Jump to content

Monty's Double

Members
  • Posts

    221
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About Monty's Double

  • Birthday 03/04/1969

Converted

  • Location
    England
  • Interests
    I love to take my work home.
  • Occupation
    professional stoat fondler

Monty's Double's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (3/3)

0

Reputation

  1. In the real world it would have been used indirect more often than not I guess. Buy a 75mm spotter if you want to replicate that usage. Personally, I like it - it's very cheap indeed and useful in a pinch. I'd use it as a one-shot weapon in tree cover, or as a long range harassing piece, in a trench behind a hill crest. Guns are vulnerable to mortars, but for the points I think this one can delay an advance for a couple of turns, which is worth the points.
  2. Does anyone know what ships were based in Plymouth in summer 1940? I'm pretty sure there were no capital ships. I would have thought that the available destroyers and light cruisers would have made the landing tough, though not impossible. My first instinct was that the navy would have been nervous about committing its battleships and battlecruisers, but the evidence of Norway runs counter to that doesn't it? I mean steaming the Warspite into a fjord to hunt destroyers isn't exactly cautious is it? Even if they had restricted themselves to night shelling of the German bridgeheads, they would have made things sticky for the invaders. Oops, here we go. Best do some work now, I'll check it later.
  3. Not being familiar with Hearts of Iron, I couldn't comment, but I can't image it would have been quite that easy. I suspect that the RN would have been rather cautious about commiting its capital ships, even given a landing on British soil. Having read what a handful of destroyers and light cruisers did to the Crete invasion fleet, I'm not sure they would have needed to either. Funny Nestor, Fowey was in my mind too.
  4. I stand to be corrected, but I believe the bulk of the 2 pounders were left in France. So, as I said, had the Wermacht rolled into Kent in June, they wouldn't have faced much in the way of AT opposition. By September, I'm guessing quite a few of the little blighters would have been available. If you doubt their effectiveness against 1940 German tanks I suggest you set up a scenario in CMAK. Remember, the Matildas that caused a stink at Arras were armed with 2pdrs.
  5. And, as I understand it, a hatful of obsolete WWI arty that could still leave a nasty bruise. As I said before, in order to make Sealion viable, it had to have been planned well beforehand, and would have essentially been an extension of the French campaign (including annihilating the Dunkirk pocket, as much for the morale value as the material one). The window of opportunity was June/July; by September it was already too late, and by Spring '41 the gaps had been plugged properly.
  6. Some thoughts on Leopard_2's ideas: * Siezing an airfield would have been about the only way to get aircover I guess. I can't help but think that what swung the Norway campaign was the use of Stukas as mobile artillery. Even with a captured airfield I don't think this would have been possible - in Norway the British only had a handful of biplanes. It would have only taken a few Hurris or Spits to spoil the party. 109's operating on siezed airfields would at least have given protection from RAF bombers I suppose, but it wouldn't have stopped bombardments from RN ships steaming down the Irish Sea. * Most of Cornwall is very similar to Normandy, but hillier, and if anything the roads are narrower and twistier. There are lots of small fishing ports but most of them don't have proper harbours, and some aren't even accessible by road. Once you get towards the Devon border, round about Bodmin Moor, things open up a bit, but you are still very restricted on movement. * The final point is the one that has to be born in mind in any Sealion counterfactual. The problem is that for the high command to start palnning in 1937, you have to have a rational Hitler surrounded by gifted men who would challenge him - and it's doubtful he would have ever come to power in the first place. Part of his fanaticism included an unrealistic attitude to the British - he was convinced they would "see sense" in the end, and this meant Sealion was never a viable plan. For what it's worth, if you could create a viable Sealion counterfactual, I'm beginning to think the Cornwall plan could have been a useful diversionary attack, but never the real deal.
  7. That's what I was getting at. Also, the RAF fighter groups who had survived (assuming the Germans won the BoB in the first place) in the South West would have had a field day.
  8. But with an intact port, they wouldn't have had to use barges, they could have used proper ships. Don't get me wrong, it's a bonkers idea, I'm just interested in the thought behind it. Can't imagine the Luftwaffe were too keen on the idea.
  9. It does make a mad kind of sense though. After all, they invaded Norway , mainly by steaming into undefended ports with destroyers loaded down with troops (though the Blucher can attest to what happens when you try that against shore batteries). That could have worked to get an assault force ashore, as the SW ports would have been all but undefended. The problem would have been breakout, since there are only very limited ways up the peninsula. Ironically, the terrain is very similar to Normandy, including the blindness-inducing apple-based drink.
  10. I'm sure I didn't dream this, but in the Times a couple of days ago there was an article about some recently unearthed nazi documents going up for sale. Amongst other things were plans and maps of a putative invasion of England via, wait for it... Penzance. Assuming I haven't eaten too much cheese (I ate a whole baked vacherin at the weekend so it's a possibility that can't be discounted), and these documents aren't either fake or misdirection by uncle Adolf and his chums, has anyone else heard of a planned invasion of Cornwall? I mean, have you ever driven on the A30? In August? Nutters.
  11. But you are choosing to frame the arguement using only two units, and the point about this game, and any wargame, is that there are many, many units, all with a complex balance of abilities. In your own example of a russian attack with germans using StuGs in defence, the StuGs look great value v the T34's but against infantry they aren't too hot, with low MG ammo and only a few HE shells. So what do you do to the points value of the german vehicles? Adjust them up to take into account the T34s then back down because of the infantry? Sorry if I've misunderstood, but I just can't seem to get my head round what you are asking for, and it seems a bit disingenuous to then complain that BFC won't change the system, if you can't explain what you want changing.
  12. But the 85mm armed T34 is more expensive than its 76mm brethren (especially with rarity), so relatively speaking the StuG is cheaper.
  13. Yes, you are correct, it is the case. However, the value of StuGs is affected by more than just availablity (and indeed rarity) of Russian 85mm guns. Only in fairly even armour battles with open terrain does the introduction of russkie tanks with 85mm guns have a big effect on the relative value of the StuGs. If you play lots of that type of battle then it seems like a big change. If, like me, you play lots of attack/defence scenarios with infantry or combined arms, the change is minimal. How can one pricing system possibly guess what types of game we prefer to play?
  14. I guess what he's trying to get at is that the points value doesn't take into account the opposing force. So, a Sherman's high mg loadout is very useful against infantry but useless in an armour battle, but you pay the same points in both scenarios. Or, if you prefer, its short 75mm gun is fine against Pz IV's but next to useless against Tigers. But since you don't know what you will be facing until after your opponent has chosen, how could you possibly take that into account? And even if you could, how many variations would there be? Billions? Trillions? BFC have assembled an awesome amount of data, but ultimately they've made judgement calls about whether 10mm of armour is worth more than 5mph in top speed. Anyone who can suggest a truly scientific system of points values is free to try. Get a good shrink first is my advice.
  15. In the words of the great W Edwards Deming; "All models are wrong, but some are useful". Personally, I find the CM points system quite useful.
×
×
  • Create New...