Wilhammer

BTS, See what we are missing having no Horses?!? The reindeer pulling sleighs, the Budweiser Clydesdales. What loss of opportunity.

Twas the week before Christmas When all through the land Not a soldier was stirring not even the BAR man. The men were all nestled in a cold damp fox hole with dreams of victory filling their head. When what do we here but the clanks of the tracks As Hitler and his men would jump them out of their sacks. A roar was heard as the Nazis delivered there packages with care. On Blitzkreig, On Rundstedt! On Peiper! On Skorzeny! The made such a crash As the GIs home wish would come to a dash. Just as the hordes begin to claim victory When what do we hear? The 101, the 2nd and 99 give the Nazis a hell of a time as they came near. The Nazi Chritmas had come to a crash when all of a sudden came Patton arriving in a mad dash! On Shermans, and Priests, Stuarts and Greyhounds! M3A1s fully equipped All together the Germans they surely did whip. And now for for the dligence and bravery of every GI I place a hand above my right eye. To salute you and to praise for the bright sunny days. For your sacrifice and a bit of (Nuts!) spice insure for us all Merry Christmas! And to all a good night!

Reindeer? Surely CM2 will have reindeer for Finnish sleds? Just think, with Santas Reindeer, we get air mobile deer equipped with a serious weapon... You guessed it.... The "Pooper Trooper".

I feel slighted, unintenional or not, that Allied AA vehicles are omitted. As for playing them with the Germans, I have tremendous success with them. The key is to know when to use them. I tend to keep them in reserve, only to commit them into a situation in which I am administering the coup de gras (SP?). They are excellent. Right now, I have used a Wirblewind (the 20mm quad PzIV) as a defense tool for my weary attackers who took a well defended position. The bastards staged an overwhelming counter attack, but my WW stopped it dead in concert with the HMGs I moved in and the weary platoon. Then, I advanced a couple of squads, a HMG and the WW in concert in pursuit and have crushed them. The WW then fast moved to another sector and has helped shift the balance in a sector on the other side of the map. A close battle that was tipped ever so slighly in my favor by the WW support. As for not having the time, well I see plenty of German HT variants and essentially one Allied, except for the love affair someone had with the Bren/Universal carrier, we have variants there. A great game none the less.

:::Actually, a 60mm mortar has almost NO chance of killing any closed top vehicle. It is that feature that the TacAI looks at, not mm of armor here or there. Mortars don't hit frontally in any case ::: Thanks for clearing that up. Only you guys can tell us precisely how the AI works, and my (erroneous) thinking was that the TacAi was limited in Kill Chance determination by the armor facing it. We all know that mortar fire is plunging fire, so I am impressed that the TacAI "knows" this. But, a slim chance does exist that it can kill through the deck, and sometimes you need all the chances, no matter how slim, you can get. Another question, is their any value in repeatedly hitting a target you cannot penetrate? 1, does it have any effect on the crew morale? 2, how well does it work in distracting the target thus making it a viable component of a combined arms approach of killing the tank (I had infantry sneaking in to the area and a M-36 peaking over crest lines as it weaved into the area)? The hope here is that the fire keeps them "pinned" in the AFV and also that the AFV will spot them and lob a few shells at the mortar team, thus not firing at other targets, i.e, the mortar team is moved up to the top of its priority list. 3, what are the chances that a 60mm mortar could take out the tracks? After all, an immobilized SPG is dead meat, mostly. Thus, my trick to hide the Vehicles and order directly observed area fire is in the hope that sustained mortar fire would contribute something to a combined arms manuever to kill a tank. BTW, I wanted to save the smoke rounds of the mortar to help with the final assault move, which is the other way to have them contribute. [This message has been edited by Wilhammer (edited 12-15-2000).]

Marketing theory. Has anyone else got the feeling that sometimes CMBO is "Black-balled" by some online mags, etc., because it is NOT in the marketing mainstream?

With platoon level mortars spotted by the HQ units, I think it would be "realistic" for the HQ to actually spot a unit for the mortar, and once the target vacates, then said HQ issues the "Hold Your Fire" command. Slightly related, I noticed that in a recent QB PBEM that my 60mm mortar would fire only one round if I targeted a vehicle directly, and quit (the target was a Hetzer). So, I used the hide vehicle command, and targeted the spot the tank was set on, and then unhid vehicles. That worked better as the 60mm mortar kept pounding the area (just buttoning the tank, but hey, that is good enough sometimes) hoping to get a kill. This leads me to think that the 60mm mortar asessed that the Front armor was a zero chance kill, so it stopped firing after one round.

I did a search ... no luck. How many feel that the US TDs should carry more HE? From my reading, it seems that the TDs strayed from their planned use and were commonly employed with infantry units for direct fire support. I never have enough HE in my QB TDs for them to be that effective as an infantry support unit. While I am on the subject of US TDs, I have seen pictures of them with light steel turret covers. Was this common? Was it so prevalent that perhaps they should be modeled in CM?

Have noticed the same problems. All units seem more willing to pop smoke, and I got to see it work real well when some 60mm mortars took it upon themselves to cover an infantry assault in a village. Have also seen the switch from HE to Smoke on targets I had plotted my AFVs to strike. Playing the AI in a QB, I had a dominant Building I put 3 MGs and a spotter in. The AI had bought itself quite a few guns, and 2 of them, a 150 (or 105) Inf Gun and a FlaK88 targeted it, and proceeded to lay a heavy barrage of SMOKE on it. Only when they ran out of smoke did they use HE, and that was some 10 turns into the game (I did present other targets to them that shifted there attention). In concert, those two guns could of demolished the building quickly. Also noticed in the same game an increased willingness of Gun Tanks using Heat more often. I swear in earlier versions, the HE round was weapon of choice. Same QB, my little M8 GMC took out a Stug III and a 234/1 on the first shot, both times as HEAT rounds to a pretty good range of 500 meters or more.

Chupa, calm down. BTS bases part of its claim on conjecture, and I offer some in return. So, if you offer up a bunch of hard facts, but offer one dubious one.... Please, if you want to argue about this, don't attack me, attack my arguments. Naming someone in your statement against the argument is close to a flame. All the facts I offer are from a WW2 manual issued by the US Army that seems to be backed up by several other sources. Please be calm, this is just a discussion board, not a brawl [This message has been edited by Wilhammer (edited 12-02-2000).]

Based on American work practice, and as dangerous as War is, it was a job, then I would say that no crews were assigned to personnel HTs in the US Army in the field, except, maybe, a driver. Driving was a part of life for many of the GIs, life on the farm, etc. I am also convinced that, for the most part, the MMG spindle mounts were used by weapons inherent to the unit, so if you want a heavily armed HT, put 2 MMG teams on it, and they mount their MMGs on the HT. Resonable for travelling, but I doubt they were used in direct combat long that way. As ofr stowage, you can see that much was behind the passenger seats, and of course the plethora items mounted outside the damn things. Concerning BTS questioning of how they were used, I can see the confusion. If the A1 series was used to carry a squad, then I doubt it could support and feed more than one MG at the same time. But BTS seems to feel that if it carries its squad, then no MG can be used. Hogwash, I say. If I had to command a unit of a1 HTs, I would put a bunch of ammo on one HT (of course the other HTs would have some ammo), and use it to feed the other's MGs as needed so that I could carry my squads in unity.

Check out Harry's Half Track Page. He is currently restoring a M3A1. http://www.eagle.ca/~harry/vehicles/halftrck/index.htm This link agrees with the link I posted in the other Halftrack thread in that the M3a1/M5a1 replaces the M3/M5 in production, and all of them carried 13 passengers. Another link describing the M3a1 HT. http://www.wargamer.com/cm/m3a1.htm [This message has been edited by Wilhammer (edited 12-02-2000).]

bump

Is this Al Nofi and James Dunnigan? It is! These guys are wargame design "gods", so to speak. They were behind most of what was the the long ago late and great SPI wargames of the 70s and 80s. Those were the good old days. With CM, the feeling has returned. [This message has been edited by Wilhammer (edited 12-02-2000).]

http://147.238.100.101/dtdd/armormag/so99/5mudd99.pdf My other pet peeve is mentioned in this article as well, the use of WP to eradicate MG nests in Hedgerow country, though admittedly, it reads like a regurgitation of Doubler's report.

Some quick research. According to the "Standard Ordnance Items Catalog, 1944, Vol 1" available at http://carlisle-www.army.mil/cgi-bin/usamhi/DL/showdoc.pl?docnum=710: M2 series carries up to 10 men. The M3A2 was fitted for 5-12 men. The M2, M2A1, and M3A2 are designated as "Half-Track Cars" The M3, M3A1 (Half Track Personnel Carriers)had 12 man capacities, and interestingly, the M3A1 was equipped with a .50 cal ring and a .30 cal. The M9A1 is equal to the M2A1, the M5 series is equal to the corresponding M3 series. The M5A1 has capacity for 13 men, an M-49 ring mount for a .50 cal, and three pivot mounts for a .3o cal MG, a direct relation to the M3A1. Apparently, the only difference between the M2/M3 series and the M9/M5 series is that the M9/M5 series was manufactured by International Harvester, while the others are by the likes of White Car. The A2 series are intended for "International Aid Services Only", which I suppose is Army lingo for Ambulance. The M2 and M3 were phased out (of production, but were still "limited standard") by 1943. The A1 versions only real change was the addition of an AA mount (the M49 ring) over the assistant driver position, not as MadMatt states "... the M3A1 which has the special MG mount in the passenger compartment." Specific mention of command versions (no command specific version were designated, they were custom made apparently in the field) is in terms of equipment displacement of men, for example if they add a SCR-508 radio, you lose 2 men. Go read this booklet, it is full of great detail on every vehicle in the US Army in March 1944. Be sure to check out http://carlisle-www.army.mil/cgi-bin/usamhi/DL/showdoc.pl?docnum=712 for US Weapons. Be sure to check out page 63-66, an exhaustive description of every type of Vehicular MG mounts used by the US Army. Apparently, an assistant driver was expected to be a gunner on anything that moved. Maybe that is why we call it "Riding Shotgun". It would appear that the reason the Brits removed the .50 cal position was likely because they did not use the .50 cal HMG normally, and replaced with their MGs. In conclusion, the M3A1, M5A1 have an M49 .50 cal mount over the assistant driver position, the A1 series replaced the the M3/M5 series in production, and that all of them can carry 13 men. No special command HTs manufactured, only regular HTs with command equipment onboard that displaces rider positions. [This message has been edited by Wilhammer (edited 12-01-2000).]

Here, Here! A confirmation GO button for setup is a great idea. A confirmation GO button for turn execution is NOT a good idea. War is messy, and mistakes are part of it. I also like the Done button getting confirmed, I have hit that in error. Though, if I really want to look at it again, I can just recover the email and redo the movie. Also, for us micromanagement types, I wish I could plot planned movement paths during my setup. Thanks for all the effort BTS. [This message has been edited by Wilhammer (edited 12-01-2000).]

Castle Itter The rescue of several French Diplomats/General Staff by Company E just at the end of the war.

Good, Handy Chart. Thank you, thank you very much. Question, does the experience level of the Arty FO have any effect on any of the stats? Does its commander or lack thereof have any effect? Are any arty pices more prone to start fires than others? How many blast points does it take to bring down each building type? Thanks.

POSSIBLE BUG? Concerning the HQ spotter for out of LOS targeting, I have seen the occasional suspension of the fire mission. Notice when you plot smoke from on board weapons that if the system hits the exact spot targeted, the smoking stops. I wonder if the two symptoms are related.

I just wanted everyone to know that I have initiated a class action lawsuit against the State of Virginia. I wanted you to hear it from me before you read about it in the paper. In summary, I bought a Lotto ticket several weeks ago. After reviewing my picks last night I noticed that I (in a honest mistake) picked the wrong numbers. What I actually meant to pick were the correct numbers! Accordingly, I should be awarded the 40 million dollar lotto prize that was issued that week. I'm certain others made the same dreadful mistake. I'm also reviewing previously unclaimed winning tickets because I also have the right to claim them as mine. I have also filed another lawsuit against the State of Virginia. After thinking about my SAT scores, I feel there is a chance that I may have punched the wrong answers on several questions, or selected two answers if I wasn't certain, when I took the exam 17 years ago. If I had been treated fairly, I might have grown up to be a Bill Gates, or, heaven forbid, even a Bill Clinton. The questions were (at times) very misleading and the exam score card was quite confusing. Thanks for your understanding on this serious matter. And please feel free to join in on the lawsuit.

I rename and overwrite, so to speak. I have a shortcut to the PBEM directory that I drag and drop pbem.txt files or zipped files too. I clean out the directory manually to keep me from getting confused. I am not a frequent mailbox cleaner, so all my PBEMS are archived by default.

This is all very fascinating. Are you guys compiling this stuff on a spreadsheet? Some quick reference charts based on your data would be very handy to play with. BTW, I always had thought that speed rank was Fast, Hunt, Move. It was also expected that vehicles would move faster than during the "acceleration phase". The questions; What is the distance of the acceleration phase of movement? What effects do waypints have on this? Specifically, if a vehicle pivots, what effect does this have on momentum?

Hey Kitty, Have you been able to find anything out about converting the in-flight projectiles?

We've been here before, I know that, so don't envoke "Do a Search" as this is a real counter productive statement that inhibits discussions. That being said, I know return to one of my pet peeves of CM, the absence of White Phoshporous rounds. WPWPWPWPWPWPWPWPWPWPWPWPWPWPWPWPWPWPWPWPWP From Combat Lessons 6 from the US Army Chapter on Street Fighting. Burning Buildings "Some buildings were set afire with 8l-mm WP shells; however, this method was used only as a last resort because it left difficult obstacles. Such fires were set at night to avoid interference with daylight combat." Apparently enough WP was present to tempt its overuse. (WOW) From the section on fighting in Villages; "WP can be of great value in village fighting, but its use must be definitely planned and explained to all elements before the attack. WP rounds should hit inside or behind buildings; if they hit in front, the enemy can escape through the smoke undetected. A round of WP will sometimes force surrender or evacuation of a building. Where resistance is stubborn, all buildings should be fired upon and either burned or destroyed." In Woods Fighting "In wooded country, have the men carry only armor-piercing ammunition; it will go through trees if the enemy uses trees as cover. A few thermite grenades are handy to have along, too. They can he used to destroy gun barrels and to start fires." The use of infnatry smoke grenades is extensively noted for use as concealment in this booklet as well. Find Combat Lessons 6 here; http://carlisle-www.army.mil/cgi-bin/usamhi/DL/showdoc.pl?docnum=146 Michael Doubler explains in Hedgerow Tactics that WP became an indepinsable tool for hedgerow assaults for some units in his book "Closing with the Enemy".