xerxes

I agree with the winter comments, HTs are much more valuable in snow. I also think the "feel" in winter is very good, less uber infantry. Then again, arty rises in relative importance. -marc s

The second 10 would be cool to see too! I think the bigdog list is more useful than the top 10 list on the depot site. -marc

I could, but the Poles used an 81mm mortar and I'm a little obsessed with being as accurate as possible. The Poles in '39 mainly faced PzIs and PzIIs (and in the scenario I'm designing it's obviously all PzIIs). CM doesn't contain the Boys ATR. Given the effective range of the Boys against PzIIs was about 200m, I'm think of using PIATs to represent the Boys. Going without the Boys seems very wrong, and the PIAT performance against this class of tank is it at ball park similar to the Boys. Of course, immobilizations were common with the Boys and not the PIAT. Thoughts? I was also considering increasing the PIAT loadout to 9. Thoughts? -marc s

:bump: wonders about answer.

Here's a very useful site, has detailed TO&E's for slavic nations. Has the TO&E for the Polish 10th motorized in 1939! (ok, well I was thrilled to find that). http://www.geocities.com/kumbayaaa/index.html My problem is, well it's not a big one, the Polish '39 army is not equiped with British support weapons for the most part. They use an 81mm mortar, arty is 75's and 100's. The Combat mission world site has a '39 polish conversion but it doesn't mod up the americans as Polish. For the onboard mortar the americans work well, but the Ami arty is too responsive to be used for Polish. For now, I'm planning on using the 25'lber and the 4.2" to simulate Polish arty even though this isn't quite right. Question: Could I just substitute the BMPs of the Polish 2" for the ami 81mm? Combat Mission World: http://www.wargamer.com/cm/cmworld/defaultflash.asp -marc s

"In 2000 Battlefront.com released the most innovative game of the previous decade when they put Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord in their storefront. The game used standard turn-based ordering, and mated it with a real-time enactment of those orders. It was fun, intense, and completely new. Better still, it sold like hotcakes -- at least for a game marketed only on the Internet. " http://www.gamespy.com/articles/february02/strat04/index2.shtm -marc sullivan

Amazing, I've been searching for this stuff for weeks, this is a lifesaver (well maybe not but it's really cool, I;m excited). Thanks! -marc s

True multiplayer would be an incredible, unbelievable enhancement. It would be great fun and would add in teamwork, natural relative spotting, true C&C, and Fog of War. I hope this is #1 on the engine rewrite. -marc s

I've found some references to Polish OOBs including 1939. Does anyone have any good references they could share? I'm particularly interested in any indications that the Poles in '44 & '45 used any non-standard small arms (stens, etc.). Even more specifically in the battles of Monte Cassino and the Falaise Pocket. -marc s

I assume since CMBB isn't an engine rewrite we won't get close range indirect infantry weapons use (grenades, satchels and FTs primarily targeting known but out of LOS positions). Will this be part of the engine rewrite? -marc s

Dispersion axis is based on the friendly map edge. In QBs that's east/west, in scenarios, check your withdrawal line to make sure you know what the axis will be.

I'd like to take a look at it. Thanks! vmclz@swbell.net

The Poles, despite propoganda to the contrary, gave a very good account of themselves in '39 against both the German and the Soviets. The Germans lost 25% of their tanks in the short Polish campaign. The Polish mistakenly defended "forward" near the German/Polish border. They did this because of the mutual defense treaty with France and Great Britain. The treaty stated that if Germany invaded Poland that the French and the British would attack German immediately. Thus, the Poles assumed that a forward defense would be appropriate. Of course the French sat on their hands and afterwards criticized the Poles relentlessly. It was the first big wanking of the Poles by their "allies". The last wanking, of course, was Yalta. Defending forward was certainly the Poles biggest error in the '39 campaign. If you read the battle accounts of the Poles you may come to believe that they were some of the finest soldiers in WWII. Their action in the Falaise Pocket and in Monte Cassino demonstrated a toughness that few can match. In any case, I'm extremely pleased to hear they will be included in CMBB. -marc

Does anyone know of a Monte Cassino scenario? I'm sure I ran across something about one somewhere but now I can't find it. thanks. - marc

Very useful reading red. Thanks.

It you play a scenario like "In The East" you'll find that you can't afford to always lead with your infantry. I think this depicts some of what people are talking about in terms of real british tactics ("In the East" has Poles, but in CM world they're the same). If you're short on infantry & heavy on AFVs and the German infantry has a lot more firepower, leading with your infantry the whole way will leave you with an infantry deficit as the battle progresses. Most combined arms scenarios have a greater proportion of allied afvs then a player would pick on their own.

Redwolf, I heard you put together an extensive explanation of exit scoring. I can't find it with search. Could you post it again? thanks.

South of Sword & To the Last Man are both excellent. -marc

How does exiting units work, what is the best strategy and why? Move units off as soon as you can? Clear a path and move off all at once? I really don't have a feel for this but I know some people really dislike exit scenarios. -marc

Why thank you! That's so great. -marc

Does anyone know what happened to the DFDR site and downloads? I really need to get access to it and the URL is defunct. Thanks for any help/info! -marc

I like the combination of light shells(3" or 81mm) with some heavy shells (4.5" or 120mm). Anything in the target zone breaks in a turn. -marc

Post Sargneto! I'm sure there's lots of people interested in anything you've found. -marc

Moving north/south is a good idea. I've heard the sit out the smaller stuff theory, I think it's a mistake if you're in the woods. Also be very careful of the nasty tactic of overlapping two 81mm FOs. Doubled up 81mm in the trees will break you.

In CM, if you're taking heavy arty fire bug out. Withdraw if you're not already moving, run (fast) if you are moving. The only exception is if you are in a heavy building.