paullus

The original production model of the Panther A (used & abused at Kursk) developed a reputation for engine fires. There were several flaws in the engine & fuel system design that resulted in major vehicle losses.

Recoiless rifles were first designed as possible replacements for machine guns on military aircraft. Unfortunately, no one could really get the concept to work (due to space limitations, ammunition concerns, etc). The US military first designed a 105mm recoiless rifle for use in WWII & Korea, but due to manufacturing problems, the weapon was almost useless and abandoned. A couple of years later, a new team was put together and solved some of the outstanding issues. The later model was still 105mm (uses a smaller, lighter shell than the 105mm howitzer), but the designation was changed to 106mm to avoid the unfavorable reputation of the original. The 106mm uses a HEAT round and was found to be very effective against armored targets and bunkers.

Funny story, the 106mm recoiless rifle is actually 105mm. The designation was changed because the first attempt at designing the weapon was so unsucessful.

To say that CM is not MOD-friendly is completely off the mark. If you hadn't noticed, there are at least a hundred mods out there, ranging from graphics, sounds, and interfaces. I know that you meant changes in the actual profile of the game, but I'm happy enough to see that the great designers of this game have allowed the greater game community put its own stamp on CM.

Nothing like watching a dozen 14" Artillery spotters take apart a German Infantry Battalion & everything else besides.

I'd love to see my name in lights (or pixels). Of course, McNamara is out (would have been great for this one), but I did see a McNamara squad leader in a British scenario a while back. Of course, I'm sure that Paullus could be included

I would not consider this gamey, since AA guns are relatively easy to suppress and vulnerable to direct fire (especially from armor and artillery). On the defense, I also find that they redress some of lack of numbers the defender usually deals with (especially against hordes of Allied infantry). I like to put one or two in flanking positions, to catch infantry in a crossfire, or defend against a flanking attack. A single Quad 20mm can hold several squads at bay until I can move up some reserves to plug a hole. Never expect them to live long, as the computer or PBEM opponents love to drop artillery on them, and since you can't move them very quickly, they usually buy the farm. I expect that German troops, especially in Normandy, pressed their AA guns (88mm and below), into direct service against allied attacks.

I was reading "SS-Hell on the Eastern Front" last night and they did state that Das Reich was able to scavenge enough T-34's after the failed Russian Offensive Spring '42 to equip an entire battalion for a short period of time. The unit performed well for a few months, but by October 1942 too many of the tanks were out of commission due to a lack of spare parts and regular wear and tear. I also did some more research of scavenging and found that German artillery batteries were notorious for pressing captured Russian pieces into action, particularly 122 & 152mm guns. They had the advantage of being throw-away pieces, they used them until the ammo stock was expended, then spiked the guns and moved on. A real shoot and scoot operation. Front line units, including a lot of recon battalions, used T-26's for patrols, to avoid arousing too much suspicion with the Russians that were being reconned.

A bunch of good reasons for not using them: 1) Friendly Fire 2) Spare Parts 3) Ammunition The first is self-explanatory. Though some T-34's were pressed into service, and more used by Russian-allied units (such as Yazov's troops), most weren't used because other German units and the Luftwaffe would tend to try to kill them. The second and third go hand in hand. Despite having thousands of these vehicles, the Germans had no way to procure spare parts, other than to strip existing tanks, and German and Russian tanks used different ammunition sizes. Although I would expect that any German tanker would have loved a German T-34, the difficulties involved meant that few were ever used. Of course, the Marder III did use captured Russian 76mm anti-tank guns.

Actually, I never even get the chance to get to the calculation phase. The game locks up at the select side screen...Regardless of what side I choose, I get an error sound (no message), and the game stops running. Anyone else see this???

I have recently found an issue with the 25%, 50%, 100%, etc. extra unit option on scenarios and operations. In larger battles, when I select these options, the game locks up and stops responding. I can't tell if it a function of my system or the game. Has anyone else run across this problem? Otherwise, the game has been exceptionally stable and free of mishaps.

I find the Hetzer to be a much better buy than even a Stug-III. I've had a dozen or more 75mm shots bounce off its sloped armor before finally taking a critical or debilitating hit (more than enough time to inflict substantial losses on advancing armor). Worth at least twice its weight in points.

I believe Stalin tried to make peace several times during the first 18 months of the war. If only to buy time for the Red Army to recover, since even Zhukov was unsure as to whether or not the Red Army could stand another German offensive in 1942 (especially when the Russian Spring offensive was annihilated in May 1942). Even if Hitler & Stalin did come to terms (maybe losing the Ukraine, the Baltics, and Belorussia in the process), both sides knew that a final showdown was inevitable.

Tanks will probably always have a place on the battlefield, regardless of advances in technology, but right now we need a tank that can be easily air-lifted into combat. Will all of the BS peacekeeping missions the army gets sent out on, and the need for a true rapid-deployment vehicle (no slap agains the marines intended), we need a quick, light vehicle with a decent punch (maybe a fully-auto 105mm or 90mm gun) and missiles. More than likely, the next dictator of the hour won't give us months to build up before starting some major sh*t. I'd prefer something that could be brought in quickly, and still deal with the old Soviet dinosaur tanks that make up most of the third world armies out there.

I remember seeing a picture of a Sherman with over a dozen penetrating holes in its side (looks like APDS or just plain AP). The caption noted that this was unusual, since German armor was loath to waste ammunition later in the war (44-45).

Anyone ever blown a bridge with enemy units on it? Would love to see a bridge go with tanks on it...

I don't know about the bottom armor on the Ferdinand, but the entire vehicle was a waste of resources. Almost all of them were lost at Kursk because the designers forgot to give them a single MG. Russian infantry just walked up to them and took them out with grenades and satchel charges. Now at a distance, they were probably decent in the AT role, but their tactical use was a complete disaster.

.50 cal fires a much heavier shell, but with a lower number of rounds fired per minute. The MG42 fires a small shell, but was built to spray an area and suppress infantry. German weapons, particularly later in the war ('43-'45) were optimized to generate the maximum amount of firepower with the smallest unit (MG34 & MG42, MP44, Nebelwhefer). Albert Speer & his cohorts realized that they could never match the allies in total production, so they would have to beat them with quality.

Actually, Panzer Lehr & 2nd SS Panzer did lose about 100 vehicles (not AFV's) on the march to Normandy, but since each unit had several thousand vehicles, this was not as large a hazard as some would have you believe.

Wow, I'd like to hear about that battle...What kind of ammo did that tank have left?

On the defensive, I tend to keep my AFVs in reserve until I can tell where the enemy attack is coming from. I also try to clear out the most obvious threats (Fireflys, Churchills, etc), before committing my own tanks. I also try to keep a couple of squads, an AT team, and maybe a MG in a central location and start moving them towards the hottest area of combat. This tactic has saved my butt more than a few times just as a position was about to be overrun. Even one full-strength squad can make a difference late in the game.

Tankers learned very quickly in Normandy that charging into the brush was a very, very bad idea. Between bazookas, PIATs, schrecks & fausts (not including grenades, close assaults, that guy putting a satchel charge against the engine plate, etc, etc), the life expectancy of a tank (not necessarily the tankers) was fairly short, for both sides.... Look at what happened during Montgomery's various operations in, around, and south of Caen. Goodwood cost the British a full 20% of their tank strength in a single day, but due to the overwhelming stockpiles of arms, all of those divisions were brought back up to almost full strength in 72hrs. CM has taught me to clear out enemy infantry first, tanks a close second (or first depending on the situation), before bringing my own armor into the battle. Never send a tank in by itself (even with some infantry support). It can and will die a nasty death. I use tanks in twos at minimum, threes is better. The mutual support is mandatory when every tree or building could be hiding an AT team.

A Bridge Too Far is also a mandatory read. The operation never should have taken place. XXX Corps should have cleared the Schedlt Estuary when they had the chance.

Not that this topic has been beaten to death, but we should all realize that we (the USA) had such a feeling of superiority over the Japanese- "They could never possibly hurt us" kind of thing, that although we figured that war was coming (and the Philippines would be attacked), we figured it would only last a few months, we'd sortie our fleet into the Mandates, meet the Japanese fleet, defeat them, and end the war. (Wow, that's a run-on sentence No one knew exactly how effective carrier warfare was going to be, therefore, the Admiralty discounted the idea that Pearl (or any real warship) could be sunk by carrier aircraft. A lot of mistakes were made at the beginning of WWII, but luckily things turned out ok at the end.

Try playing in heavy fog, at night. Visibility goes down to around 40m or less. I've had whole companies of infantry walk right up and past my positions without either of us spotting each other.