Andreas

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MichaelU: Live on Peckham Rye, right opposite the common and just at the bottom of Forest Hill Road. That should be within mortar range.<hr></blockquote> Hmm, maybe we should execute a raid...

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MichaelU: What, Forest Hill is a nest of scenario designers? I live within stone throwing distance of Forest Hill, and I didn't know this. I'll see if I can make it along on Saturday.<hr></blockquote> Mortar range, you must have meant. Where do you live? Oh, here are the pictures from the IWM. I am in quite a few of them, and apart from gaining some weight (in exchange for losing some hair) I have not changed that much.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by wwb_99: While I do not have too many scenarios out, I design purely for multiplayer for two reasons: 1) The AI is too goddamn hard and to control and direct without imposing artifical restrictions (padlocked units, restritive setup zones, etc.) and/orgiving it massive materiel bonuses to make up for stupidity. Which pretty much means I am lazy, but who cares. 2) The AI cannot appreciate my work. In general I go for interesting playbalance, gorgeous maps (which you will rarely, if ever get with a QB), and historical feel. Meaning I use units which might have fought together and common tanks, etc., while maintaining balance. Look at The Lists at the depot (see link above) and pick one of the battles top rated for PBEM. Those things are quite, quite balanced and generally make for a more interesting gaming experience than QB MEs. WWB <hr></blockquote> What he said. An add-on: balancing a scenario for multi-player involves something else than equal purchase points. To do it well you actually have to think a bit, and the real unbalancing effect is a case of PEBKAS. I.e. I can do what I want to balance a scenario, if the players are not evenly matched, it won't play well-balanced. All my scenarios are balanced for multi-player, except for the one where it says differently on the tin. You normally have to give the AI a bonus to have a decent fight against it.

John, much as I value your posts, but you are out on a limb here. The reason for that is that this is not mathematics, and you can not just take some concept of proof from some random science and apply it to this discussion. To repeat - one (uncorroborated) incident in an 11 month campaign does not disprove Jon's argument. On the contrary, it makes it all the more stronger.

Anyone bringing Marmite/Vegemite/Bovril/Tarmac or whatever some nations smear on their toast on Saturday will be shot, or subjected to exercising with the Chelsea pensioners (your choice). You have been warned.

John, one incident of 25-pdrs firing over open sights in a campaign lasting 11 months, does not thoroughly disprove what Jon said. I actually tried to find that incident mentioned in two histories of 7th AD that I own, and was unable to. Let's assume it happened anyway - does that negate Jon's statement that the 25-pdr in CMBO has no place on the battlefield (for historical scenarios)? I don't think so. North Africa, and the GPW, as well as AA guns, are a very different story.

Right, we'll meet at the National Army Museum in Chelsea at 1400 sharp (sorry Richard). Even those of you who have been there before will enjoy listening to me rubbishing Britain's imperial past, and linking it to its current train system. Followed by a drink/food in the general area - open-ended. Please email me for contact details, and to let me know if you come.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by wwb_99: Haha. Got you. Saved the weekend and played it tonight. Great job Germanboy, the map is truly impressive. WWB<hr></blockquote> Bugger - as Wyatt correctly pointed out to me in an email, there was a map mistake in Bure, which I have corrected now and sent it off to Der Kessel. Must have crept in after the testers looked at it. So if you have DL'd it, I am afraid you will have to do that again. My apologies. Thanks for the kind words Wyatt, and well done spotting it.

Bugger - as Wyatt correctly pointed out to me in an email, there was a map mistake in Bure, which I have corrected now and sent it off to Der Kessel. Must have crept in after the testers looked at it. So if you have DL'd it, I am afraid you will have to do that again. My apologies. Terence, thanks a lot - it is comments like yours that make it all worthwhile.

'Polder Grave' at Der Kessel. Nice.

As posted over in the Scenario Forum, but there is no reason to not plug a good site here too I have sent a new Byte Battle™ called 'Bure' to Der Kessel. It is my first published historical battle, based on the description of the opening stage of the battle for Bure in 'Go to it', the history of 6th Airborne. Extensively playtested, and all that. Experience 6th Para tussling with Panzerlehr. Based on the reviews at the Scenario Depot, I have also made some slight revisions to 'Into the East'. If you have played it already, there is no need to revisit it, since they are small changes. If you have not played it, now is a good time to do that. Enjoy, and let me know what you think.

If God had wanted you to have a weekend, he would not have let me near the scenario editor...

Hi, I have sent a new Byte Battle™ called 'Bure' to Der Kessel. It is my first published historical battle, based on the description of the opening stage of the battle for Bure in 'Go to it', the history of 6th Airborne. Extensively playtested, and all that. Experience 6th Para tussling with Panzerlehr. Based on the reviews at the Scenario Depot, I have also made some slight revisions to 'Into the East'. If you have played it already, there is no need to revisit it, since they are small changes. If you have not played it, now is a good time to do that. Enjoy, and let me know what you think.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Bullethead: Rune once posted up a number of links that gave the number and types of Russian AFVs used by the Germans at various points in the war. I can't find them at present so I suggest you ask him for them.<hr></blockquote> There is a list on Lexikon der Wehrmacht. The site is in German, but if you go to: 'Beutefahrzeuge', you can see a list by types, Army Group, and whatnot for July 1943. There really were not a lot of these in use.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf: Hey, easy. In fact I meant they should be given to the KG as indirect-fire artillery. As they already had with the Wespes, but too little. The lack of artillery (own or from main force body) was a key problem. Giving them more artillery on their own might have been more useful than giving them the Tigers. I never choose Wespe or Hummel in Quickbattles, but I love my 2" mortars when the opponent does...<hr></blockquote> Ah right, my apologies. Yes, more artillery may well have helped them getting past a hasty roadblock. Having said that, they were not the only ones who had problems when they outran their artillery support. Happened to the Red Army too. Just goes to show how important artillery was on the WW2 battlefield.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf: I imagine the following scenario: Forget about the King Tigers in the lead formations. Give them some more Wespes (or Hummels if you have them) and foremost, more trucks with fuel and ammo, even better would be armoured ammunition carriers.<hr></blockquote> You are kidding, right? If not, you should know that despite the abuse the Wespe and Hummel experience at the hands of CMBO players, they were artillery pieces, and not assault guns. The only reason they were lightly armoured was protection against counter battery, and the only reason they were tracked was so that they could keep up with their division. Had a German Panzer divisional commander put together a column the way you describe, he would have been relieved because of insanity. Putting the divisional 150mm artillery in the lead of an attack, great plan. Monty would have seized it and bashed the living daylights out of whoever came up with that.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Holien: I strongly Recommend Trun, But then again I could be after a free beer... H<hr></blockquote> Whoever said I was above bribing people?

Hans, I agree on all of that. IMO one of the bigger mistakes the Germans made was to not develop a 4x4 carriage, and fully tracking their Panzer division supply columns, as recommended by Guderian.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Hakko Ichiu: I look forward to playing your interpretation of 3000 rounds 105mm HE against infantry. Should be a blast.<hr></blockquote> Yeah, that one and the one with lots of burning fuel, look for it at Der Kessel soon. Anyone who looked at 'To the last man' or 'Trun' will know that I am a pyromaniac at hear.

Well, I don't really think the increased penalty further inside is that surprising. There are just more trees and stuff in the way, and you may only see parts of the target, and if it is a moving target, the chances of it being obscured increase quite a bit. Seems logical to me.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Rex_Bellator: Erm, I don't quite get the point of this thread. Am I actually supposed to be either admiring or feeling sorry for Nazi fanatics or have I missed something as usual :confused: <hr></blockquote> Well, I have gotten ideas for about half a dozen scenarios from the list. So it had some use for me.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Richard Cuccia, the PiggDogg: Indeed, after having played many board & a few computer wargames covering the Bulge, one realizes that, once the US applied its force properly, the Germans had no chance of success at the Bulge. <hr></blockquote> Except that of course on the northern flank, it was Monty applying US forces properly That was also where two British divisions (6th Para and 51st Highland I believe) and one armoured Brigade were active.

That! was so totally beyond me...

Gunfire effects on horses as opposed to those on trucks/HTs? The Shrapnell that goes through the radiator of the HT has created a nuisance and some repairable damage to the prime mover. The same Shrapnell tearing a whole in the horse has created a prime mover casualty, and you have to find a new one. Also, any shrapnell hitting the horse is going to put it out of action, while in a vehicle there are large areas where it does not matter at all. We have already talked about fodder, the need for a veterinary section (while any village idiot can be a car mechanic, you need special education to become a horse doctor), but there are also problems of exhaustion of the beasts, speed, cross country mobility for anything larger than a light field gun (ever had a look at the limbers and their wheels?) and whatnot. There was also the slight problem with the original German horses dying in droves in the Russian winter, because they could not deal with the temperatures (only one source for that, but it does not sound too far fetched). While the truck will run again once the temperature goes up, the only thing you can do with the dead horse is (b)eat it. Both are equally unspooked by gunfire sounds though, as it seems. On balance I take an unarmoured HT over a 12 horse limber anyday, even in the primeval Finnish forest, where the BMX bandits roam (thanks for that Simon). On balance I believe the German army would have taken trucks if they had had the choice.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Holien: I will be seeking advice on how to defeat my opponents in my contest for a crate of SA wine. H<hr></blockquote> Don't ask Peter then.