George MC

Can it burke. Ain't nobody got time for your old man blather. Wiggum expects to get bugs looked at and fixed. He clearly means that he thinks the "ai" still is in red thunder configuration and still hasn't been changed in this iteration - maybe they are. Who knows. We are unable to look ourselves. His point is as valid as any of yours.

My initial thoughts...this movie will bite the big one.
 
I didn't bother to go see it in the theater.  I read about a dozen "professional" reviews, and literally hundreds of wargamers' and military history buffs' reviews on this and several other forums.  I knew it would suck--from all the hype it received.  I knew it would suck when I saw the trailers--from the grim seriousness of the actors' portrayals (and the actors' commenting on the making of the film. I knew it would suck because it is a Hollywood production with no doubt an anti-war message as big as the Goodyear blimp. I knew it probably would suck when my youngest son and his girlfriend said it was great and that I really should go see it. (He's never been interested in military history or wargaming, and is quite the pacifist, bless his heart.) And I knew it would suck when I read about the crossroads battle scene. I knew it would suck because in one way or another, every Oscar-bait Hollywood movie usually does.
 
Last week, when it became available on Pay-per-view, I figured I would give it a shot just so I could take the moral high ground when dissing it later (can't do that if you don't actually watch the movie).
 
I wish I had gotten over myself and seen it in the theater! I really, thoroughly enjoyed it.
 
LemuelG and slysniper hit the nail on the head, as far as I'm concerned.  The crew was surprising believable...2nd Armored, been in the war since North Africa, would tend to have an older crew, and with the ravages of war, they look close-enough to late 20's for me. (My Dad was 23-24 years old in the Pacific, and the pictures of him after hostilities ended on Saipan show a man somewhere between 30 and 40.) There in-fighting at the dinner table rings true to me, just like my extended family when we get together on the Holidays... someone is always bitching about /fighting with someone else--usually over politics--but woe to the outsider who tries to diss one of us.  I wonder about the forced execution scene, and how likely that type of thing would occur, but who knows. More importantly, the war-is-hell and we are gonna have to take it to the enemy with balls to the wall sentiment rang true to me.  Again, only going by my Dad's experience, his outfit had that attitude in spades in the Pacific.  can't imagine it would have been much different in Europe at the end..."let's kill as many of these bastards as possible, as quickly as possible, and get this damn thing over with. I want to just get home already." 
 
The overall dialogue was way above what I thought it would be.  Face it, SPR's dialogues was mostly hokey, corny and cliched as hell. And Matt Damon just plain sucked.  Band of Brothers and even The Pacific did a much better job in that department. And frankly, so did many of the great movies listed above (and I like or love them all).  To me SPR is only good in the first 20 minutes and the last battle scene.  And come on, both have WTF? moments--in the landing scene, a German in sandbag emplacement on the ridge gets shot, falls forward, and the whole emplacement just falls apart by the weight of his body. How the hell did it stand up to the pre-invasion bombardment, fer chrissakes??? And the last battle scene, unhistorical and relatively improbable to boot.  But regardless, both those battle scenes were excellent eye candy, and were so far ahead of any depiction of WWII combat than anything before it, who can not enjoy them?
 
Fury does that for armored combat, in spades!  (Battle of the Bulge, anyone?) Those freaking awesome AP ricochets were freaking awesome, the crews' teamwork was well done, and to be expected in a crew that survived that long together, and the tension and intensity of combat was well depicted and believable.
 
Note to sound modders...Oddball, Waclaw and AKD and anyone I missed...I hope you are thinking of lifting sounds from this movie.  There's a particularly good, close-up rrrrriiiiippppp-ing MG 42 in the crossroads battle, hint, hint. And did I mention those awesome AP ricochets?
 
And seriously, even if you didn't care for the movie, you gotta hand it to the set directors and costuming departments--everything just looked right, tanks, equipment, uniformsoy the sets, uniforms, etc., etc.  Those 41st Armored Infantry fellows looked like I would expect them to after just coming through a gruelling winter campaign in NE Europe.  (As an aside, I loved the armored company CO.  Well done.).  
 
So for me, grog factor, production and drama, as LemuelG categorized the movie elements, all worked for me in this movie.
 
That said, a lot of the tactics sucked, as they do in most war movies.  But even there, there is some saving grace.  The attack straight at the AT guns, as has been pointed out, was done to cover and pull out a trapped infantry platoon.  I really liked the tactic they used--uncovering the platoon, and having them get behind the tanks, but of course could be argued that they should have tried flanking the German line.  Who knows, maybe more enemy covering their flanks? And, apparently, Wardaddy did came at them from a flank, or at least not directly at them down the road which the ATG's had covered  (his comment to the infantry company CO).  
 
The Tiger scene was believable in that they were ambushed and then were backed up against a tree line, with only one recourse left...to charge forward and hope to get a flank shot.  Those trees looked pretty skinny, and should have been easy to retreat through  (but I assume there were heavy forest tiles underneath ).  The worst part was the Tiger's tactics.  It was in a covered position. If they wanted to get out from the smoke, then they should have reversed and gone left or right and sat there, blasting the 3 Shermies as they advanced. And was it supposed  to have come direct from the factory...no camo, unit markings, or anything?  In fact, the paint scheme looked like it came direct from Sicily. 
 
The crossroads battle was preposterous as executed, but their orders were to stop the SS battalion from getting to a supply column.  What ya gonna do?  A wiser course would have been to blast them with all guns blazing while they were in march column, set charges to blow the tank, and run like hell before the Germans regained their composure.  But it's a movie, and many others (SPR for example) suffer from the same type of unbelievability in parts as well. And for what it's worth, the actual number of German casualties depicted in that fight appears to be around 50-60, which if they had blasted them in column could probably be about right...just saying.  When I saw Pork Chop Hill as a wee lad in the theater, I remember thinking that practically the whole company was wiped out in the initial attack up the hill--how could they have gone on and captured and held it? (It was after all, basically a true story.) When watching it again years later, I counted the actual number of men depicted as being hit, which was only about 25--manageable under the circumstances, it would appear.   If you assume that the SS troops were likely green and yet fanatical, I can see their initial tactics actual being as depicted, and casualty numbers reasonable. I remember one story from A Bridge Too Far, and many from books about the Bulge, that relate green German infantry committed to similar disastrous frontal attacks.  Still, I have to agree with the detractors of the movie that it was just too much of a stretch. 
 
So, overall, I wanted to hate the movie before i saw it, and ended up truly, thoroughly enjoying it.  In fact, I purchased the full HD package off Netflix, and it is well worth it if you liked the movie.  I have watched the first two battle scenes (but not the last battle  ) about 8-9 times over the last week.  There are about 50 minutes of deleted footage, too. None are added battle scenes--well, there's an extended scene showing the plastering of the plaza area when the girl and her apartment block get blown up, that shows the armored infantry CO getting killed.  But there is an important 7 or so minutes of exposition when Wardaddy and Norman are shooting the **** sitting on top of the tank as they are headed to what will be their confrontation with the Tiger, in which Wardaddy reveals why he has taken a bit to Norman, wants to toughen him up, etc....has to do with Wardaddy's girlfriend and his younger brother...and it goes a long way toward explaining Wardaddy's motivations.  It is one scene that I think should have been included in the final cut.  
 
Anyway, I rambled more than I planned, but put me in the column that enjoyed the movie--really enjoyed it.  I have seen almost every known WWII movie in existence that I could get my hands on over the last 55 or so years, including many foreign language ones.  I own about 45 on DVD, last count (Belle and Blade video is an excellent source for all war movies of any era).  Many of them are overall better in either screenplay, or acting, or whatever, but this one will remain solidly near the top, despite my initial desire to hate it.
 
YMM (and it apparently does!) V

Yup I crap my pants every night as a lay awake stressing about this.

Yup I crap my pants every night as a lay awake stressing about this.

If someone panics are they not, by the very definition of the word acting irrationally and hence do stupid things without thought to the outcome?

Hi Rinaldi
Thanks for the video playthrough. I really enjoyed watching how someone plays this. Great fun to see how you went about it. Good effort by the way
 
Re the update - yeah the new patch did make changes to the TOE. If you have redone the scenario I'm happy to re-upload the revised version to the repository and update the scenario. Likewise if you get onto 'Huzzar!'. I'm pretty committed to doing some Black Sea stuff at the moment but if you've done the grunt work I'm happy to re-upload.
 
Feel free to drop me an email to george at coldclimbs dot com if you are up for that? 
 
Thanks again for the excellent video report.

Order 'fast' then your armour will drive at full speed - ignoring the 'laser' warnings - to their most likely, but glorious deaths. Works for me. 
 
On a more serious note - laser warnings are enemy units using lasers as part of their target acquisition - hence why your units become spooked by it. Next stop is something nasty in the crew compartment...
 
Ordering 'fast' will see your units move forward and ignore the 'laser' warnings but this means that whatever is lasing them can/could also kill them. When you know something is 'out there' lasing units you can go for the balls to the wall all out charge and hope you have enough to ID and kill whatever it is or you try IDing where the possible shooter is and see if you can have several AFVs move against it. It'll only be able to lase one of your AFVS and hopefully the other may get eyes on an engage.

Sorry but sadly Bil is toast. Those M1s will just roll in, shrug of any rpg shots and machine gun (iirc buildings might be preserve options) any Russian infantry sheltering in the buildings. Once Bil runs out of a/ T90s b/ anti tank assets nowt left to do but surrender. A company team with a plartoon of M1s and two platoons of BIFVs would have made for a more balanced challenge IMO.

I was just about to start a thread about this one too.  Played it yesterday and it's a great scenario, if you haven't given it a go yet I highly recommend it.  The map in particular is stunning, and I expect to be back for that alone.
 
I thought the time worked out pretty well; it definitely gave me one of my more memorable CM moments.  Some spoilers:
 

Thanks much.  Passionate about making this game as good as it can be.  To all who gripe about features not present or in need of adjustment, please believe me that the Beta Team's strident noise has in almost all cases preceded yours.  We fight a continuous battle to convince the designers what issues need to be addressed.  They have to prioritize what they CAN actually change, against the time/effort required to get it done.  Their priority is to get an 80% great simulation of modern warfare into your hands as quickly as possible, and then to refine as time permits.  They make their livings (a few at least) doing this, so it is hard to argue with their decisions.  If you want to pay us back, every scenario designer LOVES feedback, even negative feedback.  Hit us up by PM, post a scenario-specific thread, get dialogue going on actual scenario features, maps, force mixes, balance issues, etc....   Building our experience in crafting scenarios is definitely in your collective best interests.  Glad you are enjoying the game and look forward to hearing more.  

Video link is wrong John - takes me to some footage of a drunk Russian dude...

PDFs showing houses in CMBN and other scenario stuff:
 
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/hcpas10cd31y716/AAAByUx3Xd6mygerASO1W-u2a?dl=0

PDFs showing houses in CMBN and other scenario stuff:
 
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/hcpas10cd31y716/AAAByUx3Xd6mygerASO1W-u2a?dl=0

There was a wee PDF doing the rounds which showed you what was what. I'm, errr...at work right now but when I get home I'll dig it out and upload a copy.

When approaching infantry transport:
 
Anything that has four wheels is functionally the same as a jeep.  The exceptions to this are the american HMMWVs that fit MK-19s, TOW missiles, or what looks like a big box.
 
   Tangent: MK-19 has already been discussed.  Its murderous against infantry, unarmored vehicles, and some of the APC type targets can be knocked out by it with some luck
                  Treat the TOW version a lot like a 17 pound gun that's somehow merged with a speedy prime mover.  You don't want to place it somewhere it can be shot at at all, but it will reap a terrible toll on tanks if you give it a chance.
                  The Big box is the LRAS3, which is one of the most powerful sensor systems in the US Army.  The upside is it is a great tool for calling for support, or keeping sneaky things away from your flank.  The downside is it is not especially better at either of those than an Abrams, and is knocked out by anything more than small arms fire.  This sensor is also mounted on the Stryker scout vehicle.
 
 
Anything with 6-8 wheels/tracks and a machine gun: Treat like a halftrack.  They're really not that well armored, but are great for getting infantry forward fast.  Semi-exceptions to this:
 
    The BTR/MTLBs with 30 mm guns are great against not-tank type vehicles, and very good at suppressing or killing enemy infantry.  
    The Stryker with MK19 is just good enough to use forward, great at digging out infantry from buildings, or suppressing trenchlines.  
 
IFVs (tracked things with troops, some sort of autocannon, and ATGMs)
 
Imagine if your halftracks, light tanks, and AT vehicles all had a beautiful baby!
 
    Treat them like halftracks until they get to the point where they can deposit troops, once the troops are kicked out, then feel less nervous about using them as the mini-tanks they can be.  In a lot of ways, think of them like the M5 tanks from World War Two, they're great against other light vehicles, they're amazing against infantry, but you do not want it anywhere near something that can be called "anti-tank" or a real tank for that matter. 
 
Re: ATGMs
 
Here's the important caveats to remember when operating ATGMs from any platform (except the Javelin)
1. Bullets are faster than missile. The longer you fire the missile from, the longer it takes to impact, the more time the enemy has to react to missile.  It takes a TOW missile about 30 seconds to reach its max range around 3750 meters, that's enough time for the enemy to pop smoke, or return fire with a tank gun, which could very well kill the launching crew before the missile is even close to the target.  To this end it can be wise to ignore max range shots in favor of letting the enemy close in a bit (or it takes a tank shell 2ish seconds to go to 4 KM, it's flight time is fairly constant, while your missile fired at 2000 meters will only take 15ish seconds, which is a much harder thing to react to than 30 seconds)
 
2. ERA is built to ruin your ATGM.  APS also will wreck your day.  With that said, both systems degrade the more missiles they have to deal with.  To that end firing more missiles is often a good solution, so rather than spreading out your fires, massing 2-3 missiles on one tank will often overwhelm the APS (or deplete it's ammunition), and strip away a lot of the ERA protection.  
 
Also when playing against other players, it's much more likely they'll reverse out of an engagement if one of their tanks gets piled on by a few missiles, vs the fire being more spread out.
 
3. Reloading takes a bit.  This is especially true with vehicles like the Bradley or BMP series that have their launchers external to the vehicle.  When engaging with ATGMs, don't be afraid to mass like I said earlier, but hold a few launchers in reserve to continue to engage while your first salvo is being reloaded.
 
4. Mass your missiles.  If you've got two or even three different flavors of missiles, find their average optimal engagement area, and plan to hit the enemy in that range.  Using the Americans as an example the max effective range on the Javelin is 2500 meters or so.  To that end, holding off on firing off your TOWs until the enemy is 2000-2500 meters out ensures that target area is saturated with missiles, and rather than returning fire effectively, the enemy is evading and trying to leave the kill zone.
 
5. Trees give bad vibes.  Anything that is described as "wire guided" needs to be kept away from trees and similar obstructions to ensure the missile's guidance wire doesn't get snagged and cause the missile to rather dramatically miss the target.
 
Random errata:
 
1. Q. Which American units are spotters for artillery and aviation?
 
    A. All of them. Some are better at it than others, but if it's a team with a radio or digital communications it can call for a fire mission.  Plan accordingly from both ends for that one.
 
2. Borg spotting actually does kind of exist now.  Given the advances in battle tracking, all US, and many higher tech Russian units can share situational awareness to varying degrees.  They may still not be able to engage, but if the scouts up front spot your dudes sneaking along, odds are the rest of the force now has at least a very strong idea where your forces are at vs vaguely there's enemy somewhere up front.  
 
3. Fear the Abrams.  No.  Really.  Fear it.  It is the apex predator in this game.  If the enemy has them, you really need to have a plan on how and where to kill them vs simply having some AT assets on hand.  The APS and ERA ones appear especially dangerous at this point.

have you met an Indian before? They are like miniature Einsteins.

That was phenomenal. I thought it was going to be some good old fashioned tank porn at first - which is great, but then the dialogue came in and it just got better. You did really well with making the radio chatter seem non intrusive.

An oldie now and made using an early Beta.
 

Sorry but sadly Bil is toast. Those M1s will just roll in, shrug of any rpg shots and machine gun (iirc buildings might be preserve options) any Russian infantry sheltering in the buildings. Once Bil runs out of a/ T90s b/ anti tank assets nowt left to do but surrender. A company team with a plartoon of M1s and two platoons of BIFVs would have made for a more balanced challenge IMO.

Use tanks to suppress likely points of enemy resistance using area fire, don't wait or try to spot em - infantry move up under this supporting fire. Rinse and repeat.
 
Or mount infantry onto tanks and charge hell for leather onto the position - take yer knocks but overrun it. You've enough infantry.

Whilst we're waiting From the link below:
 
However the quality of Soviet optics combined with the limited visibility from inside the tank affected combat performance. A German unit that used the T-34/76 model ’43 in combat noted (8): ‘The gun sights in Russian tanks are far behind the German designs. The German gunners need to be thoroughly accustomed to the Russian telescopic gunsights. The ability to spot a hit through the gunsight is very limited.’

‘In a Russian tank it is difficult to command a Panzer or a unit and at the same time serve as the gunner Therefore fire direction for the entire Kompanie is hardly possible, and the concentrated effect of the unit’s firepower is lost. The commander's cupola on the T 43 makes it easier to command and fire at the same time; however; vision is very limited to five very small and narrow slits.’
 
‘Safe driving and sure command of both the T 43 and SU 85 can't be achieved with the hatches closed. We base this statement on our experience that on the first day in combat in the Jassy bridgehead, four Beute-Panzer got stuck in the trench system and couldn't get free with their own power, resulting in the destruction of German defensive weapons during the attempt to retrieve them. The same thing happened on the second day.’  
http://chris-intel-corner.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/wwii-myths-t-34-best-tank-of-war.html

pnzrldr,
 
In light of the proliferation of first, TV backup systems on SAM systems for operation in jamming environments, and now, FLIR to do the same thing, I decided to look into the question of FLIR on Tunguska. I think some corrections may be in order. From the amazing Dr. Carlo Kopp and his Australia Airpower site.
 
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-96K6-Pantsir-2K22-Tunguska.html
 
Optical Sensors
Early variants of the Tunguska series introduced an electroptical tracker to provide silent angle tracking in jamming environments. The electro-optical tracking system includes a longwave (8 - 14 μm band) thermal imager for target acquisition and tracking, and a dual band short (3 - 5 μm) / midwave  (0.6 -1.1. μm) IR tracker for angular measurement of the missile beacon.
 
The Tunguska has a full-on FLIR, and by 2017 likely a better one than above, which allows it to conduct gun and missile engagements without any radar emissions. Said FLIR would presumably also be usable vs. ground targets, thus giving your horribly cut up Ukrainians two FLIR equipped AFVs--nasty ones at that. In short, you may be able to do to Bil's AFVs and infantry hiding in foliage something like what he's done to yours. Savage them when they think they're concealed. With something of the order of a 5 meter blast radius per shell, I'd think it would be pretty easy to grease infantry, even sans FLIR.
 
While we're on Tunguska, I was wondering whether the system and subsystem modeling is granular enough to permit multiple hits on the Acq/Track radar antenna, without killing it outright? The key component, after all, isn't the antenna per se, which is pretty projectile damage tolerant, but the small feed horn via which the radar does its thing. Also, can you stow the radar for ground engagements when not under air attack threat?
 
MikeyD,
 
I think you misunderstand how laser designation for weapons work. You don't have to lase continuously, but only in the far shorter period immediately preceding weapon launch and TOF to the target. Thus, the lasing unit might get a "two minutes out" warning for CAS and a "shot out" call from artillery. this makes tracking the target and lasing it a much easier proposition. Also a laser guided weapons these days doesn't have to be precisely aimed. Rather, it simply has to arrive in an acquisition basket in which the seeker's FOVs allows it to see the reflected laser spot from the now-designated target. When I worked at Hughes, we made a laser-guided version of Maverick for Marine CAS, and I'm thoroughly familiar with how these weapons work.
 
Regards,
 
John Kettler