manchildstein (ii)

i like the huge battles for the scope and the small battles for the quick-moving action. ...kind of like breadth versus depth or something... in smaller actions you get to the critical point much more quickly. in huge actions you have to lose a lot of units and (usually) play a lot of turns before that happens... andy

You might want to check out "Tank Trap (Small)" too. It has some panthers and armored cars and on the american side m8 greyhounds and m3a1 halftracks with .50 cal jeeps. the greyhounds can go toe to toe against the light german armor but need to get side shots against the panthers. if memory serves it is only 20 turns.

12,000 points per side is a lot. i've designed one with about 20,000 total points before. it's a good thing your battle will be human versus human. in my experience the ai cannot handle 10-12,000 points very well. using a celeron 400 with 66mhz bus it takes a good 5 minutes to compile a turn with those types of forces on a huge map. andy

i call these 'run and gun' scenarios... i have uploaded 3 new scenarios to admiral keith's site; actually 3 scenarios on 1 map. it is 30 turns on a huge map. the map which these scenarios use is over 2km by 2km, but the forces - the pbem ones in particular - are only the size of reinforced companies. Yankee Bridge Allies: play as americans against german ai Yankee Bridge Axis: play as germans against american ai Yankee Bridge PBEM: play pbem on that last (pbem) one i'm interested in playtesting someone else in a mirror match; 2 of my 'yankee bridge pbem' (one each way) along with 2 of whatever scenario you're working on. i'm so enthusiastic about this pbem version that i want to test it out in a mirror match. if you've got a pbem scenario you're enthusiastic about, let's play a quad match. the pbem of this scenario is about 2500 points apiece. playtesting on the ai versions has shown them to be fun; that is if you like wide-open spaces with moderately sized, vehicle-based forces. andy

i have half a dozen favorites: axis: spw 251/9 psw 231/x (mostly 234/1 and some 234/3s but usually never 234/2s) allied: m8 hmc greyhound stuart chaffee this has been discussed before, but it is more gratifying to some of us to get the kill through guile. with a panther or tiger you can engage just about anything. with light AFVs you should only engage the stuff you can destroy - infantry and to a greater extent light armor. so with these lighter vehicles you generally have to avoid head-to-head contact with the heavier stuff. in the case of the 251/9 and 234 series, you have to avoid anything .50 cal and up!! a caveat with the greyhound is that the german 20 mm gun easily knocks it out. so the gratification with these lighter vehicles is in the movement element required for their success. the can't fight at long range so have to use cover and movement in order to get within reasonable range, and usually at a side or rear angle to the target. speaking of medium to heavy vehicles, i like the stugs, plain-jane jgdpzIV and sherman 75s for medium. for heavy i like jagdpanthers and jgdpz IV/L70. i like the speed of the lighter vehicles, combined with their firepower. the idea is to throw armored protection to the wind and use fire and manuever to destroy the enemy. i imagine that is why a lot of people seem to like the hellcat. by the way, that m8 hmc is the best deal in the game for 58 points, regular quality. that is if the terrain has good cover. if it is a wide-open map those m8s might find the going rough trading shots with a panther or whatnot at 1000+ meters. but if it is nighttime or heavy fog or the board is heavily covered, at closer ranges those m8s are deadly for their price. sometimes you can outfit your force with m8 hmcs, greyhounds, and m3a1 halftracks. the speed and firepower of such a force will sometimes shatter an opponent's forces in a pbem. i've found that with massed light AFVs you can often drive straight through an opponent who had no idea what you were about to do. sometimes i've advanced so quickly as to knock out FOs before they ever get a chance to call in fire. it doesn't always work, but forces made up of fast vehicles are always exciting. in creating a fast force, the germans aren't as capable as the americans from a price standpoint. so in a fast german force for pbem i would include hordes of the spw 250/9. leaving the sdkfz7/x series aside, that in my opinion has the best cost/effectiveness ratio for a german vehicle. andy

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by L.Tankersley: That's not true, is it? I'm pretty sure any vehicle with functioning gun armament (non-MG) can hunt. <hr></blockquote> yes the 251/9s and 251/8s can hunt. i believe the 250/9s and 250/8s can hunt too.. all that aside i really like the 234/1. i too use it as an abstraction of a 20mm armored car... it could be a 234/1 or one of the 20mm models not represented in cmbo. a recon company with 22 vehicles: 2 command cars 4 platoons of 5 vehicles i like to use some combination of 234/1 and 250/9s in the first three platoons, then make the 5th platoon 234/3 or 251/9s. i figure that a panzer lehr or other elite panzer division would probably have the armored cars and the lesser panzer divisions would have more haltracks in the companies of their recon battalions. late war would have more halftracks, even in the 'elite' divisions. a company of recon vehicles, especially if they have a platoon of 75mm vehicles included - can be very formidable. throw some infantry in spw 251/1s (or trucks) and perhaps an FO and you nearly have an all-purpose, mobile force. aside from slugging it out with shermans, the german recon detachment can successfully fight most enemy forces. for my money there's nothing better than a scenario with u.s. cavalry versus german recon... andy

-- I got a better idea of how to attack with infantry formations, and a better feel for the speed of the support units (I didn't expect the MGs to take so long to get to a firing position, and the shrecks got tired and fell behind during the long runs the infantry made without much trouble).-- what you want for the HMG42s are trucks or halftracks; on a large map with a battalion-level advance, set them up at the start line and have them cover the squads out to about 500 meters. then embark and drive up to the advancing squads, then setup again to cover their continued advance. if you have a completely motorized battalion, dismount the squads in any case and if you have spw 251/1s (panzer lehr had a lot of them at normandy), bunch all of your spw 251/1s together. in a motorized battalion you could have as many as 50 of them or so!! say you have 25 of them. use them as 'swarms' to recon forward and take out infantry and gun positions. you might lose a number to guns, but with a dozen or more of the 251/1 mg42s returning fire the gun should be knocked out. so swarm with the 251/1s but use the cover as much as you can as you advance. move the infantry squads up right behind the 251/1s, along with your 251/9s (75mm) and 251/8s (81mm mortar) a bit further back. remember; cover with the hmg42s and then move up and cover some more. once the objective is seized, embark the mg42s again and move into the objective, debarking and setting up defensive positions amongst the squads already there. if you have any tanks or assault guns, move them up just behind the leading squads, or into areas cleared by the spw 251/1s even further ahead. if you have some 75mm IGs or 20mm AA guns or similar pieces, they should cover the attack from beginning to end with direct fire if possible. if allied air attacks are expected the 20mm AA guns should be held back for protection. at the end of the attack the supporting infantry guns and aa pieces should be moved into the objective if that would improve the defensive position. the 251/1s run out of ammo fairly quickly so once they're spent, use them as rear-area transport. use mass, not driblets.... unless you're being badly shelled. the idea in any single firefight is to have way more of your people shooting than they do theirs. if you have FOs try to find enemy troop concentrations. this is where you have a chance to turn their mass into driblets. i have no qualms about area fire here. i like to keep my FOs nice and alive. they always seem to die when i get LOS against a good human opponent. 81mm area fire is generally an annoyance to the enemy. 105mm and up can be deadly - even in area fire - against a concentration of infantry or afvs. andy

medium to large map ai u.s. cavalry german motorized infantry german: lots of halftracks and maybe some armored cars... some good armor... stugs, tigers, whatever... definitely a platoon of 251/9 halftracks in larger scenarios... maybe as infantry battalion support or as part of a recon company. if you do a german recon company, think of using a couple of psw 234/3s as command vehicles, or have a platoon of them. in later war i like to use swp 250/9s in recon companies because i figure by then that the 234/1, 234/2, and 234/3s were probably fairly chewed up and the 250/9 is like a poor man's version of the 234/1. the 251/9 is likewise to the 234/3. american: 'cavalry' 'cavalry troop' (company): 1 Company HQ 3 platoon hq (1 per platoon) 3 squads (1 per platoon) 9 .50 cal (3 per platoon) 9 60mm mortar (3 per platoon) 9 greyhound (3 per platoon) 10 m3a1 halftracks (or 20 jeeps but the jeep .50 doesn't transport so i buy the m3a1s... 1 for every 2 jeep in the historical force) 75mm FO or 2 M8 HMC you can put 3 'troops' and a battalion hq (with halftrack) together for a 'squadron' which is a cavalry battalion. the 6 or 8 m8 hmcs were in 'troop e' and were allocated as indirect fire support, 2 per troop a-c or a-d whichever the case may have been. (apparently there were troops a-c in cavalry group squadrons and troops a-d in the armored divisions' recon battalions) 'troop f' was 17 (3 platoon x 5 and 2 command tanks) stuarts and later the m24 chaffee. yes, a vehicle swarm over a large map is a lot of fun... you can bet that you will make contact with the u.s. cavalry!!! the scenario should be at least company-level and perhaps battalion-level or more. once i designed one with a 'brigade' - two depleted infantry battalions and about 80 german afvs and trucks if memory serves. it crashed one guy's machine. took about 5 minutes to compile a turn on my machine. there were something like 100 american vehicles in that one... 6 m8 hmcs, 27 greyhound, 17 stuart, etc... 27 60mm mortars... 27 .50 cal... it's called 'tank trap (huge)' i made a smaller, 20-turn version on a small map... it's called, 'tank trap (small)' anyway, put me down for small to large forces on large maps, 20-120 turns. my latest, 'recon rally' is on a huge 2k x 2k map with just company-level forces... there is a lot of manuevering and longer-ranged fire, but the focal point is at the bridge crossings in the center of the board. there are 3 versions, all on the same map. there is one for play against both axis and allied ai, and one for pbem. the map is the same but the forces and start locations are different in all 3. usually though, i just write for one side against the ai. i really liked the 'recon rally' map though and cranked out german and pbem versions; the original was an american attack against the german ai. all 3 versions are 'vehicle-heavy.' a lot of the vehicles are 'light' AFVs. andy

i enjoy designing larger sized battles. as the ai is, it cannot attack very well so when designing for play against the ai the computer player is the usually the defender - or it's a meeting action. in a meeting action it seems that the ai as it is will just as soon put substantial forces around one small flag, even if there are other spots on the map - spots i'm attacking as the human player - with multiple large flags. i've played through some attacks against the ai and after the cease-fire, i notice units the ai could have used to crush me, yet they're garrisoning spots out of los/lof to where the fighting was occurring during the game. so my suggestion to let the scenario designer plant generic flags and give them custom point values; that along with allowing the designer to give the ai troops rudimentary orders regarding these flags; it seems like this would be a fairly easy way - codewise - of solving the ai problem. if you went one further you could even have 'personalities' built into the game; that is if you increased the kinds of orders you could give troops. then the game could come with a bunch of different 'company commanders' and in quick battles against the ai the human player could pick the 'personality' of the opponent. with this, you could have scenario designers creating their own ai 'personalities' for given battles. even with the 'rudimentary' change in the flag system and the addition of just a few orders telling the ai how to play, it seems like that could help the ai in making basic decisions. now having said all of that, i want to remind everyone that cmbo as it is is brilliant. i'm just trying to open up a dialogue on what the scenario designers are looking for in the future releases of the cm series. one other thing that would be cool would be the ability to see the map from further away in the map editor proper. at 1024x768 it's tough to scroll around on a 2k x 2k map. being able to see the whole map from that view would be great. that would really help out in designing 'operational level' battles for cmbb. andy

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Funker Vertinox: I'm sure there were cases on the eastern front where the soviets just pulled the bodies out and put a few sand bags over the hole in that T-34 and kept going in the heat of battle <hr></blockquote> if memory serves tanks were recycled. the u.s. 'hosed them out' first while the russians probably didn't bother. andy

for cm2: ok... first, the things i've mentioned before: -the scenario editor should have more keystroke control (more accelerator keys). the designer should be able to 'tab' through the fields in the unit purchase screen, for instance. -the designer should be able to set ammo for the units before purchasing them, instead of having to go through and change the ammo for each individual unit. -pzfs, demo charges, rifle grenades... they should all have a point value... same with small arms ammo. -on hq units, the 4 leadership qualities should also have point values. -it would be good to have point values for he, 'c', ap, tungsten, etc. ammo on the vehicles and guns as well. charging for various ammo is not a biggie; charging for hq leadership qualities would be more important, in my opinion. when setting ammo values for individual units - FOs in particular - it would be good if the designer could type in a value instead of having to click on those tiny little scroll buttons. at the very least the little buttons should be a lot bigger. also, if nothing else the FO ammo should increment/decrement by the amount of each salvo (is it always 4?). has anyone else ever spent the time to max out an 81mm mortar FO? you can put a paperweight on the mouse button and go get a cup of coffee while it increments. ok... now for the new idea: i think it would be fairly easy to code in a way for the scenario designer to help the AI out with specific instructions for the units of either or both sides. to start with, i think that the current flag system should be scrapped and replaced with a new, generic flag (no large or small). instead, these new flags would have point values entered in by the designer. so the designer could make say - a 5,000 point flag and then give the ai some rudimentary instructions ('go for flag #1') to the units. the designer should be able to tell the AI how to 'operate' the units ('use covered, leapfrogging movement to flag,' 'charge the flag,' 'lead with armor,' 'lead with infantry,' 'rush armor with mounted infantry,' etc.) if the scenario designer were to be able to give the intended AI-controlled units in a given scenario some rudimentary pre-defined instructions, it could make the ai a lot better without a ton of heavy coding on charles' part. thanks for your consideration, andy

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Graaf Spee: I had a very bad experience with a übergerman scenario. A german attack with 1800 against 900 points. But that wasnt enough. Almost all the germans had max ammo(60), the german tanks had almost no AP and a lot of HE, he had a 150mm spotter with 115 shells, and a lot of my troops started tired or wary. Did I miss something? Oh yes, the german briefing said that there would be no airsupport. Fun? Not at all! Im still wondering if it was playtested at all /Kristian<hr></blockquote> that sounds like one of my scenarios... only backwards... i would have had the germans attacking at 1:2... andy

july, 1944 here is a short, fictional battle. it has fanatical canadians versus german ss fighting for a hill; meeting action. it is about 2000 points per side but neither side has more than about 4 platoons of infantry with supporting units. then there is armor. it is 20 turns and the map is 800 x 800. it is raining and night. there are a couple of surprises. please let me know if you are interested in playtesting. it is best for pbem. i would be glad to playtest via pbem if anyone is interested. thanks andy

spoiler: . . . . . . . . . . . . .. after opening it up and choosing allies i saw the map and made a quick strategy. the two large flags delineate a line marking the corner to the german left or southeast. there is a town slightly forward but still to the back or german side of the map. it is on the south or german left. a road runs diagonally from there in a ne direction. the first flag is in the town. the other flag is along the road. there is a grove of trees with woods patches leading diagonally from the allied left at the front of the board to the german left near the town near the back on the allied right. i decided to send a 'platoon' of infantry up through that and see what might be there. by the way, i split both platoons - center and left - up into half squads. the 2nd platoon of infantry went straight for the town on the north or allied left, nearest the jumpoff points. i saw that there was no flag there, but figured the mass of my armor would skirt in and to the north or left of the town in an effort to effect an armored rush around the back of the board running north-south. the tanks in the red zone were set up as close as they could be to the white zone on their left. so on turn one the platoon on the right went over the slight hill and into the tree grove across the road. their supporting mg and mortar took up positions on that slight rise, covering from behind as the squads and hq went forward. the piat waited in a jeep. the platoon on the left moved up toward and into the town on the left as tanks moved hard left behind them and to the clearing on the north side of the near town. i figured that the platoon of infantry in the middle could look for opposition while the platoon the left cleared the town and tanks would use the town as cover by sitting n-nw of it and using its profile as a shield against incoming german fire from the se. soon the near town was cleared and the tanks continued to probe the left - stuarts and bren carriers in the lead while the heavier tanks followed. reinforcements arrived and the infantry platoon was sent on foot to back up the infantry now clearing the left town. a 4.2" spotter arrived. and debarked its halftrack. the reinforcement tanks moved up and left. the southernmost tanks of the early armored thrust were through the town on the left. as tanks from the reinforcement group moved to catch up with the lead elements, stuarts and brens approached the town on the far left, at the back of the mapboard. the two halftracks, after unloading the 4.2" spotter, moved their support units to the hillside where the mortar and vickers originally set up. after dropping their passengers, the halftracks moved up the middle in order to catch up with the infantry platoon who were now fighting a slew of germans closer to the town. a 3rd reinforcement group arrived and those 4 armored vehicles moved up the right-center and into the trees, joining the two m5 halftracks and the infantry platoon. there were a firefly, a bren, and two shermans. the 4.2" was calling in area fire on some armor by then being spotted in the main town on the allied right; the lynchpin of the german defense. by now my lead armor was east of the southern town on the opposite side of the board. that mass of armor in the se now charged for the hills e-ne of the main town; they charged for position in the tree groves almost directly behind the focal point of the german defense - se of a point between the two victory flags. two tigers were spotted in the e-ne. the first allied armored charge was underway. from the start i'd figured, 'keep all of the armor in one place, and keep it moving.' the two platoons - 4 squads - of infantry weren't enough to screen the attack so masses of fast-moving armor would have to do. this would serve the dual purpose of keeping all of my firepower concentrated while avoiding sitting so long that artillery might hit the tightly-packed tanks. earlier, the arrival of the 3rd platoon in the 1st reinforcement group had done nothing to deter my intention of attacking around the north. the reinforcment infantry was seen as 'starch' for the infantry leaving the town on the left and toward the center, while the newly-arriving armor was used to increase the mass - mass at the critical point - on the far left. anyway, when the first charge went off those 2 tigers smoked about 3 stuarts and 2 brens - the lead elements of the charge. the followup shermans got to the tigers though. the brens and stuarts running around behind had gotten the tigers turned around so that when the shermans arrived from the opposite side, they were getting rear and side shots at the tigers. by now a nashorn was picking off some of my straggler tanks at an alarming rate, there as they moved south in the field just west of the northeast town. by now i knew there was no resistance in that rear town. however, as the armor curled around and cut south it came across a decent infantry picket line at about the same time as those tigers. one thing going in the attack's favor was that the moves were all 'through' the german lines. this allowed the tanks to blast and machinegun away while on the move and end up in a spot in the german rear, free for the moment of fire. the german infantry buckled. there were 2 or 3 pzks in a nest but they were too far forward. by the time my tanks swept through they were 200 meters behind that nest. the nashorn went silent as all the tanks in its los were either killed or moved out of its los. the remaining allied tanks closed around the town. on the allied right, one m5 halftrack moved directly south in advance of 2 shermans in another extreme flanking movement. the idea was to try and get the 2 tanks and the halftrack behind the germans on the south. the halftrack ran south across the front or west of the main town and found a nicely placed german at gun but got away unscathed, eventually ending up on the allied right at the rear or se of the map. the gun position having been revealed, the shermans changed direction and hunted straight into the town. the center platoon had lost another 4 men but was clearing the west side of the town. it seems the mass of german infantry was along that line where my tanks had crashed through further north. all during this time the 4.2" spotter had dropped 72 rounds in and around an intersection in the rear of the main town; the only town remaining in german hands; the town with the flag. the 2nd allied tank rush was coming into effect and for awhile it was disheartening for the brits. finally, a firefly and the 2 recalled shermans hunted straight up the gut into the edge of the town while the armor from the left thrust infiltrated from all directions. the timing could have been better, but the attack was definitely from all sides. in the end i won 58-42. apparently in the 3rd reinforcement group there is a 25 lbr FO so you might want to watch for that. mine rode the bren it was in, all the way into the firefight as the bren charged an AT gun. at the end of the turn there was this shaken FO sitting out there in the middle of harm's way. if i'd known about that i might have really softened the town up with artillery before having gone in. as it was it took me 22 of the 25 turns. positives: +first tank charge on the left in particular was successful. despite fair numbers of enemy infantry, the charge hit them off balance - on their right - and inflicted a lot of casualties. +center platoon fought well, finding a soft spot in the german infantry setup, and allowing a minimum number of AFVs to move up in support yet have a major impact on the battle from those positions. the center armored group's only loss was a bren carrier from the 3rd reinforcements. the 2 m5 halftracks from the 2nd reinforcement, and the 3 tanks of the 3rd reinforcement; all of these survived the battle. the only vehicle to survive the (main) thrust from the left was a lone sherman or cromwell. so in the end there were something like 4 tanks and 2 m5 halftracks - plus the main part of 3 platoons totalling 6 squads. +once the german armor was gone, the german infantry line was surrounded on one side by the advancing two british platoons which had gone through the town on the north; on the other side were the remaining 4 allied tanks - 3 shermans and a sherman firefly. there were also 2 m5 halftracks. these mowed the germans down from the other side for a few turns before the ai had decided it'd had enough and quit. +casualty numbers were 'good' +german minefield on south or allied right totally bypassed. i didn't know the mines were there until after the game. negatives: -lost 22 tanks German:American Casualties 133(38):56(17) Captured 29:0 Guns Destroyed 3:0 Pillboxes knocked out 1:0 Vehicles destroyed 8:22 men ok 11:164 i suppose 8 for 22 isn't that bad, especially if you throw in 3 guns destroyed. by the way, this scenario is really good. i would highly recommend it. it's one of those where you have to get creative with your tanks because you don't have enough infantry to do the main fighting while your AFVs sit back behind them and blast away. yeah this is a good scenario... really fast and liquid. andy

'chance encounter' is outstanding. another one for learning defense is 'hard stand at le lorrey.' i'm not sure if i spelt that right but hopefully you'll be able to find it in the scenarios included with the game. andy

as far as my own favorites, i'll just edit my notes. thanks for the feedback. andy

i'm wondering what anyone thinks of authors reviewing their own works over at the scenario depot. in my case, the reasons are three-fold 1) of course, to get more exposure for my own scenarios. 2) to recommend my favorites 3) to 'get the ball rolling' so to speak in the hopes that others will chime in with their own reviews. it seems like so few of the scenarios get reviewed, that if we had self-review it might cause a kind of snowballing effect where others would beging chiming in. so what do you all think? thanks, andy

Name and Location: "Baptism of Fire" Version Number: 3.0 Editor Version: 1.12 Date: 13 June 1944 Game Type: Meeting Action Based On: Historical Length: 60 Turns Map: Huge (1600x1600m) Conditions: Clear, Dry, Daytime Play First As: Axis against Computer (either default or free setup) Description: Elements of '37th and 38th Panzergrenadier Regiments,' 17th SS Panzergrenadier Division, supported by 'StuGs of the 17th Battalion,' (17th SS) and 'Paratroopers from 3rd Battalion, 6th Fallschirmjager Regiment,' attack elements of 'U.S. 82nd and 101st Airborne' (501st, 502nd, 506th Brigades?), supported by 'tanks and armored infantry from 2nd Armored Division.' 7440:13093 German:U.S. points. Author: Andy Thomas ok... uploading to Admiral Keith's and Manx'... this one really rocks! there is fighting from turn 1 onward... Andy

this is a reworking of "Twilight for GvB" based on some feedback. now, 'twilight' stands on its own, so you might want to think of this new one as a different scenario altogether. it uses basically the same map as 'twilight,' but the main roads are lined with raised 'berms' (hedgerows) of mainly scattered trees instead of flat woods as they were before. a 'chateau' has been added near the center of the board, and the 'orchards' are now more varied in their look. the victory flags are more spread out, instead of all being concentrated in 'la billonnerie.' the fallschirmjagers (german paras) are no longer all crack. battalion commander horst trebes is still there, but the organization underneath him is changed. it's basically two unreinforced companies, and some of the platoons are actually conscript! there is in any case one elite para platoon... from hq down to the 3 squads... i couldn't resist. ok... the forces of the '17th ss panzergrenadier' are now '3 battalions' there are 2 'battalions' of 27 squads apiece (9 platoons or 3 companies) and a 3rd, 'heavy weapons battalion.' the heavy battalion is 16 hmg 42s and 8 81mm mortars, all loaded on trucks or stugs, and with accompanying (platoon, company, and battalion) hq units. the 14 stugs from the original scenario are still there, and are thought to be a part of the 'heavy battalion.' rounding out the heavy battalion are 3 towed 20mm guns, and the artillery spotters from 'twilight.' there is also now a recon company, made up of 15 spw 250/9 and 7 spw 251/9s. vehicle usage: in testing this one i'm breaking the vehicles up into small groups and using them to support the squads. at least one source has referred to this attack as being a 'kampfgruppe' from the 37th and 38th pzgd regiments; so that's what i'm trying to represent here. this scenario is a meeting action as opposed to the original, which was a german attack. the tanks from the 2nd armored have been made part of a reinforcement force, and have supporting infantry and halftracks. the starting american paratroop force is weakened a bit. it is 'daylight' and 'clear;' the ground is still 'dry.' this 60-minute battle probably condenses events of 6 or 8 hours during the original. about the tanks; just as in 'twilight,' the american tanks are all green. actually, in 'twilight' they were green and in 'baptism' they're 'mostly green.' the interesting part is that there are twice as many in 'baptism' than there were in 'twilight!' don't worry though; if you play it, your spw 251/9s all have good 'c' loadouts. =grin= this scenario reminds me a lot of 'putot,' in that the germans have an early advantage, then that massive u.s. armored force arrives. right now i'm playing and on about turn 11 the going has been tougher than i'd expected; i got held up on the left road by an american roadblock, then the 105mm started falling in, and in a rush to get out from under that i lost a couple of stugs to some crack bazzes. hopefully the american roadblock is near disintegration; much of the infantry fighting is muddled and confused, with units from both sides intermingled in the woods and trees on the side of the road, often firing at short range at one another. on the bright side i've already got an spw 250/9 near the top of hill 30 on the right. in any event it looks like it will be a good fight to the end. without giving too much away, this one definitely opens with immediate action on turn 1; so there should be non-stop fighting from start to finish. in 'twilight' the fighting often didn't start until turn 12 or 15 or so. more on the similarities with putot: 1) germans open up with a fairly large advantage, greater than 2:1 2) american reinforcements include a great number of tanks 3) constant possibility of allied air attacks. 4) all allied unit slots filled the points are quite a bit more now, 7053:11852 german:american. gotta go now... the road to carentan is still open on the right... if you would like to playtest, it is better to email andyth@qwest.net than mandchildstein@hotmail.com oh.. one last thing... it might seem like there are way more units now, but there might actually be less, at least on the german side. the 81 (yes eighty-one) lmg 42s were removed to make room for all of the other stuff which was added. it turns out that perhaps modelling '125 mgs per battalion' wasn't the best idea from a 'unit management standpoint' (ums). i didn't mind it so much, but some of the feedback i received indicated otherwise. i must say that manuevering squads around is more fun than moving lmgs around. like i said, the road is open... gotta 'Go!' andy

good work, rommel! you attacked in the exact spot (right of the road) where there were no americans. when i was designing i would look over that default setup and think, "now what are the chances someone will attack down that side? nah... probably won't happen, at least not much of the time." then i figured the thing was kind of like a puzzle... if someone were to attack that weak spot, they would enjoy more success... but you really exceeded anything i'd expected... so here i am, the scenario designer, having gotten my arse handed to me multiple times, and you waltz right through! well, like i said, good work.. i'm glad the americans counterattacked. i'm glad you liked it.. i'm actually working on an update for that one... the map is improved and there should be even more forces, including u.s. air support and naval artillery.... i'm going to tone down the mgs and use more squads... some information i have has the 17th ss being at -40% cadre, so i'm going to use a lot of conscript platoon and company hqs (no modifiers... basically fodder) to represent that... it should be around 5-6 companies of motorized infantry, plus a 60% strength para battalion... the massive amounts of mgs will be abstracted through the use of squads. the idea is that, with the poor platoon hqs, the squads will have to attach to the company hqs... i wish cmbo had a way to purchase platoon hqs separately from squads... or if it had a way to tell it, 'make each platoon 5 squads and 1 hq' but using conscript hqs is the best thing i can think of... the u.s. will start with just paras, and the shermans will appear with halftrack infantry in a counterattack... it will be changed to meeting action, and the flags will be all over the map.... the roads, town, fields, and elevations remain basically the same, but the woods on the roadsides are changed to scattered trees, and turned into 'hedgerows' through use of the elevation tool... there are some other changes to the map based on user feedback... the orchard patterns are different for one thing... there is also a walled chateau in there.... oh... hate to say it but the german paras won't be crack across the board.... new info suggests that they had underaged (that i knew) and overaged troops, but were 'well-equipped'... so they'll still have lots of firepower, but probably be regular to crack, instead of all crack... by using conscripts for some of the hqs of of the 17th it will better reflect the cadre shortage, and surplus of privates.. oh... i'm thinking of throwing in the recon company shared between the 37th and 38th regiments... for that i'm thinking of 15 spw 250/9 + 7 spw 251/9.... the 250/9s will be tweaked with most or all HE, and the 251/9s will have a nice load of 'c' i would like to included onboard 81mm mortars, as well as some towed 20mm... i've already purchased the u.s. force... over 10000 points... this one should resemble 'putot' in that it will be a german attack-u.s. counterattack... i'm still toying with the idea of having the north edge an exit zone... anyway, the new one is called, 'baptism of fire' (has anyone used that name yet?) so i'll leave the original as is and upload this new, 'super scenario' when i get a chance.... yes here is the reasoning behind using scattered trees instead of hedgerows: 1) it seems there should be a single, hedgerow/road/hedgerow tile type. as it is, the hedgerow kind of 'sticks out' with all of that clear terrain on each side. somehow, using raised scattered trees/woods seems to 'look better.' 2) i find it difficult to believe that ALL u.s. afvs could cross hedgerows at will and NO german ones could. my understanding was that, they could be crossed (at least in spots), but only at the risk of exposing belly armor. the u.s. had 'hedgehogs,' but did they have them on every afv, even a week after the invasion had been launched and no major american armored offensive had yet been undertaken? it seems like widespread 'hedgehog' use would have come over a bit more time. so, by using raised rows of woods and scattered trees, some parts can be made impassible (slope on both sides, +2 elevation) to passible (+1 elevation)... it's not a perfect compromise but again, i'm glad you liked it. another one which is challenging but fictional is 'midnight.' the default british setup in that one might be tougher to beat. i found free setup to be tough too... there you have a large german recon formation (battalion?) trying to attack canadians... "12th ss versus canadians." 'putot' is another classic, based on a day-long battle but compressed into 75 turns or so... andy

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by manchildstein II: originally got some of my 17th ss verus 101st info...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> nah it looks like a different site... good reference though... andy

shuckie darns... there's a problem with that site... not only will it have me re-inventing my 'south of carentan' scenario, it opens the door for all sorts of other scenarios... did someone else say, 'who needs sleep?' as for the 'south of carentan' thing... actually, this is the site where i originally got some of my 17th ss verus 101st info... will have to take a closer look... maybe the scenario can be 120 minutes with the first 60 turns being a german attack, with the 2nd 60 turns being an attack by elements of the 2nd u.s. armored... as for other scenarios, for starters check this out... 506th at st come du mont: http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/documents/WWII/506-Nor/506-5.gif andy

i wonder how a lever-action 45/70 would have fared.. how about a camp .45? andy

i tend to use 75mm sIGs in qbs. it seems like they would have been fairly common compared to the 150s. i figure a 75mm ig is kind of like a 'bread and butter' unit. andy

aftermath: by turn 19 i had 4 stugs left, one of which was operational. my motorized battalion was shattered. the paras weren't doing much better. i'd taken two artillery barrages, and once again had pretty much gotten hung up on the hedgerow. i have a new idea... a laser-like attack along an even narrower front. i'll try 'pile-driving' the 3 companies of motorized, one after the other, through a small section of the american line, then followup with paras. maybe i'll try that.... in the meantime, i would say this is one hellish scenario. andy