Andrew H.
-
Posts
1,446 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Andrew H.
-
-
I also often use Slow when I move tanks through the woods because I'm afraid of bogging. I know that's not likely to be a problem with T-34s, but I'm not sure about the 122's.
-
Oh so many issues with this sort of thinking. First, here is what 3D games looked like in 1995:
1. I would love to have this POV for my SMG squads!.
2. In 1985, I was using little bits of cotton ball on my miniatures to show that that tank was knocked out, so I think graphics have improved a bit.
-
Is that a flamethrower in your bow machine gun mount, or are you just happy to see me?
-
I recall a long time ago seeing photos and reading an account from the first Soviet test of the big 152mm gun on a Panther hull. If I recall correctly, not only did it pierce the bow, it uprooted the transmission and blew the whole works out the back of the vehicle - then continued downrange for a considerable distance afterward. The Russians were astonished. I recall it also tore off the big gun's muzzle brake in the process as well.
Decals are great, but this is the level of detail I'd eventually like to see!
I'm not saying that you have to track every one of the 2500 parts of the Panther's engine - just the dozen or so major bits.
-
Don't you have a flamethrower?
-
However, I am sure he wishes those trucks had SMG ammunition. Just like his AA halftracks in the market garden beta AAR, he is cripple by the BETA build.
He's doing better than the beta testers in the Elefants at Kursk. The beta build didn't even have machine guns!
Well, he's doing better so far.
-
I fire my flamethrower this turn... you will want to stay tuned for that, I will post a movie.
I love German food!
-
Are you talking about Casablanca? Julius Epstein being the screenwriter?
Yes, that's who I was thinking of.
-
I first saw Cross of Iron a few years after it came out (probably in the early-mid 80's), and it was a revelation - although I'd been wargaming for a few years before then, I couldn't believe that they actually made a film about war on the Eastern front with first tier actors and a decent budget and tanks that didn't look like American tanks. With a sympathetic German protagonist.
Trivia question: which better known WWII movie did the screenwriter for CoI also write the screenplay for?
-
@All
what... Bil is pushing for what?why? what?...I...
Either my whole Analysis of the Battlefield from the Attackers Position is completely wrong, or hes making a big mistake by pushing that deep into the woods. I get why he doenst want to go for the wide open approach, but why oh why is he pushing for Objective Yellow?
Everytime I analyzed the map and the Forces available I felt that every big push for Yellow is a complete Waste of Time and Forces, when so much more can be accomplished in the west. Knowing Elvis's Defences makes this Decision even worse...
On the other hand, maybe things are going to be more exciting then I originally though ^^
I think Bil's afraid that Elvis might have bought several of Panthers (or Jagdpz IV/70s or the like) and might pin down his troops in the open and destroy his armor. Some discussion suggested that Russian armor might be slow to spot and reload. So, theoretically, a couple of keyholed Panthers could bottle up that approach with the Sovs having no effective response.
This would make the woods less risky, particularly because Bil has a lot of infantry (2+ companies, IIRC), many of them armed with SMGs. This would give him an advantage in the woods, although I think his general hope is to find a gap and push his troops though, on the theory that Elvis can't guard everything. And on the theory that when it comes time to fight, he'd rather do it at 100-200 meters than at 800 meters.
-
I also am moving the OT-34 up into a position near the end of KT1.
We might actually have an exchange of fire in the next turn.
I'll say. Nothing exchanges fire better than an OT-34.
And even with just sound contacts, you can use "area fire".
-
I was tempted to design a scenario for CMBB where at the start of the game Soviet recon troops had infiltrated German lines and were holed up where they could observe without being seen in return. I wonder now if somebody will take that idea and run with it.
Michael
Wasn't there a CMBO (or maybe CMBN) scenario like this with a few US paratroops hidden behind the enemy lines (or maybe just far advanced and hidden), and a larger US force coming on to link up with them and fight a German force?
Though in ideal circumstances such recon would be done prior to the attack itself. And here again we get into a game vs. real life thing. In real life this battle would start with Bil already committed to specific courses of action based on whatever intel he managed to accumulate from prior contact and observation. Great for a classroom exercise tool, not good for a game.I like how recon works in the game, even though the player's godlike knowledge makes things somewhat unrealistic - IRL, a commander would send the recon teams into the woods and both would be completely out of contact from each other until the teams returned. Navigation was always a problem, too; elements were always getting lost, and they would not have any idea where other mobile elements were. (This was not just a recon-in-the-woods problem - there are occasional mentions in the "Three Battles" Green Book of attacks being delayed because a company got lost and couldn't find its starting line/the rest of the battalion).
Still, I think the results of the recon mostly work out correctly, just more quickly. But I'll be very interested to see how the the split squad morale penalty plays out.
-
Wow, that's a pretty good war action film.
Pretty good training for CM East Front.
I've seen that before; it's very cool. Although, assuming that the Russians are using the tactics as described by Jason in the linked thread, I wonder how well these guys will do against the next seven waves?
-
No, it's not wrong, but it's also not complete. The German war economy prior to 1943 was running so far behind theoretical capacity that there was a LOT of room for improvement.
It's always striking to read US accounts of the buildup to war to see how differently they approached resource allocation, and how really amateurish it makes the Germans look.
I.e., in May 1940, when France is falling, Roosevelt sets in motion plans to produce 50,000 airplanes per year and asks Congress for $100,000,000 (in 1940 money). In early 1942, Roosevelt focuses on trying to build 120,000 tanks.
Roosevelt isn't able to quite meet these plans because of other needs, most notably for warships, which took up a lot of steel. But the point is that he understood *immediately* that the US needed to focus on producing a lot of war materiel. He was also able to put extremely competent, experienced people in important administrative roles (in part, ironically, because of his experience with setting up various 3 letter programs as part of the New Deal).
None of this was new or required a lot of foresight - WWI, only 25 years in the past, had very much been a battle of the factories, and then a battle of transport, and only then a battle of men. Germany knew this as well as anyone.
By German standards, Speer did an amazing job of rationalizing the German armaments industry. But compared to the quality of the administrators doing the job in the US, he was really just - like Emma Peel - a talented amateur. Who moreover, was playing catch up with countries who had started their full industrialization programs years before (even before the war, in the case of the US).
And let's not forget what the bombing did to military resource allocation, in particular fighter aircraft. It is no coincidence that Germany lost battlefield air superiority in 1943, then even air parity by 1944. Imagine what Luftwaffe operations would have looked like in Normandy, Eastern Front, and Italy if there were no air war over Germany itself.
At the time of Kursk, Germany had more fighters over Germany defending against allied bombers than they did at Kursk. You do have to wonder what 500+ more aircraft at Kursk might have done.
-
I go for a real Westvleteren
If you can get the monks to answer their damn phone. Which they weren't doing when I was in Belgium last summer...
-
I wanted to take a minute to highlight the Rifle Platoon. This formation contains a lot of bodies (34) and a lot of firepower.. they will be great in the woods where the German long range firepower will be negated. Also these squads can split (all squads can now split), however the split teams will come at a high cost to morale if they are separated from the Squad leader team.
That looks like a really capable platoon - for some reason, I had it in my mind that a soviet rifle squad only had 9 men. And didn't have four SMGs!
-
Pre-ordered on day 1; I'm getting very excited!
-
I can't agree with most of the recommendations I'm seeing, at least if you're trying to win (which I understand is not necessarily the goal). Looking at that map... the more infantry the better, preferably a type with short range firepower. Panthers and Stukas are extravagances you can't afford. Anti-tank mines only have to disable one tank to earn back your investment and the psychological effect alone is almost worth it.
I don't know how the point values break down, but I think Vanir is exactly right in recommending two companies of infantry as the core of the force. They will give a lot more survivability and flexibility to a a smaller defending force. And Ken (or Ken's wife, or whoever played the second half of his game against Bil) did a good job of showing how tanks could be impotent (
) against sneaky infantry armed with incredibly inaccurate piats and something like 1200 mortars. -
I like having the exotic stuff.
But what I really want is what we didn't get in CM1: coverage of the war in '39-41. I want Char B1s. I want Matildas attacking 38ts and Pz II's at Arras while Rommel tries to set up the Flak 18's. I want paratroopers in the Hague. The battle of Hannut (the largest tank battle in history! At the time...) Fighting in Norway!
Basically, I want Crescendo of Doom.
-
Wasn't there also a Flammhetzer?
At Ft. Knox - many years ago now - they had a running Hetzer that they used in their annual July 4 mock tank battles. I climbed inside; it was kind of like a minivan with an big gun running down the middle. (It's slightly off center - but I think the breech of the gun is near the middle of the Hetzer, making things kind of cramped.)
-
T-34's, SMG companies, Tank Riders - this sounds great!
And flamethrowers! Any idea how well flamethrowers work as anti-tank weapons?
-
So much for my 2000 km Road to Berlin campaign.
-
Awesome! I did my preorder before I finished reading the description! I can't wait to get back to the east! Woot!
-
Send a two or three man scout team forward to ascertain enemy strength, but not before having a base of fire that can pour fire into an obstacle like the hedgerows on this map if the recon team comes under fire. The US Squads in particular will have an advantage over the German teams in short range combat, especially if the US player is able to mass more than one squad against a hedgerow at a time.
I sometimes find attacking in hedgerows easier than I think it should be because it's easy for the attacker to set up a large base of fire behind a hedgerow without being spotted, and then just overwhelm the opposition when they fire on the team you send across the open.
Unless they get a few mortar shots off at your base of fire, of course...
CMRT - BETA AAR - Soviet Side
in Combat Mission Red Thunder
Posted
I'm already really liking hit decals - I can imagine the radio operator looking down at the destroyed radio between his legs and thinking "Блять!".