Hello!
Can anybody send it to me too? Thanx in advance.
My email address y cesarls@terra.es

Yes, I think if it has less warheadsize and less accuracy, it will do the same suppresion but not as many casualties. What do you think?

I have a SB Live value and I don't have any problems with SPWAW in WIN98 and WIN2000, and now with stereo enhancements the sound is perfect
(I have a Intel BX based mobo)

<r>Yes, Muscius, you are right, sorry.<br/>
The CETME and later the G3 are based in the Muasr STG45, which must had to replace the STG44 but never view action (it was cheaper to produce than the STG44, about a half of working hours to produce one).<br/>
Again, please excuse me.<br/>
(I have a ...

<r>I agree with the view that it depends on who is using it. But perhaps to be the best you must be easy to maintenance, easy to shoot with, and cheap to manufacture. <E>:)</E> <br/>
By the way, the really son of STG44 is the Spanish CETME series, made by the authentic fathers of the STG. Then the ...

I would be interested in that too. cesarls@terra.es

I follow this topic in the TOEs and OOBs forum.

Ok, If you want testers, please let me know. Also I can give you a list of some detected bugs or desiderable modifications.

<t>I must add that the bugs I found are really bugs: machine guns with a lot of HE kill(when I say "a lot" is true), impossibility to purchase Japanese ATR, some units only can be purchase at company levels,... Yeah, these are minor problems, but I would like to get OOB made by somebody instead by ...

<t>First of all I must say that SPWAW is the best wargame I've ever played. I've played to SP1 and SP3 and then SPWAW. But I have found some bugs in the OOBs shipped with the version 6.1. Where can I download modified oobs? I can modify them by myself, but I would like to get the more "standard ...

I agree with the two or three man team with FT, and yes, this is the right way the must be used in the game I think. Please let me know if you are using the same modified oob to make a "more standar" oob for my battles.

Yes, always a human opponent is better than a AI opponent.
AS the others say: "only if it eats low resources from other researches"

<t>I think that we shoulnd'nt talk about the efficiency or not of th ft and their use, the fact is that the ft weren't used so much in the reality as used in the game (who not spent a hundreds of points if flametanks if his opponent purchases them and BBQ his AT guns or MG after a few rounds of LMG ...

<t>First, I don't know if i have to post this here, if this is not the right place to post it I am very sorry.<br/>
<br/>
I have detected that the weapon 178 (30cal CMG(x2)) in the UK OOB used in the Lee MK1 (085) has a he kill of 120 and range of 120 too. Also review the weapon number 176.<br/>
<br ...

<t>OK. I think it's only needed to make some little changes in the oob, not because they are wrong, only to make the game more "realistic", and to make the ft much less avalaible: the last 4 or 5 games online or pbem i had, had converted to a huge "burning land", and it is very bored. I've been ...

<t>I agree with the comments of A_B. The best way to put ft in the game is a separate squad used for special purposes, as they was used. Also the engineers without ft would be more suitable for all scenaries as they can be considered as sappers or infantry with more abilities to clean obstacles or ...

<t>I think the problem is not the destruction power of the flamethrowers or the moral effect over the troops, the problem is that in all pbem games and online games I have played, the battles had ended with a massive use of anything with a flamethrower: it is not difficult to a veteran german ...