Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


DougPhresh last won the day on August 7

DougPhresh had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About DougPhresh

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. DougPhresh

    Minor visual Obdervations

    Tripod mounted. The Battlegroup had most of the infantry weapons co. but left the TOWs and .50's behind when out on patrol. The thermals on the TOW let us see if the Afghans in the fields at night were digging wells or ditches or placing IEDs. This was in the Canadian Army where fancy optics are less prolific, I'd guess the Germans may do the same.
  2. DougPhresh

    Minor visual Obdervations

    That's exactly what we used to TOWs for on my Afghanistan roto. It was the best way to see what was going on out there.
  3. DougPhresh

    CMSF2 Release Update

    The demo is fantastic. That Alamo scenario is tough! I mostly play quick battle in the newer games, since battalion-level scenarios on huge maps are somewhat rare. I remember SF having some really good scenarios and campaign missions though.
  4. DougPhresh

    Artillery advices needed

    Didn't realize there were other gunners on the forums. My solution is always the same, 155 crewed by 2 RCHA. 😉
  5. DougPhresh

    They meant september of next year!

    I'd pay $35 to have South Africa in CMSF2 and another 70 for France and Italy in CMBS. The biggest issue I'd see is deciding what order to add things, I can see people clamoring for any of the top three rows guaranteed. If you think about CMSF NATO having Canada, Netherlands and Germany, it doesn't seem so bad...
  6. DougPhresh

    They meant september of next year!

    If I won the lotto, I think I would invest in making it happen.
  7. DougPhresh

    They meant september of next year!

    I would pay at least $100 for SPMBT in the CM engine.
  8. DougPhresh

    Tank tactics: why the regression?

    I think it's a better command, I'd just also appreciate being able to have individuals within teams move in bounds.
  9. DougPhresh

    Tank tactics: why the regression?

    If there's one command I'd like back from CM1, it's the individual fire-and-movement. I think it was called assault? up, he sees me down, as opposed to the current assault which seems to resemble the CM1 advance.
  10. If anything, I'd like to see this formation type in all series. I imagine Russian mechanized forces would be more likely to encounter ad-hoc Ukrainian forces than coherent units after a day or so of a hot war.
  11. DougPhresh

    Are AT guns too fragile?

    @ASL Veteran think of it in the context of the Napoleonic Wars: sure the Old Guard and Horse Grenadiers draw all the attention, but they were a very small part of Napoleon's Army, and while present at Waterloo, the actions of the regular regiments were more significant. Similarly, the handful of elite Germany units (LSSAH, HG, Panzer Lehr) is a very small part of a military that by and large marched on foot and was supplied by horse drawn baggage trains. It would be nice to have more scenarios or campaigns that depict the actions of a typical battalion or company trying to accomplish a typical mission, in typical terrain with typical equipment.
  12. It's worse when you see the crew arrangement.
  13. DougPhresh

    Are AT guns too fragile?

    You would think from how certain segments of the wargaming community go on about fighter aces, panzermen, tank armour, StG 44's and so on that the Wehrmacht had won the war. The better military is the one that wins. Depicting how they won makes for good wargames. Better a Sherman or T-34 that's there than a Tiger with a broken transmission in a separate panzer battalion, 200km down the front.
  14. DougPhresh

    Are AT guns too fragile?

    I think the problem with wargames using the flashiest and biggest is that it contributes to this Axis-biased hardware-obsessed type of amateur history that skews away from an accurate depiction of the second world war. The frontal armour and main guns of Axis AFVs meant very little in the scheme of strategic, operational, or tactical warfare.
  15. That's the standard MSVS. The Artillery and Engineers have a longer cab.