Kingfish

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Holien: Bad news on the sleep, the whole set of games were very consuming of mental and nervous energy. I will send you the AAR and in return ask for yours. H<hr></blockquote> Hey, send him the AAR for the 'Ranville' you and I played. That was fun! [ 01-24-2002: Message edited by: Kingfish ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by wwb_99: What bug? I have done alot of TCP with lots of AFV reinforcements and never seen them cloned. WWB<hr></blockquote> There is certainly an AFV cloning bug occuring on the road from Hersfeld. The last couple of turns it looked like the American version of the May Day parade.

According to Ken Tout's book 'A fine night for tanks', Wittman was ambushed and killed by Joe Eskins (sp?), a Firefly gunner with the Northamptonshire Yeomanry. Ironically, after bagging Wittman and two other Tigers, Joe never fired another shot. He served out the rest of his tour as a loader in another Firefly. BTW, If you want a really good scenario depicting this action try "Cintheaux-Totalize" from Der Kessel.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by WineCape: Another Combat Mission myth: "If you beat WineCape in PBEM he will NOT part with his beloved cellared wine to said winner! <hr></blockquote> Hey, quit yer grape stompin' and send me a turn. I love watching your veteran Panthers retreating from my British rifle squads.

To determine the number of rounds fired by the Finnish army you must first determine the number of Russians who were killed in that theater, then divide by two, as it was common knowledge that each round fired by a Finn killed two Russians.

According to your Pak40, the flamethrower 2000 meters away is a greater threat than the Sherman 80 meters away.

Holien, Did you get my e-mail?

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Andreas: 2) CMBO does not model Bocage battles well For a time I agreed with that statement. Having looked at this, and designed an express Bocage battle now, I tend to disagree with it completely. If you don't insist to have your Bocage fields rectangular 300x400m fields, but instead have it twist and turn on very small fields (as is realistic in the western region of Normandy, I have been told), it appears to work well. <hr></blockquote> Sorry, but I must disagree with you here. The bocage that i've seen and read about were part earthen bank / part very thick growth. The bocage in CM act more like very tall hedges, offering very little in cover and concealment.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by JonS: PPS: Guys who've finished - when does that PTSD set in again?<hr></blockquote> For me, it started .00001 of a second after I had sent my last e-mail. I've since replayed 1 of the scenarios, started another, and have joined another tourney just to get my fix. BTW, If any ROW participant wants to replay any of the scenarios let me know. Either side is fine with me.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>The WBW Rumblings group will have first opportunity to sign up for the WineCape CMBB tourney.<hr></blockquote> 1) Kingfish 2) 3)

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redeker: Of course, I still have to wait for the resulting moveie, and I give myself a week before the withdrawal symptoms hit. <hr></blockquote> Trust me, they hit a lot sooner than you think.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by patolino: But how about that Ami 57mm AT gun lying around whose conscript crew my veteran SMG squads directed elsewhere? It's brand spanking new -- just needs some green paint on the shield to cover the 9mm hit marks! <hr></blockquote> If it was manned by a conscript crew chances are it was broken long before your guys showed up.

Select image you want to show - hit alt-S - turn off computer - box up and ship computer to Madmatt - attach note describing image and where to find - he'll post image on CMHQ. If Madmatt is not availible then send to Kwazydog.

Something to consider: There isn't a unit in CM that can change its movement rate based on casualties or ammo expenditure. IOW, a 60mm mortar team that has fired it's last round will move just as slow as a fresh team w/ 35 rounds. If you include the FT within the Engineer squad then the squad must move at the same rate as the FT. Agreed? Now, during combat FT team gets killed, what now? Does the squad keep the same speed? Unrealistic. Or, Add more coding changes to get the squad back up to full speed? Unnecessary.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>You asked for my thoughts, I gave them. If you want an argument, I'll give you one of those as well.<hr></blockquote> I don't think an argument is needed for you to get your point across. <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>My point is just b/c he is the best shot does that make him (the sharpshooter supposedly selected from whichever squad) the absolute best soldier in his squad?<hr></blockquote> But in CM if he's not at least equal or better than the rest of his comrades then his marksmanship is not as good, so therefore he cannot be the chosen sharpshooter of the unit, because only the better shots are issued the scoped rifle, correct? <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>So that if you take out the best shot he should not necessarily be "Crack" or "Elite" and then when you mix him into a squad with maybe some "Regulars" the whole unit becomes a "Veteran" one. That is not how CM works, correct?<hr></blockquote> No, but flip it around. Would it make sense for the commander of a Veteran rifle platoon to assign the sharpshooter's duties to a guy fresh out of cadet school? Perhaps in real life, because Joe cadet might be a good shot, but in CM his accuracy is worse than his comrades, because in CM better experience equals better accuracy. Why is that so hard to understand? <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Also, consider maybe he just became a sharpshooter... maybe he should suffer a penalty because he no longer has comrades around him in a cohesive unit?? Maybe all sharpshooters should be downgraded a step...<hr></blockquote> I agree, but there is just one problem with that. CM doesn't assign different levels of 'values' (for lack of a better word) to a unit. IOW, you can't have a unit that has Elite marksmanship, regular morale and green response. So if you are to give him a penalty for being out all alone his accuracy will drop, so there's no point in handing him the rifle.

Pg. 78 of the manual: Lastly, the experience rating of a unit also has an impact on its offensive capabilities, i.e. firepower. This reflects, among other factors, better marksmanship... So, to use Panzerman's example, if old Rueban was an excellent shot in civilian life, but then given conscript status when drafted, his marksmanship will be no better than some other Joe-blow that they grabbed off the street. Keep in mind that I'm talking specifically about CM, not real life.

Question: Since Sharpshooters in CM represent the best shot of a unit, wouldn't it make sense to always have the Sharpshooter equal or higher in experience to the other line infantry of his unit? It seems to me that if a defending commander has enough time to lay mines, scout terrain, deploy field pieces, plot TRPs and call in reinforcements, then he surely has enough time to pick the most experienced guy under his command, hand him the scoped rifle and tell him where to hide. Your thoughts?

No problem, I just got a bite on my line and about to set the hook.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Treeburst155: I will start looking for a replacement immmediately. Treeburst155 out.<hr></blockquote> You rang?

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>It seems that the StG in CM are much effizienter then they were in reality.<hr></blockquote> Perhaps, but your missing a very important bit of information: The number of actual weapons systems that achieved those kills. Only by comapring the ratio of German tanks to SPs can you determine how effective they were. IOW, If the German tank fleet outnumbered the Stugs by 4:1 then the Stugs were just as efficent as tanks, and cheaper to build and maintain to boot. BTW, the 21st Panzer was a regular Heer formation, not SS.

WANTED Opponent to play wwb's new scenario. This will be a dbl blind PBEM. If you're interested then send me your setup. Either side is fine with me.

Mattias, Would you like the scenario? I have it (a copy actually) in my HD. E-mail me if you're interested.

Isn't it time for your Alpha battle with Fionn on the eastern front?

Also, both the ratio of attacker / defender and the location of the VLs will differ with each game type. IIRC, the differences are: Meeting engagement - 1:1 (att / def) with the VLs located in the neutral center Probe - 1.25:1 (I'm drawing a blank as to where the flags are located) Attack - 1.50:1 with the VLs located a 1/3 from the defenders map edge Assault - 1.75:1 with the VLs located a 1/4 from the defenders map edge I could be wrong on some of the numbers, but it does give you a general idea.

Every Op has a 'no man's land' setting, which determines the distance the two sides are seperated at the beginning of each battle. This almost always in favors the attacker, so no matter how badly you crushed the amis in 'Carentan' you will still be pushed back.