Renaud

Any recommendations for good cmsf map / force selections to get trained up for bocage and Norman village CMBN actions? I'm thinking red on red green/regular infantry only scenarios....any recommendations for cmsf map or scenarios? I've been doing red vs red special forces QBs in woods maps. Other than the thermobaric rpg29 rockets it's not too terribly far from late war ww2 infantry (I ditch the vehicles).

I was think it would be possible to create small parallel cmx2/x1 scenarios and evaluate the AAR's after playing both to conclusion. The problem is that CMBO was very different than CMBB/AK, particularly suppression from small arms/MG's. Recommend using CMAK for the cmx1 side, rather than CMBO. Same exact forces, exact same map (as close as possible anyway). Recommend infantry-only company-sized attack (human attacker vs. AI defender). No vehicles or towed guns, but including the typical company-level heavy weapons (mg's, light/medium mortars, etc.). Play both using the same level of care and casualty-aversion, then compare the results. Note I don't propose this as a way to determine which game is 'right' or 'wrong', only as an interesting experiment.

I'm preordered and ready when the time comes...where do we sign up. Loved the scenarios, the competition, the aar's, and the tourney as a whole.

I'd love to see something done that hasn't been covered many times before. There are so many interesting actions out there that are overlooked. Ideas: cherkassy (korsun) pocket; novorossisk; Crimea april-July 42 (Sevastopol, etc); caucasus mts (elbrus, taupse). Cherkassy might be the best of the lot, featuring a wide range of units and vehicles, high intensity combat (especially the breakout), and cliffhanger suspense (things could have gone far differently at many decision points in the battle), and the time scale is just a few weeks. Admittedly I'm biased having just completed nash's Hell's Gate, an amazing read.

I've always enjoyed jumping in and playing, only much later looking at the manual, if ever. Half the fun is figuring out how to play and win, without step by step instructions. Mainly read the manual later to check out various keyboard combination I might have not figured out, or stats about terrain or units, or just for the enjoyment of a well-written manual. Has BFC considered in-game documentation directly linked from in-game elements? It would be handy to flip back and forth or view as pop-up windows without having to crack a paper booklet. Example: hold down a hotkey and click on a building and get a popup with the documentation on buildings, something like that...same for units and in-game iconography, etc. The actual linked content could be stored to a database the documentation authors edit or upload directly. Maybe something as simple as a collection of PDF's, or one giant hyperlinked PDF, authored by the tech writer. In-game context-sensitive documentation in combination along with a nice tutorial scenario including popup suggestions and reminders triggered throughout the duration of the tutorial would seem pretty complete to me.

I'm not really thinking of national distinctions (I believe BFC said that was not something they wanted to get into), just a generic way to order troops to spread out and not approach the enemy as small knots of men, or spread out in a long file pointed in the direction of advance. A skirmish line really, designed to force the enemy picket line to choose between opening up on a not-very-juicy target or letting you into their positions. From what i'm reading it sounds like breaking off a 'scout' team from every squad, and just sending all the scout teams out ahead would serve the same purpose.

A few questions for the guys, not sure if anyone can answer them at this stage... 1. Will there be any type of move command which causes infantry team/squad members to spread out and advance in something like a skirmish line arranged at right angles to the path of advance? I remember that in CM:SF teams would tend to move as a little bunch and all die from the same HE hit, or straggle out in a long line arranged in the direction of advance. 2. Do moving infantry teams still take detours along odd diagonal paths following the grain of action points instead of moving directly from point A to B? Those infantry movement issues didn't cause serious problems with most CM:SF scenarios that I remember, but might be an issue in the more infantry-centric CM:BN timeframe. Possibly later patches addressed these questions after I kind of stopped playing a few years ago. But of course I am going to resume playing CMx2 again with the release of CM:BN!

I see the lead guy in the moving reserve platoon has an MP44 - nice.

"Rebuilding your favorite map from scratch, an afternoon's entertainment." Really? If this means that the editor has evolved since CMSF, that is welcome news indeed. I never could get into CMx2 due to the extreme time requirements for building a map of any significant size (my main interest is building historical scenarios - rather a moot point considering the fictional CMSF setting, I know). I started a huge project of exactly recreating the GW1 battle of 73 Easting, but building the map was just impossible. Particularly elevations, which about drove me blind. Just never could get the hang of it. And this is coming from someone that put a lot of time into painstakingly replicating 1:50k topo maps into 3km x 2km CMx1 maps - time consuming, but just barely doable in CMx1. And quite rewarding as the maps really looked great and just exactly like pictures of the real place. Many others have built incredibly good looking and realistic, yet gigantic, cmx1 maps as well. Notably of the Ardennes region. CMx1 is probably a game people will be playing for another ten more years or more. If an import/export tool had been built for maps and unit data...possibly even far longer. As we know a noble attempt was made to build such a tool, but a really ugly scope creep put that in it's grave, despite heroic efforts. I would have been happy with just a simple import/export gui and a .csv file specification. A generic import/export tool for map and unit data for CM:BN and the following WW2 modules would be a godsend to campaign managers and scenario designers and extend the longevity of the game perhaps to decades (at least for a small minority of hardcore historical/military simulation freaks). Of course, such longevity is often not a strong point from a business perspective. Also it appears that the CMx2 map specification has changed with most if not every module release...perhaps the unit specification format as well (?). This would require rejiggering the import/export tool and spec for every module.

CMx1 has a of 'curved' setting to simulate that. It only applies to surfaces designated as such, like the bullnose on the T70, T34, KV1, IS2, and IS3 (probably many other's I'm forgetting). The geometry of the 'curved' attribute is not specifically modelled by vehicle, but rather a generic setting. Hits on a 'curved' aspect can result in randomized 0 degree and upward angles, from what I've seen. So you can get low-angle front hits on the early-model T-34 'curved' turret front for instance, allowing 50L42 and 37mm to penetrate. This setting does not apply to the Tiger I side, only to top-to-bottom rounded surfaces. Tiger is just treated as a 0-degree 82mm armor. I believe the +2 mm may have been added to represent this horizontal curve advantage, as the pzVI I side turret armor was really only 80mm historically.

Great! I look forward to seeing that and playing the campaign!

22nd Panzer division workshops mounted a 75L43+mantlet onto a captured KV1, but I don't know if they ever got it into combat. I have the photograph from 'Captured Russian Armor Under German Flags'. * Looking at your link, I just realized that there is a profile illustration of this very KV1 from the 22nd about 2/3rd down the page...I happen to have a photograph of the same vehicle as it is being worked on in the shops. [ May 17, 2008, 06:49 PM: Message edited by: Renaud ]

As soon as this appears I will buy it. My guess is you have at least 500 immediate buyers waiting who would pay at least $30 for a functional product. I myself would pay substantially more and I don't think i'm the only wwII ostfront history nut out there. I know that's small potatoes, but at least you could have a drink on us! I think we have at least 2 years before any CM2 ostfront module appears, and in any case it will be very narrowly focused historically and strictly tactical. I can easily think of 12 grand tactical historical situations I would like to recreate in the summer/fall '42 Caucasus alone. Thrown in at least 6 more from jan-may '42 Crimea.

Something I have discovered over years of playing with scenario design: Providing the AI with large numbers or strategically placed TRP will result in heavy AI use of arty. The AI spotters will fire at enemy units moving onto or over AI TRP's, which are also spotted by any other AI unit. A certain number of human-controlled units must be on the TRP, or a continual sequence of TRP's, for a certain period of time to cause the AI to fire arty. This is more effective when the AI is on defense and the human player must move onto or over AI TRP's. Placing snipers or any other AI units within LOS of AI trp's is sufficient to bring them under fire from all AI spotters anywhere on the map. I leveraged this in the scenario below (Russian assault vs. Axis-AI defense) Novorossisk - Ozereika

If you are lucky enough to have a spare vet+ plt or section leader with +1 or +2 stealth, you can put them up front with a few snipers in command range. Enemy can actually walk right over the hidden snipers without spotting them. After the main enemy force has passed, you have your choice of heavy weapon or leader targets. (guns being pushed/dragged forward can be pinned/ko'd easily)

My experience with period Russian sources on Kursk is that they tend to liberally borrow elements from various locales and times to assemble a symbolic narrative. Usually very melodramatic as well. As JasonC has observed, very loose terminology abounds and of course translation issues. Like the western troops calling every tank a 'Tiger' and every field piece an '88'. Later Soviet studies of ww2 actions are more analytical and lose the iconic-moment melodrama (redarmystudies.net has a lot of these, don't know if it's still up).

Certainly, emails current above. Contact me when you need something.

Parabola you are getting more than you bargained for! hehe. A large proportion of the tanks I listed for the divisions above for Nov-Dec are in fact pzII, pz38t or pzIIIkz, or pzIV-III 75shorts...looks like only about 130 50l60 and 75l43 gun-armed tanks are operational in the above 6 divisions. If you look at tank kill #'s for this period, most of the heavy lifting was done by 50l60/75l43. 50l42 got many fewer kills than 50l60 for obvious reasons. Of course the Russians were attacking and would presumably face a lot of AT/AA guns from the infantry divisions.

I love the RKKA in WW II site...a great job of making Soviet WWII era documents available in english. I trust it mostly for the russian strengths and the battle maps, because the tank #'s come from Russian strength reports. I don't use it for german figures because those are at best guestimates from Russian intelligence at the time, at worst simply made up by examining german divisional TOE.

Yes, there weren't a whole lot of stugs in late 42 yet...they didn't get put into Panzer TOE's but remained in sturmartillie until later. I'd agree with the 25% number though. There were lots of marders and other makeshifts. Here's the exact numbers for Nov and Dec 42, Panzer Strength on the Eastern Front, Jentz vol2, pg43. These #'s include only MBT's and stugs, but in practice there were no stugs organic to panzer units at this time so it mostly or completely tanks (therefore you should add stugs and other SP guns to this figure): Nov 42: 1907 Operational; 169 Total Losses; 770 Repairable; 245 Replacements received. Dec 42: 1723 Operational; 159 Total Losses; 1035 Repairable; 196 Replacements received Note that Nov 42 is actually the high point in operational panzer strength between July42-Mar42. In Feb 43 there were massive losses reported: 1105 and panzers operational dipped to 902 in Mar 43. The figures above come from actual reports by field commanders. I'd guess reported tank strength is very different from factory production minus losses. The reality is that many tanks probably were in transit, in training, being deployed, in lager or otherwise unavailable to the field commanders and therefore not reported in the daily strength reports.

Panzer Divisions, 12th, 19th and 20th strength 18 november 42: 12th: 1 pzII, 24 pzIIIkz, 17 pzIIIlg, 2 pzIVkz, 18 pzIVlg, 1 cmd tank 19th: 7 pzII, 37 pz38t (woohoo!!!), 8 pzIIIkz, 3 pzIVkz, 9 pzIVlg, 2 cmd tanks 20th: 4 pzII, 22 pz38t (woohoo again), 14 pzIIIkz, 11 pzIVkz, 5 pzIVlg, 6 cmd tanks GrossDeutchland Nov 42: 7 pzII, 1 pzIIIkz, 7 pzIVkz, 12 pzIVlg, 3 cmd tanks.

Operational tanks and stugs on the Eastern front Nov 42: 1907. Dec 42: 1723. This doesn't include all AFV's, just stugs and turreted tanks, not marders and such. Between 700-1000 were out of action but repairable. (Jentz) Here's the strength of the 1st, 5th and 9th panzer on Nov 18th: 1st: 3 pzII, 7 pz38t, 16 pzIIIkz, 8 pzIIIlg, 6 pzIII75kz, 5 pzIVkz, 6 pzIVlg, 4 command tanks 5th: 15 pzII, 23 pzIIIkz, 10 pzIIIlg, 7 pzIII75, 10 pzIVkz, 6 pzIVlg, 7 cmd tanks 9th: 26 pzII, 30 pzIIIkz, 32 pzIIIlg, 7 pzIVkz, 5 pzIVlg, 2 cmd tanks source as above

I think what he means is "is the displayed hit percentage the real percentage used by the computer, or is it obscured or randomized by FOW somehow so that it is different from the value which will actually be used by the computer to calculate a hit". I think the answer is that the displayed value is the value used by the computer to calculate the hit and there is no FOW. An interesting question though.

I've been out for 3 weeks (1 week vacation, 2 weeks business in Saigon), but i'm still interested in your project Gdog and i'm sure others as well, so keep us posted. Nice sig graphic as well.

Great map! rkkaww2 is a great resource. The southern bit is interesting. I see the 100th Jaeger far to the north. The Russian symbology: what looks like 'cd' is an Infantry Division, 'cdp' is Rifle Brigade, 'mbp' is an Independept Tank Brigade...the 63rd STB is clearly in reserve north of Rostov. Note 22nd Panzer still to the north with 1st Panzer Army.