Kingfish

Regarding M1s and fuel consumption, I remember reading a passage from 'Into the storm' in which Gen. Franks states that the daily fuel consumption of one American heavy division was just slightly lower than the 18 divisions of the combined U.S. 1st and 3rd armies in WW2.

Could be a huge flock of Geese flying overhead

The Fluffer is right! The same dilema, and the same tough decision. Treeburst, You can take my name off the list, and replace it with the next lucky bastard in line. Like CDIC, I too am a tester for Boots and Tracks, and like CDIC I can't pass up the chance to test these scenarios before being released to ROW II. Good luck, and good hunting. P.S. Treeburst, I live in West Palm Beach. I'd be happy to count the votes for you

Edit: there is a problem with the Germans in 'Paris'. At first I thought both side's functions performed the same way, but upon a closer inspection I did find a glaring difference between the two sides when it came to using the LOS tool. *****SPOILER****** * * * * * * I clicked on one of the Panthers and did a 360 degree LOS check. I started at the 12 o'clock position and the line showed up normally, but when I began rotating the LOS the line didn't follow. In fact, I was able to rotate very slowly around the tank and the line never moved. Only when I stopped did the LOS line catch up, and this was all within 50 meters of the tank. Now I tried with one of the French M4s, and the LOS line followed the cursor all the way around the tank, regardless of how far out or how fast I did the check. There is definetly something there. [ April 21, 2002, 09:38 PM: Message edited by: Kingfish ]

Let's not forget to add a Claymore or two, a few Wiley Petes, some smoke grenades, maybe some night vision gear...

I had the unfortunate luck of replacing one of the original participants, and he left me with an impossible situation. Upon opening the scenario I discover all my armor destroyed except for a StuH42 and a Lynx. All of my infantry is still embarked in HTs, with the exception of one platoon which was already shot to pieces. The HTs were still in convoy formation and heading straight into a three way ambush of Tanks, TDs and SP guns. Worse, I also had tanks working their way around to my rear. I lasted all of two turns before I committed the cardinal sin of tourneys - I surrendered. I knew the consequences of that would be severe, but I don't think I could have watched another 5 turns of my forces being blown to hell without any hope of resisting or escaping. Needless to say, it was not a fun time for me :mad:

The possibility of going up against John Kettler and a brigade of Katyushas is an offer I can't refuse! I'm in!

Kip, Use your third wish and ask for a convoy command!

Anyone who would like to see a good example of why we need a convoy command should d/l and play 'Mortain' as the Germans. The size of the map and vehicle count should give a good indication of what's in store for us in CMBB.

Proper spacing of the vehicles in column would take care of that. Perhaps sending 3-4 vehicles first, out of say a dozen, then next turn another 3-4 and so on. Maybe even give the point group a hunt command, so they all stop the moment they come under fire. Follow ups can use move.

While this might be a viable strategy, it is also a very big gamble for the German player. As you've stated, both PBs and the Pak40 were concentrating on the bridge. Meanwhile the Americans have a battalion of infantry already across the bridge, and your own forces are much too weak to stand up to that flood. In fact, if I were the American player, and saw you targetting the bridge on turn one, I would: a) Smoke one of the PBs, preferably the one targetting the stone bridge. Target the now unmasked Pak40 with my 60mm mortars c) Blitz the German line with my infantry. The bunkers, mines and German infantry will get their share, but they won't have the help of those 3 75mm guns.

OOBs of Brit armored forces

A couple of days ago I posted a possible option to the follow command. Basically it consisted of a group move but with an added restriction that keeps units on the road. This does away with the dozens of waypoints needed to get a column to the front. Just window the group, choose leader and destination and choose 'stay on road'. With the bigger maps in CMBB will come bigger OOBs. Dozens, even hundreds of vehicles having to advance thru vast expanses of Forest, deep snow or the Pripet marshes. Without a follow or convoy command it will be a micro-managing nightmare.

I'd like to give it a try as well. sc112565@aol.com Thanks

Granted, no TOE listed, but it might provide a contact from which to obtain such a list. Perhaps posting a question on their FAQ site, or going directly to the unit's official website might point him in the right direction.

Commonwealth Regiments

*****SPOILER****** * * * * * * Spoiler info for the 'Courseuless-sur-Mer' scenario. Speaking of blown bridges, here is a very rare pic (to me at least) of a destroyed wooden bridge in a scenario I was playing earlier today. The bridge took a direct hit from a 14" round. I was actually aiming for the area to the right of the PB, and you can see several craters there. Is this what destoyed wooden bridges look like taken out by DF? Just want to know if this image is rare.

VT stands for variable timed. It is specialized artillery rounds that explode at a predetermined distance above the ground. They are extremely lethal to infantry in the open or light vehicles. Have fun with it.

Just an idea, tell me what you think… Imagine being able to window a group of vehicles lined up on a road in a convoy formation, and then give the leader a destination at other end of a very long map. If we were to do this now we would have our convoy scattered to Hell and breakfast, with vehicles going off-road regardless of terrain conditions. Now imagine being able to issue a ‘Stay on road’ command after giving the convoy their destination. You will still have the constant collisions and accordion line movement due to the different experience delays and road speeds, but you’ll no longer have to plot dozens of waypoints for each vehicle just to get them to the front line. In effect it will be like a cruise control command for your Mechanized reinforcements.

A burning building will produce burning rubble when it collapses, so the LOS will still be blocked.

You rang? Ron, can you touney save the scenario and send to my address? I'd like to give this one a go. Considering what an excellent job you've done with the Winecape vs Kingfish 5000 pt scenario I expect this one to be a blast as well. I'll take the first opponent that posts here. Your choice of sides.

Lassner, This is the place where most scenarios are hosted: Scenario depot

Also check for min / max range limits.

Compassion, There is no ’95 rule’ per se. What this Pham fellow was referring to was that the Churchill VIII, which is armed with the 95mm gun, is excluded from Fionn’s short 75 list. Why he thought that the computer would follow Fionn’s guidelines when picking forces is beyond me. Keep in mind that it’s not just the gun, but the combination of the gun and heavy armor of the Churchill VIII that excludes it. You will see that the Centaur IV and Cromwell VI and VIII, which have the same gun but lighter armor, are included. Go here for a better explanation of which vehicles are included, and why: Fionn's 75/76 rules [ April 09, 2002, 02:53 PM: Message edited by: Kingfish ]

But it is not the purpose of this board to be used to settle gaming disputes. Why is this so difficult for people to understand. I challenge anyone to contact BTS directly and ask if it is acceptable to post the names / address of individuals who you think acted inappropriately in a game. Think of how immature this sounds? Here is something to consider: * almost all gaming disputes are the result of miscommunication. People have different styles of play, follow different rules, or are just not up to date on what is Kosher or not (case in point, Michael, a veteran of this board for quite some time didn't know about the 95 rule). How sure are you of not seeing your name in lights a day after a game, simply because someone didn't care for your style of play? Now picture a dozen such posts a week. Is this what we want here? Settle your gaming disputes offline. If there is no resolution then do as I do, walk away. Do not spend one nanosecond worrying about it. If you feel obligated to inform the community about this individual then have them e-mail you in private. Keep this crap off the boards, or else it will go the way of USENET and all the others.