Zitadelle

FYI- Figured this would be the place to let a large crowd of T-34 treadhead fans know of an upcoming publication. For those interested checkout: T-34 Mythical Weapon Reportedly, this will be THE SOURCE on the T-34.

Steve- Thanks for the prompt reply, and I appreciate the thought put into the answer. Having spent many years as a consultant in systems intregration, I too have experienced the slippery slope, and fully understand your position. While having a simplified TO&E for "Special Forces," it definitely isn't a must have. For scenario creation, there could definitely be other means of flexibility to create a SF-like force; although yes the "toys" would not be available. Or, some of the "toys" could probably be modelled by others means- e.g., a "hi-lux" could be modelled by either an unarmed HUMVEE or perhaps a M1025- to represent the armor and the M249. Thanks again; and more and more I am finally interested in CMSF.

Initially I was reluctant about whether I would be jumping onto the CMSF bandwagon. I figured that the game would be too much like work for me, and we all needs the breaks from the office. Now, I find myself more intrigued with the possibilities of the game, but to ensure that I could find this a useful simulation, I have a quick series of interrelated questions. I am wondering whether the scenario editor would allow for the modelling of irregular warfare. -- I understand that Syrians will be the primary foe, but will it be possible to model irregulars (insurgents, terrorist/extremists, etc...) as an opponent? Of course, using the scenario editor, ammunition loads, and quality of troops could be edited. -- Will technicals be modelled? -- Also, will be possible for modelling US "Special Forces;" and the appropriate TO&E (littlebirds, "hi-lux" trucks, etc...)? In essence, I am not that interested in Syria as a opponent, but more interested in whether CMSF will allow for accurately modelling irregular warfare; whether involving regular USMIL (most commonly) or at times something a little different. Thanks for any feedback.

Here will be a surprise, but in the US Military and the IC writings on Lawrence of Arabia are now considered a very important study for understanding insurgent conflict and relations between combatants and organizations with strong tribal and family influences (read into that: common traits in Arabic cultures).

Thanks for the answer- and a break from all the irrelevant chatter.

Figures, my first post to the CM2x or the CMSF forum, and I attract a Soddball! Better watch it- or us 'Mericans will come back for a second visit. Also- the English spelling is 'Allah'. Now, you could really impress me with using Arabic letters on the forum..... And, I guess an answer from BFC will only be inshallah.

In the past CM has modelled languages very well for the various nationalities. Will CM-SF continue the same tread- especially as it relates to Arabic? Particularly, I am wondering whether Arab sound files will use Classic Arabic or will the more correct Levantine Arabic dialect be used for the Syrians? And, will there be other Arabic dialects incorporated for the game (e.g. Iraqi, Arabic Peninsular)? With Arabic there are dramatic differences between the various dialects- including entirely different words used to convey the same idea. Normal speech between members of the same region would not rely on Classic Arabic for discussions (for several reasons). And, I won't even ask about you being able to pull a Kurdish speaker out of your back pocket (if you can, however, we definitely need to talk...). Also, congrats on your new project BFC; I am interested to see this one released and firmly believe that you have made the right business decisions on the product. (unlike many on this forum who I have no idea where they find the time to continously post their complaints and handle real-life at the same time).

The Great El Salvador Football (Soccer for those pesky 'Mericans) War of 1969! What the hell else would it be? Realize the advantages of this conflict: 1) Since it was only 4 days long- it is very modular which fits the goal of BFC. This is the first in a long series of mini-conflicts. 2) A good share of the units are already modeled. Thanks to CMAK we have a P-51 for air strikes and infantry units equipped with WWII era weapons. 3) Morale and unit quality can be based on Russian circa 1941 forces ("Run Away!") from CMBB.

Yesterday while browsing the shelves of the local bookstore I encountered a new David Glantz book. The book is a sequel to his analysis of the pre-war Soviet military Stumbling Colossus. The new one entitled- Colossus Reborn: 1941-43 details the resurrection of the Red Army. Has anyone started reading the tome? Any thoughts? Of course, it will probably follow the usual Glantz format.

Again thanks for all the advice and recommendations. And, we are still considering Stonehenge, but it might not be as certain as once before. We will be weighing on whether it can be done as part of another trek, or as part of the first/final day. But, definitely continue the debate within the main topic. Having read some histories on the Druids, I was aware of the area and that trees were not to be found in that part of the isle for thousands of years. Also, does anyone know of the hours/days the pub near Bovington is open? And, what about lodging very near Bovington in the event that I decide to spend the night in the area? I guess as we approach June, I will probably need to post another message asking for pub and restaurant recommendations.

I don't think that will be a problem- for three days the wife will be working while I can play. And for the others days, she will be interested in whatever we do. She is interested in WWII as well, and her father flew C-47s out of England "Beyond Overlord."

Soddball- Just got the e-mail- thanks for putting all that effort into the message. I was thinking it would be a collection of links, but you really exceeded my expectations! It will take me some time to get through your recommendations. I will be in touch, and let you know about my scheduling and meeting up, if possible.

Another question- As we consider a longer stay in the UK, is Stongehenge worth a visit? We are wondering especially since we will be in the UK around the Summer Solistice.

First, I would like to thank everyone for the very informative replies. I figured this would be a primary source for information. And, the wife is very surprised with the extent of the responses. To address some questions and ask some items.... Soddball- Right now the schedule is open- except for the wife's conference. We are trying to decide whether to stay for a few more days and give her a chance to see some highlights as well. We would probably be available for a pint, or two, or more (we both like our beer dark, bitter, and warm). She is a real fan of Churchill ("the bulldog-man"), so she is interested in the Museum and the Cabinet War Room. Now, that she found out about Chartwell that has also sparked an interest. Is there any other information you would like to give about Chartwell. Flamingknives- I am definitely leaning toward a trek to Bovington- I don't think that I can go to UK miss the opportunity. Since I might may a two-day trek to allow for more time (or get to Portsmouth too), are there good lodging possibilities near Bovington? Or, would others be interested in a pilgrimage? And to Many Others- Thanks for the information on the two IWMs. I was aware of the London one, but to find out about the one in Duxford was a bonus. I may need to add it to the list. It looks as though I might be doing a bit of train travel. What would be the good secrets for booking train travel- coupon books perhaps? And, of course, we are always open to the possibility to share a cross-Atlantic pint with others.... (I can be contacted through the forum or the listed e-mail address.) Thanks for other forthcoming advice and recommendations.

This June my wife has to attend a business conference in London, UK; and I am going to join her for a trek across the big lake. I would like to visit some of the military history museums in the London area, and I would appreciate any advice and/or recommendations. Of course I know about the Imperial War Museum (although is it worth it?), and the new Churchill Museum (she wants to go to that one...). But, what are some other options either in the city or could easily be made as a day trip (via train or bus- we won't be renting a car). Is Bovington a possibility? Is Portsmouth an easy day trip (for the HMS Victory and HMS Warrior)? Thanks for any advice.

Is that metal exposed? If so, then>>>> Just to add my bit- I think that there is too much weathering exposing the steel plate. It would be difficult to get that effect in a battlefield condition. The paint would all have to have been scrapped off the hull about the same time to expose the bright steel, but not have any of the metal showing as rust. Also, the undercoat below paint on German vehicles was the ever infamous primer red, and none of that is showing. The effect would be first paint would be scrapped off- exposing red primer; and the primer would be scrapped off- exposing metal; which would quickly rust and darken on the battlefield. To take advice from the modeling world, go easy on straight steel for weathering- a little goes a long way. I would probably recommend using some of the excellent weathering examples from: missing-lynx.com

I would also argue that a victory in 1944 would not have been possible for either the Western allies or Red Army primarily for the reason expressed in other postings- logistics. With only time for a couple quick arguments- By Summer/Early Fall 1944 the Western allies were at the limit of their logistical lines, and supply was becoming difficult. They would not had the capability of bringing sufficient supplies, manpower, nor equipment into battle and being able to maintain a strong offensive. At the same time, the German supply lines were definitely shorter on both the Western and Eastern Fronts. Additionally, the German armed forces was still a sizable force on both fronts. On the Eastern Front, the Russians were also experiencing problems with logistics and wearing down units. Operation Bagration made extensive advances, but at the end of that advance the Russian units were worn down dramatically, and the supply lines had been overextended. The Russians would not be able to resume extensive offensive operations along the central front until the beginning of 1945 (although the Southern Fronts were very actively as documented by Erickson). In summary, neither allied force would have had the capability for victory due to logisitcal limitations. One more argument- the Italian Front. I would argue that the Italian Front would not have had a dramatic affect on the outcome of the war after D-Day (sorry CMAK fans...). The Italian Front became a sideshow with D-Day- primarily based upon allied strategic concentration and a realization of the difficulty of fighting in Italy. Moreover, earlier victories on the boot would not have resulted in successes that would have lead to an emphasis of that front. In the event Anzio would have succeeded, the Allies would probably have trapped more troops and advanced up the boot sooner. However, complete victory in Italy would not have shortened the war. Once Italy was taken, the next two options would have been difficult for taking Germany. The Allies would have either had to advance over the Alps which would not have worked, or proceed into Southern France through a terrain bottleneck of the Med and Southern Alps. I would argue that Italy was to become a deadend front.

While an interesting looking beast, that is definitely a "paper panzer." The Germans did have plans for an 'E' series of tanks; from the E-10 through the E-100. However, the E-79 was not one of the proposed models. Furthermore, out of the 'E' series, only the E-100 was to be armed with anything in the 128mm range; some sources giving it the same gun as mounted on the proposed Maus (i.e., 128mm) and others even conjecturing a massive 170mm gun (although there are definite questions as to whether the size of the turret would be able to allow for such a deep recoil). Another source of "paper-panzers" were the PzKW IX and PzKW X. Supposedly, these things were to include revolutionary design concepts, and the PzKW X could have possibly been armed with a turreted 128mm gun. Only two proposed drawings were created, and the drawings actually appeared in a 1944 issue of Signals- which some authorities now argue makes these tank designs really only for propoganda purposes. As for the illustration itself, there are some overall problems with the layout of the tank versus German standards which I would argue even make this illustration even more of someone's imagination (who is not a German tank designer). Furthermore, there are a few general problems with the ambush paint scheme as well. As for the modding- the great modders can only change the *.bmp files for existing vehicles that have developed 3d models in the game. So, it is highly unlikely to see this paper panzer in CM at anytime.

If money is really no concern, for the best hardware for playing Combat Mission, I would probably recommend this for a setup: High Performance Computer Hardware I think with this setup, you will see lightning fast turn processing and the 3D modelling that this rig supports is incredible (having personally seen some images...).

First, IDF- Israeli Defense Force???? I imagine that you are abbreviating for indirect fire. At AMPS this weekend, I picked up the latest Nuts and Bolts- Issue 14 on the Nashorn. There is a reference in the guide that the Nashorn- which was armed with the Pak 43/41 88mm/L71- being equipped with indirect sights (in addition to the stereoscopic 'Y' sight). The indirect sights allowed the gun to be used in an indirect mode with a range of 10,000 meters.

Nothing like the smell of resin in the morning. One day to go to make your plans for the AMPS weekend.

Nothing like the smell of resin in the morning. One day to go to make your plans for the AMPS weekend.

This link was just presented on the Missing-Lynx Discussion Group (www.missing-lynx.com), and I thought that others would find it of interest. Here is the link to purchase an e-book download of a 1943 Russian Manual on how to destroy the Ferdinand. The link has a few sample pages: 1943 Manual How to Destroy a Ferdinand

If I recall correctly, a few modders created some really good Anti-tank Gun and Infantry Gun mods for the CMBB guns. I have looked through cmmods.com, and have only found a few random guns. Does anyone have these mods, and can they either load them to commods.com or contact me to send them via e-mail. Thanks.

Ta Bump- getting this back on the first page. Two weeks to go and make your plans, and an excuse to meet Steve Zaloga and Thomas Jentz (who are always there and usually giving a lecture or two), and an excuse to visit the Rust Park just down the road a few miles.