Blindicide

Only if the Americans were on your side.

Try danielh.According to his post of 03-02 he's giving up CM,seemingly because German infantry and armour can actually be killed. DraGoon, Good point about not spending as much on other games but you forgot to mention the £50+/month I now spend on books for background and tactics.

I was just about to post a Q on this and thought I'd do a search first.Some interesting posts but here's my 2c worth. From my US military vehicles guide the M3,M3A1 and M5A1 have seating for 13 whereas the M2's only have seating for 10.The M3A2,a modification of the M3A1 had crews ranging from 5 to 12 men (+ driver?) depending on stowage carried and tactical purpose intended.Normally the vehicle mounts one .50cal or one .30cal MG together with the required vehicular accessories,tools,spare parts and equipment which are provided for all HT's.Under such circumstances a crew of 12 can be carried.Three pintle sockets are provided to accomodate additional MG's when authorized.When the vehicles carry special loadings or have radios installed,personnel are displaced.As an example,if an SCR-508 radio is installed,the crew is reduced by two men.When used as a MG squad carrier additional ammo is carried in place of two of the seat positions. This certainly suggests there should be no restriction on the ability of the HT's to take a full squad unless it is loaded out for some other purpose.

Maybe I'm just a natural born coward,but more often than not,I think if there were bullets flying in my direction,my instincts would tell me to keep my head down and avoid any unwanted ventilation.

One of my most enjoyable kills was in the Last Defense demo scenario when my Hellcat found itself the target of a StuG behind a wall with a second one on it's way.With the order to reverse,my Hellcat shot back up the hill firing as he went,taking out the StuG before disappearing behind cover.I just wish all my tank crews could perform to the same standard.

Maybe I'm missing something here but can someone explain why a MG42 HMG costs 28pts to buy as a support unit,27pts if it's bought as part of a rifle company and 25 pts as part of a PzGren company (mot) when buying units for a QB.All other factors remain equal.The same effect occurs with other units as well including Panzerschreck and 251/1 halftracks.Surely if point costs are calculated on effectiveness the costs should remain the same?

I've just run a check on my V1.05 using the same parameters and you definitely pick up more armour.Anyway,here are my results. 1000pt Allied: 1)3 Firefly,1 Humber SC 2)2 Stuart,1 M18 Hellcat,1 M3A1 HT 3)2 M4,2 M18 Hellcat,1 M20,1 M3A1 HT 4)4 Stuart,1 M3 HT,2 M3A1 HT 5)3 Churchill VII,3 Kangaroo 2000pt Allied: 1)2 Firefly,1 Churchill VI,2 Stuart,3 Humber SC,1 M5 HT 2)4 Challenger,1 Sherman III,1 Sexton,1 Humber SC,2 MMG Carrier 3)1 Firefly,2 Stuart,4 Humber SC,4 MMG Carrier,1 M5A1 HT 4)4 M4A3(75)W,1 M4A1,2 MG Jeep 5)1 M4,1 M4A3(76)W,1 M4A3(105),2 M20,3 M3 HT,1 M3A1 HT 2000pt German: 1)2 StuG IIIG,1 Hetzer,1 PSW 234/1,1 251/1 HT 2)3 Hetzer,1 PzIVJ,1 Hummel,1 251/1 HT 3)1 StuG IIIG,1 PzIVJ,6 251/9 HT,1 251/2 HT 4)4 251/1 HT,1 250/8 HT,1 250/9 HT 5)1 StuG IIIG,1 PSW 234/1,4 251/1 HT None of them looked top heavy with armour to my eye for the amount of infantry available.Certainly,the ratios were about what I would have gone for,give or take,if I had picked the forces.Maybe there was a case for a very slight reduction,but if Luckystrikes results are typical it seems like it's been tweaked a bit far.I think I'll stick with 1.05 for a bit yet.

"During 1940-41 German armoured employment in Europe forced the (US)army to adopt strong antitank countermeasures which eventually led to a separate tank destroyer force.Provisional AT battalions employing artillery usable against tanks (which was withdrawn from organic assignment to armies corps and divisions) were activated commencing 24 June 1941.On 3 Dec 1941 all antitank battalions were redesignated tank destroyer battalions to reflect their "offensive spirit",the old infantry AT battalions were additionally renumbered,and all traditional association with their branch of origination (field art,etc.) was removed. In 1942 the army anticipated massed concentration of TD battalions against enemy armour which called for a tank destroyer brigade for each field army.Combat experience in 1943 negated these expectations.Even the group HQ's were scarcely used overseas,as TD battalions were commonly attached directly to divisions beginning in the African and Italian campaigns and operated independantly in the Pacific.Only two brigades were authorized,one inactivated in early 1944,the other saw limited employment in France. Initially three types of TD battalions existed:Light Towed,Light Self Propelled and Heavy Self Propelled.It rapidly became obvious the 37mm AT gun was too weak for its intended role and the army converted all of its TD battalions during 1942 to one type-Hvy-SP with 24 75mm guns mounted on half tracks.The high silhouette of this vehicular arrangement and unsatisfactory performance in N.Africa prompted the army to return to the towed gun which could be dug in with only its muzzle protruding.During 1943 the SP battalions in the US were gradually converted to towed but none were used in combat that year.In Nov 1943 the army decide that half the battalions would be self propelled,equipped with M10's with a 3-inch gun and half would be towed with the M5 3-inch towed gun.In Jan 1944 the War Department alerted theatre that a more mobile carriage,the M18 with a 76mm gun was in production and that an M36 model with a 90mm gun would be available as soon as production schedules permitted.Since all the SP battalions were already equipped with the M10,it was decided by theatre to refuse the M18 to simplify maintenance and supply and await the arrival of the heavier M36. Soon after the operations began in France,it was evident that the M10 was inadequate against certain German armour,and that the advantages of a self-propelled weapon greatly exceeded those of a towed weapon both on offense and defense.Action was initiated to speed up procurement of the 90mm M36 carriages,and early shipment of M18's was requested to Europe.The War Department was further requested to equip all M10 battalion scheduled for later arrival to Europe with M36's preferably,or M18's prior to embarkation.In Aug 1944 the first increments of M36's and M18's arrived in France and the SP battalions began to re-equip with M36's and M18's accordingly,and as many towed battalions as possible were converted to SP by being issued the replaced M10's.By the cessation of hostilities in Europe the 12th Army Group,for instance,had 45 TD battalions of which 27 contained M36's,13 had M18's,6 were equipped with M10's,and only 4 were towed.The ratio of 50% towed at the start of the campaign had changed to 9% towed,91% now being self-propelled.Because TD battalions were in general phased in faster than divisions,the ratio of TD battalions to divisions was usually better than one to one. TD battalions,especially on the mountainous Italian front which precluded massed armour,increasingly operated as reinforcing artillery.The decline of German armour during certain periods of the fighting in France and Germay also caused this role to prevail at intervals."From Shelby L.Stanton's Order of Battle US Army WWII. Apologies for the long post but I think that just about answers everyting above.

Apart from the fact that you get 50% more points for being the attacker,what's the difference between fighting a QB as an assault,attack or probe.There may be an extra flag or two to take but the extra troops more than offset that

Just throwing this back to the top to see if someone can actually explain why no Churchill III's,IV's or V's (and to show I did try a search) .Just gone to try making a scenario to find I'm a bit stuffed before I start due to a distinct lack of older Churchills. Simon:which books are you looking in 'cos my references have the Mk VI & VII with the 75mm and the Mk V & VIII with the 95mm?Typos? "I have about fifty Shermans on my left"/'Did you say Shermans or Germans?'/"Shermans!"/'That's alright then.' ------------------

You don't say which three you have so here's the full list of Spikes autobiographies. Adolf Hitler:My part in his downfall. 'Rommel?''Gunner who?' Monty:His part in my victory. Mussolini:His part in my downfall. Where have all the bullets gone? Goodbye,soldier.

www.3d-modelmother.com/GALLERY.htm ....... Well,I can dream can't I?

Try this if you want German OOB's www.home.swipnet.se/normandy/gerob/gerob.html

I don't know how most wire was made passable but I found a pic last night showing US troops using a Bangalore torpedo to remove a mass of wire.Seems like an eminently sensible way to go about the task to me, assuming the terrain allows it's use.Don't know if it's in the game though.

As long as something is out by the 27th May I don't mind 'cos I've got a weeks holiday booked with the sole intention of sitting in front of my computer playing CM.

Black Sabot says" Now i alter the squads to zig-zag from tree to tree to take advantage of cover" Why?I was under the impression trees were indicative of the area not actual representations,so why bother. [This message has been edited by Blindicide (edited 04-25-2000).]

I found the web page the article came from a couple of days ago,so I suppose in a roundabout way it's answered the question I was going to ask about how accurate the article was.Where do the Canadians fit into this?

Johan. Nice page,not to mention plenty of other stuff for me to look at later as well.However,was the smoke only used because of what they saw in the wood and if they had attacked before nightfall as per the initial order,would they have used it or would they just have gone with HE rounds. I would appreciate any other similar descriptions either with or without the use of smoke if anyone has any other URLs. LOS I have read bits and pieces from many time periods but CM is getting me to concentrate on WW2 stuff but what I prefer to read is personal rather than third person or strategic accounts working on the basis that although they might claim to being shot at by Tigers instead of PzIV's they should at least be pretty accurate about what they did.To that end,what I have read gives accounts of calling in explosive (rather than smoke) shells to suppress the enemy.

LOS,any chance of seeing the report?How much is 'far exceeds' and at what level was it used?CM's level or at more of an operational level?I am currently reading Guns of Normandy in which the author states the estimated ammo usage was about 60 rounds/gun/day as an inflated value when in reality they were averaging over 300 and peaking at 1000 rounds/gun/day after his arrival in July 44.At no time in the book has there been any mention of smoke being called in by FOO's other than red smoke to act as markers for Typhoons to take out German tanks.I am still reading through "Tractable",where the author claims so much smoke was put down that units couldn't tell where they were going or see who they were supposed to be following but that was all pre-set and brought in before the advance started.I have also read a couple of other personal accounts of artillery units in the past(one mediums,one mortars) and don't recall any accounts of smoke usage.Maybe I'll have to have another read of the one I've still got.

Cheers.I did a search and read other stuff which brought up more questions I'll get round to asking That I didn't read that particular mail.

When a FOO calls in fire from off map,how many guns worth of artillery is he calling in?Is it possible to vary the amount for specific scenarios?

MarkIV Thanx for the link.There's some good stuff on that and related pages but unless I missed it the only smoke mentioned was formed by smoke teams with the infantry on their own position not by artillery as a screen for advancing. Oddly enough I've just come across another instance of it being used at the start of Operation Tractable in Normandy but this is not at the level of CM i.e.not called in by FOO's.

DAM you Dmeek.I was going to ask that.

Having played a few PBEM games now I have noticed how common it is for people to put down smoke before advancing forward with infantry;a tactic I have copied due to the fact it seems to work,but does anyone have any idea on how frequent the use of smoke was.From all my reading I can only only come up with one instance of it's use and nor do I recall seeing any in photographs.Is the common use of smoke a gamey tactic as I suspect or was it dropped all over the place.

I've unzipped the file,it's when you try to play it,the message comes up.The main time I get the message is on the Battleground video clips.