Broken
-
Posts
293 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Broken
-
-
Flamethrowers are generally not useful except in built-up areas, fortifications or dense woods. With care, they could be used to good effect in CM1. Circa 2003, JasonC and I had a forum QB to demonstrate their effectiveness.
-
In the second scenario, I see the AI is still pretty bad in selecting targets for off-map artillery. The only target near the impact zone is one lone MG. Conscript FOs?
Also, the US tanks seem to target the Panther hulls, not the more vulnerable turret. I counted 13 hull hits on the Panthers versus two turret hits. You would think the AI could be tuned a little bit here. Just saying.
-
There are no 'old timers coming back'. Just returning deserters.
They will have to start with noob-status again.
Sez the noob.
-
Rusty CMx1 old timers that never touched CMSF will be the perfect victims for online H2H
That is why we will stick to WEGO, heh.
-
Also you would have thought that the Panther would have fired its MG's at the M12 crew immediately, especially given the turret mounted gun would be assumed to lay target first. I am not saying it could not happen it just seems unlikely.
On another board, someone gave a more detailed description of Cooper's account and said it was a Tiger, not a Panther. Evidently, the Tiger's turret was slewed to one side and the M12 had a round in the breach, allowing the M12 to get in the first shot. Another interpretation might be that the Tiger was already abandoned.
-
"Death Traps": a good read, but needs to be filtered as a source/reference. Belton Cooper relates anecdotes, not verified facts. (Not saying it's falsified, but it needs to be looked at with a bit of a jaundiced eye. Similarly, "Band of Brothers" has been shown to be based on "war stories", with all that engenders, rather than researched and verified actions.)
Ken
I don't have my copy of "Death Traps" anymore and I don't remember what backing detail Cooper provided for the M12 vs Panther/Tiger incident. However, it is verifiable that M12s were actively engaged against KG Peiper. For example, the previously mentioned M12 direct-firing on KG Peiper in La Gleize, a few miles away from Cooper's M12 vs Panther/Tiger incident. Furthermore, Belton Cooper was actually in the 3rd Armored Division which engaged KG Peiper. I would give him a bit more credibility than Steven Ambrose, author of "Band of Brothers", who never served in the war.
Cooper does mention a number of other unusual engagements, including the nasty Paderborn slaughter, the "super" Pershing in action, etc., which are corroborated by other accounts. I particularly enjoyed his account of personally using a panzerschrect (panzer faust?) against a (dead) King Tiger and then examining the hole punched through the armor.
The one thing I did disagree with Cooper on was the "Pershing versus Sherman" decision. Cooper was really down on Patton's decision to prioritize Sherman 76 production rather than introducing the Pershing earlier. I think going with the Sherman 76 and M36 was the right move. YMMV.
-
Is there anymore detail on this?
I am pretty sure it was mentioned in "Death Traps" by Belton Cooper, but I can't confirm since someone "borrowed" my copy. I am not sure if the M12 encountered a Panther or King Tiger, but it definitely won the encounter. The German tank was part of KG Peiper near Stoumont on the northern shoulder of the Ardennes offensive.
The author of "Death Traps" was a tank maintenance engineer with the US 1st Army during the war. He was a bit peeved at Patton for prioritizing the Sherman over the Pershing.
Another M12 using direct fire to good effect against KG Peiper occurred at the village of La Gleize. The M12 pounded the village from a hill overlooking the town, with KG Peiper unable to stop the 155mm beating due to lack of fuel.
Here is a picture of an M12 in direct firing mode in early 1945 in Luxembourg. Not sure what kind of target it is engaging.
-
Degree to which it actually appeared on the CM-scale battlefield aside, there might be modeling issues to depicting the M12. IIRC, the M12 had an earth blade in the rear that had to be deployed and anchored in the ground before it could fire. Without the earth blade, it lacked sufficient stance to absorb the recoil of the big gun.
I don't think the game has any kind of system that models something like this right now, though I suppose it might be possible to use the setup time feature used for things like tripod MGs and AT Guns (I assume, since CMSF already has this).
But there are details that need to be considered with a big SPG like that -- They can't dig the earth blade in on pavement or other hard surface, for example. They also usually need to deploy on pretty much level ground.
Not saying it wouldn't be fun to have a toy like that to play with. Just pointing out that M12 is really in a different weapons system class than the types of SPGs that are currently in the game (M7, SiGs, etc.), and there is some technical stuff that would have to be considered to get them properly depicted.
In terms of digging in the earth blade on hard pavement, the same is true of emplacing almost any howitzer or gun on hard-pavement: the trail spades won't dig in. Is this modeled in CMBN?
Speaking of guns, the horse-teams to draw the German guns aren't modeled either. Yet the German 150mm field gun (and it's 50 rounds of ammo) were somehow mobile in CM1. I just assumed the horses were too hard to model and were abstracted away.
By the way, the M12 which killed a Panther in the Ardennes didn't have time to emplace it's plowblade: the two adversaries stumbled upon each other on a mountain road and the M12 got away the first shot.
-
Still plugging for the M12 155mm gun carriage for the US. There were several battalions of these at Normandy. Some of them were historically used for direct fire, either defensively or to breach fortifications.
One even engaged a Panther at point-blank range in the Ardennes, blowing the turret clean off.
-
Ok, thanks for the explanation, I never played CMBO or CMBB.
You are welcome. Even with the primitive graphics, CMBO was a groundbreaking game.
Ah, for the olden days...
-
Seems to me that defending units occupying prepared positions would be likely to have extra ammo available, both where the unit is located and at some designated dump site within running distance.
Michael
That would be ideal. George MC says above that at least bunkers would be a source of resupply.
-
You know, these figures are probably true for most combat. Artillery is by far the greatest killer on the battlefield. But does that mean we want 75% of the casualties to be caused by artillery in the game? How much fun would it be to spend most of your time calling in artillery, and taking most of your losses from enemy artillery that you can do nothing to counter?
I prefer to think of these battles as showing only the final phase of combat. The time after the initial artillery bombardment, when the units are closing in on each other, so that most artillery have to stop firing to avoid friendly casualties. Light mortars and some air support and artillery may still be used, but most of those 75% casualties have already been sustained before the close in fighting starts.
My point is, you may not want to judge the amount of artillery available in the game against such numbers as the 75% casualties one. Like I said, that number will include the preparatory artillery barrage that happens before the forces close in and start fighting each other.
I agree that a significant fraction of the 75% of total US casualties caused by mortars happened as massed fires and/or the slow drizzle of harassment fire. It adds no value to have this realistically reflected in the game model.
However, properly placed and registered mortars had a significant tactical impact during the actual battles. This was not reflected in CMBO, where mortars were so ineffective that most unit purchases by savvy players excluded mortars if possible. This was partly because the infantry in CMBO were superhuman, able to charge MG positions head-on. This resulted in unit purchases of infantry, armor, and off-map artillery, but few MGs or mortars.
The situation improved somewhat in CMBB, because attacking became harder, partly due to the greater effectiveness of machine guns. Mortars became handy on the attack for suppressing MGs and other support weapons. Some people complained because infantry could no longer sprint about the battlefield like berzerker Olympic athletes, but it made for a much richer game, in my experience.
But mortars should also be effective on defense, especially for the Germans. If CMBN allows resupply of mortar ammo at a reasonable cost, that element of realism might now be achieved. We will see.
-
If there are vehicles on map then your grunts can re-supply from them. So if designing a scenario it's worth thinking about length of action, likelihood of running out of ammo and plan accordingly.
Hope this helps
Excellent. Thanks for the info. Now there is a real benefit to having an occasional truck around in the bigger scenarios.
Does resupply extend to small field guns, such as the German 75mm?
In CM1, these guns had 50 rounds of ammo, each weighing in at 13 lbs or 650 lbs altogether. Quite a herculean load for the 6 man crew (not to mention hauling the gun itself). I assumed this was allowed because the horse-teams had been abstracted away to simplify the game.
-
Thanks, George.
Does this mean that infantry units with no TOE vehicles will have no means of resupply except by "scrounging" or sharing?
-
In CMBN, a very nice improvement over CM1 is the ability to "resupply" ammo, either from scrounging or, presumably, from vehicles as in CMSF.
Is this possible for 81mm and 60mm mortar ammo? One of the inaccuracies of CM1 (in my mind) was the relative ineffectiveness of light mortars. The main reason was the light ammo load (27 rounds for a German 81mm). Since some studies* indicate that German mortars (81mm and 120mm) accounted for 75%(!) of American casualties in Normandy, it would seem reasonable to allow mortar crews access to more ammo through resupply.
The CM1 load of 27 rounds makes sense for a 81mm crew of 6 moving on the attack, since the combined weight of mortar and ammo is over 300 pounds (136 kg). However, crews in defensive positions would often have access to many more rounds than they could carry.
Can mortar crews resupply in CMBN and if not, can this feature be added to future modules?
*Busting the Bocage:American Combined Arms Operations in France
6 June--31 July 1944, Captain Michael D. Doubler, Combat Studies Institute
-
Broken,
The simple answer... they weren't used in a CM context hardly at all. When they were brought into do direct fire the situation was pretty much not the sort of thing that would make for an interesting scenario. Germans go their sIG because they are on the defensive and these guys aren't very mobile, so there would be a bigger chance of them being involved in a CM type battle.
Plus, we have to draw the line somewhere. We don't have the Hummel either, which is actually the direct thing to compare to the M12, not the sIG.
Steve
Thanks for the reply, Steve. I understand it is too late to add the M12 for the Normandy module, but when you get around to modeling Hummels, JagdTigers, Brumbars, etc., could you squeeze in the M12? It was one of the few vehicles overlooked in CM1.
I understand the Germans were mostly on the defensive, but even they occasionally penetrated to the American artillery line, even at Normandy. On such occasions, the artillery usually gave a very good accounting of itself.
-
My CM1 turf was the TH and then RD (Rugged Defense) ladders/tournaments.
I never played ROW tournaments, but they sound quite compelling. Especially since neither RD or TH still exist. We did try to put together an inter-board competition (Tournament of Titans), but it fell apart, partly due to Fionn's stubbornness, as Treeburst155 and others may recall.
-
Back in the CM1 days, we used Fionn Kelly's "Panther 76 rules" or "Short 75 rules" to limit the heavy stuff by gentlemen's agreement.
See:
-
Why no M12 155mm SP artillery?
There were 6 battalions of these beasts at Normandy (attached to 2nd and 3rd Armored divisions, among others). There were a number of occasions where they were used in a direct fire role as emergency AT, bunker busters, etc. If the Germans get 150mm sIGs, why not M12s? Certainly less rare than Sturmtigers or Jagdtigers although most of the M-12's direct fire usage came later against the Siegfried Line.
A mobile direct fire 155mm gun could be so much fun (depending on which end of it you were on).
-
In CMx1 the Stuarts could be game winners. Keep one or two back out of the way until you are sure out have sorted out the enemy's armour and AT guns, then roll them out. Three MGs, plus the 37mm pop-gun, were more than enough against infantry and, this is the crucial bit, they were usually very cheap. Half-tracks witha .50 cal MG could be used in the same way.
Gamey, yes of course, but it is a game.
Yep, Stuarts are definitely useful. Cheap, great against infantry, and give the big cats fits with their speed.
I have no problems with gamey. If you want exactly historical, get a history book.
-
Both in the case of meeting engagements and where reinforcements are entering by road, road formations are quite natural.
Yep, workable road columns would be really nice for meeting engagements. In MEs, you are often racing for the key terrain. It was a real pain with mixed vehicle types/experience levels.
-
Hey Seabee,
Yeah, Santa Barbara isn't exactly hell on earth. I went to UCSB and more or less just stayed here.
-
Agree that the old CM convoy road movement was unworkable. A lot of silly bumper-cars behavior.
I think you need two features to make road columns work:
1. A "convoy" formation for vehicles, with units maintaining minimum spacing.
2. "road movement" way points where you need only mark the beginning and end of the road section to be traversed. Ambiguities, such as multiple roads connecting the two points, could be resolved with intermediate way points and/or the computer selecting the shortest road path.
At the start of the game it would be especially useful to place units in convoy formation on a road and simply mark the point further down the road you want the front of the column to advance to.
Also useful for ambush scenarios where a large computer-controlled convoy could be bush-whacked by human-controlled Partisans, say.
-
Waiting for the Santa Barbara preview.
A fresh video to hold us over!
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
Fair enough. I was just commenting on the above video and it looked like the AI arty spotting was just as bad as the early CMSF version. Glad to hear that it has been tuned up.