Monticello

Henri, I declared a ceasefire in our game when I saw I wasn't going anywhere. Go ahead and check the Paratrooper's Retreat game. Gary Heverly (gheverly@ieee.org)

I've had no problem with CM running from a NTFS file system (this was preloaded on my new machine).

The US Govt Printing Office publishes the book and it is available at most GPO Bookstores. I purchased mine at the DC branch last month. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pak40: I recall a really good book but I'm not sure of the exact title. I think it was either "ST . Lo" or "The Battle for St. Lo". I think the US War Dept published it. Anyway, it has some really detailed pull-out maps of the Normandy countryside- very detail with contours and locations of US and enemy forces etc. Perfect for CM. It's hard to find, I've only seen it in my old university library and they wouldn't let me check it out because it was a non-circulating book. I think it's rare and fragile with the maps that come with it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's always worth checking at the local college or university library. Most have a map room that will contain at least 1:100,000 scale topo maps. University of Maryland, for instance, has maps ranging from 1:25,000 to 1:100,000 maps of a variety of countries in Europe. If you have a specific area in mind, you can get a color copy of the section (enlarged, if you wish) for only a US$1. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by grunto: Is there a good source for these maps? Are they free? =grin= Thanks Andy<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Night Raid on Noirefonte" (sic) My computer is packed away waiting until I find a new home in Massachusetts. I have the map (color copy of a 1940 Wehrmacht Topo 1:100000 scale) and books -- I just need the computer. This battle will depict a small part of the recon probe by the 551st PIB on Dec 26-27 during the Bulge just south of Trois Pont. I now have a digital camera so copying maps quickly will be a breeze.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lawyer: Gentle Jackals of the Jury.... You are assembled here today to decide who should be the First Winner of the Lawyer's Cup challenge. <stuff snipped> Review your choices below, and cast your vote accordingly. <more stuff snipped> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Er... where are the movies? Actually, I want to see the battle plan and movies before I vote.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by John Kettler: What I'd like, please, is the ability to demand my opponent's surrender when I've just bloodied his nose severely or things look bleak for him.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Of course, the corresponding options for your opponent should be "Yes" and "Nuts!"

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chris5110: I am looking for suggestions and comments on the deployment of the American heavy weapons platoon that is attached to an infantry co. Do you deploy the machine guns and mortar teams to individual platoons ?. or use use them as their own element. And what was done historically?. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Although I rarely take my own advice, I suggest using elements of the heavy weapons platoon for suppression fire to break up attacks on defense (to lengthen the time for OPFOR to reach your MLR) and to suppress key OPFOR positions during attacks. Once your maneuvering units are within closing range, then overwhelm them with small arms fire. Unfortunately, it's hard to get them to surrender My preferred method of deployment is, well, mission- and terrain-dependent. Say my mission is to hold a particular portion of real estate. On the defense with limited LOS, I'd probably parcel out the HW elements based on terrain and rely on the rifle platoons to react to OPFOR's movements. With unlimited LOS, I'd probably concentrate my firepower to funnel OPFOR's movements so my rifle platoons can overwhelm a small portion of OPFOR. Historically, the Coy CO carried their own bias on HW platoon deployment. I read in one book where the CO preferred keeping the mortar teams together since it was easier C&C. The MG teams, on the other hand, would be parcelled out depending on the mission. Suggested reading: Band of Brothers, S. Ambrose, Messengers of the Lost Battalion, G. Orfalea, Parachute Infantry, D. Webster, and The Men of Company K, H.P. Leinbaugh and J.D. Campbell

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by groundpounder: <snipped stuff> For me, one of the satisfaction of scenario construct is putting together a convincing map. I've been searching and collecting satellite maps of areas in Germany I'm familiar with to use as a base for maps. <snipped><HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Don't forget to check universities for regional topo maps. I struck gold when I found 1:25000 scale maps of Belgium created in 1935. Now I need to invest in a portable scanner!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Phoenix: I just noticed my opponent has one and oddly enough I'm not worried about it. Am I mad? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Of course...not! Given that the JagdTiger is merely a limited-mobility pillbox that will more than likely bog down in less than ideal ground conditions, I suggest encouraging your opponent to move it off the road. If the gun points in a direction useless for your opponent then you won't waste ammunition to kill it! [This message has been edited by Monticello (edited 10-20-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Baker350: Try http://www.bigtimesoftware.com/images for an index.. Now if I could just understand what they mean Baker<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Looking at the radar charts, I'd hazard that they display the probability of penetration at various ranges and angles. Notice the "tank" in the center with the barrel pointing to 0 degrees.

It's obvious that Lt Reiser had given the panzershreck team an order that they ignored. He was only getting their attention

John, I'm currently reading Bonn's When The Odds were Even, so I need to reserve my comments until I complete the book. I'll bump this thread in a few days after I gather my thoughts. Gary Heverly

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Elijah Meeks: B-29s delivered the bomb to Hiroshima and Nagasaki because they were the best planes to do it there. The bomb wasn't heavy so it could have been launched from a B-24 launched from an aircraft carrier, as I said, a la Doolitte. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The B-24 couldn't launch from an aircraft carrier...I believe you meant to say B-25. Assuming an empty B-24 could launch from a carrier, it still couldn't carry the payload, since the max payload is 8,800lbs whereas the smallest of the atomic bombs, Little Man, weighed 8,900lbs (see <A HREF="http://www.fas.org/nuke/hew/Usa/Med/Lbfm.html." TARGET=_blank>http://www.fas.org/nuke/hew/Usa/Med/Lbfm.html</A>.</A> At max payload, the B-24 range is approximately 800 miles. So, even if the B-24 could be launched from an aircraft carrier with 100lbs over max payload, the US Carriers would still be in German torpedo-bomber range to launch the attack against Berlin. Fact is, the B-29 was the ONLY heavy bomber in US inventory that carry the atomic bombs created at the time. [This message has been edited by Monticello (edited 10-10-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by russellmz: somebody actually thinks the rep deple system was a good idea?! you are talking about the single man system to replace causalties? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Quoting the book... "Although American unit training was not ideally conducted due to the need for replacements for units already in combat, it nevertheless basically satisfied the requirements of cohesion and bonding by ensuring that most of the soldiers in combat formations had served and trained together for a considerable amount of time prior to deployment to a combat theater." By lumping recently deployed divisions with combat-hardened divisions, on AVERAGE, most soldiers did train together as a combat formation. In his defense, the book was originally presented as his doctoral thesis, so he didn't want to raise any issues that didn't support his thesis. So... he forces the facts to fit the story.