Sublime

I think they.re fine. the 60mm is destructive because its accurate. Still - most of the 60mms and 81mms only have enough ammo for a turn or two of fire. Thats the drawback to players in WeGO using the mortars - the target may be killed or suppressed enough aftter 30 seconds of fire - but you have to wait to cancel the fire order. Also, someone mentioned there are no spotting rounds for DF mortars. This isnt true, in fact when I pick a new target for my mortar crews, unless its close to whatever I was originally shooting at, theres 30-45 seconds of delay while they fire, observe the round impact, and adjust, and so on. The fact is any weapon can be very deadly if used correctly. Theres a lot of situations where mortars arent adequate, or dont do the job. It's all a matter of playing style. I find them very deadly, and effective, if used in direct fire. However, that makes them very susceptible to being killed, and often if Im not keeping a close eye on them they end up exhausted (and then useless for several turns until they regain their wind). Simply because men 'moving' will start running if shot at. This is entirely realistic. However an 81mm mortar is heavy. I think a lot of people arent taking into consideration that perhaps the weapons themselves are realistic. That may not be the issue. What is unrealistic, and cant be helped, is that the majority of games played in CM are one off things. This means both sides engage longer, and are much more willing to take heavy casualties. Because noone is really dying, and because what happens after the battle doesnt matter to the players. Perhaps in campaigns this changes somewhat, but still. In real life, everyone pretty much does want to live, so they avoid insane moves or fights to the death if they can. And also one side or the other will disengage, or simply choose to attack another time if it looks too hot. Most CM games I play both sides bang the living crap out of eachother, often the decision is completely obvious before a surrender or cease fire happens, with both sides often taking >50% casualties. IRL this wouldnt happen - especially on the Western Front. Because IRL theres always the next day, and if you lose 50% of your troops taking a small village, how are you going to get to Berlin? Of course, as with everything else, there are exceptions..

lol! i saw the thread name.. opened it and lo and behold three of my pbem opponents posted here! and two of them with comments about the lethality of mortars.. (yeah those were mine) =D

I do know the M7 priest is modelled as off map arty. Thats self propelled.......

1. US tanks were not effective Not true. As stated by many above. And they improved quite a bit as the war progressed. 2, US CAS was not effective against tanks. Perhaps not directly against armor. But we slaughtered supply lines, ground the Luftwaffe to dust, had air supremacy, etc etc etc. Air power then and since has been a U.S. trump card. 3. US troops were subpar. Absolute nonsense. A lot of paratroopers and marines would get pissed at that. In fact a lot of regular riflemen, tankers, etc etc would too. Yeah there were poor examples of U.S. troops. I can also think of just as many examples of poor German, French, Russian, Brit, or whatever troops. 4. US machinguns were not very good. So how do you explain the M2 Browning .50 cal? IIRC it has to longest service life of any machine gun so far in history. 5. The Garand was not very good. Best rifle in world for that time. Good round. Accurate. Semi automatic. Very good weapon. 6. US artillery was what won for the US It helped. But I'd agree. Our manafacturing won the war for us, oh that and heavily supplying the Soviet Army who bled for us. But thats not to say that a lot of our boys, and a lot of other countries boys died too. And we basically took care of Japan on our own. 7. Supply lines too long. They were long. But too long? No. Almost every West Front memoir by Germas mentions the gigantic U.S. material superiority. I'd say we handled supplying armies over the Pacific and Atlantic VERY well. The Germans had land routes to Russia and the West and they couldnt supply half the stuff we did.

The last year of the war had some of the highest death tolls of the entire war. Very interesting year 1945.. I cant wait until CMx2 hits the Ostfront, or even the West front invasion of the Reich. (by the way Im missing Pzfausts 60's and 100s really bad in our games Winkelreid) Anyone remember the CMBO demo battle Riesberg? I loved that battle - the desperation of holding on so more kameraden could escape the Red Hordes. Bagration, Seelow Heights.... man oh man... =D

Im 26. I started with CMBO when I was 14. Played wargames before that. I prefer CMx2 by far.

I believe this is handled the same way as friendly fire. Which is also why those idiots outside my building are still there Holien Explosives can kill them - bullets wont affect them. And as far as the explosives, we've all seen weird things happen, just as would from an explosion in real life. Sometimes swathes of people get cut down, sometimes its two here, and 3 guys 50 meters away. What I WOULD like an have noticed in two PBEMs right now is> In the game with Holien, that building is occupied by my heroic US Army troops. The surrended Nazi swine are kneeling right outside the building (nothin like a .45 caliber barrel in your face to persuade you that 'Hitler Kaputt!'.) In the other game my brave Panzergrenadiers swept through the dazed remnants of a US unit in a tree line. This tree line had low hedge bordering it (adjacent to an open wheat field, and opens to grass after several meters of light trees and whatnot) and on one side is a HMG 42 team, along with some other assorted Panzergrenadiers. On the other side of this low hedge was the sole survivor in the middle of a heap of his friends bodies. In BOTH situations, my soldiers sit in place for several turns at least and the PoWs just sit there. So whats the deal? Do you have to be in the same spot to 'capture' them and clear them out? Or can you in the adjacent spot? if you can, is the fact that something is between these two groups stopping them from being captured?

Perhaps the terrain will depend on the map. Like QB maps from CMBN will have the normandy textures, while later ones will have their respective textures. And the editor will have them all for people to make as they please. This would seem to make the most sense, or seem the most doable, at least to my fragile little mind

Elmar it wasnt my intention, or Steve's from BFC to give a '1-2' on anyone in the thread. For one Steve and I are not nor have been in direct contact. Ever. I was putting in my opinion on the issues we're discussing, and expressing my annoyance at how emotional and extreme a lot of these threads or posts get on issues in a video game. Issues I may add, that do not stop anyone from playing the game at all, that are more or less matters of opinion and things that more than likely can and will be fixed. If anything, I guess I've just been getting irritated at the rash of posts where people 'threaten' to go back to CMx1, or go on about how the game is a steaming pile of dog poo. Even though they're still spending their hours on the forum for the said game. I dont feel myself on any 'side' or 'group', or with a 'status quo'. Especially since being for or against said status quo doesnt affect me in anyway. I just address things on an individual basis. FWIW.

The CMBB and CMAK nostalgia is funny anyways. I remember when CMBB came out many players decided it was completely unplayable because the T-34s were undermodelled as far as the guns, and a 'host of other game breaking issues'etc. Im sure when CMx2 BB gets released everyone will claim that because of the way snow is modelled that the game is a total pile of crap and unplayable. And that they're storming off to play CMBN, which was done perfectly. That is until Cmx3 BN comes out and then ... so on and so forth

You misunderstand my meaning. Im not advocating blind 'fanboy-ism'. But what good is it saying the game is a steaming pile of crap or throwing a web temper tantrum and saying you're going back to CMAK? It doesn't do any good at all. Throwing in your opinion, offering professional insights - thats all well and good. Getting mad and putting it on game designers is ridiculous, especially since out of all the game companies I've had the experience of dealing with since 1996, BTS is definitely the most customer friendly. I've also almost never seen game designers make so many modifications to games based on evidence that the players present on msg boards. If anyone remembers several years ago when one of the Close Combat developers would troll here, and post under pen names, and generally act like a child. It was ridiculous. Also the poster Im referring to went from someone whose posts I enjoyed reading, and took seriously, to someone I just ignore as much as possible. Michael Wittman could post on here, but if he started throwing tantrums and acting ridiculous I wouldn't give two sh*ts about his tanker experience. I can find plenty of sources that dont make me wonder how someone who supposedly has first hand experience on a tank from the 1940's could be so immature.

Im surprised noone has mentioned that in CMAK the typical engagement ranges were a lot higher than in CMBN. That may account quite a bit for tank accuracy. Everyone can complain all they want. its ridiculous. Everyone wants to complain because tanks are made slightly more accurate on the move - but you guys have NOOO problem going back to abstracted firepower ratings and abstracted individual soldiers as well in Cmx1. Good luck. The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence

honestly I would hope not. hopefully then we'd get the module sooner - and modders like that guy Ari will make kick ass mods for it anyways. however the SS soldiers should have different skins - they should have the camo pattern...

I think they wont be completely be redone. I think thats partially why they'll hopefully be banging out these modules quick and whatnot - a lot of the equipment has been done already, especially for the Wehrmacht and of course univerrally seen weapons like shermans

Actually I recall the phones being used in WW2 as well. IIRC there was a box on the back of the tank that could be opened with a direct line inside the tank.

Actually I recal the phones being used in WW2 as well

How is the campaign he posted anyways?

got it, its sent. always more bodybags open for fresh meat =)

Unfortunately I have no experience making scenarios. I'll be willing to playtest tho! =)

LLF you may have something going with the 'grace under pressure' because their backs were to the wall. American GIs halfway across the world from home can be forgiven for seeing less urgency in the situation than Germans fighting on their proverbial doorstep.. Perhaps that accounts for a lot of hesitation to attack, etc. that you've been discussing in your Carillon Nose thread. Just as also you pointed out the dogfaces did show some spark in defense - I can see how the situation would again seem more urgent once you started losing ground and were no longer conducting attacks..

Fascinating. So the SS was less German than the Wehrmacht as far as manpower make-up. Hmm. Btw, in The Road to Montebourg, Paper Tiger characterizes the first few battles as the battles for the Georgian Ridge. As I remember it, its because the Wehrmacht units were mostly Georgian Ostfront units. How common were these units outside of D-day on the Westfront? I know they had Hiwis all over, and a lot of other countries fought on the Eastern front, especially as it was advertised as the Crusade against bolshevism, but I wonder about the west.

Always can use another fix for my CMBN multiplayer addiction.. Anyone up for a PBEM? QB or a scenario? Ill play either side.. spankythamajikmunky@yahoo.com

LLF I've been extremely impressed with your info and knowledge on this thread. if theres any help I can offer with your campaign pls lemme know

yes, I meant Vlasov. You're correct. And the Waal River crossing quote - I put that in there because it was noted as a incredibly brave, and successful attack. Boche - I wasn't comparing them to an SS division, I was pointing out that they were a Wehrmacht division that wasnt compromised of German nationals.

In reference to American soldiers executed - there was one U.S. soldier executed for desertion/cowardice. As far as I know. I remember much was made of the subject - a movie, a book etc. I guess Eisenhower and the others had a lot of hard moments in decided whether or not to go through with it, but did for the purposes of making an example. As far as the SS, I dont know if they could accept any nationality. I know that they had tight restrictions INITIALLY where you had to prove your ancestry, blah blah blah. These were loosened quite a bit around 1942/1943. But its also very true that they had an Islamic SS division, I believe a Balkan SS division, a 'Nordland' (Norwegian, Swedish, Danish, etc) as well as other units. But I dont think its true that you had to be a German national to join the Wehrmacht -what about the Spanish 'Blue' division on the Eastern Front and the Russian Fascist Army under Ivanov (did I remember his name right?)