dieseltaylor

Historical all the way.! Some of the least successful scenarios I played CM*1 where historical. The problem lay in the game engine was not capable of producing the right result so beautiful accurate terrain and the correct number of tanks simply did not cut it. I hope that designers work at their art and get the right feel before they embark on historical and then find some design features [!] make certain ideas unacceptable in game-play terms. Each to his own but CM*1 scenario design does show what can go wrong.

The French seem to me to be very good at planting trees at a distance to make for straighter growth and easier logging. So people who see woods that are full of snaggled up trees should think about when wood was used for sabots [for the feet : )], fuel, chemical processes, kitchenware, furniture, etc. And leaving pigs into feed. I have no doubt that one could find tangled woods but my suspicion is that it is function of human density and terrain. Tanks are roughly 10 ft across which is a very close spacing in tree terms. Excluding things like hazel woods which would have stumps probably that close.

Having used computers for the last two decades, and been on the Internet for most of that, I am not unacquainted with it. However thank you for your welcome and the inciteful comment. : ).

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-04-facebook-cash-user.html Its an interesting thought but I wonder if I can target the Libyan and Egyptian freedom fighters : ) For the right money of course. Seems to me that things perhaps are going the way of those with big bucks. My preferred solution is that huge numbers of people leave Facebook to use more traditional forms of contact which do not make tracking easy.

Given that PBEMHelper also allowed you to get two films and two moves per e-mail, and to watch all the films quickly I think the claim above wrong. Completely. Arguably the wider adoption of Helper, and trusted modes in particular would have been a great boon to the game and the players. Excepting of course Mac players.

Repeated viewing does help with some people - or nationalities : )

The War Letters of General Monash 1934 - now that would be a book worth finding/

Seems to me that WEGO will favour larger maps as time can be spent, where it is clickfest there will be little time to look around to see what else is happening. SO each scenario designer might need to consider early on whether what is being designed suits both styles of play or favours one or other. Me I have not a clue but will be only playing WeGo and giving general orders for my pixeltruppen to carry out.

not only a box, a game, but a printed manual!!!!!

I look forward to meeting you in WW2

What I consider a perfect example of the art:

Berkhorn - You abviously have read a lot have you any comments regarding "On the pyschology of military incompetence" by Norman F. Dixon

I can give some fairly specific gripes against CM scenario info. 1. You will receive two armour platoons. [like this is early Torch era and I have not a clue what the designer is actually providing me with in terms of US armour - Shermans? Grants? A mix? Stuarts? - I maintain as its the same formation I should know [be told] 2. You will get reinforcements on turn 7 ...... [ This a map with two roads about nine fast Jeep moves from each other in North Africa. Now the number of paved roads available in the mountain area amounted to two for probably all of Tunisia so the ****** unit commander should be told what road they arrive on as he needs it to plan his start move, and its not like they can change from road to another easily so were probably on those roads 6-12-24 hours ago.] 3. Changing the shell loadout. Arming tanks with all tungsten or hollow charge. A bit naughty. I was going to say introducing tanks out of era but on reflection I think it might be a justifiable to introduce a Tiger a month early in North Africa to stop those grogs who confidently prepare to beat up MkIV's secure in the knowledge that is the most powerful tank the Germans can muster I know we are talking CMBN but the principle is an interesting one. Should players have absolute certainty when weapon systems are deployed? I am not sure it is possible for mis-Id's in CMBN : 9

Bocage would be less strange to the Germans than the Americans as Germany also has areas of small fields and similar size buildings etc. However I do not buy terrain as the basic point. Terrain can multiply a unit effectiveness but you have to take the initial effectiveness of a platoon first. What are the fundamental requirements of a platoon. Good training in tactics and weapons, fire disciple etc. Those one imagines go for all troops. The next layer after that is the mental attitude to the job in hand. If you really believe that killing a guy is more important than suppressing them then you are already making a more potent unit. Looking at the equipement I wonder if the German NG's greater rate of fire provided the suppressive action whilst the riflemen went after the kills. A Bren was certainly not in the same league for suppression. i am theorising here hoping someone has a handy book on small arms tactics compared in the bocage .....

In general a good idea but where a defence has all the hedge-lines zeroed in for mortar fire and the fields are small it would be fairly fatal I suspect. Firing from a mile away from an area without defining features is a much better idea : )

Regarding dubious anecdotes. I have no doubt there may have been bull****ting going on but I cannot rubbish what the book is based on as being totally meaningless. My reading does suggest that the German soldiers were more lethal than Allied soldiers, or Western Allies at any rate. It is actually surprising given the average soldiers reluctance to actually shoot to kill that no one has done a survey to see if in fact the German squads WERE more effective because more of the soldiers shot to kill rather than suppress as Allied soldiers were wont to do. This may be social conditioning, or as a result of fighting on the Russian front, or the be tough ethos. Possibly the reason why the Anzacs, Finns, Canadians, fill in other favoured group,were thought tough was because they actually had that higher number of men shooting to kill. And of course quality NCO's do make a very large difference to platoon cohesion. The German apprenticeship method may well have translated very successfully to the Army. SO if anyone has handy the links to this kind of data ...

Steve Actually I kind of like this idea. The designer gives several statements : 1. the bridge area is mined heavily 2. there are reports the bridge area is mined 3. the locals say no mines were laid AND 1. the germans have left a some infantry 2. the germans are reputed to be reinforcing 3. a major attack is possible through your area and the player can choose the one he is happiest with : ) The designer is not at fault as one of each statement will be true! I suspect looking at the force you have most players might decide their force mix is the clue .....Oh dear! Wodin: I can perhaps understand that with CMSF one might appreciate guidance as there is not the equipment and action history that WW2 has. I think many players of CMBN would be insulted if a player provided playing tips.

: ) warms the cockles of my heart.

JonS- if you read the last sentence of mine I am talking about the enemy not a geographical feature! In CMBN, unless I am sadly mislead, you do not get to see the enemy as a matter of course - you have to suck it and see if there is anyone in a wood, house, barn, ditch. Exactly as in 1944. : ) BTW you mentioned the recon guys for the US not being that reliable in discenting features. It does seem bizarre given the entirly similar countryside in the UK.

Linked too earlier but I thought as it was highly relevant to what made German soldiers better than some other countries. Better in this respect being killing more. As long range understanding of the geo-political situation vis a vis Stalin you could say the Italians were smarter soldiers. Professor Neitzel's work is published as Soldaten - Soldiers - with the sub-title, Transcripts of Fighting, Killing and Dying. He and his fellow author, Harald Welzer, examined more than 150,000 pages of transcripts of recordings made secretly by their British and American captors, and now stored in the British Public Records Office in Kew in London and in the National Archives of the United States.

JonS I am a little depressed that it is assumed because we do not know the height of a building from a map this reflects badly on the ease to see this in game. Maps cannot possibly show every feature unless you are down to 50ft to the inch or some equally impractable scale. But what many men would have had is the Mk1 brain which could interpret and confirm using the Mk1 eyeball. Building heights - I mean for pete's sake the range of building heights could almost be predicted even if you had no maps. Were doors and windows are - pretty much the same for every house built but actually not that important. Interpreting maps. All English Grammar schools taught geography and map interpretation was part of the syllabus. Many belonged to the Scouts where practical application was natural. And of course OTC or induction would add the military gloss. My father tells me that they only used 1" to 1 mile pre-war however despite not being overly detailed assumptions could be made. Perhaps most misunderstood but taught even to me was the usefulness of drawing cross-sections through terrain to calculate visible points, and also contours could indicate convex and concave slopes, narrow and broad valleys, and if narrow the likelihood of a watercourse even if too tiny to be included on the map. It now occurs to me that in many countries the education system may not include map-reading, or even physical geography in their curriculum so that what was reasonably obvious to men in 1944 might seem difficult now. End of day - then and now you had to suck and see because that was the only real way you would find out if the enemy was there or not.

Without a doubt the relevant figures are the platoon strengths at point in time. I have seen plenty of figures where a company can barely muster half its strength after taking a pasting. And I am even more surprised that no one so far has given actual figures, I am not such a grog that I keep that info handy : ) Also I think that a proportion of time the losses are heavy in a brief few minutes and after that event any further losses are incidental. SO a daily loss rate is actually not that relevant whilst reports by 15 minutes might show the way losses occur. In CMBN it will be real action in the sense that something is on - and if one were to graph losses to time it would have a distinctly different profile to holding formations. But graph it over a division and the picture becomes horribly useless = apart from if you are an Army commander. But that is not where we are at. http://royal-ulster-rifles-ww2.blogspot.com/2010/11/1st-december-1944-second-attack-on.html If you read the story you may want to reasd the first part which is all of the right scale http://royal-ulster-rifles-ww2.blogspot.com/2010/11/29th-to-30th-november-1944-attack-on.html

SO when you read about Cuillin plows busting the bocage hedges ...... think well - perhaps not all of them, and not the really big ones, and the ones with deep roads the other side. and the ones with ditches before the mound of the hedge. But there were loads of hedges to go for so some were definitely possible. Especially the ones chosen for the mass demonstration to the Brass and the Press. : ) Absolutely horrifying fighting area.

French interior decorating is very different for most countries : ) We have been in quite a few French houses and they are very fond of wallpaper, and less common, fabrics stretched on battens to hide bad walls. Of course the house with tartan walls, and I cannot swear whether it was a tartan carpet or ceiling lives on in memory [ if imprecisely]. Don't get me wrong I actually like French culture houses, food and decoration.

The whole point of hedges is to be an obstacle and in the country cows leaning on them means they tend to be tough. The idea of jumping a hedge is perhaps a townies view of hedges : ) I think the AI choosing a path is realistic in the general way. If you are in acction it probably pays to give more specific orders ... as long as they make sense the AI will do what you want. {I guess as I do not yet have CMBN]