Andreas

Soviet Swastikas? Do tell me more!

I think it is the original? Probably nicked, err, preserved, by German archaeologists pre-WW I. Here is an article about it. It is very impressive, if you ever get to Berlin, go and see it.

Best post evar! </font>

I had a Mac when CMBB came out, and I had nothing to do with the Waffengrenadier issue (since I did not know the little factoid then). I am not sure why you infer that I had. I have no friends in high places either, but I am certain I know quite a bit about the British Army in WW2, and I am German. Nationality is no excuse for lack of knowledge. Sincere disinterest is though, and who could blame you.

Wouldn't the same apply the other way round?

[PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT] If you were a bit clued up on the history of the term, you would know that Waffengrenadier is the title given to (at least) some of the Eastern Waffen-SS formations. These were officially called 'No. Waffengrenadierdivision der SS (Country Nr.No)', e.g. 14. Waffengrenadier Division der SS (Galizische Nr. 1). So contrary to popular belief on these boards, this is not a made-up term with no historical root, but instead a historically correct term for some (quite a few actually) Waffen-SS formations. [END PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT] Now that I have been able to show all of you that I know more than all of you together, I will fully agree with Seanachai. He's such a likeable fellow.

It is 'Stiel' (stick), not 'Steil' (steep).

Just in case Terence is still interested. According to its Ib (supply) Graf von Kielmannsegg during Fall Gelb, the first stage of the war against France, 1. Panzerdivision had a supply of 20,000 Pervitin pills for the march through the Ardennes, to the Maas. The division was the spearhead of Guderian's XIX. Panzerkorps. Interestingly, both the Ia (Ops) and Ib (Supply) of 1.PD during the campaign would go on to much bigger things. The Ia was a chap called Wenck, later expected to rescue Berlin. v. Kielmannsegg became Nato Ground Forces Commander. The commander of the one of the infantry regiments (SR1) of 1.PD was another little known chap called Balck, who rose to army group command. Another later to be well-known Graf commanded the I./PR2 in the division - von Strachwitz. [ February 09, 2004, 07:09 AM: Message edited by: Andreas ]

BUMP because I am really interested where this idea of Adolf's operational brilliance comes from.

Any other unit is not trailing wire behind it in order to do its job. There are other units where this is used as abstraction, e.g. guns. It is right.

If I translate your sig correctly, I doubt you are going to win many popularity contests here, and I find it somewhat offensive myself, provided I have translated it correctly.

Mr.Picky would like to point out that the 'heavy' tank referred to in the book is the Panzer IV with the short 75L24 gun. The company structure of German tank companies changed by 1943, if not earlier, from a mixed light/medium (Panzer II/III/35(t)/38(t) are light, Panzer IV 75L24 is medium) structure to a homogenous one. So my guess is that the company tactics can really only be used out to mid-war, where they refer to a different use of the light and medium platoons/companies.

I think the Matilda I also had a water-cooled HMG? While the optics for a turret MG (but not the hull MG) are as good as those for the gun, in most cases, the actual mount is not necessarily as good (e.g. the shoulder stabilised gun in at least one Valentine model), the ability to bring it on target is not as good, target acquisition is not as good, ammo handling is not as good, as with ordinary HMGs. Especially when you compare German tank MGs against the HMG 34/42.

My point is that Glantz's article is from perspective of English-speaking world. Nothing more, nothing less. </font>

Que? Shurely you are jesting. Where did that show itself?

I am sorry, I am not quite sure what is subjective about these facts, from Real Life : 'The further a wire spotter travels, the more wire has to be laid.' 'The time delay in setting up an HMG is unrelated to the distance traveled by the crew.' The conclusion from this is that the time delay for spotters is different from the time delay for an HMG, because one is distance dependent (from very little for a ride of 250 yards to quite a lot for a ride of 6km), while for the HMG it makes bugger all difference. You still have not said why you don't just buy radio spotters?

Becket, who's grass are you using?

It was aimed at the notion that tank MGs should be sufficient to deal with dug-in ATGs. The Dyle position was a rather hastily occupied line north of the river Dyle in central Belgium. At best some trenches, no bunkers, little overhead cover, would be my guess. 88s are clearly a different proposition, IRL, because they have a much higher signature, and more guys running around them. I have no problem with the current model. Having ATGs hard to kill makes up for the borg spotting to some degree, as far as I am concerned.

From Friesner 'Blitzkrieg Legende', an excellent study on the war in France and the Benelux 1940 (translation by me). </font>

Well no it is not, because clearly the proposal from you would only work if the set-up time is related to the disctance traveled. Please show me where in the current engine set-up time is related to distance traveled. You have not addressed this.

I think that is the real weakness in the abstraction. You need to split the job of laying the wire from the job of spotting. Laying the wire would normally be the responsibility of divisional signal troops. The artillery chaps would have their own cable sections (in German artillery battalions), but I believe these guys would just fix the lines, and maybe lay some branch lines, but not the basic network. In the German battalion, the FOO section would be three guys (one FOO, two radio operators). Cable cutting, as well as atmospheric disturbances to radio comms, are a must in my view, for future engines. I can just imagine the howls on the boards though. Having said that, if you want to go into that detail of modelling, you can also start making the case for field kitchens (only horse-drawn, please). I agree that artillery could do with a massive overhaul. I look forward to seeing that in CMx2.

They could ride anywhere. At the end of the ride, they could not spot for their battery though, because somehow the inconsiderate brutes whose country they were invading did not neatly lay out wires along the roads for them to plug into. It just won't do! What is your problem? Buy a radio spotter - that is what mobile forces in WW2 did if they wanted to have very mobile comms. It seems to me you want to have it both ways - cheap spotters with full mobility. So how should it be abstracted? Please do let us know how you would model the movement restrictions of wire FOOs compared to non-wire FOOs. While you are at it, please let us know how you would model line breaks as well. The only way I can think of at the moment is a set-up penalty, like the one currently programmed in for heavy infantry weapons. That would need to be distance related though, and this would not be covered by the current engine. Which means that like everyone else they can not spot for artillery. What is your idea how wire was layed? Did it magically appear?

Could be shatter gap at that distance. The way I understand it is that the shell decides that the best way forward for the shell is to just dissolve instead of punching through, because it has too much energy.

Can't be Nazi; it's pointed the wrong way. Duh. Michael </font>

Okay, that is Eisenhower, who never had anything to do with Korea. Ridgway did succeed Walker on Dec. 23rd 1950 as commander 8th Army.