PiggDogg

Guys, I am one of those people who will use "withdraw" without hesitation when the situation impels my guys. The situation which impel my guys is having individual squads badly out firepowered by small arms or big arms , that is direct or indirect HE. However, one must remember the following when placing one's troops: 'if at all possible', one should place his infantry in good cover with a well covered retreat route and a well covered retreat destination. :eek: Sometimes, this is more easily said than done. However, this tenent should be adhered to as much as possible. Certainly, if one's guys are in the open without a covered retreat route when a 'withdraw' situation occurs, they might possibly be dead or nearly so. Indeed, This is one of the factors that makes attacking so hard and the attacker's casualties high. Cheers, Richard

Mike D, Such loud yelling. Tsk, tsk. Bad boy. Slap your hand with a ruler and wash your mouth out with soap. Murray, You "are" whining. :eek: However, that is OK. I have played BB since the beginning, have not downloaded a single bmp, have downloaded the 1.01 patch, and have not had a significant or half significant problem with the game before or after 1.01. If BB is not the game for you, surely there are or might be games out there that might better meet your tastes, needs, desires, and level of tolerance. BB and BO are not be for everyone, and it might not be for you. It does not mean that you, BB, or BO are bad or good. It just simply is. You are welcome to your opinions and tastes, and so am I. Despite it all, in my educated opinion, BO & BB certainly are not perfect, but they are pretty darn good and pretty darn fun. I have not found any better games out there that cover their subject matters. If there were better games out there, I would be playing them. But since there are no better games out there, I'll continue playing BO & BB. Cheers, Richard

Guys, As of today, 12/1/02, none of the major USA game magazines (PC Gamer [Holiday 2002, arrived 11/12/02], Computer Gaming World [Jan 03, arrived 11/21/02], & Computer Games Magazine [Dec 02, arrived 11/5/02]) have review CMBB. :eek: Somewhat surprisingly, William Trotter the longtime wargame guru/writer for PC Gamer has not even mentioned CMBB. Usually, he will eagerly tout any wargame which he might fancy. I will never forget Mr. Trotter in 1996 or so when he reviewed the Avalon Hill Stalingrad PC Game. He gave that game a 96%. :eek: I bought that game, and it at best stunk. From that point, one certainly anticipated Mr. Trotter's reviews with bated breath. Cheers, Richard

Tigrii, The BB "withdraw" command is not as useful as the BO "withdraw" command. In BO, use the withdraw command all of the time. However, in BB, with anything other than really great morale troops (elites, cracks, & maybe vets), the withdraw command is the only useful and rational alternative for getting out of Dodge quickly. The choice is use don't use withdraw and get a few panicked men surviving, Or use withdraw and get more panicked men surviving. I suggest, that at the first (and I mean the first) signs of being out firepowered, use withdraw. Every second (and literally every second) that you are outfirepowered, your body count will mount and your chances of getting away diminish. Further, whenever you move your guys, try to ensure that they have a covered and relatively safe place for them to retreat to. :eek: This above has been derived from my BO & BB experiences. Cheers, Richard [ November 30, 2002, 03:34 PM: Message edited by: PiggDogg ]

Guys, I don't care if tanks brew, stew, mew, woo, are new, are two, are in the zoo, are you, take a que, have a clue, have money due, or have a hue. :eek: Just as long as those tanks have no crew and turn into a rue (for the uninformed, this is the heavily cooked and darkly browned flour and cooking oil gravy that is the beginnings of gumbo, the famous and most delicious New Orleans culinary dish). Also, I may be a poet ... but maybe not. Cheers, Richard

Mike E, Good to see ya. Now where is JasonC? :confused: Cheers, Richard

Jack, These are the short answers. In the early war, the Germans had operational and tactical superiority on most (or enough) of the front in areas in areas other than one's particular BB meeting engagement. In the later war (and this will be the cute answer, not the exact, technical answer), the Russians had bunches of T34s where the Germans and no or very few tanks. :eek: Our particular BB MEs are those relatively rare instances where approximately equal numbers and forces met each other. I don't need to provide precise additional explanation. You are bright enough to figure out the proper implications. Cheers, Richard [ November 28, 2002, 11:33 PM: Message edited by: PiggDogg ]

Mike (without an E or D) , Thanks for the advice. I'm gonna do that. In fact, where is Mike D and JasonC in this discussion?????? :confused: Cheers, Richard

Maxx, Thanks. Nice post & your work is appreciated. Tigrii, You are most correct. If the forces are proportionately increased, the ratio of forces to space goes way up. Any German player (when the Germans have uber tanks, mid 43 onward) &, for that matter, any Russian player (when the Russians have uber tanks, 41 to mid 42) worth his salt will cover his tanks' flanks. In short, when either side has uber tanks, the uber side uses good and proper tactics by playing coservatively, taking advantage of slopes and folds in the ground to go hull down, & covering his uber tanks' flanks. If he does this, the uber commander should generally win. Of course, this uber tank superiority with proper tactics makes meeting engagements on wide open maps very difficult, if not impossible, for the unter side. This is because the force ratio will be nowhere near 3 unters to 1 uber, and those wide open vistas should cause massive death upon the unters. Thus, if one plays normal MEs and has unter tanks, pray for close terrain, night, and/or lots of hills. If the terrain is too open in a standard ME, the unter side might request quarter. Just a thought. Cheers, Richard [ November 28, 2002, 10:57 PM: Message edited by: PiggDogg ]

Mike E, Thanks for the compliment. I try. I guess my many hours of enjoyment and study of BB & BO, plus three years of law school have some outward beneficial effects, ... maybe. Guys, Additional update on bad falling spotted arty. In one of the previously mention games the spotted Ruskie 82 mm FO's barrage went about 150 meters awry (I said 200 meters earlier; I was wrong; I counted this time.) & of course upon a platoon of my guys. Not much damage done even to my bombarded infantry platoon because the barrage was puny 82s, and it was only about 20 seconds of shells. Life is good. During the planning phase for the next turn, the earnstwhile 'crack', yes crack FO moved the aiming point about 30 meters. Of course, the FO can see the aiming point with those good Boschenlomb binoculars bought prior to the war. Hey, a little adjustment might make those 82 gunners turn those cranks and get the barrage to land on target for a change. Well, the next turn arrives, and about 25 seconds later the barrage begins. With that bated breath, the FO watches, hopes, crosses his fingers, knocks on wood, and prays to the big guy upstairs. "Help our brothers from the heart of Old Mother Russia." Well, after all that hopeful anticipation, the barrage lands ... about 180 meters off target. :eek: Fortunately, the barrage landed not upon that stalwart Russian platoon, but upon what is probably an empty patch of woods behind the German lines. Moral to story, it seems that when a spotted barrage is off target, a slight 30 meter spotted readjustment of the aiming point may not (or will not) cause the barrage land on target. This implies that a negative answer is provided to #2 and probably #1 in my earlier post. In this battle, the weather is overcast, wet, still, and hot in southern Russia in October 42. (Hot in south Russia in October! Is this Tahiti? Hey, it is hardly even hot in New Orleans in October.) Also, of interesting coincidence, the first turn of barrage had a 150 meter spotted LOS to the aiming point, and the center of the landing point seemed about 150 meters off target. The second turn of barrage had a 180 meter spotted LOS to the aiming point, and the center of the landing point seemed about 180 meters off target. What does this mean? The karma of the universe is symetric? Coincidence is rampant? I need glasses? The answer is that I don't know. BFC, we await your reply. Enlighten us. Cheers, Richard [ November 28, 2002, 10:27 PM: Message edited by: PiggDogg ]

Mike D, Thanks for making this informative article available to us. Many lessons learned. Cheers, Richard

Scipio, Mike E, Red, & BFC Guys, Twice recently, I have had "spotted" BB arty barrrages fall 200 meters or so off target. Of course, both times, the arty landed on my guys :eek: . Out of the the whole universe of possibilities, my arty scoured the whole map and sought out with incredible efficiency their poor, unfortunate, fellow foot sloggers brothers. Fortunately, the arty was 81 mm mortars so the damamge was not too great to my guys. I would have been less happy if the arty had been 105s or above. Indeed, except for smoke, I always use "spotted" arty barrages. To me, one wastes arty when it is fired unspotted in BB or BO. I too would like BFC give us a reply as to how to correct errant "spotted" BB arty barrages. I don't really care about unspotted barrages (although an answer for this would be OK) since I don't use them :confused: To make it easier for BFC, here are some of the most probable scenarios. The turn after one has a spotted BB arty barrage go awry: (1) One should not move the aiming point; the FO, within the BB system dynamics, will automatically adjust the impact point. The FO sees that the shells are not landing properly and gets the gunners to correct. (2) One should move the aiming point a small amount; this imparts a less than long pause in the barrage & allows the gunners to adjust the impact point to where it should properly be. Within the BB system, the small impact point adjustment corrects the improper fall. Once again, The FO sees that the shells are not landing properly and gets the gunners to correct. (3) One should cancel the barrage completely & completely restart the targeting process with the long, long targeting delay; the BB internal system does not allow impact point corrections without a whole new targeting process. The FO sees the shells falling improperly or at least not where they should. The FO says, "holy cow" or some similar more colorful four letter epithet; he assumes that everything is FUBB [xxxxxx xx beyond belief ] 'and' FUBAR, that his gunners are imcompetent, and that he will be called upon the carpet for having a barrage whack his own men; the FO figures the only way to get it right is to start from scratch. :eek: (4) Other; please explain what to do & why. BFC guys, thanks in advance for your most kind attention. We await with bated and somewhat baited (those fishy smells are quite noxious) breath. Cheers, Richard

Guys, I'm in the Rugged Defense Tournament. I saw these buggers did not know what they did. I guessed that they were some sort of short range mortar. One learns. Did one of these ever knock out a German tank?? :confused: Cheers, Richard

Tigrii, To attack across the open, suppress everything, yes everything or nearly everything, that the enemy has with direct gun fire, direct HE fire, & indirect HE fire. :eek: If you have smoke, while the enemy is suppressed, smoke quickly. Then "advance" your guys across the open into the enemy cover, ... then pray. Cheers, Richard

Void, Have your guys stay in cover. It helps to hide your guys and gives them protection from fire. Cheers, Richard

Guys, Sorry to see Stg. Steiner go to the Kuban pocket in the sky. However, he & Sam Peckinpah are probably having a drink on the set of their next movie. We shall all be shown "where Iron Crosses grow like trees." Richard

Greenman & Le Tondu, You guys have stolen my thunder. For me, 1500-2000 point BB games between about 22 to 30 turns are about best. The reasons are as follows: There are enough forces so that the game will probably not turn on one single mistake. Of course, two or more mistakes may doom one. The games are small enough so that they can be handled relatively easily. However, they are not too large to become tedious and too time consuming to give orders. For me, games much over 2000 points are just too much of a bear to give orders, and thus the enjoyment to tedium ratio begins to edge to the unfavorable side. Cheers, Richard [ November 15, 2002, 10:19 PM: Message edited by: PiggDogg ]

Brain, Thanks for the explanation. So about 60 meters is the correct number. It is not a far distance, but one must live with what one has. I suspect that you saw DekeFentle's post about his real life experience. Deke's experience pretty well supports CMBB's infantry model. As a nice real life exercise, I guess that one should all load up a backpack with about 30 pounds of oranges, grapefruits, apples, and blankets (one's light field pack). Also, carry a 12 pound salami (one's rifle). Then one should jog and zig zag from bush to tree to hedge across the lawns of your neighbors homes. :eek: After about 100 meters, one should observe how he feels. After about 200 & then at 300 meters, one should again observe how he feels. After this, one should oberve how long it takes to gain enough strength to run forward another 80 meters and slap the salami around your neighbor's dog's head. Then one can feed the salami to the dog for his part and pain in this experiment. The dog will love the salami carrier. Can one get the idea?! :confused: BB ain't bad and, in fact, is quite accurate in its infantry model. Cheers, Richard :cool:

Brian, Thanks for the test and results. In the just above test, what were the parameters of the "shorter bounds" that you mentioned? :confused: In BB, the lessons seems to be that walk is the way to go most of the time. Advance should be used in "short bounds" with rest. The BB model seems and probably is much more historically correct than the BO model. If someone has overly tired troops too much of the time, they are just not doing things right. Those 'make one's guys tired too much' people might (but they don't have to) take the offered good advise, learn, and get better at BB. Then again, they can do as they wish, not take the offered good advise, not learn, and not get better at BB. It is a free world. Cheers, Richard

JAT, Unless something has slipped by me in BB, in bad weather (mud, rain, snow, etc), one is stuck with the move command in order to attack. One just better make sure that every enemy within the county is surpressed. :eek: I suspect that this pretty well shows the real life situation where attacks in bad weather and on bad ground were next to impossible. Of course, we know that Russia has weather to envy. They have warm balmy summers and mild dry winters. Makes one think of Hawaii or Tahiti. Cheers, Richard [ November 13, 2002, 11:26 PM: Message edited by: PiggDogg ]

It must be all those tens of thousand of Sons Of Old Mother Russia cannon fodder guys who have nothing much to do after close order drill. Their NKVD commissars order them to polish up those caputred Panthers' armor with sandpaper and emerycloth. This causes a nice bright sheen on the armor. However, it causes thinner armor. Cheers, Richard [ November 09, 2002, 01:48 PM: Message edited by: PiggDogg ]

Raven, Clans are little mollusks with shells that live in water, filter the water to eat, and ... Ooooops. :eek: Those are clams, not clans. Clans are people who join together, blah, blah. Cheers, Richard

Kirill, With no insult intended, here are some comments. Also, there are opinions and other people may refute these comments and I am willing to listen and learn. Smokescreens are to screen the view of the enemy to one's guys. Certainly, the Russians with their less responsive arty abilities would use preplanned arty strikes, smoke & HE. Is there historical evidence? I am sure that there is, but I can't provide the citations of the proper primary & secondary sources to you. To a certain extent, I and others depend upon BTS's historical research to provide a secondary source of information and a nicely done application of the historical sources to a wonderful game, CMBB. More particularly, IS-2 don't like Cats (Tigers or Panthers). Generally, most things being equal, and one on one, the IS-2s will lose to cats because the Cats have a higher rate of fire. Even IS-2 uber tanks have to use proper anti tank tactics. :eek: If the AI uses smoke, learn to live with it, adapt, learn, and find proper remedies. Learn from the AI, learn carefully, and apply remedies. If the AI frequently beats you, you really have to figure out remedies because playing agaist humans is much more difficult than against the AI. Humans are way, way more skillful than the AI. Go to the listings of "Useful Posts" and apply those lessons. Cheers, Richard

Guys, In CMBO, I am a real fan of US Army 155 mm FOs mainly because of their incredible destructive power and wonderfully short 2 minute targeting time for regular FOs. Almost invariably (but, of course, not all of the time), if I "well spot" target enemy tanks (even Tigers and other such uber tanks), I will at least knock down (but not necessarily kill) one or two of these beasts. In those one or two such knock downs, I will at least get one or two guns and/or immobilizations. If I so target lesser tanks or SPs, I'll usually (but not always) get at least one outright kill. If Wespes, halfies, Hummels, etc are well targeted with 155s, then 2, 3, and even more "kills" may result. Remember, big fast guns (155s), well spotted. Cheers, Richard

Hiram, Lol. Cheers, Richard :eek: :eek: