Ksak

The French are still trying to figure out why the Maginot Line defense didn't work.

Ain't that rich...it's "historical" to sneak a 1/2 squad and then use workaround ambush markers, but gamey to recon with the only unit that has enhanced stealth, observation and fire discipline because it's called sharpshooter.

Glad to here the flak trucks are invincible. I just lost one to a hard stare, a teapot, and a 2 in. mortar. Whatever their combat effectiveness the flak guns have the best sounds in the game (Scipio sound mods). I'd buy them just to hear the "pom-pom."

You have left out the Allied 57mm recoiless rifle. I've had more success with this weapon than both the PIAT or the bazooka.

Check me for a pulse. I read more than one Germanboy post on a "gamey vs. historical" topic and didn't disagree with everything he said. I'm glad to see that the discussions in this and other gamey threads are heading toward the root of the acrimony - play balance. Rather than getting third parties involved in every battle, I would like to see a menu from which to pick the "most likely to be seen" TO&E for each side for each type of engagement. For example a deliberate attack is more likely to include armor (maybe even some heavy armor) for the attacking side than a meeting engagement which is more likely to see ordinary riflemen, light armor,etc. Defenders are more likely to have AT guns and lots of TRPs than armor, etc. I suppose that vanilla TO&Es would be a starting point but this seems a daunting task when the final objective is play balance. IRL commanders were not looking for fair fights.

I don't believe that a half-decent real life Allied commander would willingly put his troops into an unbalanced situation. Real life is not limted by QB game points. The German weapons did not have an advantage IRL when overwhelmed with artillery and airpower.

There is a scope for the .50 cal to use it as a sniper "rifle". The thing is very accurate out to a very long distance and easy to aim and fire. You don't pull the trigger but depress it with your thumbs. It's a great weapon and given enough time could probably knock down a small building. Leaves very large holes in the human body.

I recall reading a BTS post from long, long ago that the .50 cal does in fact have greater penetration into woodlines than the other HMGs.

This is the first honest discussion about the root cause of the "gamey vs. historical" division that I've seen in this forum. It's a lot more honest to make the argument that so called "not real life" force compositions create a play imbalance than the pontification that the composition was not doctrine or some other such nonsense. There were probably thousands of company sized engagements in the ETO and for anybody to say that such and such could not and did not happen is a ridculous assumption that gets passed off as historical "fact." A real life commander would use every asset at his disposal to create the most unfair advantage that he could - and get decorated, promoted, and his own show on the History Channel for doing so. CM is different because the design objective of the game is to provide entertainment, and it's not entertaining to get your butt kicked. If the perception that having one side automatically creates a play imbalance is widespread then that is a repairable deficiency in the game itself not a character defect in the player as some would like you to believe.

As my (ethnicity deleted) secretary used to say, "Youse people is crazy."

Agreed. I see these gamey vs. historical things and the logic wires get shorted.

Wierd.

I'm gonna' use more flak and mortars just 'cause I like the sound.

What a bunch of wimps! Did mommy make you stop going to park when the big boys wouldn't "let" you get a hit or make a basket? "Oh you poor little thing." "Let him win dear, it's not fair because you're bigger (stronger, smarter, more aggresive, you name it).

I say, I say again. There is a unit presently modeled in CM1 with "special" fire discipline, stealth, and powers of observation. Why not just change the name?