kipanderson

Hi, BTW..... quick note... I have crawled around inside both T34/85 and IS2. Both are roomy by WWII tank standards. When compared to German tanks they are just fine. They also have superb all round vision. Better than a German tanks. The commander, loader and gunner all have a Mark 4 , 360 degree general observation sight. The small “turrets...” that sit on top of the main turret roof on those tanks. The Soviets learnt their lesson with the cramped and poor vision T34/76 tanks. Starting with the KV1s turret they were very happy with their standard, three man turret design. Now.. the drivers position in T34s of all types and the IS2... that is cramped... . It is all relative of course, and the Soviets and Soviet trained armies I am sure did go for smaller crews. Better than larger for sure. But by ’44, as roomy as any and better all round vision than any. All interesting stuff, All the best, Kip.

Rokko, hi, It’s all about the ballistic shape of the armour. Look at all those curves. Good thickness of armour, but nothing great, but then rounded in all directions. Compare with the Tigers and Panther and their “box..” like wasteful... weight – wise shapes. BTW... the Soviets the thought the King Tiger a joke . Fine gun, but laughably badly designed. By very late war they were messing about with thoughts of tanks with similar protection but around 40 tons... later to be T55. All good fun, All the best, Kip. PS. German tanks certainly did the business.. but as a result of “massive use of resources... “ With their petrol engines of patchy reliability and poor ballistic shape they were not good designs.

Broadsword56, hi, You are wonder of the much hoped for Operational Layer crowd... . Superb... Operational layers add a huge amount of context and therefore fun... . Congratulations... !! All the best, Kip.

Hi, It is a great article. Makes me laugh that Steve’s photo is clearly taken in a pub.. and Charles looks as though me his about to go for a run;). We certainly are lucky Steve and Charles got into wargaming. A recurring nightmare is the thought that they had really gone off and developed Space Lobsters instead of CM... . Tactical wargaming is a desert out there without CM. Scourge of War, Command Ops and now Flashpoint Campaigns are all fine games and importantly for them, by the only measure that counts, I clearly do think they are “good enough...” because I buy them. But the mix of historical accuracy and immersion... the extent to which is can hold the player “in the zone...” while within the limits of the single controlling mind delivering historical accurate outcomes is breathtaking. Long may the mass slaughter continue... . All the best, Kip.

Hi, There are quite a bunch of assumptions behind that statement . I think we should ignore this thread, close it and hurriedly move on... . All the best, Kip.

Hi, I am not sure that is true.. if forces are of equal quality . There is the “if you use it you lose it” rule.... Having said that, the details matter. From memory, will have to look it up another day, you need to get to about 7 : 1 , attacker to defender, before aggregate casualties for the attacker fall below those of the defender. At say 4 : 1 the attacker will lose less in percentage terms but still more in number so individual casualties. And the above figures are at the operational level. But detail matters. When I have time will look up the figures. Kensal, Yankeedog and Womble can be correct depending on the detail/assumptions. However, at the overall level of the war in the east in ’44 YankeeDog is correct in that given the force ratio of say 3.2 : 1 and casualty ratio of around 1.3 : 1 does suggest that quality was in the same ball park. Soviets did things very differently, but probably equally well. Remember German ration strength in June ’44 in the East was, from memory, 2,089,000. Casualties from Nov ’43 to Nov’44 about 2,100,000. Soviet ration strength in June ’44 6,400,000 in Front Armies. Casualties over all of ’44 around 2,700,000. This clearly has big implications for quality amongst others. All interesting stuff, All the best, Kip. PS. did not see Steve's post.... will look up the figures... yes there is data on this sort of stuff no matter how imperfect.

Hi, One of David Glantz best... Soviet – German War 1941 – 1945: Myths and Realities: A Survey Essay. http://sti.clemson.edu/publications-mainmenu-38/commentaries-mainmenu-211/cat_view/33-strom-thurmond-institute/153-sti-publications-by-subject-area/158-history All the best, Kip. PS. Soviet : German casualty ratios were a lot closer than many like to believe by ’44. If you upgrade Soviet ’44 losses to account for Forgotten Battles and discharged due to disability and sickness you get a figure of 2,738,000. German losses for Nov’43 to Nov’44, counting the same way... including disabled due to wounds you get 2,100,000. Scarily close given that the Soviet Front Armies were three times the size. German frontline units were suffering far higher attrition rates than Soviet units, on average, from about August ’43 onwards. German frontline officers, NCOs and men of all ranks had on “average..” a far shorter shelf life than their Soviet opponents. From mid ’43 onwards.

Hi, Glantz is the master of the art . But... I admit that his books are indeed very dry and I read them as much, often more, for the information and knowledge rather than entertainment in its normal meaning. All the best, Kip.

Hi, Just noticed this.. Historical or fictional is fine... but with me I do like the terrain to be real. It makes a huge difference. A lot of the nature of the fighting, the tactics.. come from the terrain. It is also very difficult to “fake...” terrain. So I always take the elevations, waterways, roads from the real world. That is why the Mastermaps are such a great idea. Real terrain you just cut to size. And then if you wish fight a fictional battle over. All good stuff, All the best, Kip.

Hi, Crikey... another one of these amazing works of art coming our way... I look forward to it... A credit to Bimmer and to Battlefront that CM is so good talent like Bimmer can be attracted to throwing their talents at it for all our benefit... . Great stuff... All the best, Kip.

Michael, hi, Here we go. The Dupuy Institute. http://www.dupuyinstitute.org/booksfs.htm Ring them.... I did. For some reason they do not sell their books via Amazon. All the best, Kip.

Hi, Just a quick supplementary to my above post. The way I enjoy playing and the best way to learn is very long very slow games. I always, near always anyway, whack scenarios into the editor and increase their game length to say two hours for a company attack on a village. This is historically far more realistic than forty minutes due to the pauses to reorganise and such between surges of violence and helps careful, low casualties play style. If you give yourself time, and are careful, it is scary just how much of a simulation CM is.... All the best, Kip.

Hi, Just saw this.. have not read all the previous posts, but just in case no one has mentioned it... the book you need for everything you want to know about casualty rates and much more than anyone could possible want to know Attrition: Forecasting Battle Casualties and Equipment Losses in Modern War by Trevor N Dupuy. Is available out there... not expensive. Tables, rates, everything all in very straightforward format. BTW. The idea of “average.... “ loss rates is difficult. If you read the book you will find that at the battalion level daily losses were often at CM rates. By which I mean 30% or more a day. The reason why over a division and over several days “average..” loss rates may look low is that on a given day there are often some battalions doing very little. The classic example of this is Kursk. Buy the book, it is cheap and packed with historical data. No point arguing about it... read the book and make up your own mind. All good fun, All the best, Kip. PS. I... and my standard opponent when playing live... play very carefully... the life of every digital hero matters to us . If you play slowly and carefully CM casualty rates will fall to historical levels. I also find it more immersive that way.

Kohlenklau, hi, I am enjoying the mod and a taste of Ardennes atmosphere . I too have spotted the horizon problem. If you set Overcast as one of the weather settings you get a sky blue ribbon over the horizon. No problem... all things need testing by the masses to get the bugs out . Great stuff... All the best, Kip.

Hi, Look forward to getting it this evening... Congratulations... Thanks.... All the best, Kip.

Kohlenklau, hi, Thanks... am very grateful... . Message has been sent.. Thanks again... All the best, Kip.

Hi, Is the map/scenario available anywhere? Many of us are very keen on the setting of the Bulge so would enjoy a play around on the map, build our own scenario quickly if need be... Thank... . All the best, Kip.

Jon, That is a good find... Thanks, All the best, Kip.

Hi, Thanks... That certainly is cheap....! All the best, Kip.

Hi, Yes... this is good stuff.... Good move.... thanks. All the best, Kip.

Tank Hunter, hi, Just to say that I am still enthusiastically waiting to see this one mature to its full potential... . We all have to do lots of real life stuff too.... but when you have time do update us on how things are going... All the best, Kip.

Anono52, No... not as focused and clear-cut. There is Handbook on USSR Military Forces, TM 30 – 430. And the German equivalent... TM – E 30 – 451. But these are manuals. Narrative accounts in the Closing With The Enemy style and quality do not exist... I think . All the best, Kip.

Hi, Check out Doubler's "Busting the Bocage" which is available online. I second that... . Plus... the book it comes from... Closing With The Enemy, is the best book on US, WWII tactics there is..... by far. All the best, Kip.

Umlaut, Congratulations... great work. Thanks... All the best, Kip.

Fenris, hi, Thanks... just grabbed it.... have had my eye on these books anyway so very grateful . All the best, Kip.