Andreas

Warpy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I just checked the Kriegsgliederung. The 4th battalion of the artillery regiment had motorised 15cm heavy field howitzers. All the best Andreas

Ja genau. Alles Gute Andreas

No, invitation only, and all losers or Eric Young look-alikes are automatically rejected. Also, no Russians, because that would spoil the invincible German Überarmorlovefest that we all want ToW to become. Thanks for asking. Next. All the best Andreas

Tune in again tomorrow for more in our series of: Uncle John's Handy Tips of Daily Life., featuring John D. Salt and his sockpuppet Mr. Picky. All the best Andreas

[George Peppard Voice] I love it when a plan comes together. [/George Peppard Voice] All the best The Elitist Spammer

Dear Megakill Thank you for your inquiry. I am pleased to see that you are trying to overcome your anxiety attacks by communicating. I shall reward this by giving you the information that will answer your question: ToW is going to be a clickfest like WoW AND suck like GIC. Hopefully though, 1C will be laughing all the way to the bank. I expect to have answered your question. All the best Andreas

Thanks for the extra info John. By the way, did you look behind your sofa recently? All the best Andreas

Actually, it was already common at least by the time of the French campaign to form so-called Vorausabteilungen (VA - Forward Detachments) based on the motorised parts of the division. The VA of 1. Gebirgsdivision contributed significantly to the encirclement battle around Uman. It was the only way the division had to keep the retreating enemy unbalanced. You can check the relevant campaign histories by Hans Steets (three volumes on the 1941 campaign), or the book by Teske on the 12. Infanteriedivision on the assembly and use of VAs in otherwise leg/horsemobile divisions. You can find some pictures of 1. Gebirgsdivision trucks here. I believe that not all the artillery was horse-drawn, since my memory (which maybe tricking me) tells me that the heavy battalion was motorised. I will check this tonight. Jason is right regarding the indications, BTW. 'sf' means self-propelled, while 'motZ' means vehicle drawn. All the best Andreas

But isn't some of the type of combat seen in CM meant to be sort of pre-planned i.e. leave all the non-essential gear? </font>

Michael's view appears absolutely right to me. All the best Andreas

Vielen Dank für die bearbeiteten Bilder. Ich melde mich per email! Alles Gute Andreas

In-game or in reality? As for the original question - it compares well, which should be obvious since I design more for CMBB than for CMAK. All the best Andreas

Excellent news! All the best Andreas

No, the Ferdinand crews could not read Cyrillic, so had no idea how they were expected to act. All the best Andreas

It depends on what you look at. They were clearly absent from the part of the battle that is the charge of the Soviet tanks into the leaguered German formations. But the Germans they 'stopped' were not even going anywhere. The point here is that they would have had the same result without the stupid charge, and without losing hundreds of tanks. I agree. Clearly what matters on the operational level is how many tanks you have left in fighting condition. I think the answer to this is 'no', but again, that has nothing to do with Rotmistrov's p*ssing away of his tank army. Quite so. You're welcome - you maybe interested in this discussion we had a few months ago. All the best Andreas

Easy - they did not lose the battle. I hope I helped you out of your confusion. Read this I rewrote it heavily so that it is closer to the latest research. The '3' only refers to total write offs (TWO) on the day by the way. The number of non-operational AFVs would have been higher. But the Germans held the field, so Soviet mobility kills would become TWOs for them. All the best Andreas

Not sure I trust that booklet much. The authors could be safe in the knowledge that no-one who tried to implement the suggestions would ever come to complain to them about it, after all. All the best Andreas

Knowing John, that wasn't just a turn of phrase. All the best Andreas

Yeah, but how is his command of 'Boa' and 'Ey'? That's what we need to know. In any case, maybe I should have restricted myself to the Bavarian Svabia definition of 'Trumm', where (IIRC from my time helping them to speak proper German) it means a big thing. Volks-Oschi. Not bad. All the best Andreas

It's called 'spelling'. All the best Andreas

Viel Spass. Meine Frau kocht aber besser als die Kamera. Hat also alles seine Vorteile (ich passe besser auf was ich sage. ) Andreas

Ich hatte ein paar nette Lacher bei Deinen Vorschlägen meiner Frau die Notwendigkeit des Geldausgebens beizubiegen. Vielleicht zu Weihnachten 2010. Alles Gute Andreas

Not really - I think it is just a definition issue. Töppel is very strict - he just looks at the actual Prokhorovka battle without any context. That was over by lunchtime on the 12th when the attacking Soviet formations 'went over to the defense' (code for 'had been slaughtered'). Damn, I have to find somebody else to change that note now. He was in charge of SIGNAL, so that is to be expected. You, and most other sane people. All the best Andreas

Ah yes, the heroic Soviet tanker ramming a Tiger in his burning T-34. How could I forget. BTW - the figures from Töppel, who has used German and Soviet unit records, and uses a restrictive count of who was actually present at Prokhorovka, say maximum 3 German and ca. 200 Soviet TWOs at Prokhorovka. I believe the problem of Zetterling/Frankson is that they count in losses of units that were not actually involved in the battle. All the best Andreas