George MC

Is Kruger in the Kubel?  Has a nice ring to it...
It's not much of a KG though 😉.

Hello @George MC
I'm on mission 5.2a "shnelle Truppen Angriffe!", having pushed on in the last mission, rather than rest up. It says in the briefing/tactical map that KG Kruger is to arrive at ETA 18.30hrs. It's now 18.45hrs and I've just had notification of reinforcements. When I look for them all that's arrived is a lone Kubelwagen in the rectangular bunch of conifers to the rear of point 132.1. I was expecting KG Kruger to come in on the road near point 124.5. Any ideas as to what's going on? Will there still be time for them to arrive or will I have to soldier on without them? The losses in the previous missions have not been too heavy so I don't think that is the problem. I expected more than just one Kubel.....

It's not something I've used in CM.  I take your point though, except for
I think this has been largely debunked as a myth promoted by the Soviets?

For 90 degree bends agreed. For curving corners makes no odds - the TacAI adjusts speed accordingly. If moving a lot of units in a convoy doing this will take forever. My approach enables the player to moves lots of stuff with min. effort. Its also simple (like me!) so IMO works well for thsoe new to CM.
There are LOTS of ways to achieve the desired endstate of a traffic jam free convoy. Usually for a convoy I'm less concerned re speed and more the unit makes it to where I want em to be without creating a clusterfcuk down the road... At heart I'm a lazy bugger
As I tend to play larger actions I tend to less micromanaging and tend to go with stuff that reduces the overall work load and achieves the desired effect.
The great thing is the game accommodates lots of different styles and every player evolves their own style to managing the admin associated with making stuff move and fight from point A to point B.
 

I don't think that's true. At least not as a hard rule. They will try to dismount as little as possible, in order to maintain the momentum of their advance. But that "as possible" there is doing a lot of heavy lifting. If the situation calls for dismounting, they will dismount.
That part is true as far as I know. I think it just comes down to the old debate that comes up on the forums of whether the improved situational awareness is worth making your TCs more vulnerable. And it seems each side of the Iron Curtain reached the opposite answer. The US said yes, it's worth exposing your TCs for the improved situational awareness. The Soviets said no, keep the TCs safe. We'll improve situational awareness by just using mass to get as many eyes looking towards the enemy as possible.

This is not to disparage the information provided by George..
It is fairly damning however that in 2024 a computer simulation has not been developed in such a way as to remove the utter tedium of something as simple as moving a convoy of vehicles down a road.
The lack of sensible automation of repetitive tasks is one of the reasons that I find myself playing less and less of the game that I would love to be able to dedicate more time to.
I should be able to focus on the tactical development of the battle without having to oversee whether a BMP is going to try to drive through an impassable tile and get stuck unless I rigorously determine its path in advance.
Perhaps by the time I reach retirement I will have the time to do so unless It's been resolved by then 😄

I don't seek out armor duels because they are a bit like tossing a coin, but they come up again and again. So I was interested to learn what I can do to maximize the chances for my tank in a duel if it gets into one.
So I put two identical Pz IVH (late) tanks with regular crews, no modifiers, against each other at 600 m range. I called one "Attacker" and the other "Defender", although it does not mean anything. I put both on a mild slope (partial hull down) and varied different conditions. Crew hatches open/closed, vehicle movement, terrain type, crew experience. I ran each case at least 1000 times and recorded the percentage of wins by each side. A 'win' means that the other vehicle was destroyed or the crew bailed out. If both vehicles were alive after 5 minutes, neither side won - usually one vehicle got hit and retreated back down the slope. If neither vehicle survived, both sides got a win.
The tables show the win rate on each side. The statistics were not perfect even with 1000 duels per case. Results of repeat runs could vary by up to +/- 3%. Notably I did not get a perfectly symmetric results even for reference cases R1 and R4 where the vehicles had identical conditions on both sides. So, don't take the numbers as the absolutely accurate truth. They just show what works.
Pz IVH was a good tank for this purpose because it can easily kill itself - powerful gun and vs weak armor. Therefore, the duels were mainly about who is able to spot first and land the first round accurately on target.
I did not find anything revolutionary - mostly stuff people already know and do - but it was still interesting to see the numbers. Here it is:
1. Keep your crew hatches open when expecting to fight an enemy AFV. If you can, force the enemy to close theirs.
Table 1. Effect of crew hatches open/closed. Both AFVs are stationary on Grass.
Attacker
Defender
Closed
49%
49%
Closed
Open [R1]
48%
50%
[R1] Open
Open
76%
21%
Closed
2. Minimize movement when within enemy LOS. Stop as soon as your vehicle can see the place where the enemy is (represented with the "Hull Down" command in the table below, which gives additional advantage of being harder to see and hit due to being hull down; this is not to say that the Hull Down command is always useable, but it worked here well because the Attacker was going up the slope). Movement makes you more visible - and it does not appear to matter what kind of movement command you use - in fact the faster movement commands seem to work a bit better.
Table 2. Effect of vehicle movement. Attacker starts out of LOS and moves in towards the Defender using different movement commands. Both AFVs are on Grass and the crew hatches are open.
Attacker
Defender
Hunt [R2]
41%
57%
[R2] Stationary
Slow
35%
63%
Stationary
Move
39%
59%
Stationary
Quick
42%
56%
Stationary
Fast
41%
57%
Stationary
Hull Down
61%
29%
Stationary
Quick: Minimizes the time interval when the Attacker is moving within the Defender’s FOV. Therefore, Quick works well as it gets the attacker into position quickly, whereas Slow works poorly.
Hull Down: Better cover than the Defender and minimizes time when the Attacker is moving within the Defender’s FOV. Also: Easier to disengage when damaged – probably for both sides. High percentage of duels with no winner.
3. If you have to Hunt, point 1. about crew hatches still applies and can reverse the odds in your favor.
Table 3. Effect of crew hatches open/closed while the Attacker is moving. Attacker starts out of LOS and moves in towards the Defender using Hunt. The Defender is stationary. Both AFVs are on Grass and the crew hatches are open.
Attacker
Defender
Closed
37%
60%
Closed
Open [R2]
41%
57%
[R2] Open
Open
64%
34%
Closed
Closed
14%
82%
Open
4. Target arc can serve various purposes but does not help with seeing or hitting the enemy. TRP helps, likely by increasing the chances of a first hit.
Table 4. Effect of using Target Armor Arc and Target Reference Point (TRP). Both AFVs are stationary on Grass and the crew hatches are open.
Attacker
Defender
No arc [R1]
48%
50%
[R1] No arc
Target Armor Arc
50%
49%
No arc
TRP on Defender
72%
28%
No TRP
Note: Target Arc can still help by pointing the gun and the Commander’s attention to the right direction if the vehicle is not moving directly towards the defender. Also, it prevents distraction of the Attacker by other, low-priority targets.
5. Ground type can provide some help by concealment. Tall types of grass (T and TY), Weeds, Brush, Lt Forest (without trees) and Crop 1 give a small advantage over hard or bare surfaces. Very tall types of crops (2-6) and Grass XT give significant advantage. There is no disadvantage in being on road or pavement compared to grass, but sand, mud and cobblestone seem to hurt a little, possibly because they lower the chances of disengaging when retreating in damaged condition.
Trees are complicated and depend on type. Type A trees are somewhat helpful if there are 2 or 3 on the tile. Type B trees are not helpful at all. Type C trees seem to be best, especially if there are 2 or 3. Type D trees are somewhat helpful independently on their number. Type E are like Type A. Bush does not make much of a change.
Stone and brick walls and low bocage give some advantage - can be concealment as well as cover. But bocage is the big one. A tank behind bocage almost always wins against a tank in open ground.
Table 5a. Effect of Defender ground type – bare surfaces, hard surfaces and roads. Attacker on Grass. Both AFVs are stationary and the crew hatches are open.
Attacker
Defender
Grass
45%
51%
Dirt
Grass
47%
50%
Dirt Red
Grass
49%
48%
Hard
Grass
50%
48%
Rocky
Grass
49%
49%
Rocky Red
Grass
52%
47%
Sand
Grass
52%
47%
Mud
Grass
50%
49%
Pavement 1
Grass
50%
50%
Pavement 2
Grass
52%
47%
Cobblestone
Grass
47%
51%
Gravel
Grass
46%
49%
Dirt Lot
Grass
49%
48%
Dirt Road
Grass
47%
50%
Gravel Road
Grass
51%
48%
Paved 1
Grass
48%
51%
Paved 2
Grass
47%
49%
Foot Path
Sand, Mud, Cobblestone (?): Can impair movement, possibly making retreat of a damaged vehicle slower and less likely to succeed before the Attacker fires another accurate shot.
Table 5b. Effect of Defender ground type – low vegetation and cultivated fields. Attacker on Grass. Both AFVs are stationary and the crew hatches are open.
Attacker
Defender
Grass [R1]
48%
50%
[R1] Grass
Grass
50%
47%
Grass Y
Grass
50%
48%
Clover
Grass
50%
48%
Flowers
Grass
49%
50%
Plow NS
Grass
50%
50%
Plow EW
Grass
43%
57%
Grass T
Grass
43%
55%
Grass TY
Grass
44%
54%
Weeds
Grass
44%
55%
Grass + Brush
Grass [R3]
46%
54%
[R3] Lt Forest
Grass
42%
57%
Crop 1
Grass
39%
60%
Crop 2
Grass
39%
60%
Crop 3
Grass
39%
60%
Crop 4
Grass
40%
58%
Crop 5
Grass
39%
59%
Crop 6
Grass
38%
60%
Grass XT
Table 5c. Effect of Defender ground type – foliage. Attacker on Grass. Both AFVs are stationary and the crew hatches are open.
Attacker
Defender
Grass [R1]
48%
50%
[R1] Grass, no foliage
Grass
50%
46%
Grass + 1x Type A Tree
Grass
44%
51%
Grass + 2x Type A Tree
Grass
42%
54%
Grass + 3x Type A Tree
Grass
49%
49%
Grass + 1x Type B Tree
Grass
51%
46%
Grass + 2x Type B Tree
Grass
51%
47%
Grass + 3x Type B Tree
Grass
43%
52%
Grass + 1x Type C Tree
Grass
33%
62%
Grass + 2x Type C Tree
Grass
32%
62%
Grass + 3x Type C Tree
Grass
44%
52%
Grass + 1x Type D Tree
Grass
44%
51%
Grass + 2x Type D Tree
Grass
40%
55%
Grass + 3x Type D Tree
Grass
50%
47%
Grass + 1x Type E Tree
Grass
42%
55%
Grass + 2x Type E Tree
Grass
41%
55%
Grass + 3x Type E Tree
Grass
49%
49%
Grass + 1x Type A Bush
Grass
52%
47%
Grass + 2x Type A Bush
Grass
50%
46%
Grass + 3x Type A Bush
Grass [R3]
46%
54%
 [R3] Lt Forest, no foliage
Grass
44%
54%
Lt Forest + 1x Type A Tree
Grass
39%
57%
Lt Forest + 2x Type A Tree
Grass
37%
59%
Lt Forest + 3x Type A Tree
1x Tree: Can be detrimental because it does not provide enough concealment and can trigger APHE shells passing high, wounding the exposed Commander.
Table 5d. Effect of Defender ground type – walls and fences. Attacker on Grass. Both AFVs are stationary and the crew hatches are open.
Attacker
Defender
Grass [R4]
48%
51%
[R4] Grass
Grass
46%
54%
Grass + Stone
Grass
47%
52%
Grass + Brick
Grass
 
 
Grass + Rural Stone
Grass
43%
55%
Grass + Low Bocage
Grass
7%
89%
Grass + Bocage
6. Crew experience - there is a big change from Green to Regular to Veteran, but Crack gives little advantage over Veteran.
Table 6. Effect of crew Experience. Both AFVs are stationary on Grass and the crew hatches are open.
Attacker
Defender
Green
33%
66%
Regular
Regular
36%
61%
Veteran
Veteran
44%
57%
Crack
Green
20%
78%
Veteran
Regular
32%
67%
Crack
Green
18%
82%
Crack

How To Enjoy Hassle Free Convoying in CM. 
https://youtu.be/3Lz97ZDXSWs
The video uses Red Thunder but techniques shown apply equally to all the CM games. 

I regard pre-planned bombardment of choke-points, fords and bridges as part of doing good map analysis and would expect an opponent to do the same - it is fair game.  So, I would consider it to be sound tactics.
 

Nice article, thanks for posting! 👍

Agreed on the T72s, they probably let everybody down! Its sure tough KOing those T62s, that ERA is a game changer. I did some last min testing and found this out after my setup. But was able to readjust my defense after the start.
Also a side note, those ATGMs from the T62s pretty much suck. From both my games it appeared to do nothing after several hits, except one broke a gun. The HEAT shells killed every time they hit.

Thanks @cargol. Good game and excellent turn rate. I think the T72s let us both down 🤕
Great fun and cant wait for the next @George MCscenario. The desert has never looked better!
On that other note, I think players that dont finish their games in tournaments should be banned for a period or something. 

I have sometimes seen people refer to sending jeeps out front to get shot at as 'gamey'. That caught me by surprise the first time I came across it. Especially since I thought reconnaissance was one of the many roles jeeps were meant to fill. But it does feel like there's a difference between sending a jeep forward to poke at the enemy perimeter and sending a jeep speeding directly through a town that is suspected of being occupied. The latter really does seem like the sort of thing that people might more legitimately call 'gamey'. And yet we have a real world example of it (probably, I don't actually know for sure if the story is true, but it seems like the sort of thing that Patton would do). I suspect that most complaints of gamey tactics stem from people forgetting that soldiers fighting in real wars are often at least as creative and willing to experiment as Combat Mission players.

Game vs @Fizou is over. Good game! 
Let's move on!

Lucky on that day, less so some weeks later...
By the way @George MC's versions of both of these battles are excellent if you haven't tried them.

Death of a Panther
Minaev's T-34 stalks an unsuspecting Panther that has just shot up his platoon mates.


He spots and fires first, narrowly missing the Panther.

The Panther panics and starts to reverse...

Minaev's gunner adjusts his aim whilst the loader slams another shell into the breech.

Minaev's gunner does not miss the second shot. A flash and the Panther starts to burn...

 
 

Death of a Panther
Minaev's T-34 stalks an unsuspecting Panther that has just shot up his platoon mates.


He spots and fires first, narrowly missing the Panther.

The Panther panics and starts to reverse...

Minaev's gunner adjusts his aim whilst the loader slams another shell into the breech.

Minaev's gunner does not miss the second shot. A flash and the Panther starts to burn...

 
 

Did you already take a look at the FGM Depot?
At least you find the mods and scenarios sorted per game and per „topic“. So, it‘s easy to decide which mod works for which game.
But as George said: Many will be included in @37mm selection already.
Regarding „one mod to make everything prettier“: Well, that’s difficult anyway. Your taste is not necessarily my taste…. E.g., if you prefer Lucky Strike‘s or Falaise‘s environment mod for BN is quite much a question of your personal preference.

This pack includes new textures for the default version of the SU-76 and the various mod tags, ie [snow], [whitewash snow], [germany] and [berlin]. Each set comes with a fair amount of variant textures to avoid clone army syndrome.

https://www.mediafire.com/file/d45395z84gkzgku/ZZZ_S-tank%27s_SU-76M.rar/file

Death of a Panther
Minaev's T-34 stalks an unsuspecting Panther that has just shot up his platoon mates.


He spots and fires first, narrowly missing the Panther.

The Panther panics and starts to reverse...

Minaev's gunner adjusts his aim whilst the loader slams another shell into the breech.

Minaev's gunner does not miss the second shot. A flash and the Panther starts to burn...

 
 

Death of a Panther
Minaev's T-34 stalks an unsuspecting Panther that has just shot up his platoon mates.


He spots and fires first, narrowly missing the Panther.

The Panther panics and starts to reverse...

Minaev's gunner adjusts his aim whilst the loader slams another shell into the breech.

Minaev's gunner does not miss the second shot. A flash and the Panther starts to burn...

 
 

Death of a Panther
Minaev's T-34 stalks an unsuspecting Panther that has just shot up his platoon mates.


He spots and fires first, narrowly missing the Panther.

The Panther panics and starts to reverse...

Minaev's gunner adjusts his aim whilst the loader slams another shell into the breech.

Minaev's gunner does not miss the second shot. A flash and the Panther starts to burn...

 
 

Death of a Panther
Minaev's T-34 stalks an unsuspecting Panther that has just shot up his platoon mates.


He spots and fires first, narrowly missing the Panther.

The Panther panics and starts to reverse...

Minaev's gunner adjusts his aim whilst the loader slams another shell into the breech.

Minaev's gunner does not miss the second shot. A flash and the Panther starts to burn...

 
 

This is reminding me of why it took me so long to even give H2H a try. I want a challenge. I want to face an enemy with human-like intelligence and flexibility. I just wish there was a way to get that without having to interact with actual humans (I'm not complaining about any of my current opponents, you have all been great so far). The only really satisfactory solution would be a better AI.

Most of these just seem to be handicaps for the sake of handicaps, with no regard to realism.
1. I agree with no turn 1 arty into a setup zone in meeting engagements, but I disagree with no turn 1 arty at all.
2. I've already expressed my opinion on this one, and it is not favorable.
3. WHY?!?!?
4. ?????????? Why would you disallow a perfectly sensible tactic?????? If you find yourself in a situation where manually using vehicle smoke would make sense, then why wouldn't you use it (especially if you play the Soviets in CMCW, in which the vehicle smoke is not intended for quick getaways like NATO vehicle smoke, but to lay down screens to maneuver behind)? Are we going to just start disallowing any tactic that might have a chance of working until we are left with nothing but unsupported frontal assaults?
5. I do this sometimes when reviewing the action just for the spectacle. But it makes no sense to insist on it as a rule for your opponent. How would you even enforce it? It's impossible to know what visual aids your opponent has on or off.
6. Again, I've installed the no tracer mod on all of my CM games just because I think it improves the visual realism. But it makes absolutely no sense to insist on this as a rule. And again, how would you enforce it? It's impossible to know what mods your opponent has installed.
7. You do know that as a Combat Mission player you are in the shoes of every officer and NCO on the battlefield, not just the overall commander, right? The overall commander may not be able to see all of his units. But each of his units can see themselves. In real life if the overall commander forgets that one of his units exists (which seems rather unlikely (the commander may not have up to date info on where his subordinates are or what they are doing, but it seems doubtful that he'll forget that they exist), but that's the possibility you are modeling by turning icons off) and fails to give it any orders, that unit will still by capable of making its own decisions. If you forget that one of your units in Combat Mission exists, it will just sit there doing nothing. Again, I turn off icons sometimes when reviewing the action for the spectacle, but it makes no sense to insist on this as a rule. And again, how could you ever know if your opponent is abiding by this rule?
8. This only matters for quick battles, which I don't play (in scenarios the experience of your troops is whatever the scenario designer decided it should be). But as I understand it part of the game in quick battles is to decide on the tradeoff between troop quality vs troop cost. Why eliminate that element of the game?