Roach

Here at last - just downloaded it from Amazon.co.uk

I'd like to see my GIs wearing the correct packs - haversacks for infantry and musettes for paratroopers, and not as it is at the moment with both infantry and paratroopers wearing a mix of both. However I believe that they are assigned randomly so I can't see a way to make it happen - there, that sounds like a challenge to someone if ever I heard one!

Excellent. Grabbed it from the repository and the water (and everything else) is already looking decidely choppy! As a matter of interest, are you planning on releasing individual maps from the campaign? The only (vaguely serious) attempt I've made at making a historical map myself is Le Carrefour and I'd quite like to compare - but somehow, what with my level of expertise or lack thereof, it's going to take me quite a while to get anywhere near those crossroads! Many thanks.

I think it would look awfully nice on a Samsung Galaxy 10.1 - especially if it was mine that it was looking awfully nice on!

No musettes on the beach, just assault vests and haversacks. Talking of which, I wonder if anybody is game enough to take on modding an aasault vest or if in fact it is actually possible? I suspect that it might not be - or at least not convincingly anyway.

I had a stab at removing the musette packs to at least reduce the instance of them appearing on my infantrymen by simply editing out the musette from the us-gear.bmp. This did remove the musette bag well enough from my troops so that the few men that I had wearing packs (about 2 per squad, tops) were at least wearing haversacks. However that left the M3 knife/scabbard floating in midair where it was intended to be attached to the musette. * So the next step was to remove the M3knife/scabbard image from the us-musette-bag-shovel.bmp which I thought had worked until I noticed that there was still a grey M3-shaped image floating in position. I can’t see a separate image of an M3 anywhere in the US bitmaps so I'm not sure what is causing the ghostly M3 to still be there. Then again, I am only tinkering and not in any way a competent modder (I know nothing about masks and alpha channels!!) so I dare say that one of the talented chaps on here can sort it out. Still doesn’t solve my "haversacks for all!" campaign though! I did try faffing with the mdr files again to achieve this but to no avail. I did manage to get a second haversack hanging from the waist which suggests to me that I really ought to be able to replace the musette with the haversack with the right combination of mdr files but, again, it's all a little beyond me. I am such a quitter! Bah humbug. * Incidentally, in real life there is no attachment for any equipment on a musette bag on the side (very late war and post war versions had an attachment on the back flap) so this is somewhat inaccurate in the first place. The haversack does have the attachment for the bayonet in the same place that the musette erroneously has it but I don't think I've seen a bayonet in that position on the haversack, always on the belt - I could very probably be wrong though! Regardless, it seems that the setup of the US packs are a little a about f. Still a minor quibble though, obviously, although I should probably get some counselling about my haversack fixation...

I think that depends on the situation and it's probably true in some cases. But I wasn't looking to get rid of the packs completely, I merely want my infantry to be wearing infantry haversacks, rather than wearing musette packs which were pretty much a paratrooper 'thang' - a paratrooper certainly wouldn't be seen dead in an infantry haversack! The US had uniform regulations too so they weren't really an optional style choice but, again, it's only a minor quibble to see my boys heading for certain death in the bocage weighed down with musette packs although, oh, how that quibble itches!

I guess that means no takers, then? No matter. After messing about with the .mdr files for haversacks and musettes I did manage to replace the musette bag with an E-Tool but didn't achieve much else other than replace the E-Tool slung at the waist with another musette bag - not quite the effect I was after. But I figure that switching the right .mdr file ought (well, might!) cause the musette bag to be replaced with the haversack. Unfortunately I just haven't managed to do it - maybe I haven't hit on the right .mdr file or maybe it can't be done. This would be a shame as I'm quite fed up now of my infantrymen looking like paratroopers; it is an admittedly very minor quibble but I can't find anything else about the game to quibble about! Curiously, the actual BMP file for the haversack is labelled as a musette bag, so that just confused me a little bit more - and it doesn't take much in the first place. Still, if anybody has any ideas to rid me of the musette bags in favour of the haversacks, do feel free to jump in. Thanks.

I was just wondering if there is any way to replace the musette bag with the haversack on the US infantry or are they assigned randomly to the models and there isn't anything that can be done about it? Obviously it's hardly the end of the world but I'd just like to see my infantry running about in infantry haversacks looking like infantry instead of running around looking like those airborne fellas! :-D Thanks.

That would be the 2/115 who were involved in the incident at Le Carrefour. There isn't really a lot of information about it on the web, almost none in fact - it seems to have been largely glossed over in the history books. It does get a mention in Glover Johns' Clay Pigeons and the 29th Div History - although the latter is simply a quote from Clay Pigeons - and that account has become the definitive one. I can’t remember if Joe Balkoski mentions it in his books but I'd be stunned and amazed if he doesn't; I just haven't read any of them for a ling time but it's got to be in Beyond the Beachhead. Anyway… Where it is mentioned (other than in the above), it's often referred to as an ambush but essentially, amid the general confusion and chaos, it was more a case of the 2/115 getting ahead of the German forces retreating from the invasion area so that when they holed up for the night at Le Carrefour they were suddenly surprised by a fairly large enemy force of mixed odd and sods (including some armour) heading south to a new defensive line, and coming right up behind them along pretty much the same route they had just travelled themselves. Initially, in the dark, they mistook the German activity (vehicle noises, etc.) behind them as being friendly forces. In Clay Pigeons it states how the 2/115 made no defensive provisions at all when they halted because they were so exhausted but just went to sleep in the field - something that 2/115 vets hotly dispute - so that when the German force hit them they were totally unprepared and, essentially, they went to pieces and fled. Again, the 2/115 vets hotly dispute this and they put the exaggerated stories about the incident stemming from Gerhardt jumping to conclusions before he had all the facts. The battalion became admittedly somewhat disorganised during the action but they certainly hadn’t fled en masse with their tales between their legs - if they had they wouldn’t have left the significant number of 'dead' pieces of German armour on the battlefield that they did. So not exactly the debacle that Gerhardt's immediate reaction indicated that it was. Not to mention that the battalion was back in the saddle the next day or there and thereabouts (with a new CO, the previous one having been killed in heroic circumstances during the battle). Again, I have no links to the above but I do know that quite a few years back a lot of 2/115 vets at a 29th Convention got together and thrashed out the whole incident to put the record straight once and for all, having become just a little bit fed up with how the action had been depicted and perpetuated in various books and, naturally enough, how that reflected on them. I recall a 1/115 vet amongst a group we were ferrying around Normandy saying that he didn't mind missing the memorial ceremony at Le Carrefour because it was just a ceremony for a bunch of guys who went to sleep in a field! I think that it was that kind of reaction from their own contemporaries that made some of the 2nd battalion guys want to get the true story out there. In an attempt to get a balanced picture of the incident, there was also, I believe, a certain amount of research done regarding the composition of the German forces that attacked them; all the results were published in an article in the 29th Division Association newsletter some years ago And of course, naturally enough, now that I actually need it, I cannot find the beggar! There ends my virtually monotonous monologue. Meanwhile, back on topic, I don’t think it's the same field. Now, back to lurking...

Another no additional charge UK delivery. Splendid.

Hi snake eye, No problem. If you think it's wrong, you think it's wrong, so fair enough. Personally, I don't have your expertise so cannot give any useful opinion either way. All I can say is that the camo belongs to guys who did/do had/have many years of experience collecting GI cast offs at the usual great expense (I'm still trying to fathom what makes a sane man do that?!!) and I'd be amazed if they'd offered up hookey gear as originals for prime examples for photo work, so really, I have no reason to doubt them. But on the other hand nobody is infallible and as I'm no expert I'm happy to bow to superior judgement and if that superior judgement is yours then so be it. :-)

Hi snake_eye, Yes, the picture I posted was staged for the book in about 92, 93 (my aging memory is not precise about the dates!), but I just wanted to clarify that the uniforms are not reproductions. As I recall we had about two or three sets of the army camo in nice condition for the photo shoot. It was pooled by different collectors but for the photos they were mixed and matched to make up complete, better matched suits due to some colour differences; this was either due to fading through wear and tear or maybe just differences in manufacture. I can assure you though that the camo suits, both jackets and pants, as well as everything else (again, as with your picture, barring the guys, obviously!) were original - the chaps were very picky about that sort of thing! :-D Hi Michael, When I was collecting GI 'stuff' in the early 80s there was apparently a commercial range of camo either being produced or, more probably, had been produced (can't remember which - as I said, age is very bad for my memory!) in the US after the war and which was very similar to the WW2 Army pattern so maybe that was what you had? I never had any myself, never saw any for that matter, and never had any original camo either - my pockets weren't deep enough! :-D

A pretty picture of WW2 US Army Camo: http://i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc478/Alfred_Jones_Jnr/WW2%20Camo/USArmyWW2Camo01.jpg From the book, The World War 2 GI in Color Photographs

Yes, mine mysteriously returned to normal yesterday as well. I knew patience would triumph eventually :-)

I've been experiencing the same problem for about a week, getting a 2 minute load time. I'm in the UK, 2 mbps connection. Every other website seems to load as normal so I concluded that my isp has taken a sudden and hopefully temporary exception to battlefront. A tad irritating indeed but on the plus side I am learning the art of patience :-)

Ah, a good point, and I'm afraid that I don't have any specifics re training in the area. However, I'm aware (with no handy proof to back it up!) that the training didn't just involve getting onto the beach and leaving it at that; training exercises were conducted inland (again, a proof-free claim!) and to that end a significant area around the beach area was evacuated to enable that. The only map of the evacuated area that I can find after a very quick search is here: http://www.submerged.co.uk/slapton%20six%20big.jpg It's a significantly sized area so, again, it's hard to imagine why, when they encountered the same sort of terrain in Normandy it came as such a surprise. But, having said that, I suppose that in an exercise the 'enemy' wouldn't be fighting quite so hard in their defensive role and therefore it would be a lot easier for an attacker to climb over hedgerows and find a gate in a field for vehicles etc. Therefore I guess it's less likely that there would necessarily be a perceived problem. As DieselTaylor has correctly stated, with the benefit of hindsight on our side, it's much easier to pick holes. And without any proof to back up anything I'm saying, I'd best be quiet!

Absolutely. In the area around Slapton in Devon which was specifically cordoned off and emptied of the populace for US training purposes, the terrain is virtually identical. Consequently it always amazed me that the Normandy bocage came as such a shock to the allies later on when they'd been training in the same 'stuff' for months.

Hey, no need for apologies. In the past I've read a few quotes saying much the same thing but my personal recollection is that in the greater scheme of things we had very few re-enactors through the wardrobe doors - although I think some of the the few we did have might have bigged their roles up somewhat! And no, I don't mean to dis re-enactors. But the reality is most re-enactors can't afford to take a three month sabbatical from work to 'star' in a movie - just the odd day here and there which is my recollection. Anyway, my department's own theory on the haircuts was that the costume designer had so few choices on what could be designed what with uniforms being, well, uniform, she had to impose herself where she could! But then again, that's probably just the idle meanderings of an idle crew between takes! As for the whole accuracy thing, the sage words we were told were "we're making a movie, not a documentary..." Ah well. Right then, now it's my turn to be quiet and stop derailing the topic!

I worked on SPR and I don't recall there ever being more than a small handful of re-enactors at any given time. For the most part the crowd during filming at Hatfield were mainly the usual regular crew of jobbing extras (which included a fair few ex-army guys). Regarding the skinhead cuts the 'Germans' were given, as far as I can remember from our gossiping sessions (!) at the time about that very subject, it was purely because the head Costume Designer thought it would be a good look - just goes to show that no matter how well-reknowned and successful you are at your job you are not necessarily always correct! Such is life.

Canada Guy, If you're still thinking of getting the ATI 3870 then this is just to say that I am running the 3870 with DirectX 9.0c on XP Pro and neither CMAK or CMBB will run. Well, actually, that is not entirely correct - they run until you start the battle and then the machine shuts down! Of course, this is just my experience, it might work for others. And after all those years waiting for fog, too! :-D

Epishade, This might be a silly question but did it actually ask you for a licence code? I ask only because I have just bought the Paradox version (alright, I admit it, I got it from Play.com for a fiver!) and have just this moment installed it after reading your post, slightly worried as I have no kind of licencing code either - and mine was a sealed box. However, it installed and seems to be playing without any requests for a licence code, hence I thought I would ask the silly question.

I find it difficult to believe that the Luftwaffe could have been effective enough to prevent the RN from mauling the troop barges. If the RAF had been taken out of the picture, perhaps, but, as we know, they hadn't and so the Luftwaffe wouldn’t have been allowed to have an unchallenged run at neutralising the RN and thus preventing them from causing havoc. Still, assuming that the seaborne troops successfully run the gauntlet, get ashore and establish a bridgehead, you then you have to take into consideration the terrain the invading army first find themselves in, and then up against. If it’s a road network suitable for lightning vehicular breakouts you’re after, then Cornwall (and then Devon) is most definitely not the place. Lots of narrow lanes and only one really major road worthy of the name out of the West Country into the heart of England. Not promising for a Panzer spearhead in a hurry. In fact, we are talking about terrain not very dissimilar to the Normandy bocage – especially as you move eastwards into Devon. More narrow lanes, more hedgerows á la Normandy – in short, a defender’s dream. And I can well imagine that the Germans would have had an equally as difficult task as the Allies did in Normandy – but ultimately with a far costlier outcome. Even against an initially small (but probably determined) defensive force, I imagine that any gains would have been small and strictly limited, and as resistance stiffened (and I am not sure how, without air superiority, the Germans could have prevented defensive reinforcements arriving) the entire operation would bog down. And unless the re-supply could be maintained over such a long distance and in the face of constant RAF and RN interdiction, well… Realistically, I don't see how any invasion force landed in Cornwall would have achieved anything other than very quickly becoming an isolated force cut off on a very extended limb with fatal consequences. If we assume that all the factors were in the German’s favour, i.e., the RAF had been neutralised, and the RN could have been prevented from having its say, then maybe a landing in the West Country might have had a chance of success. But then again, in that case, with no RAF and RN, the invasion could have come straight across the Channel to the South/South East Coast with no need to take the long way round. So basically, in my uneducated opinion (and without the benefit of historical research to back me up of course!) I imagine that the German High Command would almost certainly have looked at this area, and carried out a feasibility study, but then, in the end, the consensus of opinion would have been, “Nah, sod that for a game of soldiers…”

They probably would have tried the A303....tricked everyone. But which ever way, can you imagine Pz 4's going down Gunnislake ?? Noba. </font>

Yes, I read about that too (in the Express I think) and my first thought was "what??" I'm sure the newspaper report stated that the documents were recently released from government files so I don't think they were a scam, but I can't remember for certain and the newspaper is long gone. I assumed that they could be part of an overall study going through the possibilities of where or where not to invade - with the emphasis (eventually) on not! Because just like Montys' Double said, they'd have been insane to tackle the A30 in August; I did it once and I was one man in a Ford Escort...