George MC

I'm calling this one done now.
I've created a wee handbook to go with the scenarios.
@Bootie would you be  able to do the honours and upload to TSDIII please? I managed to lock myself out of my account and currently trying to reset my password...
DONE - got back in and uploaded.
Everything you need is in the zip file. There is a website blurb, accompanying website image then the zip file with the scenarios and the accompanying PDF.
https://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-red-thunder/cm-red-thunder-add-ons-scenarios/cmrt-german-tank-tactical-problems/
Many thanks!
Cheery!
George
 
 

I'm calling this one done now.
I've created a wee handbook to go with the scenarios.
@Bootie would you be  able to do the honours and upload to TSDIII please? I managed to lock myself out of my account and currently trying to reset my password...
DONE - got back in and uploaded.
Everything you need is in the zip file. There is a website blurb, accompanying website image then the zip file with the scenarios and the accompanying PDF.
https://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-red-thunder/cm-red-thunder-add-ons-scenarios/cmrt-german-tank-tactical-problems/
Many thanks!
Cheery!
George
 
 

EDIT
Thanks to @Monty's Mighty Moustache who picked up a briefing error in TTP No2. This has been amended and the attached zip file below has the updated file.
This series of three missions is very loosely based on several of the ‘Tank Battle Problems’ detailed in the Nafziger publication ‘the German Tank Platoon in WWII: Its Training and Employment in battle’.
Whilst the series of ‘problems’ outlined in the book appear to be pre/early war I have updated the fundamental concepts to a later period in the war i.e. 1944.
The key intent of these tank tactical problems is to give the player new to using German armour an opportunity to use them in a more doctrinally ‘correct’ manner within the limitations of the Combat Mission game engine.
This series complements the German halftrack (SPW)/panzergrenadier training lessons in the CMRT Battlepack 1 where the main focus is on using SPW in Combat Mission.
For the tactical problem series the German player uses Panzer IVs. This tank was used in significant numbers during the war and though starting to become outclassed by 1944 by the Soviet T-34/85 was still a significant part of the tank strength of most panzer divisions. Though Panthers were slowly starting to form the main panzer strength in the panzer regiments. The player cannot rely on superior armour/armament to bully through this series as the Panzer IV’s armour is comparatively speaking, inadequate. 
All the missions are best played as German Vs Soviet AI. 
There are NO German AI plan. 
Each tactical problem has a ‘Tactical Top Tips’ at the end of each briefing (under ‘notes’) which may help the player new to using tanks in Combat Mission get the most out of them.

Plan is when done to convert them to Soviet versions so players can contrast.

If you get a chance to give em a whirl I'd appreciate any and all feedback thank you.



You download  https://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-red-thunder/cm-red-thunder-add-ons-scenarios/cmrt-german-tank-tactical-problems/
 
 

Sometimes bad opinions need to be shown for what they are.

That's the point. People have been bitching and moaning for years that spotting in CM is broken because tanks don't spot something which is right beside them and shooting at them.
I'm showing an example of this from real life, showing that the CM experience is what happens in reality.

It is completely broken. Just look at this they get within 50 meters of each other in broad daylight and be doesn't even see it. It's laughable that anybody would consider this to be realistic behaviour.
Completely unplayable, I want a refund.
 

Ive got the download... send me an image for the front and a description and I will get it uploaded.
Thanks.

I don't think we will ever get that ability in the general game. I could be wrong of course since I don't speak for CM. I have no idea if Steve will drop in and comment. His previous stated stance - from my memory so forgive any mistakes I might make - is that he has no desire to do that for two reasons:
- the game is a historically accurate simulation so allowing people to uber their favour tank for nerf the "bad" guys' rifles etc is not a good idea
- the multi player community would be come fractured and or be exposed to cheating because only people with the same capability mods could play against each other and the development effort required to ensure that works without cheating is huge
I, personally, agree with this 100%

Cool, just bought the fire and rubber module and bp #1

There are a couple of things to note. First when you are shooting at an enemy tank you don't get perfect information about its condition. You only know it's knocked out when  your soldiers know it's knocked out. I know I've relayed this story before (plus the original post which I was not able to find). I had a Sherman put 7 rounds into a PzIV at close range before knocking it out. I thought it must be a bug. Turns out since this was in the woods the visibility was challenging and my tank crew just did not know they KO'ed it with the first or second shot (I cannot remember which) so they kept firing.
Then there is the issue of armour vs ammo. The ability to actually cause system damage, crew casualties and knock out a tank depends on the energy left in the shell after it has penetrated the armour. At the right distance any gun can just barely penetrate a particular tank's armour. So, its not some uber property of a Panther vs some terrible property of a Sherman. Its how the engagement falls with in the damage capabilities vs armour. What you are seeing is the long 75 on the Panther has serious energy left after penetrating allied tanks out longer than the guns of the allied tanks have against it.

Nice analysis Bil, and the reason why I agreed with @IanL that the best thing he said was:
"Fifty percent of tactics is dirt. Your techniques are meaningless if you choose poor ground"

Finally was able to read through this.. luckily for me, this is in line with what I do for a living so its billable.   I do have some feedback however:
I found it interesting that he defined "Fire & Movement" as what the assault squad is doing, where the standard historical definition is for an attack consisting of two elements, a Support Element providing suppressive fire, and an Assault Element closing with and destroying the enemy. True, the Assault Squad could be conducting a Squad level Fire and Movement Battle Drill during its Assault movement, so maybe it's right? Seems odd to me though. Platoon level assaults versus a 3 or 4 man position seemed excessive to me, but that is the American way of war! I would expect a Squad to be able to deal with an enemy of that size alone, without the rest of the Platoon. I am surprised that there seemed to be little to no reconnaissance to find the enemy, you know, the first F in the Four Fs (Find him, Fix him, Flank him, Finish him)... The assault was launched before the enemy was located, this led to more casualties than necessary. This premature launching of an assault is the one thing I preach against over and over on my blog... you must find the enemy before you decide how you are going to deal with him. In several of the runs the assault squad was caught by surprise, or suppressed in the open. Neither of these would have happened if a scout team (or three) had been sent forward to recon and locate the enemy... only THEN deciding how to deal with them. The Support element seemed to be really a separate part of the action, where to increase effectiveness they needed to be working as a team, and they needed to be mutually supporting, not something I thought was happening as I read through the AARs. All in all a very interesting series of posts, appreciate you linking it @MHW, but I can't help but think that I am left underwhelmed by this, and that I could have provided guidance that would have helped them close with the enemy with zero (or close to it) failed assaults, based on the forces involved and the support provided.
Bil

Thanks for sharing. Fascinating article. 

Thanks for the heads up... haven't seen this and its now on my reading list... I can't help but think that he could have saved some time if he'd read my blog.   
Seriously, a study like this just hammers home how accurate and realistic this game can be. I wonder is the good LTC (retired) works at Quantico. I might have to reach out to him.
Bil

The below was taken from the above linked Tactical Notebook Substack. 
The empty phrases reffered to below ring very true.  Many times reading US Army and USMC manuals I've come across sentences like these and thought ...................... but how does that translate into the best course of action for this problem I'm dealing with?    
he manual focuses on static definitions and control measures, not useful procedures. When it doesn’t know what to say, it reverts to empty phrases that tell the squad leader nothing. “The assault is launched aggressively…” How? “Assault fire is characterized by violence, volume, and accuracy…” When? “[Marines] put themselves in a position of advantage…” Where?
 
Some more interesting information taken from the article. 
For fire and movement, the standard should be “close to within grenade range (20 meters) of the enemy position without getting shot.” Performance steps should include “suppress until there is no return fire,” “move only when suppression is firing,” “select and move from one covered position to another,” and “avoid moving outside mutual support (behind a building or over a crest).” 
 
A well-trained enemy is dangerous at all ranges, but when his fighting position is visible, it can be continually suppressed by well-coordinated fire and movement—two fire teams shooting while one moves. The priorities are (1) find the enemy, (2) smother with suppressive fire, and then (3) move forward using covered terrain.
 
Don't be in a hurry to die.........☠️
four assaults with six or more casualties were impatient, rushing to poor positions without suppression.
 
When on defense Target Arcs plus the Hide command.   
The biggest advantage of a long assault was that the enemy usually fired early and confirmed their position, weapons, and numbers to the assaulting squad. Most casualties inside 50 meters occurred when the enemy position was not known—or had moved—and the assaulting squad was surprised.

It's a fine line George 😉.  A few more seconds and they would have been out...

Question: When should you dismount your mech infantry from their ride?
Answer: Not when within range of enemy RPGs...
 

The NTC maps are fantastic for teaching the value of even low relief.

For sure the more I play CM the more I realize that using the terrain for your advantage as much as possible is super important.

Brendan McBreen, a retired USMC Lieutenant Colonel, ran 300 squad assaults in CMSF and drew insights from them. McBreen, who has 25 years of service as an infantry officer, found that the service's manuals and training materials give only vague and inadequate guidance about how to conduct a squad assault. He used CMSF to run a series of tests, matching a rifle squad against different defenders, and tallied up the results. 
Then he wrote up his findings. The whole series of seven articles appears over on the Tactical Notebook, a Substack run by Bruce Ivar Gudmundsson, a historian in Quantico. 
Abstract Part I Part II Part III (test setup within CMSF) Part IV Part V (tactical insights) Part VI (recommendations) Among McBreen's recommendations: "train with simulations" and "use simulations to improve our manuals." 
Fight Club US and Fight Club UK merit acknowledgements.
 

Can i get a link to the battle pack plz.
EDIT: Nvm found it

Question: When should you dismount your mech infantry from their ride?
Answer: Not when within range of enemy RPGs...
 

Question: When should you dismount your mech infantry from their ride?
Answer: Not when within range of enemy RPGs...
 

Cool  Also worth checking out @Bil Hardenberger's Battle Drill - has an excellent Tactical Toolbox series of posts all aimed at CM.

I’d suggest checking out Usually Hapless’ YouTibe channel https://youtube.com/@usuallyhapless9481?si=6cC9TjI479N_nF5a