Wilhammer

Were not many of the Thompsons issued as equipment to AFVs and Recon vehicles, and not just one, but several? So, if over 80,000 Shermans were issued 5 SMGs, that accounts for 400,000 of them. I made a big stink when CM first came out about how the engine on small arms favors the Germans, and it is mostly because of the ammo for SMG and Rifles being the same. The SMGs spend ammo far faster than a carbine or a rifle, yet they carry the same load. I call it the "Strong German Back" factor. BTS has promised to change this in CM:BB. [ 06-28-2001: Message edited by: Wilhammer ]

This is what an AI controlled FO did to me: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=7&t=000723

I was hoping that CM would eventually put in VP locations that are timed. The longer you hold it, the more VPs you collect. The further into the game, the value of the VPs go up. One unfortunate aspect of the All or Nothing VP sites is the opponent that waits to attack in the last few turns of the game. I really hate that. Of course, most of what I propose is at least party rectfied by making the battles short.

I got it. Kingfish must be playing this guy or another with a similar situation. Babra, I thought it was Barbara

Currently, Greensboro, NC area. 6-9 years ago, Greenville, NC with summers at Camp Seagull near Arapahoe, NC. 10-14 years ago, Raleigh/Cary, NC. Before that, Virginia Beach.

I really did not give an answer to how to get out of minefields. 1. If you are not under fire, and do not expect to be, plot a crawl or sneak. 2. If under fire, you are suffering twice the likelyhood of bad morale effects. You need to pin the supporting units shooting at you or throw out some smoke, and get out fast. You can bet your A** that if the defender is laying down weapons fire, the arty is soon to follow up. Arty fire is most effective on pinned uints, they stay around longer to die. 3. If 2 is the situation, perhaps your best bet is to smoke the area and launch a hasty attack, for your foe, if he is really good, has the rear of your position covered, and running away will cause a slaughter. (I typically plot arty fire BEHIND the minefield position for 2 reasons, 1 is a good opponent sends out a scout squad or half squad first, so the main body is behind him. Secondly, if I made the position untenable enough from the front, a withdrawal causes them to flee into a killing zone.) Poor minefield use happens when they are put out to cause casualties only. Good minefield employment is a combined arms approach. Something I have not deeply investigated is the effect leaders have on mine "evasion". Does leadership have such a role in CM? [ 06-27-2001: Message edited by: Wilhammer ]

Unless Kingfish is being sarcastic as your opponent, he is a bit off the mark. Arty does not damage minefields in CM. BTW, mine effectiveness goes way up when viewed as part of a combined arms defense. A squad hits a minefield on the edge of the woods he intends to attack you from. He takes a hit, then you lay down some MG, tank, and/or mortar fire, and watch that attack get broken up real fast. The enmy suffers quick morale "hits". First, the initial stumble, then some fire, then they are pinned or worse and try to get away, and the morale damaged unit "forgets" about the mines and falls back into them to suffer another morale hit. Soon, they are babbling idiots. The units that are behind the "detonator" will go around the minefield. Hopefully your support units have the bypass route covered, and if you did it well, this bypass route is in the open. Units in the open take grievous damage. In summary, place mines in likely enemy jump off points, like near buildings or in woods or on the edge of a coverinf depression, just beyond your MRL. Cover the minefields and the bypass routes with heavy weapons. Keep your AFVs hulldown and in LOS of the same. The minefields will incur greater vulnerability on the attackers. Your defense is in essence magnified. On the defense, mines are my friend. They do the job they are meant to do. [ 06-27-2001: Message edited by: Wilhammer ]

Enemy force bypasses a hidden platoon. Hidden platoon gets discovered by enemy units, all hvy weapons and one FO. Well, my platoon commander, down to 2 men, finds the FO and spends 2 turns shooting at it from 1 meter range, killing one dude. But... The FO defends itself by plotting fire on my unit, just one meter way, and it kills my HQ and it gets away!

"The Brits definitely knew about the attack because they decrypted the code at Blechley (sp?) Park. But they didn't tell the US intelligence about it." If this is true, then why no lawsuits? Some enterprising lawyers could earn a nice stack with this tidbit.

A Michelin 1947 http://www.peakpeak.com/~darylpoe/tanks/scenarios/mace/map.html Photos from the scenario http://www.peakpeak.com/~darylpoe/tanks/scenarios/mace/photos.html This site is an armor miniuatures one. They have the OOBs as well. His section on Artillery is interesting: http://www.peakpeak.com/~darylpoe/tanks/artillery/artillery.html [ 06-26-2001: Message edited by: Wilhammer ]

T-50? T-44? T-34-57? Will we see these interesting tanks? The T-44 is in a similar boat to IS-3, available but not used, except even more available. The others saw some combat.

My thoughts exactly. Less effective, but not totally ineffective. That site is appearing more and more on this board as a source, but be warned that a source is only as good as its data. Something is wrong with this bit of info.

Yamamoto. He threatened to resign if he did not get his way in prosecuting the war against the US, a children's act. Despite the success of carriers, he insisted on having all carrier task forces being large escorted surface fleets. His method and thus that of the IJN was too have the surface ships finish the battle, with the A/C commiting attrition. Despite his own success, he refused to see that carrier aviation was the end all of surface combat. To him, the CV was not a decisive weapon. He still believed in the Battleship. Just one example of flawed thinking. AMOF, the entire Japanese method of the war was flawed. Then, instead of reinforcing success, he wastes his carrier firce on the Great Ocean Adventure, the IJN carriier fleet sailing from the NW Pacific to Ceylon with strikes along the way. Hardly the proper use of a decisive weapon. Somehow, he reimnds me of McClellan.

Discussing the Su-76 in action at http://history.vif2.ru/su76.html "On the other hand, the opened compartment made all types of high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) ammunition (including weapons such as the "Panzerfaust," the "Faustpatron," and the "Panzerschreck") totally ineffective." Is this true? If so, will it be or should it be modeled?

OK, this is for the non-grongards, non historical types.... Today is the 60th Anniversary of the start of Barbarosa.

A public company becomes profit-centric as the most important person to please is no longer the customer, but the stock holders. BTS is by far an exemplary customer focused company, thus going public makes no sense.

SPs cannot carry passengers either.

The reason for the American bias is the show, History Channel, is American. Also, I am sure they wanted to avoid controversy. How come no one is Rommel, or Manstein? How about Zhukov or Monty? You see, in the good old USA, all history starts in 1776 It is also limited to our hemisphere or Europe. The entire Pacific War was fought at Pearl or Hiroshima.

I took the test two times, once as a wargamer, and I am: William Tecumseh Sherman The second test as I act in real life in the workplace: Wes Clark

Aaaah, Tobruk. Great game, unfortunately eclipsed by Squad Leader. As for duds, I'd like to see something as well.

I like the new ammo/weapons on the bar. Will we also get a passenger description on the bar? In CM, to see what passenger is on board, you have to view the Unit dialog. I'd like to be able to see it detailed on the unit bar.

The more I look at it, the more I think it is a modified AA gun from a warship.

If I recall correctly, the big AA pieces, 88s, 90s, do not contribute AA to CM due to scale. Those guns were designed for level bombers, not tracking light low moving aircraft.

http://history.vif2.ru/ Thanks for sharing this site. It is one of the best WW2 sites I have seen yet. All future CM:BBers should bookmark this. As for the ugly gun, it looks like a 20mm ATG of some kind, likely an aircraft gun quick manufactured for battlefield use, and that is just a big guess.

Seriously, From a historical POV, the force mix seems about right. As for the Sherman with a company of US Infantry, that also is about right. I would of bought 3 M-8 HMCs myself, an excellent infantry killer and about as survuvable as a Sherman at ranges of 200m or more. I mean, how many times have you seen a German MBT bounce a shell off of a regular Sherman?