PiggDogg

Chad, You know, Kloss probably or possibly "is" Gunny Bunny under a new pseudonym. :eek: Despite it all, Kloss did bring up valid points. However, his rudeness is unnecessary, impolite, disrespectful, and classless. Indeed, Kloss's propositions could have been the centerpiece (for the emteenth time) of a good thread. However, his rudeness was just to enticing. Everyone, remember: polite, respectful, civilized. If one can't post in this manner, don't post. Cheers, Richard

You Battlefront guys certainly deserve the great ("superb" as GameSpot states :eek: ) review that GameSpot gave to CMBB. Congratulations. I have the game & will be playing it nearly full time until CM3 comes out. Cheers, Richard

Bucket, You should be fully fine with that proposed rig for CMs. However, check to see how much RAM that the system has. With WinXP, you will almost for sure need 512 meg RAM. Cheers, Richard

Michael E, You are absolutely correct and concise in your analysis. Truthfully, I can't add much more, ... but I'll try. After having disposed of the enemy's tanks, one's tanks are then direct fire HE platforms to pound the enemy infantry in covering terrain into slag. Further, isolating a portion of the enemy's line by terrain or by smoke is most correct. Usually, I use the former. Indeed, I have frequently used the latter. Ultimately, maneuvering one's forces so that one has many units (lots of friendly firepower) shooting at a few enemy units (a small amount of enemy firepower). This is truly the key to BO & BB. Cheers, Richard [ October 27, 2002, 12:24 AM: Message edited by: PiggDogg ]

Guys, In CMBO & now even more so in CMBB, for recon I use the split squads all of the time. Usually, one 1/2 squad will go up each area of covered approach toward suspected enemy positions. However, they are usually 50 to 200 meters ahead of the main force men and vehicles. If the 1/2 squads are much further ahead of the main body than 50 to 200 meters, the main force won't be able to effectively support them. The main force is in good cover (preferably heavy buildings, light buildings, woods, and pines; but in scattered woods if the other cover is not available). Then the main force overwatches the recon guys & then whacks the enemies (especially AT guns and teams) that fire at the recon 1/2 squads. All of the above exposes the 1/2 squads and protects the main force. Would one prefer the main force to be caught in the open, or would one prefer a few 1/2 squads in the open? My answer is that I prefer the few 1/2 squads in the open to be cut up. As far as 1/2 squads being gamey or a CM system exploitation, this above looks relatively historical and logical to me. In my opinion, I don't consider 1/2 squad recon to be in any way gamey or a non historical exploitation of the CM system. Cheers, Richard [ October 26, 2002, 12:13 AM: Message edited by: PiggDogg ]

CombArms, Thanks for running the test. We look forward to your upcoming test. Cheers, Richard

Guys, In real life, there is no way that half squads would have radios, not even walkie talkies. Even if they did, they would not have been able to convey such detailed information as we see in CM. Cheers, Richard

Guys, In many (quite a few) CMBO games, I have never been thrown out of a 'large' heavy building by infantry assault when I defended the building with a full platoon. However, I have abandonded or have been forced out of large heavy buildings by prfimarily HE plus infantry fire. In fact, I don't remember taking a fully defended (by a full platoon) large heavy building with only infantry. I would bet that the following recommendations also apply to CMBB even though I have not tested the tactic enough in CMBB. First way to take a large heavy building, as Robohn stated, is to level it with HE, most commonly by direct 75 to 105 HE. Indirect HE (even the wonderful Ami 155s) is a bit too random to be sure to take out a particular large heavy building. The only other way to take such a building is to surpress the daylights out of the guys defending it and the enemy supporting. This will take a least 2 or 3 or more to 1 odds. Certainly, some direct HE will help. Then assault the building with a platoon or two. Cheers, Richard

Agua, Half squads are no more an exploitation of the CM system than using full squads, tank hunter teams, sharpshooters, or crews for borg spotting. In my opinion (& only an opinion), once a unit is in your set up, "almost" any (but not all) use of that unit is OK. Actually, considering the number of units, the complexity of the game, and the billions and billions of light years :eek: ... Ooops, I not Carl Sagan. Considering the number of units, the complexity of the game, and the billions of possibilities for gaminess and exploitations, there are surprisingly few instances of true exploitations. Truthfully, I don't consider using half squads for recon or point is at all gamey or an exploitation. This is only an opinion however. Cheers, Richard

Cameroon, I set up the CMBB QB with computer troop choose and random most everything else possible, including force mix and random German and Russian division type. This is where I got Ruskie infantry versus German combined arms or mech. It is tough being infantry only versus AFV on the medium wooded southern steppes. If you can help, I would appreciate it. Cheers, Richard

WWB, I am sorry that I may have been inexplicit. For CMBB (not CMBO), the short version of my question is: In computer choose troops, random everything (especially unrestricted force mix), ME quick battle, can each side have a different force mix? :confused: For example, one side may have an all infantry force (not a friendly tread or wheel in sight), and, at the same time, the other side may have a combined arms force (big cannons on AFVs). In a recent computer choose troops, unrestricted force mix, ME quick battle, the computer made my sons of Old Mother Russia all infantry, not one vehicle. At the same time, the computer made my opponent's Germans mechanized (assault guns and halfies). On this medium woods (still much open space) map, my brave infantry will have some real tough going. In CMBO, in such above described QBs, boths sides get the same force mix (inf, arm, mech, combined arms). Does anyone or BTS have an answer to this question? Cheers, Richard

Guys, In CMBO in computer choose troops, quick battles, if the unrestricted force mix for both sides was used, each side got the same force type (mech, armor, inf, combined arms, etc). In CMBB in computer choose quick battles, when using unrestriced force mix, it seems that each side can have different force types. I am playing such a computer choose meeting engagement QB. I have a Russian infantry force. Not a tread or wheel [except on the Maxims] are in sight for my Ruskies. However in this game, the computer seems to have been kind enough to my opponent to have supplied him with a few assault guns & some light armor. :eek: It may be bleak for my brave Russian ground pounders. Question: Is CMBB different from CMBO by allowing different force mixes for each side in computer choose quick battles? Cheers, Richard

Guys, Let's ignore 1941 with the uber T34s & KVs. We know that these suckers are relatively invulnerable from the front to most (but not all) German fire. 1942 has the German & Russian AFVs pounding each other to slag with all sorts of bouncing shells on somewhat equal front to front terms. PzIIIs versus T34s are relatively equal front to front fights. 1943 the German uber front AFVs (Tigers, Panthers, super StgIIIs) begin to appear. In 44 it even gets worse for the Ruskies. The Russians can't keep up with the front to front AFV battles. In case anyone has not noticed, the near biggest Russian tanks (Josef Stalins, Su152s, Su122s, etc.) much less the lesser tanks (T34s, etc.) don't like the front of these German uber AFVs. Almost all Russian back away from the German uber front tanks at range. Basically, the Russian AFVs must maneuver close to German uber AFVs and get on their flanks and rears. This requires that the Russian AFVs move fast and maneuver from cover to cover. Now this brings up the $.64 question asking for the real life, historical answer: Why don't Russian AFVs have smoke shells to help them maneuver to get on the Germans' ubers' flanks." :eek: Hey, the Germans, Brits, Poles, Amis, and even the Frogs have smoke. Why did the AFVs of the sons of Old Mother Russia not have smoke shells? :confused: Indeed, I'm near the oldest person on this board 54 yrs), and I could be consider pretty knowledgable (but not a super grog) on WWII, but I don't know the answer to this question. Smoke 'em, if you got 'em. :cool: Cheers, Richard [ October 22, 2002, 10:07 PM: Message edited by: PiggDogg ]

Void, Please read and "understand" the content of the post that Russel had set forth for your information. Life, CMBO, CMBB, and war are all unfair. Just do the best that you can. Live with it. Play two games on the same map & switch sides. Use your units to their best ability for the time period. Have fun and don't get a coronary. Cheers, Richard

Ace, It is not gamey to smoke or nuke or do whatever you wish with your FO. :eek: You have a weapon (the FO) & you can use it any way that you want. In any games, it is not gamey to use any weapon that any of your units have. Cheers, Richard

Hakko, I think that engineers and pioneers are useless against wire. It seems that they have no wire cutters or Bangalore Torpedoes. Cheers, Richard

No one in my family had any WWII experiences of note. However, a friend of mine's dad had WWII experiences worthy of note and almost books stature. Here is the short story. My friend's dad was a young Polish Jew in 1939. After the Germans invaded Poland, he escaped across the eastern border into Russia. Promptly, the Russians imprisoned him. When the Germans invaded Old Mother Russia, the Russians saw fit to utilize my friend's dad's services ... as an infantryman in the Russian army. Few who read the the BTS threads or who play CMBO & BB can doubt the courage and good fortune that it took to survive as a Russian infantryman in WWII. :eek: The gentleman fought across Russia and into Germany. He survived WWII and thereafter sought out his remaining family. The Germans and the war saw to it that he had no remaining family. During this immediate post WWII time, he met & married his wife in Poland. Soon thereafter, he and his new wife made it to the USA at Mobile, Alabama. They ended up in New Orleans, where in the uptown New Orleans area, he has run a small retail Kosher deli and store for over 40 years. Salutes to this man and all (no matter what side) who fought in WWII. Cheers, Richard

It is very sad with Mr. Ambrose's passing. Being from New Orleans, in the mid 80s, I had the good fortune to have taken a non credit course at the University Of New Orleans. The course was on the history of WWII. Mr. Ambrose was energetic, informed, and a wonderful teacher. Taking that course was a pleasure. However, he did present a very few microscopic errors, like saying that the battleship Yamato had 16 inch guns. Indeed, only a grog such as myself would know of such minutea. It did not detract from pleasure and usefulness of the course. Mr. Ambrose's USA/Anglo-phile slant on WWII was certainly present, but does not detract from the man's greatness. Certainly, none of us are perfect. May his soul be blessed. May his family be consoled. A wonderful and great man has passed. With Sadness, Richard [ October 13, 2002, 08:03 PM: Message edited by: PiggDogg ]

Peter, The disappearing half squads with no radio report on the enemy positions? Ouch. Indeed, if full squads are required for scouting, then full squads shall be required. However, it shall be expensive and the price shall be paid. :eek: Cheers, Richard

Hawk, Bast, Peter, Zuk, Andrew, & Rest of You Guys, It is so nice to have an intelligent and enlightening conversation without those flamers. Life is good. Now that in CMBB, infantry (in my opinion) acts more like real life inf, but is less fun, the question is: how does one make attacking infantry work. Defending infantry is a comparatively smaller problem as long as they are well hidden away from direct HE and can get out of the way of indirect HE. The answer is: support, support, support. One must find the enemy at small cost and then overpower and destroy the found enemy with firepower. In CMBB, CMBO, & real life, the major part of one's firepower comes from HE (direct [AFVs & to a lesser extent, guns] and indirect [arty, preferably 105 & larger]). Here follows some of my observations which is probably correct, but is not the only alternative. In all cases, with reasoned and logical exposition, I can be swayed. I am willing to learn. In most circumstances (but not all), I feel that the better of the scouting alternatives to find the enemy is half squads. They may get chopped up, but hopefully they will cause the enemy to expose themselves. Once that occurs, from good cover, the supporting forces (the main force infantry, tanks with good HE, and arty) can overwhelm & destroy the enemy. Ultimately, the proper use of direct fire HE (mostly from AFVs and which is the larger portion of one's firepower) should decide most battles. Of course, winning the vehicle battle is the prerequisite for proper use of the direct fire AFV HE. In short, the tank battle should decide most (but not all) CMBB battles. However, this is the same as in CMBO and real life. In CMBB, one must perform all of the conservative and intelligent tactics used in CMBO, but just more of those conservative and intelligent tactics. Cheers, Richard

Hawk, I my readings over the years (I'm 54, and I have certainly not read everything), I have read quite a few accounts of infantry (WWI, especially WWII, Korea, & Vietnam) in combat. Except for the lucky situations, the infrequent grand charges, or the stories of those who received or received posthumously the Medal Of Honor, the Iron Cross, or such, the large majority of the time and usually (but not always) when a company of infantry comes under fire, many men go to ground, some men seek safety in cover (forward, laterally, or to the rear), and a few men go forward. There are many and not infrequent cases where single or a few snipers have caused whole companies or large portions of a company to halt movement and seek cover. In many of these cases after the men have gone to ground, it would take the officers & especially the NCOs substantial time (1/4 to 1/2 hour or more) to get the men moving again. In short, infantrymen (real human people of flesh & blood) in the open or realtive open do not lightly charge forward into fairly effective & heavy fire. In real life, one only gets one chance with one's only life. Seldomly, do real people want to squander their only life. Real people don't try to wear out the enemy machine guns with their chests. :eek: The ground, crawling on one's belly, and getting to the nearest seemingly safe cover provides some protection and/or preceived protection for the infantry. Indeed, I propose that even the US Army at Omaha beach fits into my premise. The US infantry was dropped off under effective long range MG fire (not the 75 yard range view in Saving Private Ryan which was over the shoulder of the German MG42 gunner from the foxhole into the opening LCVPs). At Omaha, the US infantry crawled or ran to cover behind obstacles or they ran to the seawall. In each of these cases, they sought cover. Being quite well trained, reinforced, and equipped troops (in CMBB terms, probably greens [29th Div], regulars [1st Div], a very few vets [Rangers]) supported by effective destroyer HE support, these brave US fellows crawled, short sprinted, and slithered forward to near the well entrenched, not reinforced, and not well HE supported brave German fellows. Eventually, the preponderance of US numbers and HE overcame the Germans. In any case, there were few grand charges and much slithering. In all cases, there was much death, destruction, and maiming. Remember, one can always find exceptions to my general premise. I am proposing and setting forth what happens most of the time. I might be wrong, but I am probably (but not for sure) right. In short, in my opinion, CMBB represents infantry better than CMBO. Indeed, CMBB infantry may be (and probably is) less fun than CMBO infantry. However, CMBB reflects infantry reality better than CMBO. Cheers, Richard

Chanco, Grow up. Get a refund, get a replacement, or get neither. You live in the real universe. Things are not perfect. Mistakes are made. Go on with your life (which you are). Act like a mature adult. Quit whining. Cheers, Richard [ October 12, 2002, 09:10 AM: Message edited by: PiggDogg ]

PigDog2, Another PiggDogg !!!!! :eek: Well, almost another PiggDogg, but close. :eek: Oh, my gosh !! At least you have only 2 g's in your name instead of 4 g's. Good to meet you. Cheers, Richard

Deni & Wefer, You guys have waaaaaay too much time on your hands. :eek: Cheers, Richard

Haft, Yes, I am having additional CMBO & CMBB problems similar to the Win key problem. (Additional problem 1) If I am in an orders phase in CMBO & in CMBB and if I minimize the game with the "Esc" key or with the "alt-tab", when I tap on the minimized game on the bottom task bar, the computer crashes back to the boot screen, & the computer reboots. (ouch, that was a long, long sentence). :confused: (Additional problem 2) Also, in both games, sometimes (but not always) when I load a file to start a game, as the game/file loads, the computer crashes back to the boot screen, & the computer reboots. Duh. :confused: Indeed, CMBO & CMBB don't like being being minimized. I guess that it is such a good game that it does not want to be relegated to small stature. Any help is appreciated. These are not critical problems. However, they are irritating while waiting for the reboot. Cheers, Richard