Mikester

Dar, Yes, the title is simply: Grenadiers It's an autobiography of sorts, and the author is actually Kurt Meyer and the book is a translation I believe from the German version (quite well translated I might add. You'd think it was written originally in English). I believe the publisher is JJ Fedorowicz(sp?). I'll check the ISBN number when I get home tonight. I found the book at my local military book store about a year ago. Just got around to reading it recently. The owner had highly recommended it and told me that it was out of print so I went ahead and bought it. He generally knows what he's talking about, so I took his advice. I don't think I've seen it on his shelves since then. There may still be a few copies floating around somewhere at other dealers though. Mike

Tommi, I've read several accounts of the Germans doing this, especially earlier in the war in Poland, France, the Balkans, and even the early part of the Russian campaign. The book I'm reading right now called, Grenadiers, offers several such accounts by Kurt Meyer who was an officer in the AH Liebstandarte for the entire war. Typically employing a 37mm AT gun for quicker moving strikes and bringing up 88mm AA/AT guns for emergencies / planned operational support of ground attacks. But these accounts of AT gun usage by the Germans are not quite in the manner that you described. They would typically have an AT gun near the point of attack though that could quickly be unlimbered and offer support both in an AT role as well as firing HE rounds and infantry and soft targets. Mike D aka Mikester PS: The "Grenadiers" book is a great book, but unfortunately isn't easy to find since it is out of print. I'd highly recommend it to anyone that likes to read first hand accounts of combat actions. It's one of the best books I've read in this regard (probably why it's hard to find). It covers the entire war from Poland until the end. [This message has been edited by Mikester (edited 06-02-2000).]

I guess I hear and learn something new every day. From reading some first hand accounts by Panzer crews my understanding was the following: 1) Tank was normally unbuttoned (even in battle unless going into close quarters w/ enemy infantry in the area) for good visibility. Tank commanders were always on the lookout for allied fighter bombers, especially after D-day. 2) When they heard aircraft coming if tank could quickly get into cover like forest, etc., they would. 3) Otherwise they basically played dead. Tank stopped. Crew opened all the hatches to make it look like the tank had been abandoned, gunner even depressed the main gun to make it look like it had been hit. Sounds like in many instances this worked. Of course playing dead was only an option if you were not in the heat of battle. I also seem to recall in one case the Panzer crew did this, but then the plane came back around and decided to strafe the tank. Didn't do much to the tank, but several of the bullets came in through the open hatchs and killed or injured two of the crewmen. Mike D aka Mikester

I had to get w/ Steve a couple of weeks ago and straighten out my credit card info for my order. In the email he sent back to me he told me I actually preordered on the very first day that you could which was back last May. I didn't even remember that I did this, but I wasn't about to argue with him. So I guess I'll be one of the lucky people to get the game first since I'm near the top of the list and live here in the good ole USA. Mikester out.

It does sound like it's a potentially larger problem. I still find it hard to believe that just a regular turn plot file (i.e. no movie) could be this large in the VoT scenario. Maybe though, if you had one side at +25% or +50% and you gave orders to all of your units??? I somehow still doubt it, which leads one to think that something must be wrong. Hopefully BTS will get your files and have a look at them. Mikester out.

Tom, Sounds good. I'll probably take you up on that offer. Mike D aka Mikester <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by aka_tom_w: Hi I'm good to play PBEM 23- 30 of June so I'll be up for a double blind match early in your vacation if not before -tom <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Guys, The only files that are generally that big are the movie files. Is that what this is? Did the two tanks all of a sudden just this turn start to not respond, or has it been going on from the start? It might be a bug, but it sounds more like might possibly be a corrupted PBEM file to me. If this just started happening you might want to go back one turn and start playing again from there and see what happens. If everything is OK after doing this my guess is that it was just a corrupted PBEM file. Mike D aka Mikester

I think the reinforcement entry point thing needs to be examined. Having them come in at the same place all the time definitely cuts down on the replayability of the scenario. I would also like to have the player have some control over where they come in if it isn't going to be randomized. But like Scott said, I think there will need to be some rules imposed if players are going to choose where the reinforcments come in. Mike D aka Mikester

Charles, 2 more weeks? Dooooooooohhhhhhhhhhh! Ok, ok, let me help you out. By the power vested in me by the, uhhmm, er, well, the Beer Gods, yes that's it. I do hearby repeal Murphy's law for you and any other law that may stand in the way of BTS bringing CM to my door and the doors of all the rest of the faithful. I also do hereby authorize you to take whatever action might be necessary to expidite this process including inventing any new laws that might help aid in the most holy cause of getting CM released. Spare no expense, leave no rock unturned, break all the laws you wish, reinvent quantum mechanics if necessary, just get me my game!!!! I want my MTV, er, I mean I WANT MY CM. Thank you. Respectfully Yours, Mike D aka Mikester

Thanks to Captain Foobar I was reminded to look up that WWII tour site. The one I was remembering that I had bookmarked here at home is: www.ww2tours.com Also, when I was searching today at work on the web I found a couple of others too. Go to excite.com search engine page and do a search on: WWII tour It only displays 10 sites at a time. So you'll have to go through several pages to see more than one of the tour sites. I think I saw at least 3 more doing a search from there. Best hopes on going and seeing all the wonders of the European battlefields. Mike D aka Mikester

Bauhaus/Sniperscope, Yeah, unfortunately I think you guys are right. I'm just trying to be an optimist for a change. Damn, I want to start playing this gem. Oh well, good news for me is that my vacation is now scheduled from June 24th through July 4th. As long as the game gets here by then, I'll be sitting pretty! 11 pure days of gaming enjoyment. No work, no school, just pure bliss. Mikester out.

Not much being said here as of the last day or two from Steve and Charles. Hope this means they are busily stuffing CD's and manuals into whatever it is they finally decided to ship the game in. Or maybe they've just finished running all of our credit cards through and skipped off to Bermuda as part of their master plan of deception? Mike D aka Mikester

DrD, Yes, I believe artillery spotters are the only ones that can fire to an area without direct LOS. I.e. onboard artillery such as mortars and the 150mm gun for the Germans in VoT can't do it (exception is German mortars that are within command control radius of the company HQ in VoT). Obviously, the non-LOS fire is going to be way less accurate. Bottom line is, if you click on any type of artillery unit, issue a targeting order, drag on the map to where you want it to land, and then left click, and you get a yellow/gold target line from firing unit to that point w/ text of "area fire" it is going to fire there. Regardless of whether the artillery unit has direct LOS or not. Mike D aka Mikester [This message has been edited by Mikester (edited 06-01-2000).]

Found what I think I was remembering. It's a bit dated, but probably pretty close to how the game handles things. _____________________________________________ Big Time Software Moderator posted 09-06-1999 06:19 PM The "double point" thing Fionn mentioned was my initial understanding of the situation, but it isn't correct. Basically, the friendly player has no incentive to wipe out its own captured men. I'm not sure I fully understand how points are calculated in the Big Picture, but the points come out very much in the capturing player's favor. First of all, to wipe out anything involves a comittment of SOME form of firepower (artillery, tank fire, small arms, etc) so that if someone is using that to kill his own captured men, he ISN'T using it to whack enemy troops. And while he is busy fussing with killing his own, he ISN'T busy dealing with things that can actually cause pain. In other words, if Martin had used artillery to whack his own men, that would be ammunition not used in some other crucial area. And since this stuff is not unlimited, a poor decision on the player's part. Likewise, it is a BAD idea for the capturing player to use them as human shields because a dead POW doesn't count. In short, best thing to do is march your prisioners off the map ASAP. And because positions are variable, that doesn't mean that the AI should take over and just blindly march them to the rear. MUCH better to let the player do this. And since movement orders are very simple to give, this does not require more than minor effort. Plus, I think itis cool to have to deal with prisoners. Makes you feel like you reall accomplished just run away. Big deal. In CM I am staring at a group of guys that I captured and that I control. Nice feeling of power Steve ________________________________ Mikester out.

Sounds good to me CCJ. Mikester out.

Tom, Try doing a search on prisoners and the like. I think it was some time back, but I believe Steve stated that prisoners were worth more alive than dead. In many cases, like you mention, it probably wouldn't matter. However, sometimes there are some outlying defending units that surrender real early in the game. Later on the battle might grind into a slug fest and one side or the other won't end up surrendering before the game ends. In these cases, the prisoners might be worth their weight in gold alive vs. dead. Mike

Hey CCJ, How do I download the Gold Demo textures? I see hypertext to download the sounds, but not the textures on your page........??? Thanks, Mike D aka Mikester

I'm going to have to try these out when I get home tonight. The Panther camo scheme is a little toO radical/bright for me, but even it is cool. The rest looks awesome. I especially like the stone wall detail. Mikester out. [This message has been edited by Mikester (edited 06-01-2000).]

As I recall, live prisoners are worth more to you in the games victory calculations than dead ones (dead ones are treated just like regular KIA's I believe). I would therefore keep them alive and in your control if at all possible vs. killing them since they might help you win the game. Mikester out.

Targeting sound contacts is a big waste of time and ammo and just exposes your guys position. Generally speaking, in the experiments I've done, the actual unit is a good 20-40m away from the sound contact icon you actually see when the contact is made. The only exception to this that I can think of, and G4A mentioned above, is if you were expecting a massive assault from your enemy and at the end of a turn you saw several sound contacts grouped in a certain area. In that case if you had some mortars w/ LOS to this area (probably w/ lot's of extra rounds to "waste") you might want to just start dumping area fire (i.e. don't directly target the sound contact, although I don't think it will let you do this anyway) in order to start breaking up the attack, cause some casualties, etc. I usually target these area fires about 10-20m in front of where I "see" any kind of enemy unit as they will often be moving forward during the next turn and can actually move past your targeted area with little damage. Also, larger caliber / spotted artillery use in such cases probably won't do you much good as the reaction time for the shells to start coming in at the target point takes too long. Mikester out. [This message has been edited by Mikester (edited 06-01-2000).]

My guess is that Doug is correct. They may also have been "fanatical". But I don't think the CE scenario has either side set for fanatism, so Doug's explanation makes more sense. Mikester out.

Total Control does NOT necessarily directly equate to Total Realism. In fact, I would imagine in some cases the opposite would be true. And while some of the "governing" rules might be a bit of a pain at times, I think overall BTS has done a very good job of balancing all these factors in the game design. With that said, I think the game should be left "as is". Therefore: Cast one GTP vote for me. Mikester out. [This message has been edited by Mikester (edited 06-01-2000).]

Lt. Bull, I'm crying in my soup for you. I did run across a website not more than a week ago run by a couple of veterans that do several tours in Western Europe of WWII battlefields every year. I think I have it bookmarked on my computer at home. If you want I can check for you when I get out of work today. Just so I don't forget, send me an email at mikester@attglobal.net so that I remember. Mike D aka Mikester [This message has been edited by Mikester (edited 06-01-2000).]

DrD, I like the point spread / adjusted victory condition idea alot. Hopefully BTS read this. As for computer vs. computer play it would be nice to have. However, I think this came up some time back and BTS said that they were not going to do this. I believe it had something to do with the way the game is coded up and it would be too much work to try to put this functionality in. Mike D aka Mikester _____________________________________________ Doing a search on ai vs. ai yielded among other things the following: quark3000 Junior Member posted 06-12-1999 09:29 PM In Combat Mission, will there be any kind of option to setup a Computer Player Vs.Computer Player game? This isn't something I'd do often, but, it would be interesting once in a while to setup AI against AI & see how they go at it. And, if this is possible, is it also possible to adjust the weapons for each side? I realize that even CC3 doesn't allow AI vs. AI, but, I was just wondering if Combat Mission will. Thanks in advance for any info. Mike IP: Logged Big Time Software Moderator posted 06-13-1999 03:51 AM Probably not AI-vs-AI per se, but we might have an option where (1-player game only) you can hit a hotkey and the AI will issue orders to all your troops (which you can then edit or rescind before committing to them). So if you did this every turn, it would be a form of AI-vs-AI. Charles IP: Logged quark3000 Junior Member posted 06-13-1999 11:02 PM Charles, thanks a lot. Even that option would be helpful. Mike [This message has been edited by Mikester (edited 05-31-2000).] [This message has been edited by Mikester (edited 05-31-2000).]

My friend and I are on about turn 22 of our latest VoT experiment w/ me playing the Germans and no advantage for either side. I made some setup mistakes that didn't help me much, but really were not that dertimental. He is on hill 209 now and battling it out w/ my reinforcing platoon. They will be overwhelmed by his massive force up there in about 2-3 minutes though. I also still have most of a platoon just behind the hill on the victory flag location on the German right. The Panther is ranging freely and has already taken out one of the 4 shermans he had left. He's about to clock the next one as well which is lined up in his sights at just over 200m. That will only leave him one sherman 105 and the 76. If I can take them out and get over to my guys on the small objective flag I might be able to hold it. If I can do this and kill his tanks and some of his men along the way I feel I might have a chance at him only getting a minor victory, or maybe even a draw. I'll keep you posted. Mike D aka Mikester