Renaud

JC, cool. Reconciling all the conflicting sources out there can be a challenge, a lot of it is 3rd party authors perpetuating each others mistakes...i'm always prepared to revise my conclusions in light of new and better sources. GDog, my pleasure, researching unit histories, OOB's and battles is what most interests me about CM. If you ever get that campaign together and need some help, let me know. The one book you really need is "The Caucasus and the Oil", Wilhelm Tieke: J.J. Fedorowicz, 1995(first published 1970 in German). It's a little wonky due to the translation and rambling style (this is a former German officer not a professional writer after all), and there are a few unit designation typos and mis-translations but on the whole super-detailed and paints an impressive picture of the entire Caucasus campaign. Obviously a labor of love for the author and most of the officers named in the book were actualy friends and he interviewed dozens.

I might also suggest requiring TIMED tcp/ip resolution, using 1 minute for company sized, 3 for battalion sized battles. This will make it possible to play the games in a reasonable amount of time (1-3 hours depending on turns allowed and timer length). This will move the campaign along faster. Not many people seem to like timed, but I love it. Recreates the stress of time pressure and difficulty of synchronizing movement of all troops in a large force. Also, if one side can't show up for their scheduled game and no human substitute is available, the AI plays for them...hehe. JC's criticisms are real. You will need a GM to track everyones move orders and calculate collisions, set up the games, adjust unit OOB after battles, etc. Keep the scope small or this will become a monumental task.

No mention of 100th Jaeger or the Croats during the 21st-26th in Tieke, and Tieke is superbly researched...it's possible these units arrived piecemeal and were subordinated to one of the divisions I mentioned, or just got lost in the shuffle. Jentz lists 13th and SS-Wiking in 17th Pz.K., but then he does not deal with non-panzer units. None of my other sources (web, Jentz) mention these. The 97th and 101st Jagerdivisions were involved in later operations.

Some specific information on units actually involved in breaching the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defense belts, and who fought within the city itself and over the Don to Bataisk: -Rostov battle began July 21 and ended July 26, 1942. -West and Northwest face: --13th PZD --5th SS Wiking Pz.KGr (armored battlegroup) --73rd ID --298th ID (followup: west to east along the Don) --4th Gebirgsdivision (late followup 7/26) -North face: --125th ID (partial) ---421st Infantry Regiment (Oberst Reinhardt): 3 battalions - committed 7/24 to clear the city center behind the Panzer troops. ----I battalion: Major Ortleib ----II battalion: (close reserve) ----III battalion: Hauptmann Winzen --Fast Slovak Division (7/24) -East-Northeast face: --22nd Panzer (led the attack: breached 3 defense belts and entered city 23 July) --198th ID (followup) --9th ID (followup) --1st Gebirgsdivision (late followup 7/26) The initial fighting in the city center and river crossings July 23-24 were mainly borne by these units: -13th Panzer Division -22nd Panzer Division -5th SS Wiking Pz.KGr -43rd Kradschutzen Battalion (MC recon) -8th Company/II Battalion Brandenburg Special Purpose Training Regiment (Hauptmann Siegfried Grabert, Lt. Hiller: captured the 6000 meter long bridge embankment across the Don delta between Rostov and Bataisk 7/25) -Fast Slovak Division --125th (421st Regiment only), 73rd, 298th, 198th (partial), and 9th followed closely behind the above units and cleaned up nests of resistance July 25-26th. 9th ID relieved the 22nd Panzer which was then redeployed north. The 1st and 4th Gebirgsdivisions followed behind. 2nd Rumanian Mountain Division was in the 3rd echelon. Note: 14th Panzer was not directly involved in the city assault, but established bridgeheads on the Don to the east of Rostov (took Novo-Cherkask) update: added some more detail, dates and names [ February 23, 2008, 09:24 PM: Message edited by: Renaud ]

Another interesting unit that was on the scene and fought to near destruction for the Bataisk causeway and bridgehead: 8/Brandenburger Company (German special forces) -2 half-companies, each divided into 2 einsatzgruppen (like a big platoon) equipped with: LMG's, HMG's, mortars, AT weapons. The unit was a 50/50 mix of infantry and engineers...all definitely 'Elite'.

Info on 13th Panzer-Division: -Panzer Regiment 4 --I and II Panzer Battalions ---15 pzII, 41 pzIII(kz), 30 pzIII(lg), 12 pzIV(kz) ...apparently 13th pzd did not receive their new Panzer IV G's in time for the campaign. --3 infantry battalions --elements of supporting weapons (?) Showpiece of 13th Panzer Division was the re-equipped I/66 Armored Infantry Battalion (Major Brux): -Battalion staff and communications platoon in SPW -3 Panzergrenadier companies mounted on SPW --1 'heavy' platoon per company, including: 2 7.5cm gun SPW, 2 8cm mortar SPW, 2 SPW carrying HMG platoon, 1 panzergrenadier pioneer platoon in 4 SPW --3 Panzergrenadier platoons per company ---Platoon: 1 3.7cm SPW, 3 mg SPW. So this unit had extremely high firepower and was 100% mounted on SPW. 13th PZD fought throughout the battle and inside the city street-to-street.

More info on Wiking: -was subordinated to the 73rd ID at this time and was only half assembled at the time of the Rostov battles. -SS Division Wiking 27 June 42: (cmdr: Oberfuhrer Gille) --Pz.Abt.5 under Sturmbannfuhrer Muhlenkamp: ---12 pzII, 12 pzIII(kz), 24 pzIII(lg), 4 pzIV(kz) --Mot Infantry: I battalion/"Germania" regiment, I and II battalions/"Nordland" regiment. --III battalion/5 SS artillery, 12th Battery SS artillery 5 -1 pioneer company -elements of Flakabteilung -update: 6 heavy anti-tank guns (R-Sfl) *this means 76mm Marders of some sort. [ February 23, 2008, 09:03 AM: Message edited by: Renaud ]

I have done some research on this as part of my 22nd Panzer Division scenarios, but haven't got around to making the Rostov scenarios yet. Anyway, here's some data you may find helpful: sources: 1. The Caucasus and the Oil, Wilhelm Tieke: J.J. Fedorowicz, 1995 (Tieke was a veteran of Wiking and fought with Wiking throughout the Rostov battles) 2. Nafiziger Collection: Niehorster, L.W.G., German World War II Organization Series, Vol 4/I, Mechanized Army Divisions: 22nd Panzer Division, 28 June 1942 3. PanzerTruppen Vol. 1, Thomas L. Jentz: Schiffer Military, 1996 4. http://rkkaww2.armchairgeneral.com 5. http://www.feldgrau.com The 140th Schutzen-Regiment and Div. Artillerie-Regiment were reassigned at the end of May, leaving the 22nd with a single infantry regiment (II gepanzert and I Mot. battalion) and no divisional artillery. All Panzer Divisions participating in 'Fall Blau' received up to 12 of the new Panzer IV 75L43 units. - The 22nd PZD/204th Panzer Regiment reported the following tanks operational in July 42 prior to the Rostov committment: 28 PzII 60+ Pz38t 12 PzIIIj 11 PzIVf 11 (new) PzIVg -Soviet forces research, rostov defense july 1942 9th NKVD Mot Div Rostov formed 01 Jan-42 56th Army: (AA,Art,AT ) (south front, forming South east of Rostov - keep in mind most of these units were not committed in the city but pulled back across the Don early) ---317th Rifle Div 30July-41 Baku ---343rd Rifle Div 23Aug-41 Stavropol N Cauca MD ---347th Rifle Div 16Sep-41 Krasnodar N Cauca MD ---11th Stud Rifle Brigade 01nov-41 ---13th Stud Rifle Brigade 20nov-41 ---16th Stud Rifle Brigade 01Oct-at Rostov ---62nd Cav Div 01Sep-41 N Cauca MD ---64th Cav Div 11Aug-41 Lobinskaya N Cauca MD ---70th Cav Div 31Aug-41 Voroshilovsk N Cauca MD ---55th Guards Rifle Div 18 Dec-42 ---68th Cav Div 15 Sep-41 Rostov -63rd Tank Brig. (56th Army) July 01 42 tank strength (rkkaww2 site) -------- KV-1 9 T34 2 T26 14 OT26 6 T60 19 T37 5 -------- Total 55 -62nd Seperate Tank Battalion of South Front had following dug-in tanks: 18 BT, 12 T26

This thread and specifically JasonC's post inspired me to play out the game as described. Unfortunately I could only play vs. AI, but at least got to test out this force combination: 2 motorized panzer rifle companies 1 pioneer platoon plus 3 tank hunters 4 105mm howitzers 2 Sdkfz 9 prime movers 1 platoon of Panzer III H (4 tanks) 1 Pz II flamm 1 105mm FO (radio if low rarity) Me-109F air support I split them up into 3 task forces as described. Both sides 'regular', map set up as described. Due to rarity I had to replace 2 105mm how with a 28mm squeezebore AT gun and an extra carrier, and 1 of the panzer rifle CO's with a MC recce Co. I gave the red force +50 percent so I couldn't run around with impunity. The flammpanzer was amazingly effective...lit up 6 buildings and some woods in the center of town causing 71 casualties and basically saving the day. The 105mm observer caused 75 casualties. The single 105 gun which survived the red artillery levelled a number of buildings. The distribution of pioneer and AT teams was perfect and let me deal with the horde of red armor quite nicely (1 AT team KO'd 2 T34's!). The best part was the IIIH platoon which worked along the flank, finally sweeping in behind the red force as it was locked in house-to-house fighting. Only lost 3 crewmen (1 tank abandoned, 1 KO'd), but KO'd 18 red armor and 100 infantry. Red force lost 600 of 980 men, all 22 vehicles (only 4 were t34 76L models), blue lost 48 total casualties and 2 vehicles (1 recoverable). Russians had 1 mot inf. and 1 pioneer battalions. In hindsight I believe the 105's are very nice, but other guns may be a better purchase depending on the month in 1941. In late 41 the 75L36 and 50L60 AT begin appearing and are about 50% cheaper than 105. The 150IG has a special place in my heart and with a vet crew has an acceptable ROF. The ME109 did't really do much, but it would be much more effective vs. a human player who might take soft transport for speed purposes, load tank riders, and place guns in static positions at the start line. I had forgotten how effective the 105 module is compared to the 81mm...much more hitting power. Note on flammpanzer usage: I rushed this little guy into the village where it hid for 20 turns until red infantry finally broke through my artillery and HMG gauntlet. Initially I tried to over-control the vehicle, then discovered that the tacAI was very smart about using the short-range flamer and backing out as needed. I merely did short quick moves along a path behind my front line infantry teams and tacAI took care of the rest. The thing will actualy flame about once per 2 seconds if pressed...pretty frightening. Onslaughts by entire platoons were burned out, making that building impassible in future. Without the flammpanzer, I would have been overwhelmed for sure. [ February 17, 2008, 07:31 AM: Message edited by: Renaud ]

Agreed...I called in 2 Apache rocket attacks on the center of a huge building and never got a hit...the rockets stream out in a long trail on the ground either before or after the building. This was a 50 meter square building with 3 stories. Luckily I was still 100+ meters from the closest side and the long streams of missiles didn't impact my nearby troops.

well-led HMG's, IG's and on board mortars are the key. Advance only with a minimal amount of infantry teams...just enough to force the defender to open fire or risk allowing you into their trenches, at which time you rout that defender with guns, mortars and MG's: rinse & repeat. Of course, the intelligent defender will post combinations of advance pickets and keyholed HMGs far to the rear to delay your scouts prior to his MLR...but therein lies the chess game.

CMSF was clearly designed to robustly model asymmetrical warfare and counterinsurgency work exactly as it is found in Iraq this minute. A review of the syrian uncon units and victory conditions reveals that in about 5 seconds. IED's, VIBEDs, spys, triggermen, guerrila fighters, bomb detonators, abstracted civilian population, modeling of unconventional victory conditions, what more do you want...the setting is virtually indistinguishable from Iraq. Hardly a fantasy environment.

I hope they are doing well also. Arab-Israeli 67-73 wars would be fantastic. Seems like it would be a good way to go since they only need to add maybe 6-8 new vehicle models (centurion, super-sherman, M3A1 halftrack, willis jeep, amx, M48, M60, JS3), several small arms and a couple of infantry models (slap different patches and helmets on the egyptians, jordanians, syrians and iraqis). They would however need 100mm AT guns...perhaps these could be fixed bunker type models rather than the gun and crew to save time. The terrain is about right already. The game engine wouldn't change a bit.

I concur...i've inspected hits from the Israeli-Arab wars (at Ft. Irwin) and one always stood out in my mind. A 105mm sabot hit had just clipping the rounded top of a T54/55 turret at an almost flat angle. Rather than glancing off or plowing a furrow along the top it dug in and went down into the turret blasting the inside to charcoal.

I'm not sure what you guys are doing, but my M1's hit virtually every time unless there is something in the way. The game seems to track LOS and LOF seperately, resulting in some cases of repeated hits on trees, building corners and intervening ground which seem to block LOF but not LOS. This is more of a game-engine issue than M1 modeling issue i'm afraid. However if there is no intervening terrain, buildings, trees and junk, a few M1's destroy dozens of T72's in a few minutes (allahs fist scenario for example). It's almost a verbatim replay of 73 easting. I believe the near worthless performance of the Iraqi tanks in 91 has generated a dangerous myth RE M1 invincibility. In fact they are extremely vulnerable in flank, alamo or massed fire situations. If anything, the current modeling has the M1's spotting targets on the flanks too fast. Anything that pops up in your rear 180 is just not likely to be noticed before it shoots at least once. (even the SEP) When DARPA, IDA and the SIMNET guys ran excursions to the base 73 Easting simulation which evened up the odds by giving the iraqi T72's thermal sights, turret down starting positions, better gunnery and such, Eagle troop started to lose tanks (more than a couple). All in all, the current modeling feels just about right, minor quibbles aside. Regarding the Wiki article...the biggest reason for low M1 losses is mostly the outcome of sound tactics and a huge sensor advantage. Iraqi tanks rarely even identified M1's before they were exploding, and got few chances for flank shots.

From the frontal aspect, a very lucky hit on the turret ring, drivers hatch or top slope of the hull front from 100mm+ (APDS or HEAT) will take out any M1 from just about any range. Fuel tanks are located to the left and right of the driver, but that's a minor point. Heavy frontal armor is probably the least important factor in historical M1 loss rates. You have to get lucky and you are not likely to live that long in the frontal arc of an M1. More important than the armor advantage is the ability to identify first (big M1 sensor advantage), fire first, fire often and almost never miss. Possibly the biggest factor in low M1 losses historically is ability of US units at all levels to stay coordinated, in contact, online and pointed toward the bad guys.

When I loaded the scenario my first though was "wow, awesome map". My next thought was "this map is specifically designed to kill all my troops". I played super careful until the last 30 minutes when most of my losses occured. 42 total casualties, 20 killed, 8 vehicles lost. A very tough fight, any mistakes and you are toast. Great scenario!

Is there any particular reason we don't have graphical haze? Was this just left out due to time-to-release constraints? Haze of varying thickness would do wonders for the graphics...light fog always made CMx1 look better.

Turns out that it is not really possible to model this action with only the limited map size available. Just to set up the unit in question (12 M3 Bradleys, 10 M1A1HC) along the lines of historical deployment requires about 4x4km! (real life actions don't cram units together as we do in CM). Additionally, the entire unit travels 8km distance in 15 minutes. Modern desert battles require much more ground space than is currently available in CMSF, but I might try my hand at a scaled down version.

Is there any chance the map size limitations will be increased in the future? Or at least allow 1 axis longer than 4km, while retaining the 16 square km limit? For example, 8km x 2km. I am trying to replicate 73 Easting (E-Troop) using data from Janus(A)Combat Simulation, SIMNET and DARPA Project ODIN. To do this with high fidelity I would need at least 5x8 km, but I can do just the core 10-15 minute chunk at 4x4 without having to squash it down too horribly so that will do for now. (the entire engagement lasted maybe 25 minutes).

Nice work Mord.

I've had about 60% hit rate with saclos AT-3b (3 teams firing a total of 12 missiles between them, but the crews were under some light counter fire from the M1's). It's fun watching them lazily weave around as the operator guides them in. 1 Team was vaporized by HEAT after firing 4 of 5 missiles, #2 lost the launcher after taking heavy coax fire, the 3rd survived after expending all 5 missiles. #3 was firing from a slightly reverse slope position so I think the M1's never had LOS/LOF...very cool. I don't know what if any damage they did since we don't have kill stats to look at, but at least 7 missiles hit their targets from high impact angles. Sure wish that the launcher could be set up away from the crew, like in reality. They even modelled the little wire spool between the guidance unit and the launcher if you zoom in and look at it. Correction: AT-3C [ September 05, 2007, 08:16 PM: Message edited by: Renaud ]

Considering that the biggest holders of US debt instruments are also the largest exporters to the US (china and japan are the #1 and #2 holders of US debt), it's unlikely they would shoot themselves in the foot by unloading this debt and weakening the dollar, thus decreasing their export income dramatically. So as long as they are dependent on us to buy their export goods, our debt is safe. Obviously this will change over time as our debt continues to increase and non-US countries begin to account for a larger share of Chinese/Japanese exports. But of course when you hit your practical debt limit, there's always the trusty fall-back of taxation and inflation (think 1960's-70's Britain and US). Of course that kills you in the end too...

Nevermind...it was a civilian analyst who can't read a military map...I was giving him WAY too much credit. I found the primary source.

Only time i've heard of M1's running out was Ghost troop 2/2 ACR the night of feb 26th 1991 when 12th AD was trying to overrun them. They did a relief in place a few at a time to run back and get more ammo from the Troop supply train.