Bil Hardenberger

I had some free time lately and decided to port my original scenario from the CMBO CD to CMAK. I hope you guys check it out and enjoy it. It plays quite diffrently from the original so I would be very happy to get any feedback you might have. Here is the link: Fire & Maneuver Regards, Bil Hardenberger

I think what Michael is getting at is that as good as GPIG's drawings are (and they are excellent) they are not really showing a realistic footprint for the squad. The problem is that they are too close and bunched up. If the next CM is going to emphasize realism with the 1:1 representation then the individuals should be spread out realistically using the appropriate formation for the task at hand. There is no reason that if everything is scaled correctly that this can't happen, in fact I'm sure it will. If you enlarge the scale of the figures then you would have something that perhaps looks more in keeping with GPIG's sketches. Keep them coming GPIG, for all their flaws I really love seeing your work. Bil

Just having a little fun with GPIG's run cycles: Hope he doesn't mind. Bil [ January 21, 2005, 05:13 PM: Message edited by: Bil Hardenberger ]

WN, I'm not a ROW vet but wouldn't mind playing that (or any other) scenario with you. E-mail me if interested. Bil

*snicker* Makes me all warm inside to know this old scenario is still giving people fits I really must convert it to CMAK soon. Bil

Here is a map of the battle, good luck on your search. Bil

Sounds to me like very few of you have actually done any reading on WW1 tactical combat. It is a facinating period and I second Michael's request. Bil

Looks incredible.. and it is very timely actually.... I'll be picking up the PDF version.. sorry I can't help with the hard cover. What is the publication date? Bil

No, those are definitely MG's. Take a look at this graphic: graphic You can see that the V on the bottom does denote that it is a heavy MG. I might be mistaken about the MG with the dot on the bottom, but seeing as it does not have a number on it it is a single weapon. The numbers on these symbols will not denote the type of weapon, but the number of weapons in that unit. The extra line under the right most mortar unit makes it a heavy mortar, not a column. This is the symbol for mortar as can also be seen in the graphic above. Bil [ February 19, 2004, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: Bil Hardenberger ]

No, those are definitely MG's. Take a look at this graphic: graphic You can see that the V on the bottom does denote that it is a heavy MG. I might be mistaken about the MG with the dot on the bottom, but seeing as it does not have a number on it it is a single weapon. The numbers on these symbols will not denote the type of weapon, but the number of weapons in that unit. The extra line under the right most mortar unit makes it a heavy mortar, not a column. This is the symbol for mortar as can also be seen in the graphic above. Bil [ February 19, 2004, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: Bil Hardenberger ]

I believe that would be 9 guns. 2 HMG's at each of those positions. The "dangly part" indicates a mortar (it is upside down)... you have a heavy mortar (on the right) and a mortar platoon on the right has 2 tubes. I would assume the mortar Platoon (left) has only one weapon. As indicated above, that is a single MG in position. A vertical line with dots on each side is the symbol for an MG. The additional symbols on the bottom indicate weight, transport type, or other data. edit: after looking at this again, I think what we have is an LMG taken from an Infantry Squad. The dot normally represents a single infantryman, in this case, the dot combined with the MG symbol would indicate a single LMG normally inherent to an Infantry squad. You are right about that Bil [ February 19, 2004, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: Bil Hardenberger ]

I believe that would be 9 guns. 2 HMG's at each of those positions. The "dangly part" indicates a mortar (it is upside down)... you have a heavy mortar (on the right) and a mortar platoon on the right has 2 tubes. I would assume the mortar Platoon (left) has only one weapon. As indicated above, that is a single MG in position. A vertical line with dots on each side is the symbol for an MG. The additional symbols on the bottom indicate weight, transport type, or other data. edit: after looking at this again, I think what we have is an LMG taken from an Infantry Squad. The dot normally represents a single infantryman, in this case, the dot combined with the MG symbol would indicate a single LMG normally inherent to an Infantry squad. You are right about that Bil [ February 19, 2004, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: Bil Hardenberger ]

Michael might be right about the black curved lines representing lines of advance, that makes sense, they are probably assault positions. However, he is incorrect about the black dots representing motorized units. These are MG units. The ones with the upside down V represent heavy MG's, the MG symbol with the little black dot on the bottom (remember the black symbols are upside down) represents a single weapon. Bil [ February 19, 2004, 10:28 AM: Message edited by: Bil Hardenberger ]

Michael might be right about the black curved lines representing lines of advance, that makes sense, they are probably assault positions. However, he is incorrect about the black dots representing motorized units. These are MG units. The ones with the upside down V represent heavy MG's, the MG symbol with the little black dot on the bottom (remember the black symbols are upside down) represents a single weapon. Bil [ February 19, 2004, 10:28 AM: Message edited by: Bil Hardenberger ]

This page should have everything you need: German Tactical Markings The red markings show heavy MG's in position. The black markings are all upside down, most represent MG's also, but you also have mortars in there and Infantry guns, all are dug in (except for the mortars). The curved lines represent infantry Company entrenchments, the 6.Ko. is broken down into Platoon size elements in the drawing. Hard to tell what echelon the red infantry entrenchments represent, perhaps they are Platoon sized as well, based on their size. The box with the 5 in it is the 5.Ko which looks like it is in reserve. The cross sitting on a black dot is an aid station. Bil [ February 19, 2004, 10:05 AM: Message edited by: Bil Hardenberger ]

This page should have everything you need: German Tactical Markings The red markings show heavy MG's in position. The black markings are all upside down, most represent MG's also, but you also have mortars in there and Infantry guns, all are dug in (except for the mortars). The curved lines represent infantry Company entrenchments, the 6.Ko. is broken down into Platoon size elements in the drawing. Hard to tell what echelon the red infantry entrenchments represent, perhaps they are Platoon sized as well, based on their size. The box with the 5 in it is the 5.Ko which looks like it is in reserve. The cross sitting on a black dot is an aid station. Bil [ February 19, 2004, 10:05 AM: Message edited by: Bil Hardenberger ]

Moon, while I respect you tremendously I find this mildly amusing. All 3 of the CM titles are all about micro-managment. It is one of the two aspects of the games I really dislike. The amount of micro-management really turns me off to the larger scenarios, which otherwise I would love. Fix that, perhaps with Platoon orders among other controls, and I will be very happy. With that being said, CMBB, CMAK, and HTTR are the only games I play now, so I can't be too upset. Bil

I'm happy to hear that people are still playing those old scenarios. Fire & Maneuver was only meant to illustrate how tough it could be to advance with armor over open terrain. For that purpose, and to practice a combined arms advance I think it worked well. Thanks for mentioning it, brought back some nice old memories.. of when the forums were smaller, and life, as well as the game, was simpler and in some ways more appealing. I wish I had the time to convert that scenario to CMAK... I'd love to see the difference the more realistic gameplay makes. Cheers, Bil

I want to make a prediction. If Kitty plays in this tourny she will be in the top 3. Go get 'em girl. Bil

IMO gridded terrain is a must until such time as we have dynamic lighting in this game. You can call it whatever you like, but the current textures in no way reflect the real life ability to read terrain. Bil

Here is the vehicle I referred to: NEUBAUFAHRZEUG Bil

Also there was an earlier tank (1940 or so) that was called Pz V... This tank, IIRC, was a concept vehicle that never went into production (might have been use din Norway though.. though my memory is spotty about that). Bil

Kammak, I just wanted to pipe in and say that I agree with you 100%. Your responses are well reasoned and thought out, and the fact that your beliefs mirror mine almost exactly doesn't hurt, eh? Are you military, you sound like it at times? Bil

Hmmm.. I don't think I share your enthusiasm for the Jock Column's role. As one British officer said they did nothing but entertain the chaps and keep the Germans on their toes. Jock Columns also dissapated British strength in uncoordinated, unsupportable actions that really didn't accomplish much and cost them dearly at times. Also, I've read that in some formations Jock Columns were used up to the end of the war. Bil

This CAN be done as long as the mortar is in command and it's HQ has LOS to the targetted area. Bil