Steve McClaire

Yes ... nothing like backing into the finals and then getting grouped with WN.

I will beat you senseless. And when I'm done, Nidan1 will beat you senseless again. </font>

I heard from him last week and he said he was moving over the weekend, which was when we had discussed play TCP/IP. But nothing since then and no PBEM turns. Steve McClaire

I haven't heard from Yacinator in a while again. We're only on turn 7 of the Sanitorium scenario. At the current turn rate we'll never finish by June 7th. Is anyone else in group 1 in contact with him? Steve

Thanks Michael, I will give it a shot. Steve

Almost, but not totally off topic. I am looking for a copy of "World War II Balistics: Armor and Gunnery" by Lorrin Rexford Bird and Robert D. Livingston, published by Overmatch Press. There was an old review at wargamer.com that gave an email for ordering directly from Mr. Bird, but this doesn't seem to work anymore. If anyone knows where I can order the book, or wants to sell a copy, email me: smcclare@yahoo.com. Thanks, Steve

Are you still out there Yacinator? I haven't received any email from you if so. Has anyone else in section 1 heard from Yacinator? It's been over a week since I've received anything from him and I've resent the last turn twice. Steve

Unfortunately it appears it is, somewhere along the line. Last file I sent you was 012. Did you receive it? I have received nothing from you since. I am resending, along with asking Kingfish to relay for me. Steve

Kingie - What you have listed there now is the correct email address, yes. Thanks. I have not, Nefarious. I have not received any email from you since the first time we exchanged email. Are you receiving my emails? Steve Steve

Nefarious: I have sent you the first file for Highlanders a few times now, but have not received any email in reply. Are you getting mine? If several people are failing to get your email at all, you may be getting spam blocked. Do you have an email address besides the Yahoo one? Yacinator: Have sent you the most recent file in our game 2-3 times now. Are you receiving my email? I have not received a reply if you sent one. One more time (I am sure you're all sick of hearing it now ) but if you're using the original address for me that Kingfish sent out, I am NOT getting the email. I screwed up and gave Kingfish the wrong address originally. Just reply to the messages I send you and that should get to me. Thanks, Steve

Kingie, What's John Kettler's status? I haven't heard anything from him via email -- did he confirm if he is going to have a machine to use or not? If not, at what point will a replacement be brought in? Thanks, Steve

Yacinator, I heard from everyone in our section save the (apparently computerless) John Kettler, so they're out all out there. Steve

I don't think anyone has really mentioned what I think the most important benefit of 1:1 modelling is: Getting rid of the current abstraction of an entire unit's position down into a single point. Right now in CM a unit is present at a single point in the game world, regardless of how many men are in it or how much ground they would really occupy with proper spacing. If an enemy unit can see that one point of ground it can (potentially) hit every member of the target unit. Granted, the current engine abstracts by only causing 1-2 casualties per 'hit', but it still leads to some gamey tactics. You can area target near a unit from out of LOS and kill every man in the unit, even if they wouldn't have been within 50m of the point you're targeting. Abstracted movement commands / situations will also benefit greatly. If half a squad 'Advances' into the open and comes under fire, the other half won't be exposed in the open too. If one guy in a squad is going to assault an AFV with a grenade bundle he actually has to run across the 30m to the target rather than being able to safely 'lob' it from cover. Only being able to 'see' part of a unit will also increase player uncertainty - and so far this sounds like the mantra of CMx2. If you see one enemy soldier behind a wall you don't know if he's by himself or if the rest of a squad is lying down out of sight. If you fire on the one man and see him go down, have you destroyed the whole unit, or not? I am optimistic. I think it will really bring a new level of realism to the infantry part of the game ... which I've always felt came up a little short in the current engine.

There is a fairly thorough discussion of the Western Allies strategy in the Med. in the various US Army 'Green Books' about the campaign in Italy ("Salerno to Cassino" and "Cassino to the Alps"). There was a lot of political manuevering by the British to try and expand operations in the Mediterranean. The Americans had always been in favor of taking the fight straight to Germany (via France) and thought of the Med. as a side-show and a diversion of resources. As I recall Anvil/Dragoon was delayed because of the Anzio landings and the necessity to supply the beachhead during the winter of 1944. After this the Americans 'just said no' to any British suggestion for major landings, including several proposals for landing units in the Balkans and near Trieste. I believe that the US Army just didn't consider the capture of northern Italy an important military objective, and the Balkans were considered a Soviet area of operations. It was more important to topple the Vichy government and clear southern France and open a major port to bring in new units and supplies than to clear the Germans out of the Po valley. Steve

Hey Leland, did you ever get time to finish the CMAK update to MM? Steve

You're welcome. It's from the Combined Arms Research Library (CARL) at the US Army Command & Staff College. They have quite a few digitized WWII operational documents available, as well as some really interesting masters theses on various aspects of how the US Army fought WWII.

Not sure if you've seen this yet KF, but it looks like a good resource for your Brest scenarios. Recount of the battle from Geramn 343.ID perspective. Steve

Reynolds shows each of 3 TD coys having 1 SP and 2 towed platoons, each of 4 guns. [/QB]</font>

US Army towed TD units were always equipped with 3" M5 guns. You can find a good TO&E here. Click on the sub-units to see their composition. Cheers, Steve

Nafziger just gives the original designation of the regiments when they were first formed. I would guess they were probably re-designated with the other numbers when they were re-formed as Type 44 Grenadier Regiments. This site lists 70.ID as having 1018, 1019, and 1020th Grenadier Regiments.

From Nafziger: 70.I.D. - Confirms the information given earlier by JonS. 157th, 159th, and 236th Gren. Rgt. each of 2 bns. Fusilier bn 70 and 70th Art. Rgt. with 3 bn. 346.I.D. - Formed in 1942 as a static division with 857th and 858th Fortress Infantry Regiments (2 bns and 3 bns respectively) and the 346th Artillery Regiment (2 bn). 857th was filled out by absorbing the 630th Ost Bn. It was ordered to reform as a Type 44 division in March 1944. Orders were issued in May 1944 for some of its heavy weapons to be upgraded (included below). He gives the intended organization as: 3 Grenadier Regiments of 2 Bn each: 3 Companies (13 LMG & 2 8cm mortar ea) and 1 MG Company (12 HMG, 6 8cm mortar) per bn. Regimental units were bicycle platoon, pioneer platoon, IG company (2 15cm and 6 7.5cm IG), and PzJg coy (3 7.5cm and 3 5cm ATG plus 36 Panzerschreck). Fusilier Bn: Same as infantry Bn but one company on bicycles. Panzerjaeger Bn: 1 coy 12 x SP 20mm Flak, 1 Coy 14 x SP 7.5cm AT, 1 StuG coy (16 StuG). Artillery Rgt: 1st-3rd Bn w/ 12 x 10.5cm, 4th Bn w/ 12 x 15cm. Pioneer Bn: 3 coy w/ 2 HMG, 9 LMG, 6 flamethrowers and 2 8cm mortar each. One coy on bicycles. Feldersatz Bn w/ 5 companies. He also notes that the 346.I.D. absorbed 17th Admin Coy from the disbanded 17th Luft. Field Division on 28th October 1944. Stug. Bde. 244 - nothing specific about this unit is listed, other than showing it as an operational StuG unit as of Jan 1944. Generic organization was 3 batteries of 14 StuG each plus a pioneer/recon plt and a flak platoon (SP 20mm flak) in the HQ company. Hope that helps.

Holien - Two of my first round AARs are not listed on the B&T website. Have you received them? They are for 'Firefight '40' and 'Things that Go Bump in the Night'. Steve

I believe 141st RAC Rgt was part of 79th Armoured too ... at least I know elements of 141st RAC were on loan to the US 29th Infantry division in Sept. 1944 to help reduce German fortifications on the Brittany peninsula. They were equiped with Churchill croc flamethrowing tanks.

Not sure if you have his unit already but he was in Company I, 33rd Armored Regiment. 3rd Armored Division's CP was in Namur on Sept. 5th, so I assume the action took place within a day or two of that date. They were moving fairly rapidly at the time, entering Belgium on Sept. 2nd and into Germany by Sept. 12th.

Plus some of it is already available for free on the web: http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/online/Bookshelves/Books3.htm