Joachim

You can have it in any colour as long as it is camo. Gruß Joachim

If yoo look only at the engine, I guess CMAK is ahead of CMBB. If the difference from CMBB to CMAK is just like CMBO to CMBB, CMAK will definitely be an improvement and not jut an add-on. I am interested in the epic struggle in the east, so CMBB will probably not vanish from my desk (except if it is a very big leap forward). I will decide to buy CMAK after I heard about the improvements. If you are interested in the Med theater, then CMAK is your weapon of choice. Depending on the size of the improvements, there will be more or less, but still many CMBBers left - just look at the CMBO forum, there are still people playing it. But many will switch to CMAK - especially the Yanks. Gruß Joachim

CM: Here cost is an issue. The bang for the buck will leave you no units to exploit the suppression (maybe even the destruction of an FO). Exploiting an arty barrage might work, exploiting an airstrike is virtually impossible (which IMHO is an adequate model for a RL airstrike from level bombers. Don't wanna discuss CAS ) RL: Cost in a given Schwerpunkt is not an issue. But leaning on the barrage by an airstrike of level bombers is calling for disaster. I doubt the suppressive effect of a front line bombing on a single target of limited size - especially if the defenders on the slopes below the abbey get away pretty much unharmed. Until the allies are up close in strength, the Germans should be able to deploy another FO in the abbey. TRPs could enable other FOs to fill the gap in the meantime, further reducing the value of reducing a good OP. The suppressive effects were not used, the barrage was wasted. Thus except for the morale effect, the bombing was an unneccessary failure. My opinion is it was done for the morale - softening some angry voices. Gruß Joachim [ October 29, 2003, 11:38 AM: Message edited by: Scarhead ]

Maybe 'cause you should be more specific. Scenarios (in CMBB) allow for an insane amount of points. I never found the limit, but I played an op with 20000 pts (check "To the Volga", "Fridericus", ...) So I guess you mean the limit in QBs: QBs normally allow for a max of 5000 pts for the defender. If one player sets up the map in the editor, buys most of his forces there (say 15000pts for the defender), then imports the forces and map into the QB generator and allows for a huge bonus (say 300%) for the other player to compensate, you have lots of points in the QB generator, too. (in this example 20000 as a base, with a 600% bonus even more!). You have to either trust your opponent, or receive the setup + scenario after the battle ends to be able to check the spend points. When doing this vs. the AI, you have no problem at all (except that 17k pts with combined arms will play like "To the Volga"). Gruß Joachim

a) Check the weather and ground conditions in the little picture in the control panel (while you have not selected a unit, you can see a picture there.... Wet ground means mud, mud means bogging. Even the AI tries to use roads with his T34s in wet ground conditions! Avoid mud/wet ground tiles. c) Avoid scattered trees (except in the worst ground conditions(?). Somebody stated that on wet ground, tanks bog less in scattered trees) d) Avoid the low ground in anything but dry ground conditions. Higher ground is usually less muddy than the bottom of the valley. You can't see that in CM, but it's in there (as it is in RL). Gruß Joachim

If we are talking CM you are not comparing apples with apples. 1. In a CM game it would be a Church or some such tall building. 2. There are not that many Arty OP's in a game and taking out one or two would be very useful. 3. The loss of a high point. Tall building and dust can be very useful to the attacker. If you want to talk CM then please don't switch between the real world and the game. If you want to talk Real world I agree that in the long term destroying the Abbey had no good points for the Allies. As my post alluded to. H </font>

Yep, that's what I read somewhere. It is a perfect site for an OP. The Allies got a big trashing. The English general in Command faced some accusations of wasting CW lives. He wanted to make damn sure the CW divisions get the best support available. ANZAC wants the abbey bombed? After all they have to blame something for not being able to advance and the accurate fire on their positions. From a purely military point of view, the abey is THE target. No problem, just order in the Air Force. And I bet afterwards nobody accused that general of not supporting the CW divisions as good as possible. BTW: The Germans even evacuated the art from the abbey to the Vatican! (also featured in that movie...). And I doubt the numerous Italian partisans were unable to tell the dispostion regarding the abbey to the Allies. The only question is whether the Allies believed that info... @Holien: Letting loose a million points (in CM terms) to annihilate a single FO (or two)? Maybe you create some rubble, and some temporary dust (being a mountaintop, there is a strong wind clearing any dust soon). But once the smoke settles, the rubble on the mountaintop is still a good OP. Just send some other FO in. So I doubt it made sense to send in an air fleet just to erase an OP. Gruß Joachim [ October 28, 2003, 07:34 AM: Message edited by: Scarhead ]

2nd this. A tank is not the weapon of choice when it comes to taking out guns. If tanks stop to get slaughtered by guns, I'd complain. Maybe set an infantry covered arc for the tank along with the hunt command. This *might* encourage the tank to stop when inf or guns are encountered. Gruß Joachim

Congratulations on finishing ROQC! Doing a similar thing myself I know how much work is put into this! Guys, whenever you play a battle and curse about the bookkeeping - What Rob has done took far more work than your bookkeeping. BTW: Blame the bookkeeping on BFC Rob, have you ever considered asking BFC to allow for importing custom maps into the scenario editor while keeping the forces? Or importing ended games into the editor? I guess ROQC would profit from that as well as BCR. The next battle would be much easier to set up than now. If yes, maybe we should send them a mail. Gruß Joachim

Shouldn't that be Herr Picklehaube, you Salt wannabe? </font>

Covered arcs can also be used to "protect" area fire orders from TacAI intervention. For example I had situations where I wanted to smoke a specific spot with a gun, but the TacAI always decided that it would be better to fire at a MG somewhere completely different. So I set a very narrow covered arc around the smoke target spot, and then it worked. Your suggestion would make this use of covered arcs almost impossible because my gun would switch to any unit within the arc. I guess we can't have everything. Dschugaschwili </font>

Flags are only for static operations! In Assault or advance ops only terrain counts. Set the according parameter to "static" Gruß Joachim

It is not yet finished. Currently it can generate new battles, but I want to have the Battle group sheet and the favor sheet working with it. Guess I'll send the preliminary results to you guys tonight. To Rob for some ideas, to Jim to decide how we can put his battlegroup sheet (which I started copying and toyed around a bit) and my rules sheet (plus the favor sheet, but this is minor work) together to create a solution. Biggest problem as of now for the rules sheet is how to add favor (for more ammo or different troops). Maybe I'll change the rules to ease that... General Design: I have a "Calcs - Battle" sheet where the random effects and the rules are. Another sheet sees the ouptut, the "Roll Battle Button", probably (ToDo)some "add favor here" buttons plus finally the "Roll After Battle Button", which copies the "Calcs - Battle sheet" to a "Calcs- Last Battle" sheet. @Rob: Thanks for allowing me to copy ideas from your sheets . I avoided looking at it too closely for fear of copyright violations. Gruß Joachim [ October 27, 2003, 04:45 AM: Message edited by: Scarhead ]

Depending on the size of the enemy forces, the time to compute the AI turns is very long. I guess the problem with the AI is that each unit plans its own mission, unaware of the others. Resulting in n calculations. If you plan it calculating what all the other units are doing, you will get from n calcs per turn to n*n calcs. So with 100 units, you will spend on the order of 100 times longer than now. If you use formations and sub-formations for movement and do the calcs based on them, you might get less calcs, but I guess it would still be a lot of calcs more (say you have 25 plts and 100 unit´s. Guestimate is 25*25+100 calcs). I have done some work in optimal control of stochastic dynamic models (ie trying to get the best result over several time periods (aka turns) where you don't know the exact behaviour of things and have some added uncertainty). There are some approaches now adding game theory (ie another player). But then optimization is even more complicated. The AI behaviour JasonC wants (especially considering for one unit what happens to the others) could be modelled that way. I guess "Bit Battles" would be the favourites of 99,9% of players then - all others would take hours to compute 1 turn. If AI programming was so far ahead, it could solve our problems, too. Then we could stop research... BTW: I want that good AI, too. But I believe BFC when they say it will take lots of computational time. Gruß Joachim

1. Dunno. but Japan considered the US to be a top threat to its expansion plans in SE Asia. So I guess it is a "Yes" 2. "Der Lebensraum liegt im Osten" (Mein Kampf, A. Hitler). The West was never the target of Hitler. It just got in the way after he invaded Poland. Neither the French nor the Brits are "Untermenschen (sub-humans)" in Hitler's eyes that are to be destroyed or used as slaves. The Brits do count as "Herrenmenschen", he would have preferred to have them as Allies. Ultimate goal: Extinct all sub-humans and rule the world with the "Herrenmenschen". You need lots of those to rule the world! He envisions a Germanic state consisting of workers and farmers (and prison-guards for the slaves). Academics or universities are not that important. So women are encouraged to give birth to many children to increase the population. Orders are awarded to women who give birth to several children. Grandma got one with 8 children, and there was one for even more children. Programs were started before the war. Imagine all generations twice the size of their predecesors. Population doubled after 50 years, then again every 25 years. You need some room for all these people! Hilter wants the vast spaces in Eastern Europe for the Germanic race (after all the Germanic tribes came from there before the middle ages). Hitler's logic: There is only one solution to this problem: War. If won, it results in more land and slavery for the so-called sub-humans. (Disclaimer. I don't share any of Hitler's views. If any of the above sentences is written in a way that could stir the idea I would support any of Hitler's views, this sentence is not as it was intended. Blame it on my bad English. If you wonder why I write this disclaimer: a) I'm German, I don't want to be accused of certain things in this forum c) There are some laws over here. While I am not a friend of these laws (laws don't change people, education does), I support the ideas why those laws were made (yet IMHO can't achieve) and don't want to spread or stir racial hatred in any form.) Gruß Joachim [ October 24, 2003, 08:08 AM: Message edited by: Scarhead ]

Hey, 8 posts already and I second each! The AI is the best AI (for its genre). But the best sometimes just ain't good enough. Most of my games are GE vs AI soviets (QBs). I play them along BCR rules, usually the AI has a bonus. A list of some scenarios where the AI does a good job: a) setup for defense on custom-made maps with medium cover (ie defendable terrain). Placement of units is not outstanding, but solid work. setup for defense on maps with good cover - mainly because you just don't know where the AI will put his troops and can't bomb likely positions. c) Human wave infantry attacks with lots of higher HQs and a bonus to the AI. Any waste of ammo by the humn player is punished. Abundant higher HQs help the AI in maintaining some command structure. d) Dynamic flags with AI attacker!!! This is a real gem! The AI does not attack the nearest but the only valuable flag. It is much harder to outguess the AI then. The dynamic flags are often overlooked in custom scenarios! Any battle with a very huge AI bonus Things that don't work. Some of them might be able to change. AI defense: If the flags are too far from the AI map edge, AT gun placement is bad - especially if they can't even see the areas around the flag. AI defense: Counterattacks. Piecemeal, too early. Maybe tweak it so the first captured flag does not always trigger the counter. "Capture 1 outlying flag ASAP, wait for counter, slaughter counter, advance further" is faster than advancing into the counter. Sometimes you can just slaughter the counter and win without any other flag. AI attack: I'd like some more probing by the AI to see which flags are defended I'd like to stop the AI from taking the flags in a fixed pattern (the nearest flag to the start line, then the second nearest flag to the start line - even if it is on the other flank. Parading parallel to the front line is a recipe for disaster. The original plan is probably to roll up the flanks, but if the human player abandoned the forward positions, the AI is doomed. Penetrate deeper, then roll up the flank! Gruß Joachim [ October 24, 2003, 06:17 AM: Message edited by: Scarhead ]

But green troops under the command of a leader with all +2 bonusses behave like vets only while in command. Vets are vets even out of command. With equal numbers the vets would still be better. With equal points, you get approx 30% less vets. If all greens have all bonusses and the vets have none, I'd expect a good player to win with the greens. Gruß Joachim

Man! That's amazing! I've always wondered why the MGer couldn't be looking out for infantry while the main gun was shooting. Every day you learn something! GaJ. </font>

Eh? Where and how did you pick up this tidbit? :confused: Michael </font>

2nd this. Maybe Michael D. has a chance for some close encounters now after he run the gauntlet out in the open, but his troops are neither in good shape nor order. I guess even I would not need SMG squads to defend vs the odds we now see in the city. Either use a bonus for the attacker (+50%) so the force ratio is still in his favor (1.5:1 or better) when he comes to town. Or use a setup with covered approaches. Fionn's Sunken Lane AAR comes to mind. The effects of a few SMG plts or a few 1SMG/1LMG9 rifle plts instead of the 2SMG/2AR/2LMG/xRifle plts would really show up there. (BTW: The JC-MD AAR is excellent, with JC-GF still good. The setup is not optimal to show the point.) Gruß Joachim

Eh? Where and how did you pick up this tidbit? :confused: Michael </font>

It is possible. The covered arc is only cancelled when you area target outside it. Setting the target area first then the covered arc does work. Area targetting inside the covered arc does work. a) The T34 did not spot the TH team - despite the LOS. Crew too busy inside shelling the wrong area. Probably buttoned, as they were fired upon before. The TC spotted them, but the TH team was already in dead ground for his coax MG. His driver did not understand Russian, and the ropes directing him to drive left or right could not deliver thet message to fire the bow MG to the right. BTW: Borg spotting only happens between turns. Gruß Joachim

So this is how the double posts are done... [ October 22, 2003, 05:52 AM: Message edited by: Scarhead ]

Which model of the PzIIIj ? The late model with 50+20 frontal armor and the 50L60 is a good match for the T34 M41 or M42. The better optics allow for a faster acquisition of targets. Once the Russians zero in, the advantage is reduced. IIRC the T34 has a higher ROF than the StuGs. So 4 T34 have (at least) double the amount of shots vs double the hit probability of the StuGs. Expect an equal amount of hits! The T34s have big HE loads as AP, so the effect after penetration is just boom. The StuG's shots may just ricochet on the sloped armor of the T34. Which outcome do you expect? There is even a mathematical law for this effect (search some old JasonC threads). The content of that law: Never ever start a shooting match with superior numbers of tanks if they are not outclassed. You can face several T34(76mm)s with a lone Tiger. A pair of StuGs with 80mm frontal armor will make a stand vs a few T34(76mm)s at above 500m. PzIIIj(late) will hold their ground vs an equal number of T34s. My tactic would be to keep the T34s fixed with the PzIIIj (if late model) at 600m, then go for flank shots with the StuGs at above 750m. Angle between firing lanes should be 120°. Fixing does not mean you start dueling it out. Shoot and scoot with the PzIII till the StuGs arrive if you have to keep the T34 occupied. Preferably show your PzIII to the T34s so they just have time to turn around and face the PzIII when you arrive for flank shots with the StuGs. Should the T34s decide to face the StuGs afterwards - well, turning tanks don't fire in CM and even the 50L42 has a chance to penetrate the sides of a T34. If all of your StuGs are gone, use a PzIII plt for flanking. Keep your armor concentrated on the target. Do not use them piecemeal. Try to attack small numbers of tanks. Keyholing your flank attack might work even better. In another game there was a "Chinese pincushion" tactics: Have your tanks in positions so one group A (good armor, weak gun) can see all targets once in firing position. These tanks are just out of range for frontal kills. Another Group B (weak armor, gun good enough for flank shots) can see only a part of the enemy. Which ever has flank shots to the enemy shows up first. A presenting targets as they are relatively(?) safe, B keyholed on a small portion of the enemy, probably using shoot&scoot. Enemy turns to face threat. When enemy has turned, the threat breaks contact. Enemy tanks out of sight to group B may change direction to move into better firing positions once Group A is out of LOS. When Group A appears again it might even get rear shots. Make sure you establish and break LOS with all tanks of a group at the same time. The distance to two tanks just 40m apart is almost the same. So when switching targets, the 2nd target is acquired much faster as you already zeroed in. So when the first disappears, the 2nd one gets all the incoming... Keep you armor apart, only concentrate on the target area. Gruß Joachim [ October 22, 2003, 05:45 AM: Message edited by: Scarhead ]

Are those Campaign rules? (With campaign rules I associate things like the old Steel Panthers (long) campaigns.) Redwolfs armor rules or Fionns Short 75 /Panther 76 rules are for fair PBEMs. As they are for one battle only, they are less complicated than a set of rules trying to keep track of a series of battles. For BCR '41 there is a Java Program Biltaid to do most of the calcs, BCR '42 will soon be available as excel spreadsheet doing most of the calcs(Expect it to be ready just before CMAK ). IIRC ROQC has an auto-spreadsheet. Gruß Joachim