Moriarty

Lorak, get out yer infernal mallet at scribe thusly: That gamey, end-game-rushin’ (not Russian, CM2 ain’t out yet), Churchill-loving, pseudo-Celt Senility has managed to eke out a draw – 50 somefink (me) to 40 somefink (him) – against the valiant defenders in feldgrau, commanded most aptly by himself, Moriarty. Thus ends the ongoing plethora of losses to that wacked out Minnesotan. It was a winter battle on terrain with smallish hills, not too many trees and a couple of buildings at a crossroad. The valiant German defenders had some decent quality fallschirmgerbils backed by a platoon of SMG-HMG guys. And there was a smattering of onboard arty to make life miserable for those execrable Brits. Moving headlong toward the valiant ones were Brit infantry, Crommies, 3 Churchills and a halftrack or two. Senility’s flanking force was rendered toothless as an array of hardware on “gun hill” opened up early on in the game. Cancel the Crommie, and a couple of other vehicles. The 75mm IG (which survived until T-28) supported by MGs kept the flanking infantry at bay. The boys in brown didn’t cross the midline of the map until after T-20 as the advance platoon of FJs and a piddling 57mm ATG slowed up the main body of his advance. These stalwarts were supported by the FJ platoon at the far VL, which never was challenged. The first Churchill to raise its ugly turret was neatly dispatched by an ambushing ‘schreck. As Senility’s troops moved into range, a 105mm HOW on the back of the map opened up on INF advancing over rough ground. Senility informed me at T-29 that one of the 105 rounds skipped on the rough ground and slammed into a building downmap, killing half his FO team that was attempting to rain death and destruction on gun hill. (hehe). That disrupted his fire mission for approx. 4 turns. Senility managed to take an outlying large VL, defended by a platoon. He also had moved up troops (squad and HQ) in a small, light building about 30m from a large VL, which I held (gamey, end rush). The 105mm HOW was still available for use as his mortars on that side of the map couldn’t hit a bull in the butt with a 2x4. The 105mm had no LOS to the building, which was obscured by a small rise. I targeted the crest of the hill ... hoping for either a shot to go long or the “skipped” shot like before. The AI gods smiled upon my efforts. Approx. 10 secs into T-30, the house goes boom, the HQ is dead and the few remaining squad members are gunned down. Don't know if the shot skipped or went long, but in the end that doesn't really matter. Mebbe I should have set the turns at 20.

My favorite stock scenarios still are Last Defense and Riesberg with Chance Encounter close behind. Guess I'm old school.

double post. nothing to see here. move along, please. [ 06-06-2001: Message edited by: Moriarty ]

The only time I'll use crews is if there is no other option available because they are caught in a defensive situation where there is no route open to move them to the rear. Then they're stuck with the grunts, but I'll usually try to find a building or some cover for them to hide in. Using them in combat is the last resort. There were indeed real-life instances where bailed out crews did remarkable things on their own after their tanks were immobilized, mortars put out of action, etc. But, these crews acted of their own volition ... they were not ordered, nor do I believe there were standing orders to the effect that "If you lose your tank, find the nearest dead bazookaman, pick up his weapon and ammo, which you may or may not know how to use, and go forth and slay an enemy AFV, or, if you can't do that charge the AT team with your .45s and carbines." In essence, this is what the CM player does. You, as commander, are ordering into battle a crew that is ill-equipped and ill-trained for the mission. Tactically, I don't find that to be supported by life. For this reason, I consider the use of crews gamey. Would I quit a game because of it? No. If it works into the tactical plan I will hunt them down and eliminate them ... more points for me. If it doesn't work into the plan, oh well, c'est la guerre. Just my 2 cents.

Sharpshooters can be very useful. It has been my experience they are most effective when left to select their own targets. If armor is approaching, they'll target the TC. When hit, the tank remains buttoned the remainder of the game (limiting visibility) and likely will be shocked for a turn or two. If a platoon is moving through the open, the sharpshooter will target the HQ. As noted, the sharpshooter also will tangle with any crew-served weapons and FOs. Use the highest quality you can afford or is available, but don't overload your side ... they're not going to win the battle by themselves.

One of the best defenses I have found for rapid recon by jeeps or other light vehicles are HMGs, specifically Ma Deuce and the HMG-42 (still not a big fan of the Vickers). Both sides have them, they're relatively cheap, they can turn to keep up with the vehicles and easily take out the thinly armored ones. They're also a big nuisance to most of the ACs. Just my 2 cents. Hiya, Jarmo! [ 06-05-2001: Message edited by: Moriarty ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Berlichtingen: Outstanding! Now I may commence stomping dalem's guts out<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Oh, you mean this time?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maximus: It's just that people always want more eye candy, and if they say they don't, they're lying. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Not necessarily true. It may well be that a majority of CM players use mods to one degree or another, but to make a statement like this is ludicrous. I use some mods (mostly vehicles) because I appreciate the additional detail. But, I rarely spend any appreciable amount of time at View 1 so I would enjoy the game just as much if there were no mods. Whether they are there or not makes no difference to me. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I mean, just listen to everybody who uses mods, they all say that it makes it a new game everytime. In my game, just about everything is modded. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Listening to "everybody who uses them" is preaching to the choir. That's not exactly an objective audience from which to draw a conclusion. [ 06-04-2001: Message edited by: Moriarty ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by stevetherat: While I and Wildman are already dancing on one of Berli's abortions, I am willing to try another (if only to see if even ONE of his maps has ANY sense at all). What say me? I say bring it on. By yours or any other claw-like hand, bring it on. StR<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Done. Said abomination is en route.

Rats. double post. Move along, move along. Nothing to see here. [ 06-04-2001: Message edited by: Moriarty ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dNorwood: OK. I checked the "Instant Graemlins [sic]" and it's not there. How do we indicate irony and/or humor....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well the easiest way is to take your member number and divide by 4. If the member number of the person you suspect is using irony or humor is at or less than that number, you're probably right.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Terence: I believe that it is wrong to use mods. If Steve and Charles wanted us to use mods, they would have included them in the game. I'm sure people who use mods have the game run slower than the rest of us normal, right-thinking Combat Mission players. I also bet that using mods causes the game to return many ahistoric results, like when a Sherman kills a Panther. Also, I think you mod guys like to drop kick small dogs and probably push little girls out of line at McDonalds.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I had a modded HMC kill a King Tiger. You mean that's ahistorical?

I don't have any snappy quotes, so I'll just offer this: 1) Armor protects infantry; infantry protects armor. and I definitely second this: 7_ You can never have enough infantry.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by stevetherat: I'm feeling rather charitable myself actually, and will offer you your only freebie. I'm going to visit the country this weekend and so will not be able to send a setup before Monday. This is my gift of aid: I will give you the whole weekend to ponder, plan and propogate the most scheming setup your tiny mind can put together and, when I return from my sojourne, I will set about hunting you down like the vermin you are. You may start now. OK Moriarty, consider my Dearstalker donned, my magnifying glass offered up and my pipe smoking. You're going to be Sherlocked. StR<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You may bring Lestrade along, sir, but Watson must stay home. Oh, and the cocaine still is illegal. Alcohol may be used at will ... let me restate that. Will can get his own hooch. Alcohol may be freely used. Here's the grip. Using Herr Berlichtingen's "Tank Country" battle map, we square off at opposite ends. No troops of higher quality than regular, no vehicles valued at more than 100 points. Either I can cobble this abomination together, or I'll have a third party do us the honors. What say you?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MrPeng: et al Peng<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well said.

As mentioned, they are not modeled in CM. If you want to simulate them, I'd suggest using paratroop squads, but knock out 2 of the LMG teams. As to quality, I'd suggest veteran or crack to reflect the higher level of training. Granted, some Rangers did join in on earlier British raids, but not all who hit Omaha Beach or Le Pointe du Hoc on D-Day had the combat experience to warrant "elite" status.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by stevetherat: Oh bollocks. Who am I trying to kid? Barely I word I submit is read by anyone here, and if it is, by boredom or lack only. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Wrong-o, rodent boy. A posting of yours in the last pool incarnation, which was in response to my list of faux victories, indicated that I was too scared or cowardly or quivering to have played you. In point of fact, I had not played you because I had not noticed your malodorous presence ... it being at times difficult to distinguish one stench from another in this place we call home. Someone with a record as execrable as mine does not kowtow to anyone, much less a creature with beady little eyes, whiskers and a hairless tail. So, clear the excrement off your eyelids, bottom dweller, and send me a setup.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Prescot: Thanks for your answer BloodyBucket! Is there any way to avoid this "unauthorized surrender"? I still want to give em hell for five more rounds... Prescot<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The point at which the AI throws in the towel is tied to morale level and whether or not there are reinforcements on the way. When your morale hits the high teens, the AI begins thinking about surrender. I'm not being facetious, but the best way to avoid that is not to get into the "hopeless" situation.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MrSpkr: Hey Moriarty - Can the rest of us DL this scenario somewhere?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Abbott has the map and the scenario and may have had one or both posted somewheres. I also have a battle map available that Berli and Bauhaus are playtesting. I think I have the game with the units in place saved. You can e-mail me if you're interested or get in touch with Abbott. [ 05-29-2001: Message edited by: Moriarty ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MrSpkr: Hey Moriarty - Can the rest of us DL this scenario somewhere?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Abbott has the map and the scenario and may have had one or both posted somewheres. I also have a battle map available that Berli and Bauhaus are playtesting. I think I have the game with the units in place saved. You can e-mail me if you're interested or get in touch with Abbott. [ 05-29-2001: Message edited by: Moriarty ]

Greetings, gentlemen. Your most welcome. I'm glad that this one was, firstly, enjoyable and, secondly, a close fight. In all honesty, I was very concerned about getting balanced forces within the point restrictions and maintaining at least a head-nod to history. I tried to follow platoon models of 3-4 tanks per platoon for the Axis (with the exception of the understrength AT platoon); and five M4s for the US with no more than two 76mms. The reinforcements -- three crack or elite mounted infantry platoons and another armored platoon per side -- at or about T-21 had not been requested by the players and were a spur of the moment addition. Glad you enjoyed the fight, guys. [ 05-30-2001: Message edited by: Moriarty ]

Greetings, gentlemen. Your most welcome. I'm glad that this one was, firstly, enjoyable and, secondly, a close fight. In all honesty, I was very concerned about getting balanced forces within the point restrictions and maintaining at least a head-nod to history. I tried to follow platoon models of 3-4 tanks per platoon for the Axis (with the exception of the understrength AT platoon); and five M4s for the US with no more than two 76mms. The reinforcements -- three crack or elite mounted infantry platoons and another armored platoon per side -- at or about T-21 had not been requested by the players and were a spur of the moment addition. Glad you enjoyed the fight, guys. [ 05-30-2001: Message edited by: Moriarty ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tom: Hi , 2.) If you want to access my site , please use the link given below ( the link given by Moriarty could cause problems if you work with Netscape ). Cheers Tom<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Jeez, does anyone still use Netscape? (Just-freakin'-kidding, guys and gals). BTW, Tom, you've got a good site going there ... only place I saw Tiger's gray Marder III and Wespe mod. Love that one.

Here's a couple places to start: Combat Mission HQ http://www.combatmission.com/ Tom's CM HQ http://home.germany.net/101-77027/CM/International.html Der Kessel http://www.geocities.com/greg_mudry/sturm.html Combat Missions http://www.combat-missions.net/

double post. move along, please, nothing to see here. [ 05-25-2001: Message edited by: Moriarty ]