Count Sessine

Bump :confused:

Excellent - except that it looks like there'll be no SS-units in CMMC2 We'll post something here when it's time to sign up for CMMC2. Now, out of interest, would you prefer playing as the Soviets or the Germans in Nov '42 ? [ October 27, 2002, 05:28 PM: Message edited by: Count Sessine ]

I think I can answer your questions. First of all, we're not yet recruiting for battalion and regimental level positions, so you'll have to be patient The battles are played by PBEM, or TCP if both parties can agree to meet. Every player only plays one battle at a time (unless he fills in for somebody else, a rare occurrence). Since the campaign has it's focus on operational level maneuvers, the frequence of tactical battles varies a lot, dependant on the position your battalion is responsible for at the front. If you're assigned to a quiet sector, worst case, you may fight a battle every six months, or, if you're part of an offensive operation, you may fight once a month. That's it. Compared to other campaigns which focus more on fighting battles, the tempo in CMMC is quite glacial :cool: What you will know of the overall frontline as a battalion commander is limited. Even division commanders often only know their own sector and positions of neighbouring units to their immediate right and left. Generally, as a battalion commander, your regiment will provide you with a briefing, but it'll be quite cursory. The actual operation maps are kept at the respective HQ's (battalion thru Corps), and even those maps are generally inaccurate, due to Fog of war and reporting friction in the chain of command etc. So, what I'm saying is, that no one (except the Gamemasters) actually know 100% what the front line looks like. We have written a comprehensive set of rules, which is being revised for CMMC2. All aspects of operational warfare pertinent to Corps level operations, are included. The revised rules will be made public when they're ready. The old rules, CMMC1, are available at http://www.combatmission.com/CMMC/Academy/academy.htm. If you want to see how the first day of the CMMC1 went, check out the cool Flash files at: http://www.cmmc2.org/CMMC1%5FMultimedia%2Easp Hope to see you in Russia !

bump

No - not that I recall. But if that's the current rationale to explain that they can't reman abandoned guns, then ok. No problem, I was just wondering.

Which brings up the unanswered question I brought up a few days ago: can crews re-man abandoned guns ?

The title says it all I seem to remember someone mentioning it a while back, but did this feature make it into CMBB?

I you have read Jentz' Panzertruppen, you read the opposite, that russian gunners (perhaps their optics too?) were really bad, and that german tank crews usually ignored russian tanks until they were 100% sure there weren't any AT guns around.

LOL, I have to agree they look a little dated.

I played as the germans (of course) and I won a smashing victory. I killed all but two of the british tanks and inflicted massive casualties to his infantry. The terrain was just perfect for hit and run tactics. I admit the arrival of the 3 kp probably tilted the game in my favor, as my line was wavering we they arrived. The sMG's were pulling back on their own initiative, mortars completely out of ammo etc. As usual I expended the 120 mortar FO's too soon in the game. I generally find that it pays to wait before committing the arty FO's. I know a prevalent school of thought claims the most efficient use of artillery is disrupting the enemy advance, but I find it's also a good idea to wait until the enemy focal point is totally clear, ANd he's engaged beyond quick withdrawal, and THEN let the arty rip. But this demands you use it really close to your own troops, and that can sometime cost troops by stray impacts... Oh, well. I won /CS

Malmvig, Please mail me the details wiinholt@mobilixnet.dk Thanks /MW

Hi all, Yesterday me and a friend played Sunken Lane on my LAN. Although I knew about the scenario from Fionns AAR against Hardenberger, I never played before. I honestly think it is very likely the best scenario I've played in CM. Everything is perfectly balanced, it's realistic (the OoB's), the terrain is really great looking and the suspense just never ceases. I would like to hear whether anyone knows about scenarios similar to this one out there for more network gaming? /CS

Hi Franko, I really think you're the top operations designer in the community, and I know my regular opponents share this view - so, please forward the ops to me at wiinholt@mobilixnet.dk Thanks /CS

That's totally unrealistic and very irritating, but, alas, also very old news. I've always been annoyed with the way airpower is implemented in CM, but if it wasn't, imagine the outcry Just make sure to avoid it in your scenarios (gentlemans agreement?). /CS

Thanks, Jason. Very instructive and interesting. I for one, has been somewhat on the lookout for hints how to deploy PAK guns, and IG guns. My experience is somber. Usually they get blown apart almost immediately, or pinned and then killed by small arms fire. /CS

Hi Bill, Thanks for all your hard work designing scenarios. I like all sorts of turn limits... depends on the battle. However, as you, I think there's too few short ones, 10-15 turns, as its often the ones I feel I have the time to finish. Also, its best to finish them of in one sitting. /CS

I can't get to it either /CS

I still think this warrants either an explanation or an adjustment. I played Carentan as german in a PBEM game. Even though we agreed on setting the no-mans land to 80 meters, I still got pushed way too far back... as it works now its practically impossible to defend in an operation.

Interesting indeed, as the discussion concerning accuracy, or lack thereof, of german guns at long ranges. It seems that maybe BTS has cut some corners...

Hi Malmvig, Sure, Lisbeth's still the editor I'll give her your greetings. And she's still fishing, I can assure you. Its not as much about 'getting' through, as about being 'downsized', hehe, to accomodate some article on graphics cards, if I recall correctly. Who needs them anyway ?? /CS

Hi Malmvig, Okay, back in english Your intentions are good, and your estimates of the danish attitude to e-business probably correct. Just make sure your site is registered on Jubii etc. For my part I have done what I could to propagate Combat Mission to danish wargamers. Perhaps you've read my review of CM in Politiken on July 13th (5/5 stars). Unfortunately editorial whims cut it by 2/3 of what I had intended, but that's sometimes the destiny of game reviews in newspapers, they're generally pretty low priority. The review, however, contained pretty much the essential truths about the game (a 'must have' for any wargamer) and along with it Mad Matt gave me permission to print one of his nice POTD's, this one of a King Tiger in winter. So we all work in the service of good /CS

Hi guys, Just my two cents. Last saturday I spend the afternoon at an army firing range (a friend of mine is still in the army), firing among others a LMG (the descendant of the german LMG42). It was a simulated attack, with targets popping up all over... I used to be pretty good with a LMG, still is in fact Anyways, I burned well over 300 rounds in about four-five minutes time, and yes, I fire it the correct way, burst of 3-5 shots etc. My point being that 300 rounds weighs pretty damn much, and dragging more around would be hard (for me at least). So if the battles in CM last no more than 30-60 minutes on account of ammo supplies, I should think the scale to be fair enough. /CS

Hej Henrik, Grafikken ser godt ud, specielt synes jeg menuen til venstre er rigtig godt fundet på, men indholdsmæssigt bliver det nok svært at konkurrere med CombatHQ (du ved sikkert hvilken en jeg mener ... Du er kommet i mine favorites, og jeg glæder mig til at se hvad du finder på. Held og lykke. /CS

Well, I just peroused the above mentioned site. Its interesting to see how different historical opinions are. Samuel W. Mitcham in his Order of Battle of the German Army, states that 17th SS was considered an élite division (its the only SS-division of which he says this), whereas this website pretty much says the opposite... I noticed that the website uses von der Heydte's (of the 6FJ regiment) memoirs, and his disparaging comments on the 17th division, as its primary source. One could question Heydte's objectivity in this matter. /CS

Okay Andreas, point taken on the LAH division. But don't underestimate the 1200 troops left from the original division. Such a nucleus would make the difference in battle as well as in training, and they would certainly raise the divisional expertise (meaning logistics services, artillery, all the technical stuff) far above that of the mostly untried allied divisions they were facing. The 2SS, the Das Reich division, was very experienced having fought at Kharkov, suffering heavy but not ruinous losses, before moving to France in April. Veteran, with some crack units. The 9th SS came directly from Russia, near Koval, where it had been refitting with new vehicles, before it moved west on June 12. It hadn't suffered particularly high losses. Very experienced. Veteran, with some crack units. The 10th SS had been in France until March 1944, when it was send to Russia, only to return with the 9th on June 12. Also very experienced. Veteran, with some crack units. Of course you're right about the 12th SS. They were all new. But don't forget that had been trained in the Beverlo area in Belgium since spring 1943 (thats more than a year), by a cadre of about 1000 men from 1st SS, who were included in the division. In CM, I would make this a regular, interspersed with veterans. And adjust the fanatism levels to suit the Hitlerjugend mindset as it turned out at Caen. AS for the 17th SS, Mitcham calls this an elite division. It was formed in October 1943 in Western France, as such had ample training and lots of veterans in its ranks. As a formation it hadn't seen combat. Regular, with veterans, or just veterans to compensate for its historical performance. Or perhaps even better... Which is another discussion: should scenario designers give units experience levels based on facts (the 17th SS had never seen combat as a formation: make it regular), or based on historical performance (17th SS turned out to be an elite formation: make it veteran/crack). Without wanting to become too philosophical, it must be the last: as far as experience levels goes, we are dealing with history as it turned out to be, not what it could have been.. /CS PS. Is there any unit behaviour difference (ie. between SS and Wehrmacht)?