Andrew H.
-
Posts
1,446 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Andrew H.
-
-
I think it's only a short step from Schwimmwagen to cavalry and bicycle troops.
Both of which were used more than the Pershing. Although, to be fair, none of them took out a King Tiger.
Still.
-
2 hours ago, Ultradave said:
The goal is to use the Schwimmwagon to motor across and get to the exit objective alive. It's an opposed crossing so that group of halftracks is your fire support to soften up a crossing point. You can pick your spot. Keep the Schwimmwagon back at first and use the tracks to take out enough opposition so that you can cross without being blown out of the water. The Russians have some AT weapons so be warned. The tracks are not making the crossing, just the team in the Schwimmwagon.
Here's the plan as stated in the briefing:
Dave
It just occurred to me reading this thread that it may not be obvious to non-grogs that a Schwimmwagen is an amphibious vehicle that can cross a river without a ford or bridge.
-
I love the fedoras on some of the Volkssturm members. They look so dapper.
-
Komrade Ivan speaks perfect '70's English. Dig it! Because they don't ride in jalopies anymore. And the old man has is own track!
I think the dude has the lingo down so perfectly because he was in spetsnaz, where they all learn to rap in American-ese.
-
6 hours ago, rocketman said:
If the Schwimmwagen gets hit, will it sink (including the partisans)
?
It's battlefront. You know it will be more complicated than that.
First they will need to determine whether the hole is above or below the waterline.
No, wait, I skipped a step. First they will need to determine where the waterline is based on the number of men and equipment being carried by the SW. As well as the density of water, which can vary slightly based on temperature and salinity.
Then they determine whether the hole is above or below the waterline...the angle of shot will be important because some shots may enter above the waterline but exit below it.
After that, it's a simple calculation of amount of water that can enter based on the number and diameter of the holes.
However, what might be tricky is that as a SW takes on water, it will gradually sink, meaning that the waterline for a holed SW will constantly be changing over time; this will be critical for determining the effect of new hits.
-
51 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
You forgot about the Partisans.
And Schwimmwagen.
And partisans in Schwimmwagen.
-
I heard a rumor (or a "rumour") that the MoD was interested in replaying France 1940.
I think Battlefront should begin preparing now.
-
22 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
IIRC that crazy CMBN CD was purchased by a customer on the streets of one of the "Stans" (Kazakhstan IIRC). It is so endearing
Steve
You aren't fooling us Steve; we know that's from the CMBN Space Lobsters of Doom module.
What we don't know is why the British MoD is worried about space lobsters.
-
On 9/21/2018 at 11:42 PM, SgtHatred said:
I've posted Combat Mission on Pornhub. No one can stop me.
Like the classic Saving Ryan's Privates:
-
I would like to see realistic modeling of the sponson gun and turret on the Char B.
I would also like to see a Char B.
And it should be included in a '39-41 early war module.
-
3 hours ago, Erwin said:
Isn't that strange how the demographics have changed. Back ion the day when cardboard wargames were the only ones available, 90% were East Front topics. In addition, you had to practically pay opponents to play the Allies. Everyone wanted to play Axis, well Germans specifically. And the sexiest pieces were the black and while SS units. At the time, the SS shoulda received an award for their contributions to the hobby of wargaming.
I'm a big East Front fan...but I do think that some of the appeal of that front had to do with the fact that the cold war was going on at that time.
-
Troll post.
CMx1 had absolute spotting (or whatever we used to call it). If one unit on the battlefield saw a unit, all other units instantly knew it was there. Instantly!
CMx1 did have 38(t)s, though...so it had some advantages.
-
Despite the many steps, my installation has gone flawlessly.
-
On 5/17/2016 at 11:44 PM, shift8 said:
Im sure someone can dredge up some off kilter example to contrary, but in real life war does not have a "time limit." Now before someone rips my head off, YES there are time sensitive things at the strategic or operational level. However, time tables for battles are rarely if ever kept, and units in the field generally take as long as they need to do complete and objective. After all, you cannot take town X if you are dead. Units do not generally come across a heavily defended positions and go "well crap! the colonel said we had to take this in 20min, so we had better just charge right in!" Slow is smooth and smooth is fast: Period.
I would disagree with this - timetables matter a lot, especially at CM's level. It's not a matter of "losing" if you don't capture the village or hill on time, but it is often a matter of the larger attack stopping until tomorrow because you can't move supplies up until the hill is cleared (or whatever). It can also mean the difference between enemy troops being able to escape or being cut off.
As others have mentioned, time is compressed in CM - probably by at least 4 or 5 times. A quick 30 minute CM battle would probably take at least 2 hours to fight in reality (if not longer). A 2-hour CM battle is an all-day battle in reality. But the number of *actions* taken in the 30 minute CM battle/2 hour real battle are going to be the same. CM - basically - cuts out the numerous 10 minute pauses where everyone freezes and nothing happens. (Not to mention platoons getting lost in larger battles and the CO having to send a runner after them to point them in the right direction).
Of course if I just want to play around, I'll set up a small QB and give myself 2 hours to play it - that way, I can futz around to my heart's content (and I do this a lot). But there are lots of historical reasons for time limits like we have in CM - accounting, of course, for the time compression.
-
On 4/27/2016 at 5:00 PM, Michael Emrys said:
Uh, unless you are making a joke, CM has always been available on DVD. Or, if you are making a joke, then no there are actually no such things as DVDs. They are all urban fantasies begun by Chinese electronics manufacturers to get consumers desperate to find them.
Michael
Actually, I think it [CMx1] was on CD. Which included both the Mac and Windows version.
-
On 4/26/2016 at 9:27 PM, A co said:
An anecdote about a successful use of the 'slow' command. This was in CMBN but the dynamic is probably the same for all of CMX3 - I sent a small team to move 'slow' into a building. Just behind the building, unknown to me, was a pair of enemy troops apparently hiding in ambush. My men, while still crawling, spotted the enemy and killed them, apparently without ever being spotted themselves.
Crawling into buildings is my SOP for entering them unless I know they're safe.
-
I think spreading fire is rare enough to not be an issue within the scope of CM (with maybe one exception*). But I think that persistent fire in one location is more realistic, and could mean that that location cannot be entered.
But - even within an action space, fires will start small and spread. While they are small, troops can put them out; to be realistic, we would probably need rules for troops fighting fires. Which starts to get kind of complicated.
*Fires started in a building should maybe spread to other squares in the same building. Unless firefighting troops put it out.
What I would actually like to see is a chance that 3+ story buildings, when rubbled, fall into an adjacent square. Possibly blocking a road.
-
I didn't know that CM was ever on TV. But I found out about CMBO when I read the review in the NY Times (which today just strikes me as completely weird). I bought the game immediately and joined the forum a couple of days after that.
And you can still read the review here! http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/05/technology/game-theory-playing-war-but-with-a-new-set-of-rules.html
I do miss boardgaming and miniatures for the social aspect...but I never really found a good group after college.
-
I would also recommend River of Blood against the AI. I also won, but I also felt like the AI kicked my ass. It has an interesting puzzle aspect to it, plus lots of opportunities for realistic tactics.
-
6 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:
How about using the Cambell's Soup jingle?
Michael
"This smoke mission is brought to you by Lucky Strike cigarettes. Smoke 'em if you've got 'em!"
-
I've had good luck using area fire with the new Granatgewehr teams the Germans have. They aren't as effective as mortars (and I keep expecting them to be like mortars), but when you fire enough rifle grenades, you will eventually kill some infantry.
-
Keep in mind that the 88 Flak, when viewed from the front, is approximately the size of a military truck.
-
I've had some luck with having Granatgewehr teams area fire on an occupied building.
I'm still kind of figuring out how to use them...
-
2 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:
If the bullet can penetrate a maximum of 10mm vertical plate at 100 metres, wouldn't that mean it cannot penetrate the plate if it is angled just a little bit? Which means at 200 metres there should be no chance at all of penetrating?
Sources are inconsistent in what they mean by "penetration". Usually when penetration is stated as a number, it means that the projectile has a 50% chance of penetrating that number; presumably it has a smaller chance of penetrating a few millimeters more. But the gun shield on the HT does seem to be sloped pretty well - eyeballing it, it looks like it's angled about 30 degrees from the vertical, and then goes back about the same on each side as well.
So what tanks should the Germans have skipped, and what would have been the positive results?
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted
While I don't think that changing one weapon system would have changed the war, Germany had the technology in 1937 to manufacture the Pz IV F/2, the Pz III 50 L/60, and the StuG III ... with the long 75; I've forgotten the model.
I think if they had started the war with the Pz IV as a main battle tank...or maybe with a combination of Pz III L/60's and long barrelled StuGs, they may have achieved just a bit more earlier that could have made *some* difference. At least in production...maybe they would be more efficient at producing the IV if they started with the base model they ended with and didn't need to keep reengineering it during the war.
There's no panic over the T-34s and the KV's, so there's no need to develop the TIger I at all.
Of course they would have been a lot better off if they had focused on making the manufacturing easier and the tanks more reliable. There were 5 different sherman tank engines, but each one was based on an existing and already proven engine. Two engines were based on aircraft engines or aircraft engine prototypes. The diesel was based on two bus engines joined to a common crankcase (the tank could still move if one of the engines was knocked out). And the sherman used mostly in British service consisted of *5* V6 automobile engines all mounted around a common crankcase. (There was a toothed gear attached to where the driveshaft on each of these engines would have been, and these five gears all interlocked with the toothed gear connected to the tank's driveshaft.