Joachim

Aircraft experience is crucial when it comes to telling friend from foe. The more experience, the more likely it is the flyguy correctly id's the enemy. But if your elite flyguy errs on who is who, he will more likely hit at what he is aiming. So whether you have an experienced flyguy or not, the danger for your own assets is the same. However an experienced pilot might cause more harm to the enemy. Gruß Joachim

In a current PBEM I have a 1 1/2 plt firing at some entrechend British "inf squad?" (inf firepower 700-800 at 7-8% exposure.) Distance is from 50 to 100m. Of course I have two 75mm chuckers targetting the Brits (damn, one of those has canister and doesn't use it). 3 or 4 tank MGs all below 100m. The Brits are still up and firing. If they head towards the house to the rear, they'll quickly die on those 10m of open space - even if they don't pin. It will take longer to die in the trench. Retreating them doesn't help any more. It is too late. There is some function of exposure of where you are, distance to safety, speed, exposure in terrain to cross till safety and firepower you encounter that decides about survival (expected percentage of surviving squad members). Plus some random factors. You can simplify the equation by mulitplying firepower with exposure to get the "effective firepower". Integrate the effective firepower over time to get a function that depends on only one variable. You can easily show that for any small epsilon (e.g. 0,00001%) there is some effective firepower over time that has an expected percentage of surviving squad members that is lower than that epsilon. Read: The expected percentage of surviving squad members converges to zero. The function works for squads running as well as squads staying where they are. One should be able to compute the time it takes till a squad in place is expected to be below some epsilon (read: effectively destroyed). Or the amount of firepower it takes to have a 99,999% chance that a squad doesn't get away. But my main point is that there are situations where you won't get away. Example: Entrenched German squad with 40m to safety across a street vs 2 vet Soviet SMG plts and a plt of T34s at 50m-70m distance. Chance of survival? Only when surrendering. Advantage of not running: The SMG plts might run out of ammo on that squad. The same situation with the Soviets firing at a distance of 150m? Run and save the most of that squad. Between those two points in the function, your losses will rise the longer you wait to run. It depends on the overall situation and what you can gain for their sacrifce what to do with the squad. Gruß Joachim [ January 07, 2006, 06:52 AM: Message edited by: Joachim ]

a) Rushing doesn't work in CM. Patience is key. MGs jam more easily in extremely cold conditions. Please tell me if you ever got rid of a jammed MG with thick gloves on. Of course those were not tailor made but anything that you get your hands on. Touching metal with bare hands at below -20°C ain't good for your skin - it might stick to the steel instead of your flesh. Plus the quality of the parts was much worse in 1942 than it is now. c) Did the Tiger turn when it stopped? Turn rates are awful in CM. Any turn above 15° will stop the vehicle, have it turn and then continue its move. Turning in trees, stones or wet ground takes very long. It might be better to issue several waypoints approximating a smooth curve or to plan the move to turn on good ground (e.g. roads). d) I support the hotseat idea from Jason. Another idea is to save and replay a turn and view the effects of different commands in the same situation. It will take a time to prove something never works. But you'll get a quick feeling for what seldomly works. Gruß Joachim

The key with inf vs tanks is patience. You want to attack buttoned tanks. Other key factors: - separate inf from tanks - let the tanks come towards you - stationary units hit better and are harder to spot. - reverse slopes works best - THs don't fire to button a tank. - teamwork. One unit buttons the tank, others try to kill it. - many on one. And you want to attack in one single turn. Borg spotting only works during the command phase. So if your attacking is spotted by anything, next turn the tank will know where it is. The 5cm PaK can kill KVs - at flat angles from the sides or rear. Hold fire till they are close. Put the PaK in reverse slope: ------cccccclcccc------------ -------i--i---a -MG--------------------MG- ----------MG where c is cover that blocks LOS, i is inf, l some listening post where it can barely look across c that will retreat if inf closes in, a is an ATG and the MGs makes sure no inf crosses c. One might be enough if there are few of them. If they are set up 200m or more to the rear, they won't get spotted and thus avoid incoming. The trick is: If there is an open field of fire in front of cccccccccc, the MGs to the flanks will stop/delay inf in front of cccccc. Hopefully the tanks move in. If they cross c, the inf behind cccccc can deal with them at short ranges. Maybe even the ATG gets off some rounds at short distance. If they pass c, you'll wait for side shots. Preferrably vs non- hull down tanks - the lower hull is usually the weakest spot. If inf crosses ccccccccc, you have some inf there to protect your ATG and the tanks can't hit you thru ccccccc As seen, you want to separate the tanks from the inf. To kill the inf, you don't want DF HE coming at you. To kill the tanks, you want some privacy. Buttoned tanks without inf support in built up areas are dead. I had a TH team in a house kill 3 tanks thru the back door. Then the inf came thru the front door and killed the TH team. In this example the house was ccccccc and I had not enough to stop the inf from crossing ccccccc - but enough to delay them till the tanks had passed. Team work is essential. Anything else can button the tank before the THs throw their ammo. Their SMGs are to finish off the crew - or if they get spotted by inf. Many on one from different angles allows the tank to target only one attacker. It might pin that attacker with one or two rounds or bursts from its MG. But if these are the last shots of the tank, your beaten team might stay alive to kill another tank. The light German ATR work vs tanks even in late '42. I had one kill a Stuart and penetrate the sides of Lees - in CMAK. In CMBB you can hope for gun damage or try to scare the tanks. It might work to fire at the side of a tank to persuade the tank to turn and present a weaker side to a PaK. Gruß Joachim

I would not pull out in any case: If you are in a trench and the enemy is firing at 100m, IME the chance of surviving in the trench is bigger than outside (except when you have a covered line of retreat.) So if you can bring in reinforcements before the enemy closes on the pinned unit, I'd stay. Having a unit in the best available cover once your reinforcements arrive helps those reinforcements. Nothing worse than having half a plt in the open advancing on a trench when your supporting forces get distracted and the pinned unit in the trench recovers. If you can't support the beaten unit - get out. The enemy will close in and wipe you out once close. Hiding in trenches does work sometimes. In a current PBEM I have several units with LOS to enemy trenches. Distance around 100m. Several pinned (?) enemy units manage to hide, several remain id'd. Hiding/pinning behind walls or crests works. Gruß Joachim

Depends on the situation. If I have just one squad there that needs to hold ground vs a company or reinforced plt, I probably made some mistake. Either a) showing too early (ie taking lucky shots instead of hitting the enemy on the move at short distance getting out too late c) setting up forward posts without evacuation routes d) setting up dispersed troops There might be circumstances where it pays - you sacrifice a team, halfsquad or squad to delay the enemy for a few crucial turns. But they won't get out. If you don't want to sacrifice them for time and they can break contact quickly, do it ("withdraw" command). If they can retreat thru good cover - withdraw. If they are alone in a trench with nothing but open ground around them for the next 30m and the enemy is closer than 100m - they are dead meat when running. Staying in their trench will at least cost the enemy time and ammo. So stay there. Usually sneaking doesn't work for me - troops tend to panic faster when not stationary IMHO. If the enemy concentrates all of his firepower on one unit - shoot with the others. You should be in much better cover. The cover differential can offset numbers. Your beaten unit breaks. The enemy concentrates on the others. The first unit rallies. If the enemy has enough firepower to hit each of your units with multiple shooters - tough luck. See the errors above. Hopefully you have some reinforcements to take advantage of the situation or some smoke to reveal your withdrawal. Gruß Joachim

My record with a mine field (1 tile) is 3 tanks killed or immo'd. Mines on dirt road, damp ground, lots of AI tanks. The best indirect score for an AT mine field were 1 T34 and lots of grunts. T34 gets immo'd. Infantry with engineers arrive. Engineers clear mine field. T34 goes boom. Lots of grunts go down. The single tile was placed in a likely approach route. Apart from these outliers my experience with the AI stepping on my mines is good, too, so I doubt there is a bonus for the AI crossing mine fields. Mines are best used in combination with wire when playing the AI. Either put them behind wire so the engineers can't close to 20m without crossing the wire - or put them before the wire where you expect the AI to cross the wire. The former tactic sees the AI cross the wire. Forward units hit mines. Forward untis retreat while following units are caught on wire. Then add arty (treebursts!) or MG fire. The latter sees the AI crossing the wire, receiving incoming and panicking into the mines. Gruß Joachim

I proved that cigars can be smoked in BMW 3 series. Cubans can smoke cigars on their T34s, too - massed stogies replace smoke generators. I doubt the Americans smoke Cuban cigars on their tanks though. I also doubt you can smoke a cigar on a ronson - the ronson is there to light the cigar, not vice versa. @JasonC: You nee good relations to some maintenance chappy to get your BMW repaired at reasonable rates. Gruß Joachim

When exchanging PBEM as .txt files, I had problems with my opponents or me receiving the PBEM file broken. The file was usually displayed in the message instead being treated as an attachment as intended. The PBEM file usually begins with "----------------- Play-By-Email Data Follows This Line -----------------" In the first few lines of data there is a "1^7890". If you only see "1⁷⁸⁹⁰" you have located the problem. Repair method: 1) Save the whole mail as .txt file. 2) Edit the file with a text editor. Wordpad will do fine. Notepad even better (for small files). Ultraedit, qedit etc. are best. 3) Search the start of the data: "----------------- Play-By-Email Data Follows This Line -----------------" 4) Search for the "7890" in the next few lines. 5) Add a "^" in front of it. 6) Save as textfile. 7) Load that textfile in CM. Has somebody else come across this problem? Gruß Joachim

Might be caused by a wrong patch or some mod. My text is fully German. Gruß Joachim

Infantry attack. No HTs. Pushing guns forward to support the inf. While a vet inf plt is overtaking an ATG, I hear a StuKa coming in. 50mm ATG, a full plt and 2 man from a MG34 team 100m away are gone. Gruß Joachim

1) Local counterattacks: If there are likely routes of advance - try to position parties outside those routes that can counterattack after the first wave passed. Make sure you can retreat them. Fionn's Sunken Lane AAR comes to mind. 2) Ranged weapons: Make sure your enemy looses more than you show him if you can't relocate your assets. a) tanks - best with local armor odds in your favor. Guns that are out of range from on board mortars and/or entrenched. Keyholing works great - first reduce the overwatch group, then the spearhead. Just imagine a 15cm sIG doing this. c) Guns that can reposition. d) Arty - if the overwatch group is close together 30 seconds of incoming from a arty bty might panic or rout parts of the overwatch group. If the overwatch group is in trees (usually the best cover for attackers) even a 81mm mortar barrage might do some killing. If the overwatch group is spread out arty is wasted. Anything else will not kill but suppress at range. That will not destroy the overwatch group but helps, too: 3) Delay Try to delay the overwatch group with long range fire. They are usually slower than squad inf. An advance moves at the speed of the slowest element and loses speed or it loses strength. So if you delay the slowest element, you delay the attack. Delaying the fast elements won't delay the attack. It might be better to target the overwatch group at 600m than the spearhead at 400m with an MG (that is out of id range!). @Xavier: It is enough if the overwatch group suppresses your troops and allows the squad inf to close in. Those will finish the job then. Gruß Joachim

It's a field mod with parts of StuG top hulls as skirts. Gruß Joachim

300+ for a vet GE PzGr '41 squad that started with 60% of ammo. Some scen of the BCR Kiev pack (factory map), GE defender at 100% strength with combined arms vs Soviet paras inf only at 100% bonus. Guess some 3 plts. One lone PzGr plt with some Romanian teams in assitance defending my sole outpost to stop the AI from coming down on my vehicles in a perimeter of the main force further back It was night, foggy, viz at 30m or sumfink and the Soviet AI tried to rush across wire and minefield. The wire went across a road and ended at a burning trees hex. In the AAR screen it was hard to distinguish the red eliminated markers at the end of the wire. The other squads in the plt performed in the same league. 1000+ kills from mines, a lone tank that retreated quickly and 2 or 3 Romanian teams that acted as OPs guarding the line of retreat. Rest of troops did not see any action. The plt performed an orderly withdrawal and had just managed to break contact when the battle ended. Almost no losses. Glad the Soviet FTs were too slow and never joined the battle. Gruß Joachim

Do you use the 'Fast' command to move infantry? I have learned to use 'fast' with good results, and now use it almost exclusively. I do use advance over short distances in cover, but in the open my men sprint. Now (from what I have read) this is contrary to the JasonC school-of-thought for moving infantry. But 'fast' will get your guys there in a hurry, which is one weakness of advance-and-rest method. </font>

Depends on the length of the campaign. It is rather unlikely to have an upgrade in 4 weeks - training will take much longer except if it is the upgrade from PzIVf2 to PzIVG (early) or Panther Ausf. D to Ausf. A. Which however ain't that important in CMC. If you consider a campaing to take place over the course of several month, it might make sense. From what I've read so far, CMC is much closer to a CM operation (regarding time) than to what many of us have in mind when they hear "campaign" (-> PG, SP, BCR, ...) Gruß Joachim

4. No. Not in a campaign, only in the editor. </font>

Which cover for both units? Which weapons were left in your green squad? Which fanaticism level? My guess is that the gun was in woods, trees with foxhole or even a trench. They probably had little exposure. Your exposure doesn't matter vs canister. Did you have any SMG in your squad? The crew most likely was fanatic. Still I don't expect a gun to turn around under fire in real life - especially not with a cover bonus. But hey - it is just a model and it has some glitches. If you try to get rid of any glitch you might make it worse. Gruß Joachim

Last CMAK PBEM: Tebourba. ME where the heavies arrive later. Last but one CMAK PBEM: A Big One. Lots of reinforcements. Different setup zones with HTs, some inf and ACs forward for the Axis attacker. Huge map. Scouting for firing positions for attacker's guns paid. Knowing the enemy dispositions paid, too. Current CMBB PBEM: South of Kharkov. No recon zones, but lots of ground to cross before the attacker reaches the defender's positions. IIRC turn 30 had still no enemy contact (Now 67 out of 120 and I'm close to my objectives for turn 80. Another current CMBB PBEM op: Lithuania mon armour. Half over and almost no firing yet - except blind suppressive fire. There are quite a few scenarios out there. You don't even have to make it all alone. Plus with reinforcements there will be more space to maneuver on a map of the same size. Gruß Joachim Gruß Joachim

Can we have the AI-controlled side with a quicker and higher casualty recovery rate? If the human player wipes the board because the AI is less mart than him and the AI doesn't know it it playing CMC, then the AI should get a bonus. Either more units at the start - or a reduced campaign loss rate when the battle is not auto-resolved. Example 1: AI attacks (worst case ) with 3:1 odds. Human player inflicts 50% losses and withdraws before the AI can close in. Losses below 5% as the human player shamelessly exploited the AI's weaknesses. A bit unfair... Example 2: Human attacks. He goes for one flag. AI counterattacks. AI gets wiped out, then human goes for next flag. One of the main reasons are the two targets for the AI. It either goes for the flags or for enemy positions that it discovered. Is it possible to patch CM so we get battles where it does no counterattack once it looses a flag? I mean it would be pretty boring if you take the right forward flag, kill most of the counterattacking force and then march ahead fighting only the few units still in place. If this patch ain't possible, please don't put the flags in the center of the 1x1 sectors - put them towards the defender's edge of the sector. Gruß Joachim

RTW lacks a good AI. One unit's actions don't take into account the actions of other friendlies. The CM TacAI suffers similar during a turn - but to some extent the AI player corrects it when planning a turn. It is much harder for me to achieve an overwhelming victory vs vastly superior forces in CM than in RTW. So auto-resolve should be much closer to the real thing in CMC. OTOH I remember some unbalanced AI attacks in CM with BCR. Superior forces suffered heavily. For single player campaigns, I can imagine house rules for CMC where a player has to stick with his maneuver element so his tactical advantage doesn't imbalance the whole operation. Gruß Joachim

Where can I preorder? When I saw the announcement a few minutes ago, I immediately picked up my credit card. Gruß Joachim

I was reborn at 17. So now I'm 19. Ah yes... Going to town... long time since then. Gruß Joachim

Trenches shrink from setup phase to turn 1. IIRC an old thread mentions that you can check this best when placing a contiuous trenchline during setup who just touch but don't overlap. There'll be gaps between the trenches in turn 2. So if a unit is placed on an edge, it might find itself in a foxhole in turn 1. Gruß Joachim

Comparison of Italians vs (early) Soviets: Both were hardy people, but usually ill-led. The Soviets had better equipment and were motivated by defending their homeland. The Italians had obsolete tanks and ATGs. The Soviets had the Red God of War aka massive arty. The Italians had little arty. The Soviets had commissars and the NKVD to stop their soldiers from fleeing - yet many surrendered. The Italians had no commissars. So what do you expect from them? They can fill support roles in CM. But look at the firepower of the inf squads or the MGs. Look at the penetration charts of their guns. Check the armor of their tanks. It was an army designed for colonial warfare... that got caught in a modern war. Gruß Joachim [ October 03, 2005, 03:27 PM: Message edited by: Joachim ]