Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/17/2020 in Posts

  1. All wars are started with the assumption that you have a good chance of winning. It's only in hindsight we know who was right. If Russia had buckled after the losses they suffered in the first part of the war, we'd all be agreeing now that of course they would.
    2 points
  2. Thanks Aragorn 2002, Very interesting. Here is an excerpt from an interview Sokolov gave a Polish blog in 2014 (B.S. is Boris Sokolov): N: Up until this day the Russian Historians use the work of Nikolai Wozniesienski called „The War Economics of the USSR during the Great Patriotic War”. It was published in 1947 – in it, the Lend-Lease was not even mentioned. It was only said, that it accounted for 4% of the total production. In the Russian textbooks it is stated, that the whole Allied help accounted for 2% of artillery, 7% of tanks, 13% of combat aircraft and only 6% in cars.Those n
    2 points
  3. domfluff

    Canons and attack

    In general though, it's the setup time that kills it. I don't think it's a coincidence that their use was phased out - 2 inch and 60mm mortars provide some kind of embedded artillery support, without the associated setup period. The rise of handheld AT weapons and an increase of mechanisation really cover your other use-cases pretty well. Later of course, ATGMs are very man portable, and even the clunkiest of them are more flexible than a WW2 Infantry Gun.
    2 points
  4. domfluff

    Canons and attack

    The extreme situation is a meeting engagement. Meeting engagements aren't the most realistic of scenarios to begin with. That isn't a CM problem, it's a perennial wargaming problem - players want balanced, even fights, and reality doesn't work that way very often. Typically, the dominant strategy in a lot of meeting engagement scenarios to rush up to claim the objective early. That means that an AT or Infantry gun with a setup time of x-minutes may be worse than useless, since it might just be too slow to react. That means that their useful role is limited to a couple of obvious situ
    2 points
  5. MikeyD

    Canons and attack

    I've been working on a scenario for *another title* (ahem) and find there's a BIG difference between facing SMGs (or carbines) and full rifles. WWII era big bullet rifles have a long reach which makes positioning and using a cannon during an assault difficult. If you magically find yourself in a good position 600m away from the action you're probably good-to-go. but that doesn't happen much on these maps.
    2 points
  6. wadepm

    Canons and attack

    On the attack I use them to protect the flank I am not "using." A keyhole position is also best for this.
    2 points
  7. 37mm

    Buy CMSF2

    The CMSF base game is still $60, the big bundle is $125. If $125 is too steep at the moment (and you don't have the original CMSF which can be upgraded for as little as $15) you can always buy the base game now & then the module bundle for $90 (you will likely end up buying all the modules)... it'll be a little bit more expensive overall but will allow you to start playing sooner. @Erwin isn't far wrong about the content available... I estimated there were around 800 scenarios & almost 50 CMSF campaigns (all playable in CMSF2) & that was before CMSF2 was released. An
    2 points
  8. Eicio

    Canons and attack

    Hello I was wondering about the usefulness of canons during an attack. As far as I know canons are good in defense, you put them concealed here and there and they can be a nasty surprise for your opponent's armor. However I do prefer self propelled canons even in defense in spite of their cost since when a canon is spotted, when it shoots basically, it become a priority target for the ennemy's artillery and your canon is probably going to be destroyed really easily because of it's lack of armor whereas a tank or SPG will survive (generally) and can retreat pretty fast. My quest
    1 point
  9. The thing with Rommel was hat he was never supposed to take Alexandria and Cairo, just prevent an Italian debacle. If the Brits hadn't removed most of their best forces to Greece, the "Rommel" myth would never have happened. The story is one where the moral is be wary of early success as it can suck you into a trap/dead-end - the same moral as in the Vietnam era "We Were Soldiers and Young..." Once Rommel had unexpected success he became a Nazi PR tool and had to live up to his own myth. Of course that's what he wanted and believed and like all top executives, he must have had a huge e
    1 point
  10. Now, to the topic at hand. I think a game focusing on the Africa Korps would be really nice. Yep, that's about it.
    1 point
  11. It has been mentioned, occasionally, that the British would have lost the Battle of Britain without American aviation fuel. One thing to remember is that the United States was the single largest producer of petroleum products in the world during WW2 by a HUGE (we're talking something along the lines of five or six to one) margin, and the largest producer of refined petroleum products as well, especially aviation fuel, gasoline, diesel, bunker oil, etc. If oil was the most important operational resource, then being on America's side was the single best guarantee of operation
    1 point
  12. 1 point
  13. Would be an instant buy for me.
    1 point
  14. I would like to recommend 'Myths and legends of the Eastern front, reassessing the Great Patriotic War' by Boris Sokolov. I'm not going to delve to deep into the contents, but he has some interesting things to say about the importance of LL ( among other things).
    1 point
  15. Bulletpoint

    Canons and attack

    I believe infantry guns were used actively to move up and bombard with direct fire, which is so much more accurate than indirect fire. But at the time of WW2, I think that tactic was becoming obsolete, and self propelled assault guns (StuGs etc.) were taking over that role. In Mius Front, infantry guns are often used actively in an attack, and they do well at 1000m+, with the crew well protected behind the gun shield. Not saying that proves anything, but just to contrast the CM game design choice where infantry guns are next to useless in an attack.
    1 point
  16. Modern conversions done, campaign script done, campaign briefing mostly done... just the manual & a single 3D model now... oh & a few voices. @mjkerner has also started bringing his stuff directly to the game, here are our "Bong-Hai Civil War" era "Imperial Army" troops fighting (and dying) during a recent conversion playtest...
    1 point
  17. Updated dropbox link to beta v2 - I would appreciate any feedback on this thanks. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/9utcncif8j73y8v/AADD-i2_aRAkij-35ovFMGR1a?dl=0 Cheery!
    1 point
  18. MOS:96B2P

    Buy CMSF2

    CMSF 2 has amphibious vehicles. And un-conventional units To include spies VBIEDs Pick-up trucks and taxis that can actually be used (not just flavor objects). IEDs - Small, medium, large, huge. Controlled by radio, cell or wire. That can be used to bring down bridges in some designer made scenarios. With lots of cool mods and scenarios @37mm is currently working on a Southeast Asia mod / campaign: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/135081-heaven-
    1 point
  19. Erwin

    Useful for New Players

    As we seem to see new players here, I found an old CMBN review that may have useful information about the CM2 game system and CMBN in particular: http://armchairgeneral.com/combat-mission-battle-for-normandy-seeing-the-game-through-contemporary-field-manuals.htm
    1 point
  20. Erwin

    Canons and attack

    Depends on the map size (the greater the distance you can shoot at the less likely the gun will be spotted) and the time duration of the scenario (it takes a long time to limber and unlimber a gun). In most CM scenarios a gun is not that useful in attack, unless you have a nice protected keyhole position from which to fire at a particular target (like a building) which ideally can't shoot back effectively.
    1 point
  21. I was merely pointing out that the Soviets did not accomplish their victory on their own - as the Soviet propagandists implied for many years. It is indisputable that the lion's share of German forces were always deployed in the east. And "Europe" was not really liberated (unless you are referring to the period 1989-91) - one occupying terror regime simply replaced another in eastern Europe. Ironic that the British Commonwealth went to war originally to prevent Poland from being subjugated by Nazi Germany, but ended up acquiescing to Poland's subjugation by Stalin's Soviet Union.
    1 point
  22. Without Lend-Lease the Soviets would have lost - regardless of a Second Front. "Now they say that the allies never helped us, but it can't be denied that the Americans gave us so many goods without which we wouldn't have been able to form our reserves and continue the war," Soviet General Georgy Zhukov said after the end of WWII. "We didn’t have explosives, gunpowder. We didn’t have anything to charge our rifle cartridges with. The Americans really saved us with their gunpowder and explosives. And how much sheet steel they gave us! How could we have produced our tanks without America
    1 point
  23. In 1976 the US Army estimated the first shot hit probability for a Soviet RPG-7. Panzerschrecks and Bazookas were fairly accurate weapons. The US Ordinance manual lists the dispersion for the M6A3 Bazooka rocket as 6 mils, which comes out to about 1.6 meters at 300 yards (274 meters), so accuracy was dependent on the operator. Real world combat accuracy is anyone's guess, but the in-game results don't strike me as unbelievable.
    1 point
  24. Jace11

    Bug and stuff thread

    A bit more info, I think the TOE changes are not causing the crashes, though they may still cause other issues. I found the crashing problem occurs with QB maps too and they have no units. Load an old map, followed by a new map and CMFI will CTD. Seems to be a file format issue. Looks like all the older maps need to be opened and resaved in the later version of the game. I did this for the 400+ maps in the QB folder and all scenarios. This fixes the crashes when loading old then new maps and the editor no longer crashes. Found some other issues regarding building sizes too. Looks like the
    1 point
  25. My point is that the British took the position along the coast - the U.S. forces agreed to take the inland position - without control of ports (later the U.S. established a Cold War position in Bremen/Bremerhaven, but this was not part of the original plan). Thus, the British controlled the port areas and the U.S. was dependent upon that control - even post-war. This meant that the U.S. would have a strong strategic interest in British stability even after the war was won. This was typical of Churchill's grand strategic outlook - trying to get as much out of the post-war world as he could, in
    1 point
  26. I think, as Citino says that the Allies as a whole thought the Wehrmacht was collapsing and wanted to take big risks while they were off balance. While Citino is more forgiving of Clark for his failure to encircle the German Tenth Army near Rome, by Market-Garden the harsh criticism of Allied generals for letting the Wehrmacht "get away" at Messina, the Anzio Breakout and Falaise must have been a consideration for Monty and SHAEF. 21st Army Group was already having problems making up for infantry losses and the Americans did not share the Commonwealth appreciation for set-piece battles
    1 point
  27. SimpleSimon

    Using Stummels

    The Stummel was about as typical as Assault Guns got and that was a category of weapon system many Armies found extremely useful. It's just crucial that you know what you're using it for and against what. It's easy to accuse the Stummel of many things that it certainly was with its limited traversing and weak Stuk L/24 gun mounted on a vulnerable half-track chassis without so much as a machine gun. Why then did so many vehicles like it exist nonetheless? The SU-76 was also an open top gun carrier that the Soviets built the hell out of so why build so many examples of an ostensibly inferior AF
    1 point
  28. Robert M. Citino. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand”
    1 point
  29. Pop History is Pop History. Citino, one of the best western historians of German Arms, while focusing on the Wehrmacht thoughtfully analyzes the Soviets and Western Allies where applicable, using the latest research. His judgement of Monty from the beginning to the end, including Market Garden, I think is fair. Monty was the epitome of the British Way of War, with all the good and bad that comes with that, in the way that some German generals embodied their way of making war. Americans judge him harshly because the American conception of battle, operation, campaign and generalship genera
    1 point
  30. No offense taken Aragorn2002. I found the article thought provoking and well-written. ...so why did he attempt to go all the way into Egypt? ... with such limited logistics?...with an increasingly limited air force? ...while violating his specific mission instructions? There is more to campaign-winning generalship than good tactics. Kind of like the argument over the "superior" Panther tank - that was complicated to produce and maintain vs the "inferior" Sherman tank argument, don't you think?
    1 point
  31. I didn't edit my post quick enough .... we already have SS & Luftwaffe in CMFB. I'm currently in the CMRT editor and am thinking about RT stuff. +1 A CM title that includes both Western forces and the Soviets would fantastic IMO. My hope is that the last release for CMFB will be an equipment pack introducing Soviet forces/equipment into CMFB. Call it meeting on the Elbe River or something. Then the US, Commonwealth and Soviets would all be in the same Combat Mission game. No BFC created scenarios would be needed. Just an equipment pack of already designed equipment ported ov
    1 point
  32. Well they have arrived at the final destination and Bootie has cleared some space... Hopefully won't get into trouble posting the link he gave me for his YouTube Channel... It does mean you get to see who Bootie is.... My Wife is already plotting what she will do with the free shelf space...
    1 point
  33. Recon units moving to Les Forges crossroads, just south Sainte-Mère-Église. Reinforcements arrived! Crossroads secured.
    1 point
  34. I'd have grave doubts calling Ambrose a historian. I had the misfortune to purchase his book on the development of the North American railways and found it truly atrocious. Even my layman's knowledge knew what I was reading was bad history - which a few quick web searches confirmed. Anyone reading his WW2 books should remember Albert Blithe. This guy would write anything without any fact checking. I don't have time to research if the facts in books I'm reading are actually real or just the authors make-believe facts. Dreadful stuff to waste money on when there is so much quality well wri
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...