Fluf

Hi, I read with interest a thread concerning the veracity of the representation of the 25 pounder field gun as represented in CM. Now I studied cello at university under Donald Whitton - then the principal cellist with the NAC - and we often discussed his experiences as a signaler with the 4th Royal Canadian Field Artillery. He highly recommended the book 'The Guns of Normandy' by George Blackburn, M.C. as "telling it the way it was". Mr.Whitton (known as "The Big D") to his students, was the signaller with FOO "Stevie" Stevenson at Woensdrecht, calling for the Victor target on top of their own position. He survived that living nightmare, amongst many others. According to both these gents, the normal rate of fire for these guns was 3 rounds per minute per gun, or 5 rounds per minute per gun when "intense" fire was called. They were actually capable of 12 to 15 rounds per minute if they pushed it. The regiment of 24 guns was subdivided into 3 batterys of 8, and each battery into 2 troops of 4. Each troop of four guns had an FOO team, as did each battery, for a total of 9 FOO teams forward with the 3 battalions of an infantry brigade. The CM representation of the smallest divisible unit of guns delivering fire at the normal rate seems entirely correct to me. This gives the player the flexibility to represent the use of these guns at any level desired from troop to division by the use of game FOOs in increments. The previous thread examined the question of the quality of the 25 pound field gun, as held to be "one of the finest" in service. I believe that the thread failed to fully discuss why that was so. The regiments of field artillery in Commonwealth armies integrated the 25 pounder into an extremely efficient and flexible system. Units like the 4th Field RCA trained for 4.5 years before going into battle in Normandy. The gun itself was very well designed with innovative features like the attached ground plate (providing a flat stable base to rotate the gun quickly on), excellent range options based on variable shot charges. The gun was coupled with an excellent 4x4 tractor and caisson. All of these attributes which made the gun so successful, however, are really operational qualities which do not translate into CM in any real way. The closest that you can come to reflecting them is to make the 25 pounder support highly available in campaigns to reflect the ease of movement and speed of setup and netting that the field regiments were capable of. Mr.Blackburn cites a setup time of 3 to 5 minutes from road to first round for a troop of these guns. SO, I say 'bravo' to the designers of CM. I think you've done a fine job here. The graphic representation of the gun is quite wrong - it looks like a US 105mm in the game, which is nothing like the real thing - but it is so rarely onboard that this is a moot point anyway. Now one fellow in the previous thread suggested that Mr.Blackburns' book wasn't trustworthy, and written to have mass appeal for sales. I suggest that the arrogant windbag actually read the book before daring to question the integrity of the author and insulting the memories of these veterans, for whom this war was not a just a fun computer game. The great quality of CM is that it has heightened the awe and respect I have for the men who actually fought in that war.

Firstly please allow me to convey my deepest sympathies to my American brothers and sisters. We here in Canada have been deeply affected by the recent tragic events, as have folks all over the world, and join in your shock and sorrow. My CM question: I've noticed that incoming enemy mortar rounds sound like artillery shells. By all accounts their flight was silent, or at most a slight "fluting" sound was heard. Is this part of the fog-of-war system used to disquise the origin of the fire? On-board mortar rounds do not make a ripping tearing sound like this, so that's the only possible explanation I can think of.

Thanks for the responses - so the old stuart wasn't completely helpless than.... In answer to Pak40's question - I spoke with a former combat engineer and part of his job was recovering damaged Canadian Shermans (at night so he wouldn't get shot at) in Italy. He said that an armour penetration by solid shot would bounce around the interior of the tank tearing through crew in the way, and igniting fuel and/or ammunition. The big powerful guns (88mm) would sometimes shoot clean through the lighter tanks, occasionally missing anything vital and just leaving some instant ventilation holes and very worried crew. In this sense the penetration by a smaller calibre gun could be just as unpleasant. Incidentally, my uncle reported hearing the German 28mm squeeze-bore PaK gun being used in Sicily. He said that it had an incredibly loud and distinctive sound. Most AP ammunition was solid shot of various types, (still true today), although as CM illustrates, the lower velocity artillery cannon (self-propelled included) were equipped with hollow charge anti-tank rounds for self defence against armour - don't know how common it was in real life though. I'm sure that there are many experts contributing to this message board who will know the details.

I've just finished playing an excellent scenario which I'll not name to avoid spoiling, but I got it at Der Kessel. It involves a situation whereby I found a stuart tank involved in a duel with a panzerIV. Both were surprised, but the stuart got off the 1st shot and knocked out the MkIV at a fairly long range (>300 metres). This little stuart repeated the feat with a second MkIV before succumbing to lead poisoning. I would never have thought the 37mm capable of penetrating the front aspect of a medium tank at greater than close ranges - were these guns supplied with tungsten core or other high performance AP rounds in '44/'45, or were these just fluke hits?

Hi, My CM CD arrived yesterday and I'm already in trouble with my wife! I just can't believe how much serious fun this sim is - I started out making a simple scenario to train myself with and wonder if anyone can tell me how to place foxholes, or to allow them for the defending side. I can't seem to find any references to them in the manual or in the scenario designer, but I know that they were available in the Demo. Please forgive me if I seem to be overlooking the obvious - this game is rather overwhelming! ***And now a Magic Newbie Moment*** I allocated the German side two panzer IVs, and started a company sized attack on a small cross-roads (the automatically generated map was really good and subtle right off the bat!) - not long into it an unknown tank was heard, and a turn later a Tiger tank with 3 kill rings on the barrel appeared prowling around behind some trees!!! To say I was shocked and suprised and quite tickled would be an understatement - of course I later realized that this was just a very welcome side effect of the "fog of war" feature built into the game. The nervous troups had reported the 1st contact with a panzer IV as a Tiger. I have often suspected that this was a common mistake mistake as I read unit histories. I am currently reading a book by a battalion commander which includes a photo of some of his men posing around a knocked out tank. The caption calls it a "Panther Tank", but it is clearly a MarkIV, so even senior officers could be indifferent as to their tank identification. This is the first game I've played which gives the forces involved such human characteristics. Bravo!

Thanks for the welcome AND the answers! The 'Ops' sound really exciting!! I ordered the game over a week ago, and so supose that it is languishing somewhere in Canadian customs. Fortunately the demo is so good that I am still finding interesting things to do with it while I wait for the real thing to arrive. Oh yes, I think I meant to say "Jagdpanzer MkIV", but I think you all knew what I meant. Thanks again -

Hi Guys, I've just discovered this stunning simulation and spent the last week playing the two demo battles over and over from both sides. Wow! This is everything and more that "Across the Rhine" was meant to be (if any of you are old enough to remember that one). I am intrigued by the "ops" mode I hear oblique references to, and wonder if anyone could explain how it works to me? I gather that an "Op" is a series of related battles - but just how related are they? Do consequences from one battle in an 'Op' carry over to the next? If so, then I will be even more anxious for my copy of CM to arrive in the mail sometime in the next week or so. This information doesn't seem to be provided in the Battlefront website anywhere. BTW - I am VERY impressed by the calibre of discussion, and the international representation by CM users on these discussion boards. I was absolutely won over by the deapth and quality of the mods and scenarios fans are publishing as well! I live near Ottawa (Canada), and there is a modest but interesting collection of WWII armour and artillery stored in a warehouse here (called 'Vimy House') that is open only in the summer. They have some very rare samples of German and British armour and guns, such as a Panzer Mk II, a Matilda, and my favourite, a Panzerjager MkIV L70 with the all-steel front bogie wheels. It is marked with the symbol of a running greyhound, and is painted in a yellow and green camouflage. They even have a tiny 1 man Italian tank. I look forward to any enlightenment you may care to shed upon me, Fluf