pm| Quote: |
| Are there some bugs you are still working on or do you think v093 or 1.0 will be released soon? |
.
| Quote: |
| Thanks for this mod and especially how fast you fixed the bugs!! |
.
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 12:30 pmPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:17 pm| Quote: |
| 20mm taking out shermans...think about it, front on at 250m.... |
0019c54f28640c2f254.jpg)
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 6:45 pmPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 1:18 am| ANZAC_Tack wrote: |
|
I have found through all versions so far, the german 20mm is a truely awsome weapon, to strong?
I always loose with tehtrah's,i lost some shermans!,and killed some shermans, yes even front on, takes a few minutes though.... 20mm taking out shermans...think about it, front on at 250m.... |
Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:30 amPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:37 am| ANZAC_Lord4war wrote: |
|
keep in mind when the germans were in stalingrad they already had a serious tungsten shortage.As all nations did as they couldnt mine it as fast as they could use it.
And sometime in 1943 an order was given that it be used only for tool building purposes.As so to be able to keep on making weapons,which was considered more important (and fair enough too). DDay happened in the middle of 1944,at no time between stalingrad and DDay did the germans get Tungsten delieveries. And if they did,im sure some general in charge somewhere would of slapped (executed) down the idiot who gave the order to turn their last tungsten into ammo for a 20mm/37mm flak gun. |
Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 11:14 am| Quote: |
| The first wave suffered 50% casualties |
Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 6:48 am| Quote: |
| Cause Juno seems like the easiest beach for Allies not hardest in game. |
| Quote: |
| The german 20mm 115 cal ver was able with SP Ammo at 100m to penetrate 106mm!!!! |
.
| Quote: |
| they knocked T34s on the russian front as well and were used in common use to do this late in the war after 44. |
. And thing is that tungsten core has just usually fallen on the floor of combat compartment of penetrated tank as core spent all it's energy to perforate.
| Quote: |
| There are photos of Sd.Kfz. 221 light armoured cars mounting this weapon, instead of the light machine gun they had previously been armed with exclusively. |
| Quote: |
| keep in mind when the germans were in stalingrad they already had a serious tungsten shortage.As all nations did as they couldnt mine it as fast as they could use it. |
| Quote: |
| And sometime in 1943 an order was given that it be used only for tool building purposes. |
| Quote: |
| at no time between stalingrad and DDay did the germans get Tungsten delieveries. |
.
| Quote: |
| And if they did,im sure some general in charge somewhere would of slapped (executed) down the idiot who gave the order to turn their last tungsten into ammo for a 20mm/37mm flak gun. |
.
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 8:48 am| Quote: |
| at Stal time germans were on a peak of using APCRs. |
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 8:58 am| Quote: |
| Germans were at the peak of using APCRs during 1940 invasion of France. |
.
Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 2:43 am| Quote: |
|
haha
just try to get some information about the time germans invented APCR shells and when units started to receive them . |
| Quote: |
|
The 28/20mm AT gun was the one i know were Tungsten was in the most use and they stoped making this gun because of this shortage.
Also it may have not been Tungsten they were using for the ammo? Tiger! |
Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 11:18 am| Quote: |
| if u think the germans invented them ur entitled to ur opinion. |
| Quote: |
| in 1940 the pak35/36 recieved the pzgr40 for the first time.lengthening its time on the front line. |
| Quote: |
| Russia being Germanys primary Tungsten supplier. |
| Quote: |
| Portugal and Spain could never supply enough or really wanted to for fear of retribution from the allies. |
.
| Quote: |
| yes this gun and the Pak 41 were both made in a very limited production run. |
| Quote: |
| i guess the 41 gives away when they were made |
so u r trying to tell that they were all made in 1941?
| Quote: |
| keep in mind they also ceased being made that year,for u guessed it no other reason than tungsten shortages. |
| Quote: |
| as they were both very effective guns. |
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 1:25 am| Quote: |
| invented/designed/developed/etc german APCR |
| Quote: |
| so how does it correspond with: Germans were at the peak of using APCRs during 1940 invasion of France. (c)Anzac_Lor4war ? |
| Quote: |
| at least put "imho" in such lame statements. |
| Quote: |
| study history |
| Quote: |
| ~2800 of sPzB = v limited production run? |
| Quote: |
| and according to yer logic MG.34 was made in 1934? |
?
| Quote: |
| so u r trying to tell that they were all made in 1941? |
| Quote: |
|
interesting,
stupid germans didn't know that they've ceased production of tapered-bore guns in 1941 (according to yer previous phrase) and kept producing them and ammunition for them till at least mid of 1943. |
| Quote: |
| PaK42 was v effective ATG as well but somehowe production was ceased. Reason - tungsten shortage? |
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 1:48 pm| Quote: |
| or copied would be more historically correct.The german army were very efficient at stealing their enemies weapons and putting them to use. |
| Quote: |
| Also no war with Russia was a big factor too. |
| Quote: |
|
Then follow the natural progression for the ammo to be introduced
to the 5cm pak. |
.
| Quote: |
|
It places the timeline for you,and the situation of supply.If u cant look at it in a logistical way,its like food in a mess tent,
you have been told the availability is low,you then have to ration it before it runs out,or you run out faster. |
.
| Quote: |
| imho you and your denial are/is lame. |
. Tho u still substitute lack of knowledges by speculations and insults.
. Maby u can try to make a guess?
| Quote: |
| the fact that spain and portugal became germanys main supplier from mid 1941 is not being disputed by me. |
.
| Quote: |
| please provide evidence that spain and portugal could supply Germany with enough. |
).
| Quote: |
| well yes,take into account the weapons range up to 500metres,lets say 400metres to be on safe side.compare its range to a Faustpatrone or Panzerfaust |
| Quote: |
|
it comes out on top,now compare its accuracy,it comes out on top again,now consider its R.O.F.
then consider how many throwaway zooks they made. Reason - tungsten shortage?,quick hit the history books. |
| Quote: |
| no im afraid thats your logic on its own.where did u get that from |
| Quote: |
| no a msn friend just said to say that to get u rambling,lol. |
.
| Quote: |
| Sorry dude it is german logic!All three of the German tapered-bore guns bear the same date of standardization—1941.(stupid germans you may say) |
| Quote: |
| 2.8 spzb rolled out in 1940,when they made the only 24 Sd.Kfz 221.fitted with the 2.8cm sPzB 41(of which 10 survived 4years to represent in TRSM) |
| Quote: |
| maybe would be better represented in a SdKfz 250/11 for the time period. |
| Quote: |
|
and the 7.5cm Pak 41 first rolled out in new year of 42 (150 of them)
with the 4.2-cm Pak 41 being released in between. |
| Quote: |
| its ur opinion the germans were stupid. |
| Quote: |
|
my previous statement was in reference to the 2.8cm sPzB
hmmmm maybe u think i said germans had no tungsten stockpile? |
| Quote: |
| coz they were great at logistics,they knew what they were facing before they had to face it. |
| Quote: |
| their greatest losses were predicted by their own military,caused just for pleasing Hitler. |
| Quote: |
| not that it has anything to do with current debate (like MG34),so maybe first u could enlighten me to the fact it does. |
.
.
| Quote: |
| id be glad to debate about it,if that is what you want,it is ur opinion or a dickhead throwaway statement? |
Posted: Sat Nov 17, 2007 6:29 am| Quote: |
|
if u had any experience with industry u'd know that to steal and copy is possible
(i say again possible) only with v simple things.APCR isn't simple thing. So if u want to copy that u'll need to adjust everything according to your production possibilities and experience with it. And that means develop yer own thing. |
| Quote: |
| Also no war with Russia was a big factor too. |
| Quote: |
| yes of coz lol. |
| Quote: |
|
Then follow the natural progression for the ammo to be introduced
to the 5cm pak. |
| Quote: |
| what year? 1940? |
| Quote: |
|
and i will give u another tip.
Production of 3,7cm-Pzgr40 in 1000 shells: 1940 - 286,6 1941 - 885,2. |
| Quote: |
| so how does it correspond with: Germans were at the peak of using APCRs during 1940 invasion of France. (c)Anzac_Lor4war? |
| Quote: |
|
good, u start to learn how to have civilized argues.
Tho u still substitute lack of knowledges by speculations and insults. |
| Quote: |
|
Now let me tell u the facts:
during 18 monthes of Soviet-German trade agreement, Germany received 500 tons of tungsten. Does it tell u anything? |
| Quote: |
| Russia being Germanys primary Tungsten supplier |
| Quote: |
| at least put "imho" in such lame statements. |
| Quote: |
| I don't even tell u why did the soviets supply tungsten to germans. Maby u can try to make a guess? |
| Quote: |
|
well, u know enough is v subjective word. f.e. for u 1000$ is enuf and for me 10000$ is not enuf or vice versa.
objective thing is that they supplied to germans 1100tons per month in 1944. Now try to compare with the Soviet supplies in 39-40 and mining capabilities of tungsten of USSR or USA (or just world mining capabilites). |
| Quote: |
| well yes, take Pupchen into account... |
| Quote: |
|
same for Pupchen.... reason - tungsten shortage?
Pupchen and sPzB.41 r like twin borthers in terms of employment. |
| Quote: |
| what do u mean by that then: i guess the 41 gives away when they were made,(c)Anzac_Lord4war ? |
| Quote: |
| huh ho, so SdKfz 221 with sPzB.41 appeared in 1940?Thats another historical breakthough! |
| Quote: |
|
Anyway, to fill the gaps in yer knowledges i will tell u that operation of mounting/dismounting
of the sPzB on SdKfz 221 or SdKfz 250 or SdKfz 251 could be pretty fast made by field repair units. |
| Quote: |
| maybe would better for u to start to study subject? |
| Quote: |
|
Tips for u:
1)Try to get information in what role was sPzB41 used in SS-PzD after reorganization in 1943 i.e. which units inside the division had them. 2)If u speak about 21.Pz, just get some good book about it, start with J-P Peregault's. |
| Quote: |
| it was irony on yer statement |
| Quote: |
| sure, and maybe Napoleon was great and Charles XII and many other.... |
| Quote: |
| ohh, those genious generals could do everything...if not stupid Hitler/general Frost/T-34/human waves/etc lol |
| Quote: |
|
of coz i will enlight u - ask more.
Thing with MG.34, FlaK.37, leIG.18, KwK.36 etc is that they were not made the year that their index says. That was told just to point that: i guess the 41 gives away when they were made(c)Anzac_Lord4war - often is not correct. |
| Quote: |
|
Tip:
Pak.41 even with AP shot with steel insert could penetrate more than Pak.40 with APCBC. |
| Quote: |
| Thing with PaK.42 is same as with Pak.41. Try to guess what is it. |
| Quote: |
| well, again, why do u try to insult if u want good debate? |
| Quote: |
| PaK42 was v effective ATG as well but somehowe production was ceased. Reason - tungsten shortage? |
| Quote: |
|
ever tried to make logical conclusions from what u read/hear?
well i will try to give some tips: 1)Who had the most armored AVF in 1940 according to germans? 2)When and why did the germans decide to make the tank that will be named PzVI in 1942? |
Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 4:37 am| Quote: |
| yes that would be extremely difficult to copy something when u have an example of it.lol such development. |
| Quote: |
| another 2 questions u dont know,u say ur a ww2 historian,but dont know what the /1 means on a KwK39. |
| Quote: |
| and that proves that the tungsten ammo kept the 3.7cm atg on the front line a year onger. |
| Quote: |
| as well as eating into there ever dropping tungsten stocks,which started to fall from 1941. |
| Quote: |
|
thats right u quoted pak 3.7 figures(which they only started to use Tungsten ammo in 1940)
hoping they would represent overall picture. |
| Quote: |
| have u any idea how many 20mm ammo was in use,or even how many 20mm guns there was at time,let me tell you! |
| Quote: |
| they dwarf the pak 3.7 figures. |
| Quote: |
|
well obnoxious, im not asking you for a thank you or anything
i dont mind telling u which tanks had which guns if my knowledge is greater than your knowledges.lol |
| Quote: |
| u just recently learnt about the kwk39/1 for the Puma |
| Quote: |
| its free info for you to copy,steal,develop,invent |
| Quote: |
| just to show no hard feelings i give u 1 tip for TRSM v94 PzIVG does not use the same gun as PzIVH! |
| Quote: |
|
thanks for verifying it after insisting i put imho in such lame statements,such manners.is
that a fact or facts? |
| Quote: |
| its really not necessary,as i did not ask you,i told you about it. |
| Quote: |
| once again i asked u to provide evidence of it(in the form of some type of documentation).not to type some figures in forum,in an attempt to obfuscate the matter,i really would like to see the documentation,coz if u can find that it will probly say which industries it was delivered too and for what! |
| Quote: |
| p.s $1000 is way too much for me(feel better now?),id think i was rich.but i guess them dollar amounts r just like ur mining figures.lol |
| Quote: |
| why? u comparing it to a 2.8cm sPzB 41 which was designed a few years earlier and also for a total different ammo used. |
| Quote: |
| usually twins r born within an hour of each other.not half a war apart. |
.
| Quote: |
| the same date of standardization—1941 this is german naming not mine.i.e:like Hitler renaming MP43 to Stg44. |
| Quote: |
| how come you dont know this? |
| Quote: |
| ahhh silly i said sPzB 41 got rolled out in 1940 |
| Quote: |
| Geez u mean the sPzB 41 was easily mountable,such extrodinary knowledge,who would of ever thought that from a 120kg 2manned gun,that troops carried up mountains? |
.
| Quote: |
| did they do it to the Pak42 too?lol dont stop ur running hot. |
| Quote: |
| ur knowledges know no knowledge,lol |
| Quote: |
| i always am and will continue to do so regardless of ur advice,its enjoyable for me. |
| Quote: |
| just becoz u think u know all and have stopped. |
| Quote: |
| thanks im sure they are great books,but im mainly concerned with mid 1944.and am aware of how fast things change in a war, and of the need to be constantly adaptable to the situation around you. And in 1944, A major problem resulted from a lack of clarity in the panzer command structure. The newly formed 47th Panzer Corps was still in process of taking over command of 21st, 116th and 2nd Panzer Divisions, whilst administrative and supply matters remained under Panzer Group West, with both responsible to Rommel's Army Group B. To complicate matters further, Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt, Commander in Chief West, was powerless to commit the strategic reserve without the authority of OKW, meaning in effect Hitler. |
| Quote: |
| and i will keep telling u that tungsten and not irony is the subject. |
| Quote: |
| ok the generals didnt want to retreat when they knew they had to do so for survival. |
| Quote: |
| Hitler ordered them to retreat,and the german generals said no we will stay here without supply and fight to the last man and do it for the fatherland. |
| Quote: |
| is that easier for you to believe?I thought so! |
| Quote: |
| funny part is i didnt say it,u did.lol MG34 is in ur head. |
| Quote: |
| but at least u now know that it is the case with these 3 weaponswhich i was talking about,,which primary use was anti tank gun. |
| Quote: |
| k98 hmmmm,they got a bit ahead of themselves there.lmao according to your logic. |
| Quote: |
| what does that have to do with the price of fish/tungsten? |
| Quote: |
| i already know,and offered you the debate.(see image below) |
.
| Quote: |
| it was an honest question to you,there was 2 answers for you to pick from,which u could not pick one (kinda lame). |
.
| Quote: |
| are you too scared to say its ur opinion?like u might get trapped?or is it a dickhead throwaway statement? |
| Quote: |
| and here is pak42 production figures and why i offered u them 2 choices of answers. most people wouldnt hesitate to back themselves and say that was their opinion/or IMHO,but u have! lol |
| Quote: |
| anything to obfuscate the subject at hand,hey dima. |
.Sux, yer logic sux lol.
Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 5:26 amPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:53 am| Quote: |
|
First of all it would be as the example u have was made on different machines by different ppl using different tools.
Second im not familiar with the history that germans copied someone's APCR. At least no country had APCRs in production in 1940 |
| Quote: |
|
1)I never pretended/told that iam historian.
2)I can't understand what u mean by dont know what the /1 means on a KwK39. I mean how did u come to that conclusion or how it corressponds with our topic? |
| Quote: |
| Anzac_Lord4war - often is not correct. |
| Quote: |
| Also no war with Russia was a big factor too.(c)Anzac_Lor4war - explain this statement plz. |
| Quote: |
|
Then follow the natural progression for the ammo to be introduced(c)
so u know that 5cm PzGr.40 wasn't introduced in 1940 ?! Cool! |
| Quote: |
| Now how then yer statements corressponds with:Germans were at the peak of using APCRs during 1940 invasion of France. |
| Quote: |
| wow cool conclusion! |
| Quote: |
|
i didn't get it...
how the higher production of 3.7cm PzGr.40 shells in 1941 supports the statement: Germans were at the peak of using APCRs during 1940 invasion of France. |
| Quote: |
|
seems u have problems with logics...
I showed u rite direction by tips, but u just can't get it. Second try: When did 3.7cm PzGr.40 were put in production i.e. month? |
| Quote: |
|
have an idea of how many 2cm PzGr.40 were in production in 1940 - will be close to....ZERO.
|
| Quote: |
| u told me why USSR supplied tungsten to Germany? when? |
| Quote: |
| anyway, u know what is logical? |
| Quote: |
|
1)i give u numbers as there were not any given by u.
2)u try to counter them with sources and it is u who's not agree with them. 3)i show u my sources. |
| Quote: |
| it's yer own problems - can't help u with them |
| Quote: |
|
becoz Pupchen production was ceased for same reason as 2.8cm sPzB.41.
now i c it - u do have problems with logic. employment was the key word . |
| Quote: |
| I believe anyone can clearly c that u told SdKfz 221 in 1940. |
| Quote: |
| actually it has crew of 3. |
be warned they may clash with ur training manuals.
| Quote: |
| it does say only that Pak41 with PzGr.40(W) could penetrate more than Pak40 with APCBC at same distances vs soviet tanx |
| Quote: |
| Was tungsten used in manufacturing of Pak41, sPzB41 or lePak41? |
| Quote: |
|
If Pak.41 with PzGr.41(W) had better penetration stats that Pak.40 with APCBC -
why should we remove it from production? |
| Quote: |
|
So yer statement:keep in mind they also ceased being made that year,
for u guessed it no other reason than tungsten shortages.- is at least very doubtful. |
| Quote: |
|
3)Regarding the issue of PzGr.40...
3.7cm PzGr,40 were issued in 1940 (late summer - fall) for first time. 3)before that it was majority 2cm kwk and flaks who had the stocks of it. (c)Lord4war - totally wrong statement as 2-cm PzGr.40 shells were put in production in 1941. 2cm PzGr.40 were issued in 1941. 5cm PzGr.40 were issued in 1941. 7.5cm PzGr.40 were issued in 1942. 8.8cm PzGr.40 were issued in 1943. |
output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT