Bil Hardenberger

Hmm.. sorry, I still don't buy that this would have worked. Exactly.

The game time limit was set to an hour before forces were purchased... nothing worse than running out of time in the middle of a great game. Most of our games are over relatively quickly, when one or the other decides he is in an untenable position so we (Warren and I) will cease fire, forget the last game and set up another. Armor heavy games rarely last very long while games with infantry can take a long time (game wise) to play out. The only thing I would have done differently is purchase some light mobile force to perform the recon role... but as I explained in the earlier part of this thread, I thought we were both buying an armor only force (based on this line from Warren's setup e-mail, "here you go, buy some tanks and lets bust heads" (or something to that effect))... it wasn't until we were far into it that I realized Warren had something other than just armor. Bil

Rocky, I plan on doing some game tips like achieving a good hulldown position, terrain masking etc... but really wanted to do them after the game is released. Let me think about it.

FYI, this is the turn where I had my tanks shoot and scoot: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1240840&postcount=588

Vark, you can do shoot and scoot in CMBN. In fact I did that when I first committed my 2nd Platoon tanks. You have to set it up manually but it works well.

There are always dips in the terrain, and woods that can be used for terrain masking and hulldown positions. For example, the woods next to Warren's first two M-10s on AA2 (the first two I killed) was light woods, the same type I drove through with 2nd Platoon... also, these TDs were sitting on top of a hill.. wouldn't have taken much to move them back some onto the reverse slope and find good hulldown positions. Would have made a world of difference.

I don't think Warren could have gotten his infantry there in good order without transport. Now if he had rushed his M-20s to good hulldown positions, or defilade positions along AA2 and AA3 then he could have seen the deployment of my recon screen and acted accordingly.. as it was, I think he was kind of surprised to see me where/when he did at first. If he had rushed his Shermans or M-10s (at least two of them), into the woods where I parked my 2nd Platoon, then he could have controlled the center, and I would have had trouble maneuvering against or even finding a flank. I think this open map really dictated either an all armor force, or at the very least a mobile one. If he had bought a couple trucks to carry his infantry they might have contributed, but I don't think on foot they could have ever made a difference. I think Warren's problem was with committing his main force down AA3 without even knowing where or what I had. To me that was The_Capt's #1 sin.

Hmmm.. might have found a hole in my plan there. Guess you and your pal will need to team up against one or two human players and do co-play that way.

You could do this now. If you are playing against the AI and want to team up with another player, just save the game after you give your orders, etc. then e-mail the saved game to your friend... he will give his orders to his assigned forces and generate the movie. He would then save the file and send it to you. Both of you could watch the movie independantly, but he wouldn't give his orders until you e-mailed the save game back to him. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Thanks. I see you "got it". I agree.. Warren and I especially have as much fun post game discussing it that we did actually playing the game. We often cease fire before the game even gets as lop-sided as it did this time... because the writing is on the wall. We both have military backgrounds, and ot be honest that is my preferred opponent.. I seek them out actually as the gameplay to me is the most rewarding. So how about that "OK Corral" shootout? Did you feel that the interplay between those two crews was realistic? Think two crews ever really faced off outside their vehicles? I bet they did at some point.

Then don't play QBs when you get the game. As has already been stated QBs are not supposed to be realistic representations of WW2 combat.. the way I look at them is they are more akin to a really advanced chess match (especially my preferred MEs). Two evenly equipped forces facing off against each other. They are a test of skill, and perhaps a test bed at times for equipment effectiveness, but they are definitely not realistic. For more realistic play, you need to look at the scenarios. Some of these give a very real, gritty, and sometimes scary look at what combat was really like. If there is one important thing I would like people to walk away with from this AAR, its that you should never plan a battle down to the lowest level when starting any scenario... do some recon, find out what you are facing, and where, what speed is he travelling? What is the terrain like? How can I use the terrain to my advantage? Where is he strong? Where is he weakest? etc... Once you have those important questions answered, or sometimes even hinted at, then you can start manuevering with intelligence. Bil

Claymore, I saw none of the "stuttering turret" syndrome you mention, when playing out the game in my AAR... units popped in and out of view because of the smoke buildup and the turrets did not slew off target after they lost contact, unless another juicy target came into view. What are the dynamics you are looking for in the quote above? I tried to give you as much information as possible in that AAR with every engagement. If there is something I can add please be specific and I'll see what I can do. Bil

All this talk about the points and the scoring... as Steve said this is still a BETA and scoring is being looked at. For another thing, when I play I don't put too much stock into the end game scoring... I have problems with the score most times.. instead I look at in game performance versus my competition (and I rarely play the AI) to decide how I did... ...in this game I would say I got a tatical victory, on losses alone, I lost five tanks to Warren's nine, plus I held the objective, if not with overwhelming manpower I did control it by fire. So take any of these end game scores with a grain of salt, as they never tell the whole story. Anybody have any comments on the tactics that were used in this game, or on battle plans/approaches used? Bil

US Forces I’m not going to get too much into analyzing the US force performance. I will say this, Warren learned a lot from this PBEM game (and the one after it too I suspect) and he is handling tanks much better in our current game. Using the terrain (ie. getting into a good hulldown position) is an art that you had better learn if you want to succeed in CMBN. Sherman Platoon This platoon along with two M-10s and two M-20 ACs attempted to steamroll over my 1st Platoon. They failed, but the cost was high on my side, as is to be expected I suppose when opposing any main effort. The Sherman Platoon had a 2:5 loss ratio, two Pz-IVs killed for the loss of all five Shermans. M-10 Platoon The M-10s underperformed in my opinion during this game. They should be used like I used the Pz-IVs, namely they should be kept hulldown and in ambush positions, or if on the attack, they should carefully use the terrain. The M-10s had a 3:4 loss ratio, killing three Pz-IV’s but losing all four TDs. Additionally Warren had a two AC section of M-20s, which played little role in the battle, and a Company (-) of Airborne infantry, that except for the bazooka teams that fell in the last turn also had little influence on how things developed. This battle ran the gamut for me, from despair to elation, and felt very realistic. I loved being able to use real world tactics (outlined in both the German and US field manuals of the time) in the game to good effect. I appreciate all the comments throughout while pulling all of this together for you guys. It’s been a fun ride. Here is the final AAR screen: FINI

CEASE FIRE Part 1 After turn 18 when Warren lost his last TD and two bazooka teams I offered him a cease fire, as it would be pointless to continue. I had the objective covered by fire, he could never hope to get his infantry on it safely, I had seven operational tanks and could bottle up his infantry before they had a chance to retire... of course digging them out would be out of the question. For this wrap up I want to show you final positions of all the players in our drama, their kill stats, etc. Here are the final positions, labeled with the identities of each participant. This image also is color coded (for the German forces anyway) by Platoon to show what US kills were attributed to whom: If you remember the “brave tanker” from a few turns back, well he did survive the battle, even though he is meters from the HQ 1 tank. His name, in case anybody is interested is Pvt. Gibson. I think he deserved to be singled out: German Force Overall I think my force did fair… after I lost the initial four tanks and decided to try a different approach I only lost one tank, and I think I can chock that loss up to user error, as I reported earlier. This entire game was a learning experience for me, and I think I really know how to apply armor better now, whether it be a Pz-IV, a Sherman or an M-10, or even a Panther. This AAR is full of lessons, from both sides, if you decide to heed them. 1st Platoon Performance 1st Platoon unfortunately had a bad start. It lost Tank 4 on turn 2, and Tanks 2 and 3 on turn 4. It was then that the light bulb switched on in my brain and I started to get smart about how to use the equipment I was issued. Losing the HQ Tank on turn 16 was a screw up on my part, but also Warren’s good positioning of his M-10 obviously played a part. The Platoon had one hero tank in my opinion, Tank 1. This lone tank, with the Company HQ element as backup pretty much stalled Warren’s advance down AA3. It only had two kills, but the numerous hits (did anybody bother to count them?) had a huge impact on how this battle played out. They had a 1:1 kill ratio… they killed three tanks and one armored car and lost four tanks. 2nd Platoon Performance 2nd Platoon lost one tank early when I made an idiotic move and rushed it across an open field without prepping the area with smoke first. After that sad incident, the platoon performed perfectly and except for Tank 4 getting hit, bailing, and luckily being able to re-crew, they stood out. Interestingly, they performed very well despite having the least experienced crews of my force, the four tanks that were in action had two veteran and two regular crews. They had a 4:1 kill ratio, three M-10s and an M4A1 to one tank lost. Company HQ Element Performance The Company HQ element performed admirably as well and in conjunction with 1st Platoon’s Tank 1 they held my right flank against the horde of Shermans, M-10s, and armored cars heading up AA3. HQ 1 stood out and had all three kills, two Shermans and an armored car. Next: US Forces

Thanks for that Warren. I am in the midst of putting together my wrap up post.. stay tuned, should be finished later today!

The formulas are all based off of Rexford's book. If you have that then you have a window into the inner workings of the game. If not, then its all magic, like it is to me. Seriously read the "explanation" post and the threads surorunding it and I think you'll have a better understanding of how the game does its calculations Here it is again... http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1239443&postcount=303

Damn good questions. Unfortunately I'm not smart enough to answer most of them.... I can say that smoke is automatic of course... and check out this post for some details on why the Shermans were so tough in this AAR: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1239443&postcount=303 Bil

Correct, fire is not simulated yet in CMBN.. that was just the remnants of an HE round explosion effect. Nope, AI handles all round choice by each tank/gun, etc.

LOL... no, I sent it not to draw fire (that was an unfortunate incident) but to use its working eyes to spot. It worked wonderfully too, as I did discover (the hard way) where your M-10s were. Is that gamey? BTW I do not consider recrewing an immobilized tank gamey either... it still had a working gun so could still be a threat.

Scottie the panzers did not spot them until they started to fire. Also Warren had said earlier that he had three bazooka teams and I never spotted that third team at all. Warren the last Pz-IV you killed was the tank with the gun kill. So you only killed five. Sorry.

Minute 18 Part 2 2nd Platoon On the other side of the field 2nd Platoon continues to pummel the M-10s. Tank 3 puts another round in to the TD it killed last turn. Just making sure I suppose. It took two more rounds to finally dispatch that last M-10. If you are keeping score that is a total of six hits that it took to kill that bastard. I gained a new respect for the much maligned M-10 during this game. The following images are composite images showing 1. Firing, 2. Round on the way, and 3. Impact: Crew 4 from 1st Platoon was keeping an eye on the woodline and spotted two bazooka teams last turn. Note how close both of these teams are to the edge of the woods.. if they had been farther back away from the edge I might have never seen them: HQ Tank will reverse so it is not so exposed to Bazooka 1 (B1) and will target MG fire against B1 as well. Tank 3 will also lay down some MG fire on B1 to cover HQ Tank’s move. Once in place HQ Tank will attempt to get eyes on B2 and then fire on it was well. Off screen, Tank 1, who hasn’t moved in several turns will lay down HE on B1’s position. Tank 4 is to finish off the M-10 as we have already seen. The bazookas get off four rounds, all aimed at the HQ Tank, and all of which go long. The end is inevitable with HQ Tank and Tank 4 both teaming up on B2 after B1 was neutralized: Next: ???

Minute 18 Part 1 1st Platoon and Company HQ Element With Warren’s tanks all but wiped out, there isn’t much I want to do with 1st Platoon’s lone remaining tank, nor with the Company HQ element. I am simply having Crew 3 move through the woods some, with HQ 1 in support to see if they can find Brave Tanker (last known location indicated by the blue circle in the image). Crew 2 will do the same on the other side of the wood line. Unfortunately Crew 3 runs into a little ambush set by Warren with at least one US crew, and one of them I believe has an M-3 (blue circle in the image below). Crew 3 panics and retreats out of danger, but not before losing their gunner. The US crew’s jubilation is cut short however when HQ 1 shows up: Next Minute 18 – Part 2

Actually Alan, I would love for a player, when he loses C2 on any unit to actually lose all visual contact with that unit until he can get a unit that is in C2 in contact, visually, or otherwise back in contact with that unit (friendly FOW) ...alas, tis but a dream. But imagine the tactical repercussions and the potential chaos.

If you look at the thread I linked to above you will see that there has already been a Meta Campaign that used the Panther Games system as an operational layer. It was with CMAK of course. Myself and a few friends (The_Capt being one) are in the midst of planning for another META campaign after CMBN is released using Battles From the Bulge (Operational layer) and CMBN (tactical resolution).