Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

gunnergoz

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,933

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by gunnergoz

    OT: Highest Ranking US Officer KIA in WW2

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    Well, McNair died due to "friendly fire" so perhaps that's what they were implying with the comment about Buckner being the highest-ranking killed by "hostile fire."

    Only a lawyer could call it "friendly fire," methinks...

    BTW I remember reading that McNair was so busted up by the AAF bomb that hit near him that they had to ID him by his watch or something similar.

    I haven't personally observed many friendly fire casualties in CM, does anyone have any tales to tell about this phenomenon? Some estimates for WW2 friendly fire casualties run 10 per cent as I recall.

    0

    Prolonged campaign game in CM2?

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    One thing is sure...if you track units that historically saw a great deal of combat, you will find yourself totally replacing all your troops once or twice. This is especially true at the scale of CM. Junior leaders and sergeants just don't last that long. They may survive, but few made it all the way through unscathed. Several US divisions replaced several times their alloted numbers of line infantry.

    What this means to me is that it is relatively unrealistic to do a long term campaign and expect to have many of the starting units still there at the end.

    Operations would be different, and it would be nice to track vehicle and equipment losses and observe the "wising up" process of green troops.

    At this scale, each battle is sort of a fresh start. This is largely because of the generic nature of our little troopers.

    If we begin looking to individualize the leaders and crewmen to the extent that they have discrete personalities, then one wonders how this will impact processing speed in battles over company size.

    Of course, I'd love to see WW2 with the original cast! All on my little 19" screen. Perhaps when we all have Pentium XVII's. biggrin.gif

    0

    Grass mod

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    SS Peiper:

    At present I don't have a site to to post the files...they are hires and weigh in at a hefty 15MB. I suppose I can zip them and email them as an attachment if you like.

    Here's another sample:

    View?u=1532709&a=11607024&p=41128393

    And another still:

    View?u=1532709&a=11607024&p=41128407

    [This message has been edited by gunnergoz (edited 02-17-2001).]

    0

    Were British Land Rovers used in WW2

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    GPIG wrote:

    "I'm no historian, but please correct me if (and when) I'm wrong, but wasn't there British Long Range Patrol units in the desert like the SAS? Didn't they do behind the lines kind of action on the DAK, using landrovers?"

    You're doubtless referring to the "pink panther" LR's that belong for the most part to the SAS. They were strictly a post WW2 development and were mostly deployed in the '60's or later, especially in Aden. The WW2 LRDG used Ford and other trucks as well as jeeps.

    0

    Sound off, folks: What's the story behind your "user name"?

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    I grew up an Army Brat and love everything khaki or olive green. My last name is Gosnell. One day, an NCO serving lunch at our GI school in Italy, probably humoring my military-industrial complex, nicknamed me Gunner Goz and the monicker stuck. My dad was just Goz, of course. The '50's army was a much more fun, informal place than today's "army of one." Army of One...what an ego trip! Wait until the newly enlisted Army of One finds out he's one in 500,000. And a very small one at that...Who dreams up this smarmy crapola?

    0

    so why did tank destroyers not work?

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    It was the fault of flawed doctrine. General McNair et al of the Army Ground Forces had this theory that tanks were for exploitation, and that TD's were to kill tanks. TD's were seen as lightly armored gun carriages, while tanks were seen as killers of rear-area units (hence the heavy bias towards HE round effectiveness in the M-4 series. TD's ended up too often in pitched tank slugfests because they were up front supporting the tank-starved US infantry, a task for which they were ill-suited. I don't know about the 10-1 ratio, it sounds way too high for me. BTW, McNair paid the ultimate price for warriorhood by getting killed in Normandy by friendly airpower, and so did not live to see his pet theory disproven in combat, paid for with the lives of untold GI tankers and TD crewmen.

    0

    CM overdose ?

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    Well, at least you haven't camouflage painted your car/truck yet. I actually did that once when I was enamored of the then-new MERDEC camo schemes. Drove around for weeks deciding which color scheme was best for my area. Later a cop told my my stealth truck was hard to visually track (this was before CHP had radar) and so he let me off with a warning for "probably" speeding.

    Nowadays, thanks to CM, I merely spend hours in front of a monitor trying to come up with the "perfect" grass scheme...(sigh). Can't top DD yet, but I'll keep trying.

    0

    Rare Vehicle Poll

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    1. German Goliath radio-controlled kamikaze tankettes

    2. U.S. halftrack M-3 gun carriage w/75mm gun as used in N.Africa and Italy

    3. U.S. M-6 heavy tank (what-if)

    4. M-22 Locust airborne tank

    5. LVT series amphibians

    BTW, reagarding earlier post, there were no "40mm bofors halftracks" in U.S. service other than a very few field mods which seem to have been restricted to the Pacific. But the M-15 HT, now that I'd love to see...

    0
×
×
  • Create New...