Durruti

I'd like to see a proper SCW mod with new vehicles and stats for something like ToW or Combat Mission too! For ground combat, there are also SCW mods for Close Combat 3 and 5 (both very good) and Blitzkrieg (somewhat "arcade"-like but fun).

Hehe well I can't resist either I certainly wouldn't want to be the crew of an obsolete 37mm AT gun in Normandy - even with that low range Stielgranate thingy...

Minor nitpick, but I wonder why PAK-35/36 AT guns appear in the Normandy missions as Panzer Lehr only had a few mounted on platoon leader Sdkfz 251/10s? Unless the ones with the Stielgranate 41 shaped charge are being used by Fallschirmjäger or other light troops?

Hehe well that's what makes buying in $$$ so attractive at the mo I do remember a few years ago when ASL cost a small fortune due to the boot being on the other foot though! Thanks for the swift reply.

Looks like I'll have to get hold of this game now (although the non-enterable buildings still put me off a bit...). Still considering the different purchase options - don't see any postage charges (UK) indicated for the mail order options?

FPS games are in a league of their own. Those games are about killing each other, the setting is almost irrelevant. All that is needed is a lot of cool graphics, variety of weapons, interesting tweaks to the well worn genre, etc. and the game will sell like hotcakes. Oh, and having millions of Dollars in advertising and marketing muscle doesn't hurt either So I'd say those games are popular simply because they are good FPS games, not because of the subject matter Steve </font>

Same for the Spanish Civil War! (and more nationalities involved despite the moniker) Seriously though, I remember the reasons given, way back, for not allowing "total conversion" mods in CM. MP cheating and so forth. But do you really think that would be an issue with this "serious" wargame? People play CM against friends they trust don't they, it's that sort of game? The likes of CC, BF42, HL, etc were all opened up to full modding with far greater dangers and they have only benefitted as far as I can see...

Interesting how the debate has brought out the "WW2 vs modern" thing again. Having little personal interest in games based on the modern middle-east conflict (real or hypothetical) I haven't bought CM:SF and have also refrained from commenting so far (apart from maybe one post stating this position a while back) simply because it's up to Battlefront to decide what subjects they want to cover (and presumably will have a market for). There are certainly plenty of WW2 games of all genres out there (FPS, arcade/RTS, wargames, sims etc.) but I do find it odd that Steve's "point 1" seems to suggest modern combat (especially in the middle east) doesn't have a huge following. Perhaps it's just a biased mis-perception on my part but the game-store shelves seem to heaving with "modern warfare" titles - BF2, COD4: Modern Warfare, Armed Assault, Delta Force, War On Terror, Joint Task Force, CC: The Road to Baghdad, CC: Modern Tactics, Joint Operations etc... Then there are mods like Insurgency for HL2. I could say I don't like "middle east" game scenarios because it's all a bit too "close to the bone" with current events and can come across as xenophobic propaganda. Then again there are some people who say all historical wargaming is "bad taste" so that might be hypocritical of me. Anyway it seems to me both WW2 and "modern" are saturated markets. So just when is "Combat Mission: Spanish Civil War" coming out??

Er..yep that's a pretty good description of the "Political Compass" I just posted a link to!

Well this risks reverting to the type of discussion on the old "World Events" forum but suffice to so I don't believe the simple "left vs right" model works - your statements being a prime example why. Still prefer the Political Compass model: http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2 http://www.politicalcompass.org/extremeright

Oooh, now that would be something wouldn't it? The SCW. Not that it there's much chance of it making it into a released game (I can only recall games such as "Luftwaffe Commander" and one of the "Blitzkrieg" anthology having a couple of SCW scenarios though there's been some good mods for the likes of CC3, IL-2 FB and MOH). Shame because, despite the "civil war" moniker, you have the opportunity to fight as Americans (Abe Lincoln Battalion), Canadian (The Mac Paps), British, Irish, French, Italian, German, Russian, etc...plus er, Spanish. Sorry, but the subject matter of CM:SF holds zero interest for me though I'm sure it will be a well made product with a ready audience in the USA.

Quote: ------------------------------------------------- 'The additional 5 KTs I have for Normandy were in Panzer Lehr, having been transfered to that formation from one of the Funklenk units in June - sPzKoFkl 316. This unit only had Tigers at all, rather than StuG, from Feb 44 to June 44, and only 5 of them were KTs. They were turned over to crews in Panzer Lehr, and the Fkl. crews sent to the rear to go back to StuGs.' ------------------------------------------------- There is disagreement over the employment of Tigers by Panzer Lehr. Helmet Ritgen (commanded II Abt of 130 Panzer Lehr Regt.) is adamant that no Tigers of any sort saw action with the division. He claims in 'Die Geschichte der Panzer Lehr im Westen' that the Tiger I's initially supplied were replaced by the first five production KTs (Porsche turret) but that they were so prone to mechanical failure they were 'scuttled' at Chateaudun to prevent capture. He says the Fkl Ko fought in the Tilly area with nine StuGs plus the Borgward BIVs. However other sources ('German Remote-Control Tank Units' - M Jaugitz, 'Tigers in Combat Vol 1') claim the KTs fought in Chateaudun as static 'pillboxes' against the Americans. A photo in the Jaugitz book shows a couple of these KO-ed tanks surrounded by US troops with what look like penetrations in the turret side. Still other sources ('La Panzer Lehr Division' - Jean-Claude Perigault) cite a Panzer Lehr strength return for June 44 still showing three Tiger I's with the Division so Ritgen, as a sub-unit commander, may not have known the whole story.

Darknight, I've been interested in this subject for a long time too. You really ought to get hold of 'The British Soldier 1944-45, Vol 1' by Jean Bouchery - its got loads of examples but perhaps not all you want what you want. Also for British armoured uniform insignia - 'Tank and AFV Crew Uniforms since 1916' by Martin Windrow. Looking at the Bouchery book suggests the whole subject can be very complex. The whole range of shoulder-strap loops, shoulder titles, Scottish regt. badges, formation badges, arm-of-service strips, regimental flashes and badges, proficiency badges and unofficial insignia etc were only supposed to be worn together with 'walking out'/parade dress which is why the best examples seem to be photos of blokes getting medals from Monty In cases of some senior NCOs, most of the sleeve seems covered when the rank insignia is included Inevitably these rules seem to have been made to be broken with plenty of examples of various partial combinations seen in the field though the censor unfortunately seemed fond of scratching these out of some photos Volume 2 of Bouchery's work covers organisation and OOB for 1944-45 (NW Europe) and this too is really essential to understand the right combination of insignia (eg the correct regt shoulder title for the formation patch and number of brigade arm-of-service strips at a particular point in time - for example the 3rd CLY (used the unofficial 'Sharpshooters' shoulder title in yellow on green) merged with the 4th CLY in July 1944 and swopped the black rat of the 4th AB for the red rat of 7th AD). I thinks its just a pity that in CM, Brit AFV crew and infantry share the same sleeve... Contact me for specifics, if you want. venatio64ad@yahoo.co.uk

Here are some relevant notes I made from a couple of useful books in my collection; 'Monty's Marauders: Black Rat and Red Fox (4th and 8th Armoured Brigades)' - Patrick Delaforce and 'Gold Beach' by Chris Dunphie and Garry Johnson. Eyewitness accounts that give a good impression of tactics and field organisation. First of all, British tank squadrons in 1944 could be either 4 troops of 4 tanks or 5 troops of 3 tanks. The units of the 4th and 8th (Independent) Armoured Brigades seem to have favoured the 5 troops of 3 setup. Also, whilst most distributed the Fireflies one per troop, they could sometimes be grouped into totally Firefly or 75mm troops: 24th Lancers (8th AB): 'There was much debate as to how best to use these new weapons (Fireflies), one per troop with two 75mm tanks or group three 17-pdrs together in one troop. We adopted the latter option.' 4/7th Dragoon Guards (8th AB): 'For the invasion all five Fireflies were with 'A' Sqn, and 'B' and 'C' were equipped with DD tanks.' B and C Sqns 4/7th DGs: 'The attack on Cristot turned out to be a flop. Our first set piece attack with infantry planned just as in the text books, to have tanks 'B' Sqn leading, followed by infantry (Green Howards) followed by more tanks, 'C' Sqn. This arrangement proved to be a dismal failure. The Jerries (12th SS Panz Div) lay low until the tanks had passed, then opened up on the infantry with Spandaus. Then they set on the cut-off tanks. 'B' Sqn only had nine tanks at the beginning of the attack and seven were knocked out by hidden guns...' 'One lesson learned was that in the close 'bocage' country instead of alternate waves of armour/infantry, the tanks could best give support from a position slightly in the rear, and to a flank. It was of course extremely difficult for a tank commander to watch his 'own' infantry even when moving with them' Sherwood Rangers Yeomanry (8th AB): 'Major Semken, OC 'A' Sqn summoned 'B' and 'C' to join him to repel the enemy attack which never came. Stuart Hills, the troop leader didn't hang around - he just lined us up line abreast and we went for it. The tactic succeeded.' 'C' Sqn, SRY: 'Our troop of three tanks were ordered to escort a Churchill petard tank to a German HQ in a chateau. We moved off. The Churchill commander took us to the target unerringly, stopped his vehicle, the lap gunner got out, put a small 'dust-bin' into the petard and retired back into the tank. The gun fired and we could see the small canister on the way to the target. It hit, there was a tremendous explosion and the chateau was no more...' 'C' Sqn, 4/7th DGs: 'Major 'Knocker' Bell had five of his Shermans knocked out and also two Fireflies 'borrowed' from 'A' Sqn in reserve behind...' 'A' Sqn, SRY: '"A" Sqn's five troops each of three tanks were deployed by Major Semken with his Fireflies in the centre...' 24th Lancers: 'The common type of message picked up on the net was "Press on, There's nothing in front of you...Intelligence says there's nothing there' followed by '**** "intelligence", who the hell's shooting at me if there's nothing there?'...' 4/7 DGs: 'The leading troop leader (3rd tp) lined up his tanks, over the air gave them 'one two, three, GO!' and they charged. As they reached the crest two went straight up in flames...' 'A' Sqn, 4/7 DGs: 'In 4/7 DG the five Fireflies were given to A Sqn...Lt. Morrison's troop had three tanks. His own and Corporal Johnson's had the 75mm gun. The anti-tank punch for 4th Troop was provided by Sgt Harris' Firefly. But with its longer gun barrel and different turret, the 'Firefly' would be an obvious target for the German gunners. For the most part, therefore, Morrison and Johnson led in the 75mm tanks, with Harris' tank tucked in behind to cover them forward and move in quickly to engage enemy tanks, when a particular threat developed.' (-note, this sounds to me like 'inverted wedge' formation) Not sure of that ammo-loadout page but the following is good for British tank units in particular - even gives numbers of particular mark of Sherman in each unit in June 1944: http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/8418/ Cheers, Durruti

Hi Steve, Your tests seem to have put *most* of the objections about firing on the move to rest but I wondered about your opinion on the earlier posts that included references to crews with gyro-equipped tanks finding them so 'unreliable' that they de-activated them? I'm sure I've read this in a couple of sources myself but I'll have to 'put my hands on them' as they say Does Hunicutt have anything to say about reliability or malfunctions? Cheers, Durruti