Blackhorse
-
Posts
796 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Blackhorse
-
-
Andreas,Originally posted by Andreas:Chris - you don't really. One of the German officers on the receiving end commented 'By the end of the barrage, Russian tanks were deep into our position.' (Hoffmann)
A German battalion commander (Hauptmann Hans Diebisch, CO II.IR579, 306.ID) commented: 'The fire assets of the German defense were literally destroyed by the Soviet fighter bombers attacking the MLR and the rear positions. When the Russian infantry appeared (auftauchte - indicating they did not see them coming) inside the positions ofthe battalion and it tried to retreat, the Russian air force made this impossible. The battalion was dispersed und partly destroyed through the fire of the air force, mortars and machine guns.' (quoted from Mazulenko)
Indeed. It must have been pure hell on the receiving end of that attack.
The Attritionists won that day eh?
-
Andreas,
Very nice post.
I can only imagine what it must have been like to see that juggernaught approaching one's own lines.
Cheers,
Chris
-
Andreas,
Very nice post.
I can only imagine what it must have been like to see that juggernaught approaching one's own lines.
Cheers,
Chris
-
What you probably don't realize yet is that you actually just bought two games. One is CMBO. The other is "CMBO the Board". You'll find yourself coming here almost daily, if not ten to thirty times daily. Then you'll discover the General Board and the Scenario Board and the Airborne Assault Board and the Strategic Command Board. Then you'll play lots of people in PBEM, probably get sucked into the Peng thread, get in a few glorious flame wars and hang around here discussing many more things than just CMBO.Originally posted by wamphyri:OMG .. I place a post on a forum for a 2 year old game and I have 3 replies within 15 minutes . . thats amazing.
I now feel that I picked the right game to purchase, i know i won't be disappointed if it has this kind of support from it's players.
I hope to play a few of you in MP games even if I know it's a lost cause. What better way to learn then by losing. (maybe that was hitler's reasoning behind the blitzkrieg( he didn't want gas attacks halting his advance), he was in the infantry(in think!) during WW1)(any errors in my info can be blamed on the discovery channel..
) Hope to lose to you soon ..
Wamphyri
All other computer games will forever pale in comparison and soon your wife (if you have one) will be happy you purchased CMBO because you no longer buy a new computer game every week. She will not be happy however that you play CMBO constantly and that you have to go check for those PBEM turns every few minutes. It's at that point you'll move the computer into the same room as the television so as not to make the interruptions so obvious.
Welcome aboard. Most of us have been playing the game for over two years! and the game is still "King of the Hill". Only CMBB will most likely knock CMBO down a notch.
-
Tanker, I went to IOAC in the summer of '90.Originally posted by USTanker:I'm definately coming. Hey Blackhorse, what's the surpise? You can't get us into SIMNET or the CCTs (never had a chance to play with those) can you?
When did you do AOAC?
USTanker
Before that I was in the 1st Cav Division. After IOAC I was in the 11th ACR, Blackhorse, in Fulda, GE.
How about you?
Regards,
Chris
-
Lookie here, a bunch of CMers getting together at Fort Knox and the Patton Museum!
Yes, I am still stationed at Fort Knox.
I'm currently on leave; will be back home early next week.
I will attempt to arrange a special surprise treat for ya'll.
Matt, I didn't realize you were from Looeyville.
Rune, let me know what you need me to do.
-
This very issue of tanks being so accurate while on the move was brought up in this forum by a smart bloke back in 1999. THat thread is Here
I completely agree that tanks firing on the move are overly accurate. Most WWII tanks fired from the short halt. This was a practice still used by the M-60 series tankers of the 70's btw. It wasn't until the advent of reliable gyros and laser range finders that firing while traveling cross-country or anywhere on the move for that matter became SOP.
-
I just looked at Panzers on the Eastern Front this week. It looks to be a great book. From what I read it is at the unit level describing low level actions as opposed to ecehelons above reality stuff found in some of the other books you mentioned **cough**Lost Victories**cough**.
I believe it was originally written for the Armor School in the early 50s.
The maps are superb, btw.
As for must buy books?
1. Forgotten Soldier
2. Enemy at the Gates
3. Hitler Moves East
4. Scorched Earth
5. The Black March
6. Cross of Iron
7. Panzer an der Weichsel (German only)
8. Wenn alle Bruder Schweigen
9. Der Panzerdivision 'Wiking' im Bild
10. Small Unit Actions During the German Campaign in Russia
That should get you started.
-
Better yet Jeff,
How about doing away with replay in the single player game. Simply let the computer calculate the results and then remove/reduce units accordingly. Who needs to see what is going on??
Seriously folks, this ommission is critical. It is a show stopper for those of us who PBEM. not having a replay kills the game. I wouldn't play it single player without being able to see what is going on, and I damn sure will not play it PBEM if I cannot see what is going on.Think about it. Would you play the single payer if you couldn't see the computer make its moves and attack? Why should the PBEMers not have the same benefit?
-
We can use the Principles of War to analyze whether the attacker or defender has the advantage.
----------------------------------
Objective
Direct every military operation toward a clearly defined, decisive, and attainable objective.
At the operational and tactical levels, objective means ensuring all actions contribute to the goals of the higher headquarters. The principle of objective drives all military activity. When under-taking any mission, commanders should have a clear understanding of the expected
outcome and its impact.
COMMENT: No clear advantage exists for either the attack or defense. The mission statement and clarity of the commander determine objective.
----------------------------------
Offensive
Seize, retain, and exploit the initiative.
Offensive action is key to achieving decisive results. It is the essence of successful operations. Offensive actions are those taken to dictate the nature, scope, and tempo of an operation. They force the enemy to react. Commanders use offensive actions to impose their will on an enemy, adversary, or situation. Offensive operations are essential to maintain the freedom of action necessary for success, exploit vulnerabilities, and react to rapidly changing situations and unexpected developments.
COMMENT: The advantage here lies with the attacker. The attacker determines where and when to attack. He sets the conditions for battle. The defender will have to work harder to seize the initiative away from the attacker.
----------------------------------
Mass
Concentrate the effects of combat power at the decisive place and time.
Commanders mass the effects of combat power to overwhelm enemies or gain control of the situation. They mass combat power in time and space to achieve both destructive and constructive results.
COMMENT: Advantage to the attacker because he chooses the time and place of attack. Defender must work harder to achieve similar results
----------------------------------
Economy of Force
Allocate minimum essential combat power to secondary efforts.
Economy of force is the reciprocal of mass. It requires accepting prudent risk in selected areas to achieve superiority—overwhelming effects—in the decisive operation. Economy of force involves the discriminating employment and distribution of forces. Commanders never leave any element with-out a purpose. When the time comes to execute, all elements should have tasks to perform.
COMMENT: Basically a wash. Both sides equally affected.
----------------------------------
Maneuver
Place the enemy in a disadvantageous position through the flexible application of combat power.
As both an element of combat power and a principle of war, maneuver concentrates and disperses combat power to place and keep the enemy at a disadvantage. It achieves results that would otherwise be more costly. Effective maneuver keeps enemies off balance by making them confront new problems and new dangers faster than they can deal with them. Army forces gain and preserve freedom of action, reduce vulnerability, and exploit success
through maneuver. Maneuver is more than just fire and movement. It includes the dynamic, flexible application of leadership, firepower, information, and protection as well. It requires flexibility in thought, plans, and operations and the skillful application of mass, surprise, and economy of force.
COMMENT:Advantage to the Attacker. Defender again must work hard to gain advantage over attacker.
----------------------------------
Unity of Command
For every objective, ensure unity of effort under one responsible commander.
Developing the full combat power of a force requires unity of command. Unity of command means that a single commander directs and coordinates the actions of all forces toward a common objective. Cooperation may produce coordination, but giving a single commander the required authority unifies action.
COMMENT:No distinct advantage to either attack or defense.
----------------------------------
Security
Never permit the enemy to acquire an unexpected advantage.
Security protects and preserves combat power. It does not involve excessive caution. Calculated risk is inherent in conflict. Security results from measures taken by a command to protect itself from surprise, interference, sabotage, annoyance, and threat ISR. Military deception greatly enhances security. The threat of asymmetric action requires emphasis on security, even in low-threat environments.
COMMENT:Advantage to the defense.
----------------------------------
Surprise
Strike the enemy at a time or place or in a manner for which he is unprepared.
Surprise is the reciprocal of security. Surprise results from taking actions for which an enemy or adversary is unprepared. It is a powerful but temporary combat multiplier. It is not essential to take the adversary or enemy completely unaware; it is only necessary that he become aware too late to react effectively.
COMMENT:Advantage to the attacker.
----------------------------------
Simplicity
Prepare clear, uncomplicated plans and clear, concise orders to ensure thorough understanding.
Plans and orders should be simple and direct. Simple plans and clear, concise orders reduce misunderstanding and confusion. The factors of METT-TC determine the degree of simplicity required. Simple plans executed on time are better than detailed plans executed late. Commanders at all levels weigh the apparent benefits of a complex concept of operations against the risk that subordinates will not be able to understand or follow it.
COMMENT:No clear advantage.
----------------------------------
Conclusion
Overall, the attacker has an easier time than the defender. Attackers choose the time and place of the attack and strive to choose conditions that favor them. The attacker plans to attack at ratios that benefit him and disadvantage the defender. Thus, the Defender is at a disadvantage in that the battle is not fought on his terms but rather his enemy's terms.
Defenders that successfully defeat their attacker know how to take the Principles of War and use them to their advantage.
Caveats
Attacking does not guarantee victory/success.
Defending does not guarantee defeat.
Purpose of the Defense (FM3-0) Operations
Army forces defend until they gain sufficient strength to attack. Defensive operations defeat an enemy attack, buy time, economize forces, or develop conditions favorable for offensive operations. Alone, defensive operations normally can-not achieve a decision. Their purpose is to create conditions for a counter-offensive that allows Army forces to regain the initiative.
Although offensive operations are usually required to achieve decisive results, it is often
necessary, even advisable at times, to defend. Commanders defend to buy time, hold terrain,
facilitate other operations, preoccupy the enemy, or erode enemy resources.
Purpose of the Offense (FM3-0)Operations
The offense is the decisive form of war. Offensive operations aim to de-stroy
or defeat an enemy. Their purpose is to impose US will on the enemy
and achieve decisive victory. While immediate considerations often require
defending, decisive results require shifting to the offense as soon as possible.
In war the only sure defense is offense, and the efficiency of the offensedepends on the war-like souls of those conducting it.
General George S. Patton Jr.
War as I Knew It
-
Fanboy.
Mama's fanboy.
Cry baby fanboy.
There.
What now fanboy?
How about sending me my dang turn fanboy.
-
Jason,Originally posted by JasonC:The reason I take this sort of thing seriously has nothing to do with Fionn personally, or even with CM. The attitude he is expressing is one intentionally cultivated in modern US and NATO military training, for junior and field grade officers in particular. And it is every bit as dangerous today as it was in 1914. I care very little whether CM players believe the Norman Vincent Peal philosophy of warfare. But I care very much that future commanders of American fighting men (and of allies) may face the modern smart weapon firepower revolution with a contempt for Petain's dictum as extreme as the boys in blue pants of 1914. Preaching rash self-confidence as a military philosophy is not something to be done lightly.
Where do you get that? Explain how this is translated into an officer's military education. There are no courses entitled "Battle and victory through Norman Vincent Peal's philosophy of confidence and over confidence." Better yet, explain how this particular discussion is even remotely going to affect any officers?
This is not AC3 or CGSC or the War College. This is a forum for a game, and Fionn, a fella who plays the game damn well, was giving us his opinions of what makes a successful player.
Lighten up Frances.
Tarqulene,
Bravo! Well said.
-
Fionn is better than damn good. He is in fact gifted at CM.
There is another player present in this forum that plays at the same level as Fionn.
If the two ever played each other the resulting game would be most likely end up being the match of the year; a veritable clash of the Titans if you will.
-
Totally agree. PBEM desperately needs a replay feature.
However, Hubert has implied this will not be implemented.
-
Some might say Across the Rhine was close. Albeit the tactical game was crippled (for me anyway). If played as a RTS with an operational layer, then it worked for some folks.Originally posted by Big Time Software:I asked before. Can ANYBODY name me a game which was equally superior to all others in both Tactical and Operational levels? I have asked this question dozens of times and there have been NO answers. Note that Nac4 dodged this question.
It is our position that a full fledged Tactical and Operational level game, with all the accuracy and quality you have come to expect from us, is too much for us. Let me say that again... we do not have confidence that we can make the game you have in your minds AND not lose ground in the process. Perhaps even losing it to the point of going out of business.
Steve
Perhaps what people should be doing is offering suggestions on how to seamlesly and efficiently implement such an operational layer rather than criticise BTS.
There might be ideas out there that haven't been thought of or considered by BTS. Attacking BTS like USERNAME NAC4 did is not the way to go.
I'd like to see an operational layer built into the CM series, but not at the cost of other games in the series. Maybe at some point in the future, BTS can get together with their other development teams (MajorH, Panther Games, Hubert Cater, etc) and have one of them help in the creation of the operational layer for CM.
For instance, there are some of us who look at AA and see how it could work as the operational layer for CM if it allowed the manual input of battle results from CM battles.
CM is and will continue to be the premier WWII tactical wargame.
-
Is there a PBEM playback feature or is the end of turn report the only feedback we get from PBEM turns?
Great game, btw.
-
Hail TankDawg! How goes life on the left coast?Originally posted by TankDawg:Blackhorse!?!
Who the hell is Blackhorse?
I sent you a turn ages ago.
Since I hadn't heard back, I thought perhaps you were decisively engaged in preparations for the NTC and such. Shall I resend?
-
-
Wesreidau will be the Axis
-
I'll play against Wesreidau and provide you feedback. Hell, he and I fight each other PBEM all the time anyway.
CHris
-
Is there support for multiplayer PBEM?
Can a group of friends and I take up sides and fight WWII via PBEM?
You know, me as the Yanks, Mark as the Brits, Joe as the Rooskies, etc etc all done via email?
Other than that, looks smashing! Battlefront is seriously offering some excellent, excellent products in addition to its own CMBO and CMBB.
-
Send this way please.
Thanks.
-
While contemplating and wondering about what sort of system to use for Campaigns, it suddenly dawned upon me that there exists a system that can be used.
It is called TACOPS and it is already part of the Battlefront product offering. It even comes in PC and MAC versions.
Now then, here is what would be required, as I see it.
1. Develop a database for WWII units, or allow users to develop that.
2. Enlarge the scale to where the maps are 1:100,00 or greater. Maps can still be the 2 elevations they currently are, as what is most critical are the movement rates.
3. Create Unit footprints, similar to that seen in Decisive Action. Barring this, make it so that battles occue when opposing unit icons/counters come within a certain set meters of each other or when the opposing icons touch.
4. Set wepaons engagement ranges to zero. In other words, units on the TACOPS do not engage each other. The battles would occur as per #3 above. CM would be the tool to determine battle outcomes.
5. CM battle combat results would be manually input into the TACOPS shell by the players (primarily by updating the unit equipment, logistics, and manning levels as well as morale state).
6. The TACOPS system uses 1 minute impulses like CM. Make those 1 minute Impulses variable, to where they might represent 10 minutes, or 15 minutes. This would represent the Operational Level as opposed to the tactical level of movement.
7. Best of all, it allows MAJ H. to develop this in conjunction with BTS. There already exists that relationship. It's win win for all involved.
-
How to attack like a Soviet Rifle Corps in 1944
in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
Posted
Indeed. It must have been pure hell on the receiving end of that attack.
The Attritionists won that day eh?