ASL Veteran

Unfortunately you can't put anything under the shelter. I tried putting lettuce boxes and milk containers under the shelter one time and it just didn't work. You can move them under it initially, but when you reload the map the stuff under the shelter will all disappear IIRC.

Is that a British leg poking out from under the tank?

The game makes no distinction between dead or alive. It's also not a sound contact but a 'contact', the contact being a reported contact. Squad A sees an enemy unit (dead or alive) and reports that through the radio net. Squad B doesn't see into that area but because squad A reported something there they get a 'contact' marker in that spot. So in the exact same spot Squad A sees a destroyed enemy truck and Squad B sees an unknown enemy contact. Until Squad B actually looks at the enemy unit itself the contact marker that Squad B sees in that location will never firm up to a destroyed truck (at least I don't think it will, although it's possible that over time it might). I'm not trying to defend the behavior or tell you that you need to like it. I'm just explaining what's happening in the game.

This isn't any sort of mystery. It's the result of relative spotting. Until a unit sees an enemy for itself it only gets that information through the information sharing between units that are in command and control. This frequently results in contacts for one unit if they don't have eyes on something even though another unit has fully spotted the destroyed enemy in that location.

I'm very interested in picking that book up, but when I see the price my eyes start to water .

It's possible that might happen, although it would have to have unique terrain features and or TO&E in order to work. If you just made scenarios with the base game and had nothing unique in the 'pack' then all you would have to do is have one guy buy the pack and then he can e-mail all the scenarios to his friends. I have seen loose talk of 'Battle Packs' that were scenario focused but I haven't seen anything concrete yet so you never know.

Perhaps, but I think that QB players and Scenario players in general terms are different. A QB player is focused on the force he selects and how that force selection matches up with different combinations that your opponent can throw at you. In other words, the QB player is all about the force selection. Many QB players then try to tailor that force into an unbeatable combination for the purposes of competitive play. Their tactics and outlook tend to be focused on maximizing the strength of the force they can select as compared to other force combinations they may encounter. A scenario player, by definition, has no control over the force he has to work with since the force and situation is unique to the scenario. Therefore the scenario player has to adapt their tactics and approach to the force and situation that he finds himself in as outlined in the scenario they choose to play. A QB player could play twenty games all commanding the same exact force (quite possibly on the same exact map) since they will purchase what they want to command. A scenario player who plays twenty scenarios will have twenty unique situations to try to adapt their tactics to. It's a completely different mind set to playing the game.

I thought every scenario on the CD had a briefing for each side as well as an AI plan for each side? What is it that you are looking for exactly in a head to head scenario? If you are looking for "Tournament Scenarios" then you probably won't ever get something like that from BFC.

Yeah, I was wondering about that. I saw some photos with the sleeve rank but many with no insignia of any type at all. In WW2 the sleeve ranks were probably still yellow chevrons rather than green and black. Most of the Vietnam pictures still have the soldiers wearing the black strip with "US Army" in yellow above the left pocket though so I don't think it's the color that's bothering them. It's probably rank that's an issue because of snipers but a little color on the shoulder probably wouldn't mean that much one way or another if you are running about in the middle of Nijmegen. I once told a Vietnam era medic that since I wear glasses I was always worried about reflections from the sun giving me away. He told me something to the effect of 'It doesn't really matter what you do cause when it's your time that's when it happens. It's completely out of your control'.

You should probably keep in mind that many WW2 photos and video have had the divisional insignia obscured or removed by a censor. Modern US soldiers still wear their divisional insignia on their uniforms, although the insignia is all green and black now instead of multi colored. I don't believe the US Army switched to the green and black divisional insignia until sometime after the Vietnam war. I think the insignia is now attached by velcro, but when the patches were sewn onto the uniforms it was done with a specific number of stitches as per regulations (I know because I had to count them!). The divisional patches were very difficult to remove once sewn on and a determined effort to remove it might leave a hole in your sleeve. I did a quick search through some Vietnam pictures and it appears that the colored divisional patches were phased out sometime in 1967 or thereabouts. It's pretty hit or miss as to whether soldiers were wearing any insignia at all - even with regards to rank. They probably switched to the collar rank insignia about the same time they switched to the green and black divisional insignia. It seems like the 1st Infantry Division were the most consistent in wearing their divisional insignia though - First Cavalry Division was the least consistent or so it seemed from a quick photo search. Here's a nice shot of an infantryman from the Big Red One http://www.pbase.com/d_berry/image/111026576

The National Socialist Workers Party was a 'left wing' organization not a 'right wing' organization. Don't let Stalin's post war posturing fool you (Stalin, chomping a cigar 'wow, wouldn't want to be associated with those guys - better call them right wingers so nothing sticks to me. Oh, don't look at all those Ukrainians - nothing to see there). No, the Nazi Party was not communist but Fascism holds many 'community' and 'collective' based foundations. The collective being the state as opposed to the proletariat.

That's always a tough call because some players like less information and some like more so it's a bit of a balancing act. The US conditions are spelled out fairly well on the US tac map and OP map but many players probably just skip through a lot of that 'yeah yeah, when does the shooting start'. The US briefing also tells the US player not to worry about terrain and to withdraw if enemy firepower becomes too heavy. The US has no terrain victory points so they can hide anywhere on the map that they want, while the German has two terrain objectives so their direction of attack can be predicted with some level of certainty. The terrain is a bit rolling too so the American should be able to get off some Bazooka shots and set up some deadly ambushes on reverse slope defensive positions. The 57mm can definitely take out a Tiger as well. If your opponent threw in the towel at the thirty minute mark then I'm guessing he / she didn't follow the briefing advice. Even with the victory condition tilt, it's still a tough game as the US and that player will probably still have to take more casualties than most average players are probably willing to accept and continue playing. If you had Cease Fired rather than just stopping then it probably would have read as a Total US Victory or something along those lines (they also get a victory point bonus)

The victory conditions are heavily slanted to the US side, so while the US gets pummeled, it's supposed to be more difficult to gain points as the axis. So yeah, the battle will not play out in a way that is equal, but hopefully that is compensated for with the victory conditions. Out of curiousity, when you hit cease fire what was the score in the game? And no, it's not meant to be played as Axis vs the AI only. The victory conditions make it playable head to head - the superior player would probably want to take the US side. There is also a full Axis AI plan if someone should want to play as Allies vs the AI. There are 1000 worth of variable points that are easy for the US to get and hard(er) for the Axis to get (a 2000 point swing). The casualty points the US can gain are front loaded onto the first German infantry battalion (it's worth three times as much as the second battalion). It's not just about how the battle plays out but how the points are scored. The US player also has to be talented enough to conduct a fighting withdrawal. If the US player just sticks his jaw out and lets the Tigers pummel it then he's going to have a tough time of it.

After inspecting our target, discussing possible danger spots and driving tactics, we mounted and informed Arno, our gunner, Karl, our loader, and Egon, the radio operator. Their first combat action was now before them. Ready to go, ready to fire. ‘Panzer March!” Our nerves tight to the breaking point, each alone with his thoughts, complete silence inside the vehicle, only the engine was humming. So we crawled and crept slowly toward the hill top. What was waiting for us on the rear slope? Otto was standing in his hatch. ‘Slowly, a little higher! Stop! Turret three o’clock, aim at the edge of the woods! Again, nothing, Helmut, let’s go, march!” I geared up and opened the throttle all the way. We crested the hilltop. I spotted the edge of the woods and steered toward its left corner. We wanted to go around it so we could see what was behind it. Then, a violent rattle on the outer walls, machine gun and rifle fire. Our turret MG was firing. I recognized a rapidly firing enemy machine gun, spotted the flat helmets. De clutching on the right, aiming the hull MG, firing – all that happened in a flash. There, at the corner of the woods, enemy soldiers moving a gun into position! Report to the turret again aiming the hull MG. Our gun was firing with the Panzer moving at full speed. ‘Stop! Stop! Back! Back! Faster!’ Otto shouted that order. I knew the engine was at full speed, it could not go backward any faster. I turned toward the instruments, we were way past the maximum allowable number of revolutions, the time was sixteen minutes before sixteen hours. Just as I was about to look out of my sight slit I was blinded by a flash of light. There was a bang as if a soda pop bottle had smashed into a stone floor. Hit to the forehead, alive, those were my thoughts. Then, the Panzer was shaking as if in the grip of a giant fist, brightness, howling, shrieking noises, totally inhuman. Smell of sulfur, complete silence. Then Otto’s voice: “Bail out, Panzer’s on fire!” I unlatched my hatch, pushed it open, it moved only a few centimeters. Flames immediately blazed through the opening. The turret skirt sat above. I saw how Egon, our radio operator, pulled his legs from his hatch. That was the way. Across the transmission, the radio, my breath stopped, it was getting so hot, I had to get out, I could not take it anymore. Far away, a face. Arms stretching toward me. Shouts: “Helmut, get out!” Pulling, ripping, fresh air. I was outside, jumped off, letting myself drop. Egon had come back and pulled me out. Thanks comrade! Egon helped me to get up, I was standing again. Bullets whistled by and hit the hull. We lept to the side away from the enemy, there was Otto. What about Arno and Karl? Otto pointed to the turret, its side hatches were still closed and yelled: “Both were killed outright, I was still inside!” I could not believe it. Arno Eltus from Konigsberg in East Prussia, my gunner. Since Hasselt we had been together with Otto, always in the same Panzer. We lived through our first actions, victories, always the three of us together. Now he was gone, just left inside the turret. What a terrible realization. Dark smoke billowed from the open hatches. We ran into the direction of our front line. Suddenly I heard: “Helmut, you’re on fire!” I rolled on the ground, Otto and Egon helped extinguish the flames. Again, machine gun bullets were whistling by us. We ran and ran. Finally we reached the rear slope, found German soldiers, houses. A squad of soldiers addressed us but I did not hear or comprehend anything. I could see but not recognize , felt pain, severely burning pain. Then it turned all black around me and silent.

The main problem with the BAR is that it only has a 20 round box magazine and it loads from the bottom which is less convenient than the top feeding 30 round box magazine for the Bren if you are firing from the prone position. You are almost guaranteed to lose your aim when reloading a BAR. I don't think the BAR has a barrel change either, although I'm going from memory on that.

Besides, the correct terminology according to General Patton is Spaghetti Benders not Spaghetti Eaters. Let's try to get our disparaging remarks correct first before becoming offended by them.

I doubt that any of the yellow level wounded are counted as 'wounded' in the after battle stats. The wounded in the post battle stats are probably all 'red' wounded while the killed would be the brown 'KIA' plus a percentage of the red wounded who didn't receive buddy aide.

Typically after a crew bails out they are subject to some form of shock or confusion. Just getting out of the tank is a dicey affair. Sometimes, for example, if a Mark 4 has it's turret turned just the wrong way the skirt will block the driver and radioman's hatches from opening and they have to attempt to exit through the turret. After surviving the exiting of the vehicle the crew are almost always unarmed since the first reaction is to get out of the vehicle before suffering from a fiery death. Crews don't typically spend time taking weapons off the racks before getting out. In fact, I've read several accounts where a German tank commander gets tangled up in his throat mic and has a lot of difficulty bailing out because of it. One guy was even dangling on the side of the turret hanging by the throat mic while enemy infantry were shooting at him. That should give you some indication as to what tank crewmen's priorities are when bailing out of a tank. After a successful bailout, the crew will typically look to assist wounded crewmembers and then attempt to run for cover if there are any enemy infantrymen nearby. I've read one account of a driver who got out and it took several seconds before his comrades even realized that he was on fire! After reaching cover the crew almost always heads back to the workshop or company headquarters / rear area if possible. A particularly motivated commander may mount another vehicle if there is one nearby in order to continue command of his unit, but that's certainly not always going to be the case. This seems sensible to me because after surviving a near death experience it's probably not normal for a human being to put themselves right back into danger unless they are highly motivated. Incidentally, I've also never read of a situation where tank crewmen switch places to continue the fight after a penetrating hit kills a crewman. If a crewmember is killed and the other crewmembers notice it (from a penetrating hit) the tank will almost certainly retreat out of danger and possibly even return to the workshop where the tank is examined for damage and the body of the dead crewman is removed. Japanese tank crewmen, on the other hand, will not bail out of their tank if the tank is in direct LOS of the enemy even if the tank is on fire. If the tank breaks down or immobilizes out of the LOS of the enemy the crew will dismount the vehicle removing any MGs that can be carried and they will continue to advance as infantrymen. I have read some accounts of Japanese tank crew and they are in a class all by themselves.

Ahem, rescuing crew members of a disabled tank and cramming that crew into an already manned tank is a distinctly different situation than having a crew look upon an abandoned tank, jump into it, and start driving around fighting the enemy. One would also presume that such a tank that was filled by both it's inherent crew and a rescued crew would be compromised in it's ability to function during combat. I would expect a vehicle filled with two crews to head to the rear so that the wounded men could receive aid and the extra personnel be offloaded in a safe area. Regarding an abandoned tank on the battlefield let's run through some common sense logic here shall we? I see a tank on the battlefield that doesn't appear to be moving. Is there a crew inside? Maybe or maybe not. Unless there is smoke coming from it or obvious damage then it wouldn't necessarily be apparent that the vehicle is even abandoned. Assuming that you have determined that the vehicle is abandoned how are you going to know that all the systems are working? Does the gun fire? Is the radio working? Does the vehicle move or even have fuel? Does the engine work? So you and your comrades decide - yeah, even though the tank is under fire by Soviet HMGs and there is an AT gun nearby and we have no idea what condition the tank is in, I'm just going to jump into that bad boy, fire it up and start kicking some Soviet a$$. I'm sorry, but that just doesn't even pass the smell test. John, I have read more personal accounts than I would care to count - many of which are directly on point with what is being discussed. I've never read an account where an abandoned tank gets remanned in the middle of a firefight. Ever. Not even a single time. Have I read where a crew abandons their tank and happens across another tank on their way back to the workshop area? Yeah. The dead crewmembers were both inside the tank and on the ground nearby. They checked out the vehicle, inspected it for damage, tentatively tried to start it up and were surprised it ran - and had fuel. They drove it back to the workshop to have it looked at. No, the enemy was nowhere to be seen. Have I read where individual commanders will join an already manned tank so he can continue to command his unit? Sure, but even in those circumstances the commander waits until the opportunity presents itself so that the switch can be made safely.

While historically tank crews would switch between vehicles on occasion, it typically isn't the kind of thing that is done while under fire. If the abandoned vehicle is sitting in the direct LOS of the enemy you typically aren't going to see a vehicle crew go and jump into it. Even if it's their own vehicle a crew typically won't jump back into a vehicle that they just abandoned while the enemy still has a direct LOS to it. I think the game is actually more forgiving than reality.

It's been my experience that the less experienced a player is when playing against a human opponent the more aggressive that player is. In other words, if someone normally plays against the AI and you are their first human opponent they will tend to be more aggressive than someone who has played a lot of games against other people. There are exceptions of course - I used to play one guy pretty regularly and he was always aggressive to the point of foolhardiness every time we played. For some reason he always kept coming back for more though :confused:. My favorite game was one in CMAK ... I don't remember the name of the scenario but it came with the CD. I play scenarios by having one person select the scenario but the other person selects the side they want to play as. I selected the scenario assuming my opponent would pick American (defender) but he selected German (attacker) instead. I told him I didn't think it was a wise choice but he insisted so I obliged him. I deployed all my stuff and waited. He advanced through the open valley with a tank and infantry force and I just watched him and waited. The valley was split in two by a river or creek as I recall and there were high mountains all along one map edge. He started to get nervous, but continued to advance with his infantry and armor. Finally, at the last possible moment I opened up with everything I had. He was completely annihilated and auto surrendered after about five minutes. I didn't lose a single man wounded or killed. I'll give him credit though - he played through adversity rather than rage quitting. I had another nice one in CMSF Marines where I played as the insurgents against a Marine assault force in a valley. Once again, I don't remember the name of it. Anyway, my opponent drove his APCs right into the center of town with a small flanking force on either side of town. Once again I waited and waited - he even unknowingly passed several of my positions on his side of town as he raced down the main street. Once he reached the bridge in the center of town though I let him have it both from my side of the bridge and from my insurgents on his side of the bridge. I led off with several RPGs and had the HMG, Sniper, and insurgent squads rocking on all his poor truppen bailing out of his burning APCs. His lead platoon was almost eliminated completely with bodies and wreckage everywhere (they were completely surrounded and had nowhere to go since I was in the buildings he tried to run for to get cover after my initial ambush). I was actually running low on ammunition though and we didn't get a chance to finish it unfortunately. He did seem to be gaining the upper hand by the time we had to stop just because my troops were too lightly armed to go toe to toe with those Marines and their APCs (those ridiculous automatic grenade launchers are killers). However, my troops had taken hardly any casualties and I had a fallback defensive line to go to. I think the ammunition problem was going to be my downfall before the end though. Anyway, I love to play against aggressive opponents, although if you aren't ready for them they can catch you by surprise and get an advantage during one game. After that though any aggressive player can have his nose smacked by the newpaper easily enough. Whenever I play against an unfamiliar opponent I tend to prepare for the super aggressive attack and then adjust accordingly if the opponent turns out to be more cautious. I agree that aggressive play is important, but like everything it has to be used when it's appropriate and that's going to come down to the player's .... battle sense I guess I'll call it.

Well, theoretically the HMG loading time might be accurate if you assumed that the MG only had one strip available. The loader would have to shell the spent casings from the strip and then reload new rounds onto the strip before the weapon could be reloaded. That could take a while. I have to think that more than one strip would be available, however, once the supply of new strips is used up the gunner would be entirely dependent upon the loader shelling and reloading the strips for reuse. For those who didn't catch it - the HMG uses strips that when the weapon is fired instead of just spitting the spent casing onto the ground somewhere several meters away it actually replaces the spent casing back onto the strip. :eek: The only theoretical reason to do this would be to keep the gun position neat and tidy since all your spent casings would be on the strip rather than scattered around the gun position. Of course, when reloading the strip the loader would have to remove those spent casings from the strip before he could place new live rounds onto the strip. One can imagine that performing this task under fire would be an unpleasant activity. The long time delay seems reasonable for that sort of activity. The problem comes with how many fresh strips the gun starts with and how soon the loader can get started on his task after firing begins.

The Italian squads are split. They start split by default. What you are referring to as squads are actually teams. You are asking to split a team into two sub teams with one element led by a private.

I think it's fair to say that scout and AT teams are task specific and that the person 'leading' the team is only leading it for a short time for a specific task as directed by an officer or an NCO. "Hey Joe, go look over behind that barn and tell me what you see." There is a big difference between something that is task specific and something that is a leadership function standardized within the TO&E. In other words, the sergeant and the corporal have specific leadership functions to perform at all times under all circumstances, whereby the scout team just has to do something specific that the leadership directs them to do.

Section 222 is easily satisfied by using the Assault Move command that is present in the game now. It doesn't require the team to be split into independent entities. It's pretty obvious that you feel passionate about this issue Amedeo, but I don't think you are going to have any success in moving this issue in the direction that you want so you might as well just take a few deep breaths and let it go my friend.