Treeburst155

Here's the latest news of the war. Shandorf has beat up on MickOZ by a score of 58-26. This is Shandorf's first completed game and his first victory. More importantly, this is the first victory logged by The Cesspool. Hopefully it will be the last for the Mutha Beautiful Thread. Congratulations anyway to Shandorf!! Here's how we stand: Fionn..............539...7...77.00 SuperTed...........154...3...51.33 M. Dorosh..........150...4...37.50 Claymore............99...1...99.00 Texas Toast.........99...2...49.50 Berlichtingen.......70...4...17.50 MickOZ..............64...3...21.33 Moon................60...1...60.00 Jshandorf...........58...1...58.00 Bill Hardenberger...38...1...38.00 John Kettler........20...1...20.00 Sorted by average: Claymore............99...1...99.00 Fionn..............539...7...77.00 Moon................60...1...60.00 Jshandorf...........58...1...58.00 SuperTed...........154...3...51.33 Texas Toast.........99...2...49.50 Bill Hardenberger...38...1...38.00 M. Dorosh..........150...4...37.50 MickOZ..............64...3...21.33 John Kettler........20...1...20.00 Berlichtingen.......70...4...17.50

My only qualifications for the following statement: Gunner, M60A1 gyro-stabilized tank, 1975-78. There should be no firing allowed during FAST movement. HE and AP fire should be allowed at MOVE speed with terrible accuracy and reduced rate of fire. Modelling of gyro-stabilizers should be completely done away with. [ 07-25-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]

Anybody alive out there?!

Texas Toast Beats Fionn 99-1!!! Ooops, that was Claymore vs Berlichtingen. Sorry. The truth is, despite a valiant effort by Texas Toast, Fionn managed to get the best of him by a score of 65-35. Congratulations, Fionn!! The juggernaut rolls on!! The best score obtained against Fionn was by Bill Hardenberger who managed 38 points. Texas Toast was close with 35. John Shandorf and that nutty physicist Claymore are preparing to do battle with the Irish Incinerator now, along with some of our low profile contestants. Good luck, fellas! Better you than me. Here's the standings: Fionn..............539...7...77.00 SuperTed...........154...3...51.33 M. Dorosh..........150...4...37.50 Claymore............99...1...99.00 Texas Toast.........99...2...49.50 Berlichtingen.......70...4...17.50 Moon................60...1...60.00 Bill Hardenberger...38...1...38.00 MickOZ..............38...2...19.00 John Kettler.........20..1...20.00 Sorted by average: Claymore............99...1...99.00 Fionn..............539...7...77.00 Moon................60...1...60.00 SuperTed...........154...3...51.33 Texas Toast.........99...2...49.50 Bill Hardenberger...38...1...38.00 M. Dorosh..........150...4...37.50 John Kettler........20...1...20.00 MickOZ..............38...2...19.00 Berlichtingen.......70...4...17.50

News from the front! Sledge59 hammers Tincan 80-20. Congratulations, Sledge59!! Hang in there, Tincan. I'm sure you are picking up lots of things you can use in the next tourney. To lose is to learn. At least that's how it works for me. Here's the updated standings: Mike8g............331...5...66.2 Fangorn...........281...4...70.3 Sledge.............256...4...64.0 tank buster...245...6...40.8 StuG III.......194...6....32.3 Tincan............172...6....28.7 chuckle..........122...3....40.7 Mr Spkr......122...2....61.0 Sorted by average: Fangorn...........281...4...70.3 Mike8g............331...5...66.2 Sledge.............256...4...64.0 Mr Spkr.........122...2...61.0 tank buster...245...6...40.8 chuckle...........122...3...40.7 StuG III.......194...6...32.3 Tincan............172...6...28.7

Oh, I forot to comment on the posts above regarding the attack/defend tournament. WineCape, you're gonna run out of wine if you don't watch out. How big is that cellar of yours anyway? You'll hear from me this weekend on this new tourney. Berlichtingen, I'll be talking to you about this tourney by the weekend also when I have some time to devote exclusively to it. Your input will be much appreciated. Be advised, gentlemen, this tournament is still pre-alpha at best.

We have another completed game to report. Texas Toast has bested MickOZ by a score of 64-21!! Congratulations Texas Toast!! Here's the standings: Fionn..............474...6...79.00 SuperTed...........154...3...51.33 M. Dorosh..........150...4...37.50 Claymore............99...1...99.00 Berlichtingen.......70...4...17.50 Texas Toast.........64....1...64.00 Moon................60....1...60.00 Bill Hardenberger...38...1...38.00 MickOZ..............38...2...19.00 John Kettler........20...1...20.00 Sorted by average: Claymore.............99...1...99.00 Fionn...............474...6...79.00 Texas Toast..........64...1...64.00 Moon.................60...1...60.00 SuperTed............154...3...51.33 Bill Hardenberger....38...1...38.00 M. Dorosh..........150....4...37.50 John Kettler.........20...1...20.00 MickOZ..............38....2...19.00 Berlichtingen.......70....4...17.50

Congratulations Fangorn!! Congratulations Mr Spkr and Sledge! Mr Spkr, you need a new machine. You would be amazed at what I could build you for $1,500. Email me for details. It's time for you to join the 21st century. Hang in there, Stug III. Just think about how much you have learned. Here's how we stand: Mike8g........331...5...66.2 Fangorn.......281...4...70.3 tank buster...245...6...40.8 StuG III......194...6...32.3 Sledge........176...3...58.7 Tincan........152...5...30.4 chuckle.......122...3...40.7 Mr Spkr.......122...2...61.0 Sorted by average: Fangorn.......281...4...70.3 Mike8g........331...5...66.2 Mr Spkr.......122...2...61.0 Sledge........176...3...58.7 tank buster...245...6...40.8 chuckle.......122...3...40.7 StuG III......194...6...32.3 Tincan........152...5...30.4

Play the armor battle. By "fair" I mean even. I've played a few of these and those Hellcats really get to show their stuff. In fact, I wouldn't even choose anything heavier that a Panther if I was the Germans. As long as you use moderate trees and modest hills there's plenty of cover for the Allies. Mr Spkr, maybe Sledge will take the Allies since you think the Germans have an advantage. I'll bet he just might go for it. Am I right, Sledge?!

This just in! KiwiJoe beat Sajer 85-15! Congratulations KiwiJoe! He's a real tough one, this KiwiJoe. Somebody has to stop him before it's too late. Here's the standings: KelsieD........279...6...46.50 Kiwi Joe.......232...3...77.33 Sajer..........149...4...37.25 aka_tom_w......142...3...47.33 GClement.......124...2...62.00 Stalin's Organ..65...2...32.50 The_Capt........56...2...28.00 Sock Monkey......0...0...0.00 Labappel.........0...0...0.00 Sorted by average: Kiwi Joe.........232...3...77.33 GClement.........124...2...62.00 aka_tom_w........142...3...47.33 KelsieD..........279...6...46.50 Sajer............149...4...37.25 Stalin's Organ....65...2...32.50 The_Capt..........56...2...28.00 Sock Monkey........0...0...0.00 Labappel...........0...0...0.00

Hi John, I think this tournament is simply a test of who understands the game the best, as opposed to real life tactics. It is really a mini-ladder. We are playing unlikely meeting engagements using forces specifically tailored to the map and conditions. There are no restrictions on what can be purchased. The only difference between these tourney games and regular ladder games is that the maps are a bit nicer and players get to really cherry pick their forces in the editor. I have been thinking about starting an Historical Attack/Defend tournament using carefully designed scenarios. No force picking in the editor. Carefully designed attack/defend type scenarios never seen by anyone before. The aim of this new tournament would be to find out who is the best tactician in realistic situations that were actually encountered. The prize would be the knowledge that you have come out on top after a series of realistic tactical problems were thrown at you. You would be tested on the attack and on defense. The tourney would probably have to have no more than 10 players. Maybe even less since more players means more QUALITY scenarios. I cannot design historical attack/defend scenarios myself but there are a some who can. I will be approaching them as soon as I have the time to think about how this thing will work. The tourney mechanics needs to be thought out a bit more. SuperTed originally came up with the idea for an historical attack/defend tourney. I've been thinking about it ever since. He has already reserved his spot in it too. I will be moving on this new tourney within the week. I'll keep the community posted as things develop. Right now it is nothing more than a very good idea with lots of work to be done (scenario designing) before it can become a reality.

More news from the front. Fionn just picked up a Tactical victory over Bill Hardenberger. The score was 62-38. Congratulations, Fionn!! Here's the updated standings: Fionn...........474...6...79.00 SuperTed........154...3...51.33 M. Dorosh.......150...4...37.50 Claymore..........99...1...99.00 Berlichtingen.....70...4...17.50 Moon..............60...1...60.00 Bill Hardenberger..38...1...38.00 John Kettler.......20...1...20.00 MickOZ............17...1...17.00 Sorted by average: Claymore...........99...1...99.00 Fionn.............474...6...79.00 Moon...............60...1...60.00 SuperTed..........154...3...51.33 Bill Hardenberger..38...1...38.00 M. Dorosh..........150...4...37.50 John Kettler.......20...1....20.00 Berlichtingen......70...4...17.50 MickOZ.............17...1...17.00

mPisi has just wasted another of my valiant Wirbelwinds with a keyhole shot to beat all keyhole shots. I'm afraid my asskicking days are numbered. mPisi knows what he is doing and my KTs don't stand a chance in the urban environment where he's got tanks behind every other building. I just don't have the time to dig him out, even if could. It was fun but I think it's about over. My hat is off to you, mPisi. You're a tough nut to crack. Treeburst155 out.

Here's an AAR from Fionn. Thanks, Fionn! Hi all, A friend told me I’d been asked for an AAR. Here goes… The map DID feature an earthen ziggurat which completely dominated the map and was centrally located. The VLs were situated on all 4 corners of the hill with a fifth at the top of the hill. Such a dominating terrain feature which completely dominates the map can only mean one thing…. that it will dominate tactical planning and act as an irresistible lure for both commanders. I could have sought to fight John on the hill etc but I knew that is where his attention and forces would be focussed therefore I resolved to fight the indirect fight by, ostensibly, using the ziggurat merely as a location from which to conduct maskirovka operations aimed at keeping Mr Kettler’s attention while I disembowelled him elsewhere. Terrain doesn’t win battles, killing and psychologically breaking the enemy does. If you attack the dominant terrain the enemy thinks this is your main operation. This means that your main thrust can continue in relative peace while the enemy is focussed on a mere demonstration. So, I concentrated 2/3rds of my force on the right half of the map and 1/3rd on my left. I simply moved forward to contact and, by the 4th turn, had encountered John’s forward line. His reconnaissance line was virtually non-existent, especially on my right ( which, incidentally, was where my main force was advancing at the run) and where it existed comprised only 3 Crack Sharpshooters barely more than 40 metres n advance of his main body. Isolated, weak, unsupported reconnaissance elements don’t last long and if they are too close to the main body they don’t provide any worthwhile advance warning. I annihilated his recon by turn 5 and had frontally begun to pin elements of his 4 platoons. On my right my main body detached two platoons to flank his flank platoon while two more platoons continued deeper into his territory seeking out his FOs and supporting HMGs. Some artillery fire hit a platoon at the top of the ziggurat hurting the platoon but also showing that attention was focussed to my left and centre. I think very little attention was paid to my right flank at all, despite the fact that just under 2 companies were advancing there. The 6th turn featured the destruction of his rightmost ( from my POV) platoon and a Company HQ dash into his support line for that platoon. Soviet doctrine speaks of the desirability of engaging supporting lines with units which rush past the enemy MLR at the same time as the friendly main body tries to reduce the MLR. This attack which so seemed to surprise Mr Ketller was simply a variation on this theme. His platoon and supporting mortars ( roughly 60 men) was destroyed within 90 seconds of combat because: I hit it with 3 platoons ( 1 frontal, 1 far flanking (firebase) and 1 close flanking) I engaged his support line at the same time as his front line. This complicated his tactical problem and also robbed his front line of the support fires it so crucially needed at this stage. Elsewhere I was continuing to make a demonstration against the enemy on my extreme left flank. I had brought 3 x 120mm FOs to the engagement and decided to use them en masse to crush the enemy on my left flank. I was moving too quickly anywhere else to make use of anything with more than a 40 second delay in any case. If I spotted it on turn 5 it was attacked on turn 6 and dead by turn 7.. My arty would only have begun firing on turn 7 so it was best to use it in a supporting sector where I wasn’t bothering to assault. With the annihilation of Mr Kettler’s rightmost (from my POV) platoon I was free to push leftwards. This push isolated one of his platoons in the brush on the reverse slope of the ziggurat. It was facing the remnants of two of my platoons to its front, 2 of my right flank platoons to its rear and one of my platoons from my left on its left hand side. In essence it was virtually surrounded and outnumbered at least 4 to 1. I tackled the HMGs and HQs in the woods behind it and poured fire into its positions. Meanwhile I drove the platoon to its left out of the woods it held with one of my platoons ( I believe 3 men escaped from those woods) and close off ALL avenue of escape for the platoon cowering in the brush when, on turn 8 my forces linked up and completed the encirclement. By that stage it didn’t matter much though as I had reduced that platoon to just 3 panicked survivors. That left only the 1 platoon on my extreme left… The 120mm FOs had done a great job destroying its infantry squads and routing them but Mr Kettler interpreted my movements on that flank incorrectly. He stated that I pulled the infantry platoon facing that platoon + 60mm mortars + multiple HMGs because I wanted to avoid my own arty hitting them. My intentions were nothing of the sort. I withdrew my infantry deep into the forest since my arty was now available to pin the Amis in place, thus leaving my infantry free to manoeuvre again. I moved the infantry over covered terrain and within 80 seconds of disappearing from view I found myself around the Amis flank and would have been astride his rout of retreat in about 60 seconds if the game hadn’t auto-surrendered then. On my right nothing much of importance happened anymore. I cleared out 2 HMG nests with the 2 platoons left on that flank and assaulted his FO position. Interestingly enough 2 out of his 3 FOs continued to concentrate exclusively on my formations on the ziggurat even when my infantry were under 30 metres away. An excellent example of focussing on entirely the wrong area IMO. I read, with amusement, many of Mr Kettler’s comments during the game as his view didn’t correspond at all with what I knew was really happening. I didn’t disabuse him of his conceptions though since doing so would have ruined the “surprise” and/or allowed him more insight into my thinking than he achieved. As to Mr Kettler’s continued ability to resist.. Well, he had 39 survivors on-map at the beginning of turn 9. 3 of his 60mm mortars had escaped BUT that was all. Of those 39 survivors only 2 HMGs and one platoon HQ were not panicked or routed. I had platoons on the flanks of all his positions, platoons to their front AND one platoon 60 seconds from completely cutting off his escape route forever. If Mr Kettler feels 2 MGs and a platoon HQ are going to stop 6 or so platoons then his definition of “effective” resistance and mine are very different. His global morale was about 14% and he had a sum total of 6 weapons capable of firing at me. I had a platoon for every weapon he could fire . Not exactly a good ratio for him. The 2 x 4.2 inch shells are absolutely irrelevant. They MIGHT have inflicted 1 or 2 more casualties but I doubt it (unspotted fire is notoriously inaccurate). In short I think the auto-surrender at the beginning of turn 9 was entirely appropriate. Anyone who would seek to continue fighting when an entire reinforced company ( over 200 weapons) was reduced to just 6 merely ensures the total slaughter of their men IMO. Conclusions: Well, I simply used maneuvre, decisiveness and mass to achieve the positional advantage I wanted and could exploit using shock effect. As befits the fact that I maneuvred using the terrain better than Mr Kettler ( many times my forces appeared on his flanks “out of nowhere” without being spotted approaching) I achieved surprise at the decisive points and therefore won those fights at those points. Overall though I think the game shows the importance of flank protection… Mr Kettler’s rightmost platoon ( from my POV, leftmost from his) had NO flank protection worth a damn and it paid for this with almost instant death. The recon screen was virtually nonexistent and too close to the main body in any case. Fail to recon, prepare to fail. Focus on dominant terrain but NOT the dominant sector is a major error and one which is all too common. Push your troops hard. Pushing them hard for 10 minutes saves lives in the long run. The importance of terrain analysis… I did a better terrain analysis than Mr Kettler ( as shown by the fact that I realised that my right was almost ideal terrain for a covered approach aimed at allowing a sudden and decisive thrust to unhinge a flank.) and that won me the battle. Well, I think that’s enough for now. I focussed on my right flank since, really, the left and centre were merely holding actions. I was simply pinning Mr Kettler’s forces there in order to allow the decision to be reached on my right. That I wiped out half his force ( 2 platoons) on the left flank is immaterial, to my way of thinking, since this battle was won through maneuvre and decisive action and not through how many casualties I inflicted in a particular spot. P.s. I think Mr Kettler’s assessment of my Bn’s ability to fight again is EXTREMELY optimistic. Then again he was totally optimistic in our game until such time as I chose to hit him with my hidden force. His current optimism re: a counter-attack would be the exact same. It would last only as long as I wanted it to. The terrain we’re in is tailor-made for me to chew up an infantry Bn with counter-attacks, ambushes etc

Hey Shandorf and SuperTed, I made a mistake! I just check your game file. That's a blank map!!! Hold everything. I'll redo your game.

Don't worry, Berli. So far you are a prime candidate for a shot at the bonus prize. You also still have plenty of time to make a comeback. Gentlemen, the standings above DO NOT reflect Berli's lastest smack down by Fionn. I'm sure there is a bug in Fionn's copy of CM that causes the score to be miscalculated. BTS, do somefink!!

Hello, gentlemen. I've got 10 emails concerning this tournament that I am working on now. I've been gone for 36 hours. I'll post any final scores within a couple hours. Our stats man, Michael Dorosh, is out in the boonies somewhere playing soldier with the Canadian Army I believe. That being the case I'll post the standings here too sometime in the next couple hours. Carry on. EDIT: Here's the latest: As reported above SuperTed got by Berli 53-29. Congratulations SuperTed!! Fionn put a hurtin' on MickOZ 83-17, and took apart John Kettler too by a score of 80-20! Fionn is on a roll here! So far, out of the four games Fionn has completed, John Kettler has the best score against him with just 20 points! Congratulations Fionn!! Yes, gentlemen, the Irish juggernaut must be stopped while there is still time. Who will do the honors? Here's the way it stands right now: Fionn..........328...4...82.00 SuperTed.......154...3...51.33 M. Dorosh......150...4...37.50 Claymore.......99...1...99.00 Moon...........60...1...60.00 Berlichtingen..54...3...18.00 John Kettler...20...1...20.00 MickOZ.........17...1...17.00 Sorted by average: Claymore.......99...1...99.00 Fionn.........328...4...82.00 Moon..........60...1...60.00 SuperTed......154...3...51.33 M. Dorosh.....150...4...37.50 John Kettler...20...1...20.00 Berlichtingen..54...3...18.00 MickOZ.........17...1...17.00 [ 07-20-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]

Sorry I haven't been around, but I was called out of town unavoidably. Here's what has happened since: MrSpkr over StuGIII 44-39 Sledge over StuGIII 84-16 Mike8g over StuGIII 71-29 Mike8g over Tincan 81-19 Congratulations to all the winners and to StuGIII for getting a draw!! Here's the updated standings: Mike8g......331...5...66.2 tank buster..245...6...40.8 Fangorn....209...3...69.7 Sledge.....176...3...58.7 StuG III....166...5...33.2 Tincan.....152...5...30.4 chuckle...122...3...40.7 Mr Spkr...122...2...61.0 Sorted by average: Fangorn...209...3...69.7 Mike8g.....331...5...66.2 Mr Spkr....122...2...61.0 Sledge.....176...3...58.7 tank buster..245...6...40.8 chuckle....122...3...40.7 StuG III...166...5...33.2 Tincan.....152...5...30.4 It looks like Mike8g might be the one to beat now. He's maintaining an excellent average with only two games left to complete.

(copied from other thread) No, Mr Spkr, the 100 pt. rule on deletions was never put in place. It was finally decided (and posted) that there would be no restriction on deletions but compromise between players who disagreed on the issue could be achieved by setting a point limit to deletions in negotiations. I suggested 100 points. Now that I have set up many games it is becoming clear that many are purchasing battalions and deleting virtually all the support weapons of the battalion. At the same time it has become clear that many are NOT taking advantage of deletions at all or very little. It is my opinion that the second group is at a significant disadvantage and should be warned of that fact. I allowed the support units to be stripped from battalions from the gitgo because I figured everyone would probably do it. Now that purchasing patterns are beginning to appear it is clear that some just don't delete and others have no problem with it. Those who don't delete should seriously consider doing so or remember to negotiate the issue. This is a heads up for you guys. A lot of troops can be had for 1,500 points if battalions are purchased and the support weapons deleted. Something to think about, eh?

That's right, KiwiJoe. This deletion problem does not apply to WineCape I and II.

Sledge and Mr. Spkr, Why don't you two do a heavy armor fight with moderate trees and modest hills in a rural setting with clear weather. Make the battle 3,000 points and use armor only. Those are fun fights IMO. The trees and hills hamper the Jagdpanthers enough that the Hellcats and Shermans have a fair chance. Wirbelwinds and Ostwinds can give the Hellcats hell. Fast Allied turrets keep the Panthers and Tigers in check. No negotiations necessary. All armor is legal but only armor is legal. It's fun.

No, the 100 pt. rule on deletions was never put in place. It was finally decided (and posted) that there would be no restriction on deletions but compromise between players who disagreed on the issue could be achieved by setting a point limit to deletions in negotiations. I suggested 100 points. Now that I have set up many games it is becoming clear that many are purchasing battalions and deleting virtually all the support weapons of the battalion. At the same time it has become clear that many are NOT taking advantage of deletions at all or very little. It is my opinion that the second group is at a significant disadvantage and should be warned of that fact. I allowed the support units to be stripped from battalions from the gitgo because I figured everyone would probably do it. Now that purchasing patterns are beginning to appear it is clear that some just don't delete and others have no problem with it. Those who don't delete should seriously consider doing so or remember to negotiate the issue. This is a heads up for you guys. A lot of troops can be had for 1,500 points if battalions are purchased and the support weapons deleted. Something to think about, eh?

You must be very careful with the rotate command for vehicles. If the movement plotted before the command gets rerouted due to obstacles then your rotate command becomes a movement command. I'm not absolutely sure about this, but that seems to be the case. I'd have to test it to be sure.

The latest news from the front: Fangorn whips Tank Buster, 82-18. Congratulations, Fangorn!! Fangorn has yet to suffer a defeat after three games. His average is way up there. Can he go all the way?! Updated standings below: tank buster....223...5....44.6 Fangorn.....209...3....69.7 Mike8g.......179...3....59.7 Tincan.....133....4....33.3 chuckle....122....3....40.7 StuG III....82....2....41.0 Mr Spkr.....78....1....78.0 Sledge.......14....1....14.0 [ 07-17-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]

Thanks, John! Very entertaining. I appreciate you taking the time to write like that. You do it well.