Profile of Bastables

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 20

General Information


Thread: DevM's USF without Tears20 Nov 2015, 13:20 PM Jump back to quoted post20 Nov 2015, 10:48 AMDevM Well it depends on how you use the squad, generally speaking having one BAR is enough but 2 BARs to run down squads (snipers) is better. Cheers, I'll start experimenting with one bar per squad. In: Guides
Thread: DevM's USF without Tears20 Nov 2015, 03:25 AM Cheers for making a excellent Guide DevM. I've got one question concerning BAR's: Is it better to have 2 per squad or can you actually get away with 1 per squad? In: Guides
Thread: Panzer 4 penetration.3 Nov 2015, 07:20 AM Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 06:29 AMMr. Someguy What about the 5 fuel difference between the Panzer IV J and Easy Eight? Yet the Easy Eight beats 3/4 times? Your concern is that the doctrinal E8 that is more expensive in manpower and fuel than the PIVJ beats the PIVJ 3/4 of the time. Have you thought about taking your blinders off? In: Lobby
Thread: USF 76mm Sherman?29 Sep 2015, 22:53 PM Jump back to quoted post29 Sep 2015, 20:51 PMMr. Someguy The 76mm Sherman wasn't half finished, it was completed and ready. The Army just rejected them because they valued their 75mm HE shell too much, and didn't consider better AT a worthy trade because they used Tank Destroyers. You're misinformed and seek to misinform others. M4A3 (76mm) tanks went into service in mid August in two companies in 3 tank battalions. 70 went into action with the 7th army which was coming up after the landings in southern France post August. During Operation Cobra, aka the breakout from Normandy 102 M4A1 (76mm) went into action as part of 2nd and 3rd Armoured Div's. By October 1944 entire Armoured Divisions being sent to Europe such as the 9th were full equipped with M4A3 (76mm) in their battalions. By the battle of the bulge (December) 1/3 of the US ETO forces were 76mm armed M4's. In armoured divs 2 times the number of 76mm M4 were available whereas the Infantry Div M4 battalions and independent Tank battalions had to make do with the 75mm gun M4s. On February 15 1945 the 12th Army group refused to issue any further 75mm M4s resulting in around 600 M4 (75mm) sitting in depots. The Idea that US forces only used 75mm Shermans relies on ignoring US armoured Divisions from the Normandy breakout onwards and pretending the only tank battalions were the independent units and integral Infantry division Sherman(75mm) battalions. It's as disingenuous as arguing German "heavies" were in the minority while ignoring Panthers making up 46% of the Panzer arm in the west. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Stuart and Quad rush are pretty retarded,but....7 Aug 2015, 01:26 AM Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2015, 01:14 AMBastables This is a flat out lie: 222 had 5-8mm of armour Luch had 14.5-30mm. Even the early production Pz II variants (A,B,C) had 14.5mm as a basis. (excluding roof and belly which was 10mm). Nope I'm wrong Ausf B 222 (1942) had a 30cm frontal armour. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Stuart and Quad rush are pretty retarded,but....7 Aug 2015, 01:14 AM Jump back to quoted post5 Aug 2015, 19:23 PMSierra Why not just buff the 222 to be on par or slightly less than the Luchs in armor? Historically it had the same armor integrity as the Panzer II (except for the 2cm gunmount, This is a flat out lie: 222 had 5-8mm of armour Luch had 14.5-30mm. Even the early production Pz II variants (A,B,C) had 14.5mm as a basis. (excluding roof and belly which was 10mm). In: COH2 Balance
Thread: SU-76 issues4 Aug 2015, 22:28 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Aug 2015, 21:37 PMhubewa My point at the end of the day is there is no gun in the world that has excellent AI and AT performance, especially in WW2. The higher the AT performance, the worse the AI performance. You can't fit a lot of High Explosive in a high velocity round. Which is why the HE rounds should be designed to have a less powerful cartridge when fired out of the same gun, and a HE warhead designed to hold more HE filler as opposed to a ap shell. Note that the Kwk40 on the PIV had Pzgr 39 at 750m/s while the HE round spgr had a initial muzzle velocity of 550m/s. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Rommel the team killer 23 Jul 2015, 10:54 AM Odd chap kept yelling abuse, then said have fun playing alone ect them proceeded to kill oh my poor OKW trucks. Sometimes these Germans like to roleplay as NAZI's a little too much. In: Replays
Thread: EZ8 should have 800hp20 Jul 2015, 04:51 AM Jump back to quoted post20 Jul 2015, 03:19 AMCyanara "This isn't a simulator" aside, I was surprised to see that a tin can like the Sherman was given higher armour values than the late-war sloped armour of the T34-85. But then I remembered that HP has effectively no real world basis. In fact, it's practically impossible to ever get a satisfying hit on a t34/85 in this game thanks to its high HP. You only ever knock off a few pixels unless it's a Pak 43. The only armour change from 1943/44 T34s to T34-85s was thicker turrets up to 90mm. Hull armour was the same 45mm as the 1941 era T34's. (there were limited run factory up armour hull kits for the 76mm armed T34s but it was decided it'd be better to have the larger turret and 85mm gun than upgrading the hull armour) Sherman's had thicker (always sloped) frontal Hull (54mm-108) and turret armour 76mm in the continuous upgrades that resulted in the M4A3E8 W 64-108mm front hull and 64mm overlaid with a 89mm mantlet. Sherman had thicker armour on the front but thinner side armour. With the wet stowage upgrades it burned less after penetrations than T34's, PIV, and Panthers meaning less dead crew members. Note that in Soviet service M4A2 were eventually concentrated in elite/proven formations such as 1st Guards Mechanized Corps, 3rd Guards Mechanized Corps, and 9th Guards Mechanized Corps. Not exactly indicative as being regarded as bottom of the barrel equipment for "penal" or "green" corps units. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Nice to see the new patch....17 Jul 2015, 02:53 AM Jump back to quoted post16 Jul 2015, 02:10 AMNuclear Arbitor he's saying that every country committed "war crimes" and thus that trying to draw distinctions between the "civilized" and "non-civilized" countries based upon war crimes a non-sequitur. Yeah so he decided to conduct a separate straw man argument then. In: Lobby