dieseltaylor
-
Posts
5,269 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by dieseltaylor
-
-
Interesting to hear what was available in WW2 Ital for planning. Is there some handbook on observational skills that has come out post war?
I have read an interesting anecdote of two US soldiers wandering down a road and stopping obliviously next to an Allied armoured car. One asked the other for a light and the armoured car commander chipped in to offer. : )
Here is some WW2 training vids
http://www.shotgunnews.com/2011/06/06/wwii-german-sniper-training-%E2%80%93-part-2/
-
As a man totally ignorant of post WW2 army matters I was wondering on whether the technological advances over the past 70 years have actually made a significant difference.
For instance I assume now that all modern infantry have very very good binoculars at least. My little compact camera has an effective zoom of 17 but that is 2012 technology. Most of the guys who served in the military and are playing I imagine saw there service in the 70-90's.
This interest was sparked of by Ron saying the spotting seemed reasonably on but for non-military guys without experience .......
BTW does noise come into the game or RL - apparently the Germans always knew when American tanks were about as US drivers gunned their engines, conversely the German tanks were relatively quiet.
-
Thanks slysniper that is really interesting stuff. Funnily enough Ron was saying it was pretty realistic but for non-military people with no experience of these matters that sort of emphasises the learning problem.
Anyway I am just going to start a thread on whether modern military are much superior to WW2 in spotting with superior optics laser rthermal ... I have no idea what the modern army uses.
-
No one comments on the fact Bil lost two halftracks or his TD took several hits without him ever spotting the source.
I may have if I had been reading his AAR.
It doesn't really raise my eyebrows the MG bunker did not spot his infantry in the tall grass at 1km+. Is CM problem free here - no, probably not, but my experience the spotting is generally very realistic with some randomness thrown in. Isolated that may not appear so but in the end it is good in my opinion. It definitely does not negate the system as some seem to suggest based on their anecdotes.
DO you think is BF said C2 increases spotting likelihood by around 100% [?whatever] that would actually help people get a grip about the system rather than a gripe??
You say the spotting appears accurate enough however for those players with no actual experience of spotting troops/tanks at range in RL this is just underlines the sort of learning curve we are on. If my two opponents were available I might, with enough games, get a degree of confidence and understanding .
I will start enough thread on whether modern spotting is significantly better than in WW2!
-
Kind of blackmail really. The interesting thing is I understand people who write to you also have their messages scanned. But they will be unaware of it I assume.
Do I have to upgrade to the new version of Yahoo! Mail? Resolution
Older versions of Yahoo! Mail will only be available until the beginning of June 2013, and after that, you can access your Yahoo! Mail only if you upgrade to the new version. You should have received an email from Yahoo! letting you know that your account required an upgrade.
Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
When you upgrade, you will be accepting our Communications Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. This includes the acceptance of automated content scanning and analyzing of your communications content, which Yahoo! uses to deliver product features, relevant advertising, and abuse protection.
If you prefer to opt out of interest-based and contextual-based advertising resulting from your scanned and analyzed communications content, you can change your settings at any time using our Ad Interest Manager.
Other Options
If you don't want to use the new version of Yahoo! Mail, you may consider these other options:
- Download your Yahoo! Mail using IMAP: IMAP allows you to access your email from a different email program, such as Outlook, Mac Mail, or your mobile device's application. You can download your data to your personal computer or device using an IMAP program. But, in order to continue using Yahoo! Mail you will need to accept the Communications Terms of Service. See instructions for accessing Yahoo! Mail using IMAP.
- Close your account: Learn how to close your account.
Mail Plus accounts
If your previous version of Yahoo! Mail is no longer available and you would like to cancel your Mail Plus subscription as a result, you are eligible for a prorated refund for the unused portion of the service. See our refund policy and cancellation instructions.
- Download your Yahoo! Mail using IMAP: IMAP allows you to access your email from a different email program, such as Outlook, Mac Mail, or your mobile device's application. You can download your data to your personal computer or device using an IMAP program. But, in order to continue using Yahoo! Mail you will need to accept the Communications Terms of Service. See instructions for accessing Yahoo! Mail using IMAP.
-
slysniperGAJ was expecting sighting enemy units at too great of a range, especially for infantry. I find infantry can move to well within 100 meters in grasses and not give clear identifications to the enemy.His AT guns showed up easy, WTF. I am playing a battle right now where the enemy has had 6 guns all in tall grass and or wheat, and let me tell you. not one of them guns has shown up to my units spotting until after they have fired multiple shots or I have moved almost on top of them.And I had more units than Bil is using and much closer to the guns, so plenty of eyes ( but the main trick with that is to place the guns so that the enemy must look through 3-4 hexes of grass, you want the unit as deep as you can get it in the grass and still see out and fire, I am not sure, but GAJ guns looked like they sat at locations where they hardly had any grass in front of them, maybe same hex or a hex in front for concealment, that is not enough.
I get the feeling that a casual player, particularly if they do not read the forums, has a monumental learning curve?
Incidentally you mention not spotting firing tanks without giving a concept of range - also we know the Allies had a smoky propellant. Perhaps you could flesh out your experience.
-
weta nz - Thanks for seeking the photo.
BTW on the tight hand side of each post is the number for the post - yours here is 418. I have the maximum posts per page chosen so I am now on page 20 in the AAR and you are quoting page 65 .....
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1446479&postcount=418
: )
-
It has been interesting only seeing one side of the story. That way I do not reveal too much when posting or feel too smug.
Lessons learned seem to me:
1. If you are not familiar with game effects you suffer
2. Weapon efficiency also
3. Make sure the scenario gives adequate forces/time for balance.
When I played seriously in CMx1 if I were unfamiliar with a weapons effectiveness I would dummy up a battlefield and test it out. CMx2 I am finding is very very much more complex and therefore difficult to feel comfortable with results.
And to be boring if I had access to the map I would actually time units to various places and work out artillery plans. However this would be a rare event and was a load of work on a simple game system.
Having seen the way the battle developed and the use Bill has made of the flanks given the time available there is no doubt in my mind this a bad deal for any defender.
I am not sure a force change helps at all given the time. If one were to keep the time would a change in visibility such as fog have any effect - : ) now there is a interesting idea!
-
Interesting point on M10 and being "open". It never occurred to me that an open-topped vehicle could be anything but open as it has no hatch to open or close. I suppose I made the assumption the TC would behave as infantry and automatically duck down when things got nasty and pop-up othewise. A major error on my part.
By default AFAIK everything is loaded as "closed" even if in RL it would be the reverse ... unless it were raining : ).
-
Well if it were HE it would go bang and everyone dies. This suggests that AP is used : )
The odds on getting clean through a slit I would think would be slight and therefore the shell would be tumbling and perhaps also blasting in some concrete debris at speed. However there is no reason why a single death could be the result. As for the HMG ...
I was wondering about bino's but I think whats illustrated is how poor HMG's are at range anyway so why give them bino's. Safe observation post maybe ....!
-
An 88m round, through a firing slot and only one man is hurt, boy those Rangers are tough, myopic, but tough.
Made me laugh!
Nearly as funny
http://www.pillbox-study-group.org.uk/index.php/types-of-pillbox/type-22/
-
If the screenies a movie mode I find it hard on the eyes.!
A Bunker shot. Yeah. Whats the Elefants accuracy like?
-
This then raises the question, was CM1 more fun to play for the average gamer?
I am sure you meant IS rather than was. : )
As to
Here it's like watching a trained swordsmen outwit and humiliate an eager novice. I don't think most of the posters here, including myself, go into such a pre-game analysis and, as a result, would probably find themselves in a similar situation to GaJ, i.e. about to loose big time. Swap roles, and Bill would have executed a frustratingly efficient defence, with alternative firing points, covered avenues of approach, key holed ATG guns and support weapons covering carefully planned obstacles and a fast mobile reserve, not penny-packeted. GaJ might have been able to raise his kill count, but would still have lost.I think overall you are right. However we must remember that this IS Bill's map and I think this is quite a big advantage. How big an advantage would depend on how much he plays with it as he builds in terms of sight lines. Obviously it would be open to anyone to peruse the map for hours and but most people do not have that kind of time or desire.
Secondly I think as a designer he probably has a far better feel for cover effects for various terrain.
He also may be better versed in the value of various equipment efficiencies and believe M-10's are not good value.
Overall if you layer this with a military training then I think Bill would better than GAJ with the same equipment. I still think that the map may favour the attacker particularly as he is using the flanks knowing there cannot be any weapons there.
-
akd - the conversion factor of 40 to one was included in one of the quotes
WO 291/262 Study of casualties caused by bombardment.
"25 pdr equivalents" for two weapons, in nominal lbs:
Weapon Warhead weight HE weight 25-pdr equivalent
5-in rocket 29lb 7.0lb 50
105mm shell 33lb 4.9lb 40
I must admit I was surprised at that and I prefer your 1000 equals 600. Where do you get that figure from ?
One answer may be that the bombardment is air-burst in which going to the botttom of the trench does make a difference from standing in a trench !! The depth of the game is such that we have to experiment to find out these effects rather like in WW2 they had to do all this research and refine their tactics in line with what was discovered.
-
Interesting figures on the CMBN effective use of trenches. Its interesting to see, in terms of casualties how ineffective shelling can be from reports from that period.
As you are using 105mm this might give a conversion factor:WO 291/946 Effects of bombardment – present state of knowledge.This summary was published in 1946.
Against men in slit trenches, 25-pdr groundburst must hit the trench or parapet to be effective. If firing 1000 25-pdr shells into a 300 ´ 300 yard box with 100 men in it in slit trenches, the expected number of casualties would be nine.
........
Conveniently we can say that the figures shown mean 25 105mm is equivalent devastation. However I suspect they mean by area effect and pay no attention to the length of time and the individual chances of being hit. On the face of it 1000 small explosions is more worrying than 25 large ones as one might think some of the 25 shells may cover the same area.WO 291/262 Study of casualties caused by bombardment."25 pdr equivalents" for two weapons, in nominal lbs:
Weapon Warhead weight HE weight 25-pdr equivalent
5-in rocket 29lb 7.0lb 50
105mm shell 33lb 4.9lb 40
......
Another piece of wartime research goes into the effect various sorts of terrain have for nullifying bombardment effectiveness. In an operational game the terrain effects I am sure averaged out whereas in CMBN I am assuming terrain does have different effects. Perhaps that might be a fruitful area to test which types reap more bangs for the buck.
Overall though the degree to which HIDE makes such a big difference is puzzling.
-
Really an interesting area. I remember someone becoming aware of infra-red light to the extent of pain from looking at a supermarket scanner. Wjilst looking that up this nugget turned up in a Yahoo answer:
Yes although only two cases have been reported as it is extremely rare. Here is an article about it:Tetrachromacy is the ability to see light from four distinct sources. An example of this in the animal kingdom is the zebrafish (Danio rerio), which can see light from the red, green, blue, and ultraviolet sections of the light spectrum. True tetrachromacy in humans is much rarer however – according to Wikipedia only two possible tetrachromats have been identified.
Humans are normally trichromats, having three types of cone cells that receive light from either the red, green, or blue part of the light spectrum. Each cone can pick up about 100 graduations of color and the brain combines colors and graduations so that there are about 1 million distinguishable hues coloring your world. A true tetrachromat with an extra type of cone between red and green (in the orange range) would, theoretically, be able to perceive 100 million colors.
Like supertasting, tetrachromacy is thought to be much more common in women than men – estimates range from 2 – 3% to 50% of women. Interestingly, colour-blindness in men (much more common than in women) may be inherited from women with tetrachromacy.
Other bits found suggest that some people [particularly young] can see into the infra-red particularly provable with infra-red remotes, and older people after cataract operations can see into the ultra-violet end.
Assuming there is a basis in fact interesting to cogitate if any of these conditions provides a combat advantage in spotting in RL.
-
Thanks for the good replies on troops firing outside of arc constraints. Thats a plus from the thread as it means within the current game engine there may be troops who will only hold an arc until provoked. Ditto ATG's can be positioned to survive, and that no bonus for them occurs in terms of concealment from initial placement.
The point made by enecid73 is well made regarding distance outside of the quadrant. And it does prove that Vinnarts solution is only one of bearing but does not cover a retreat movement.
sburke- " No one else at the moment has LOS on me nor do they know where the shot came from."
Is that not an assumption that your troops cannot make? You then argue that within the remainder of the 60 seconds both infantry and a tank appear and your troops react. Seems entirely logical that they should believe that these units do know where they are.
Thinking a tad more it seems that perhaps some fuzzy logic could be considered. Such as arc triggered and immediately expands to encompass a further 10% or minimum 50metres. Just thinking this might cover the eventualities of retreating or moving outside quadrant. However the simplistic once activated arc cancelled seems easier to code but does mean you lose type of arc.
-
Perhaps "firing action within arc" was too pithy and I should have explained further as I foresaw sburke's idea. Until the ambushing troops open fire themselves the arc order remains good. And once triggered the ambushing troops know they are rumbled and open fire on anything they think fit until a further order is made.
Re. testing for troops opening fire outside arcs - I only do armour testing : ). Anyone have actual knowledge of troops firing outside of arc?
-
ME. Surely GAJ suggested the solution - firing action inside arc negates arc order.
Incidentally I know fanatics obey orders to the end but do lesser troops actually decide to react despite orders?
-
Unfortunately a game mechanic "trick" which GAJ has not implemented. An expectation that the game AI will have some commonsense reactions proves false.
I was aware of it but I am now mulling what happens if the German was in the arc quadrant but 10 metres outside the limit. I assume that they would not shoot at him either so drawing a circle is not much help then. Anyone know?
-
Interesting post verulam. Makes sense - it is easy to forget how widespread and dangerous malaria was.
And for those of an enquiring mind : )
Short History of Malaria and Its Eradication in Italy With Short Notes on the Fight Against the Infection in the Mediterranean Basin
-
I had a quick look at an early scenario and though it does not mention it the scenario starts at 7.55 am and the reinforcements turned up at 8 am - Union men : )
-
sburke - Brilliant thanks for that. Though working backwards in seconds still hurts when logging events.
-
I was looking up binoculars on various sights[geddit] to see if there was any useful detail on optics. I know German binos were markedly superior to Allied ones but finding a side by side comparison seems impossible. I do have a US tank commander as quoted saying he was able to make out a German ATG hidden AFAIR remember .5 mile away that he could not spot with his US issue binos.
However in this instance we are really talking about situational awareness to put your binoculars looking in the right place. A human eye is able to pick up movement at well over 5 miles as I used to see trucks at that range - resolution is of course trickier.
Just for fun:
Eyeball Height in feet
5
6
10
50
100
250
500
1000
1050
5000
10000
29000
100000
500000
Miles you can see
2.65
2.9
3.74
8.37
11.83
18.71
26.46
37.42
38.34
83.67
118.32
201.49
374.17
836.66
Incidentally Olympus make a really good cheap travel compact with a zoom to 800+mm. Effectively a 17 times zoom.
BUGS :CMFI and CMGL
in Combat Mission Fortress Italy
Posted
And if you are not a native English speaker that is no excuse. We expect total accuracy and the correct nuance from whatever you post. Particularly if you are posting for the first time it necessary to read all previous posts and avoid any words that are emotive. [ I joke : )]
BTW welcome to the community, generally we do not bite.