Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


akd last won the day on August 28 2018

akd had the most liked content!


About akd

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling


  • Location
    Fort Worth

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Das Reich has 29 "Masch. Karabiner 43/1" on their Feb. 1, 1944 return, but the following returns for March and April have no such listing. Yes, I was aware of this order for a trial organization (but above offers some additional detail), but still have no evidence for which, if any, units used such an org in Normandy. That said, you can "mine" something pretty close out of the September Panzer Brigade panzergrenadier battalion. Doesn't have the rifles, but some headcount manipulation and specialist teams additions can get you even closer.
  2. 2nd Panzer and 1st SS PD LSSAH don't show any on their returns at this time. LSSAH had 120 "M.Pi.43" on their return for 31 December, 1943, but these are gone on later returns.
  3. I recognize fully that in reality you could encounter huge diversity with individual units, but the TO&E system in CM is not setup to capture the exceptional, but the typical. Sometimes exceptions can be carved for very particular units, but generally this is avoided as "soldiers" are often reused across multiple formations, and this includes their chances of particular small arms. That means that even the "poor" setting needs to reflect what was typical across many formations, not what might be seen in a handful of units (of course more accommodations for the exceptional will be found with armor, since even in small numbers these could have more significant effects on individual organizations). Just poking through my files, here is an excellent example of how it would be nearly impossible to code a "generic" system to capture the individual diversity of particular units. Backside of Kriegsgliederung for 131. Inf. Div. on Jan. 10, 1945. This sort of diversity is nearly impossible to capture in the game system (and even includes something I have not seen elsewhere: DP-27s converted to use German ammunition). I will point out that the TO&E system already accommodates much of your CMFB Volksgrenadier example. Set one of these to "poor" in CMFB and you will in fact get a unit that has few Sturmgewehr, substituting these with MP40s, Kar98Ks and G43s. Set the same to "excellent" before purchase and you will get a formation with close to its full paper (KStN) establishment of Sturmgewehr. That reflects what was typical across many formations. If it were typical for formations that did not receive Sturmgewehr to equipped with mostly with G43s and Italian SMGs, then we could accommodate this, but that was not the case. There were indeed some divisions that received large numbers of G43s instead of StG44s, and some divisions that had more Italian SMGs than MP40s, but these were not typical. Indeed, and a typical Sicherungs formation was equipped with German small arms, IIRC. Ost battalions were definitely a special case and not well-accommodated in the TO&E currently. I will revise my previous post to make my statement there less categorical. They would really be better handled as separate formation rather than a "poorly"-equipped standard infantry battalion. Their defining characteristic was not equipment, but personnel. The "Ost Battalion" in the CMBN tutorial falls victim to the general problem of the MP44 in CMBN: there is really no way to know how these were distributed to formations in Normandy because there was no official TO&E or reporting for them at the time. I don't really like how it is handled currently, but haven't really figured out something better to propose. That said, setting a formation to "poor" before purchase should lower the chance of seeing MP44s significantly, and this is probably simply an oversight at the time that particular scenario was constructed.
  4. Very nice, but would be more helpful without all units names sometimes translated too literally to English, e.g. I believe "Demonstration" here would be "Lehr" and "Projector" would be "Werfer". Presumably this is translated material from US archives? Shame he doesn't provide proper documentation.
  5. If you are interested in any particular unit, I have the kriegsgliederung for most German divisions for January - March 1945 (or at least for one or two months in that timespan) except Infanterie / Volksgrenadier divisions in the range 1.-99. These usually have Deutsche Waffen and Beutewaffen listings on the backside. This provides a much more consistent overview than the somewhat random snap shots in the Forum-der-Wehrmacht material. Having reviewed all these, in my opinion the importance of beutewaffen for small arms in German divisions is often overstated. Setting every German infantry battalion to, e.g., a 25% chance of Russian or Italian MPs would be deeply misleading. I will note these were a driving factor in having the option for lower equipment quality give late war panzergrenadiers 1x LMG instead of 2x. That is certainly something that could be characterized as typical rather than exceptional.
  6. As you can see even with these few examples, the ratio of of any particular beutewaffen small arm to standard small arms is often incredibly small, almost to the point of meaninglessness. Including something then setting it's appearance rate at 5% or less averaged over every formation in game does not really add much and can have some odd effects, particularly if you are dealing with weapons that draw on different ammo stocks. If one squad in your company randomly ends up with a French LMG then runs out of ammo in the first battle of a series without resupply, you will be deeply annoyed. The exception is Beretta MPs, as the Germans took over the factory in Northern Italy late in the war and began to produce Beretta MPs to supplant MP40 production as those production lines themselves were turning to MP44 production. And of course these could use German 9mm supplies without modification. Consequently a number of divisions in Italy, being closest to to this production center, did receive significant numbers. You will see this reflected to some degree in Rome to Victory. 715. Infanterie Division was in Italy until March 1945, so I would guess was one of the divisions to benefit from this "official production beutewaffen" and then take that to the East Front for the last few months of war. Note that 15. PGD was also in Italy until summer of 1944, but it's holding of Beretta MPs may have come from disarming Italian divisions in '43 rather than from northern Italian Beretta production. Where "beutewaffen" are more significant is actually heavy weapons like mortars, field guns and light flak rather than small arms. Even Ost battalions were equipped mostly with German production small arms, but some did have large numbers of Russian heavy weapons. might be equipped entirely with German weapons. *note that English MPs are almost certainly Stens, not Thompsons, especially considering the significant numbers sent to resistance groups. Thompson would probably be listed as an "American" MP, although I'm not off the top of my head remembering a "beutewaffen" listing I have seen for that.
  7. What oversights would you like to see corrected?
  8. With the Sherman IIA? South African 6th Armored Division.
  9. Okay, I see the issue, but I'm not sure it is avoidable due to how the code for uniforms works. The FJ motorized battalion and the FJ Panzer Aufklärung Battalion are both motorized rather than true airborne formations, but they did wear full FJ uniform and equipment. This all works properly in the full scenario editor, but at some point it was decided that even though these are airborne division / corps assets, they should not be in the "Airborne Infantry" QB section in fully motorized form for balance reasons. As such, the QB Airborne Infantry section has dismounted versions of both formations (which have correct uniform / helmets) and the QB Armored Infantry section has the intact, fully-motorized formations. Unfortunately, uniforms are not set by the formation, but by the "branch," so this placement under Armored Infantry leads to change in appearance although the formations are functionally the same. However, I think the premise of removing them from Airborne Infantry because they have vehicles needs to be revisited, as it causes problems like this and is not implemented consistently. Looking into this, also found some Brit Airborne formations missing entirely, so will try to get that addressed also.
  10. You will need to wait for next module for Waffen SS, but elements fo 16. SS will be available in the Anzio timeframe.
  11. The 81mm and 60mm mortars for the Stryker Battalion are still in the most recent TO&E. The recon battalion is a bit different.
  12. Yes in CMBS; CMSF/II not explicitly so, but perhaps it is given a lot of leeway. Might need to look at that if there is zero suppression. But there are all sorts of guidelines for utililizing earlier non-CS munitions from buildings, so it is never simply yes / no.
  13. I believe the plan is to either upgun or replace the Bradley. Replacement would have larger caliber.
  14. Mr. Kennedy's site is back, but still in the process of rebuilding! www.bayonetstrength.uk
  • Create New...