winkelried

LOL - the movie is cut. look at 00:44/00:45 and at 00:55/56 and again at 02:00 and again at 03:48 and 05:11 ... maybe you want to check for the shadows to see how much time has passed

I heard this excuse a lot - when I talked with veterans and when we arrested some of those "followers". Not just from Germans. This attitude makes things possible like Srebrenica, Rwanda or Abu Ghraib. It's too easy. Everybody carries part of the responsibility as a soldier. And every soldier or citizen can say no. Look at the Weisse Rose or what happened in Denmark in 1943.

I concur with you statement JonS. All branches of the Wehrmacht were instrumental for the consolidation of the Nazi regime in the 30s and all bear their part of the responsibility of the human disaster which followed - to create a gradual index is quite absurd. And some exponents of the Luftwaffe get forgotten in this context: Albert Kesselring, Kurt Mälzer (just to name two examples) - under their responsibility, or direct orders, massacres like the one of the Fosse Ardeatine were committed. Also Luftwaffe ground troops, e.g. the Fallschirm Panzer Division Hermann Göring were involved in war crimes ... BTW: Before and early in the war the air aces of the Luftwaffe were willing instruments of the Nazi propaganda - despite that some did what pilots do when the situation goes out of control -they bail out (see Wever, Udet ... and later just to confirm the pattern Göring, Greim, ...) - there were just a very few who tried to resist actively in the Luftwaffe like Caesar von Hofacker or Herbert Gollnow.

so size (/43 to /48) really doesn't matter ... more if you're on the move or static (at least for the ejection)

Try to answer 1) and 3) I checked the KStN 1108 (gp) Stab und Stabskompanie eines Panzergrenadierbattalions (gepanzert) from 1.11.1943 and the later with Freie Gliederung (F.G.) from 1.4.1945: Both show a 251/3 in the Stab - the 1943 Version had an additional 251/8 (Ambulance) in the Stab. In addition the Stab has 1 Kübelwagen and 4 Krad or Kettenkrad. The Stabskompanie has two 251/11 (Telephony) and one 251/3 - no other 251s. The 1945 version had just three 251/3 in the Stabskompanie the 251/11 had gone. There were no gunners assigned in the KStN on battalion level to the 251/3, there is a comment stating that one of the radio operators was a gunner at the same time. The KStN 1114 c Panzergrenadierkompanie (gepanzert) from 1.11.1943 shows two 251/3 in the Kompanietrupp (HQ) with no gunner and not mentioning who would be the gunner. The Panzerzerstörertrupp then has a 251/17 (Flak) [Hope we'll get this one soon ]. Each Zugstrupp (Platoon HQ) was assigned a 251/17 too. The three 251/1 per platoon had assigned 1 gunner each. The heavy platoon had a 251/17 assigned to the Zugstrupp (platoon HQ) and the four HMGs were transported on two 251/17 too. The two 251/2 had MGs, but no specific gunners assigned. There were two 251/9 too. In reality the 251/17 were a bit rare and were replaced by 251/10 and 251/1 it seems. Later (1.7.44) the Zugstrupp of the heavy platoon had a 251/1 assigned instead of the 251/17. A 251/17 was assigned to the Kompanietrupp at the same time. There is another KStN 1114 a (Freie Gliederung) dating from 1.8.44 with just two Panzergrenadier platoons with four 251/1 each all with gunners, one heavy platoon with one 251/1, two 251/2 (all without gunners) and two 251/9 . In addition there was a fourth platoon with six 251/21 (Flak).

Looks like a problem with the action spot to me. So that the action spot you want to throw at is in the building. Maybe you should throw farther or besides the spot?

Sure - that an MP would be an advantage. But it just wasn't there in history. And since the proper tactical employment of a Panzerschreck would be embedded with additional infantry. Since CMBN strives to get us a feeling as historical as possible there should be no MP in a Panzerschreck team.

There was no need for an MP for the Panzerschreck teams since they would operate under the cover of other troops, e.g. an infantry squad. And that's what you should do in CMBN too. To use a single Bazooka/PIAT/Panzerschreck team is just not tactically sound. So no need for an MP for the team.

And the Panzerjäger to ignore the stupid suicidal order right away and shoot the squad commander (by accident naturally)?

I love flogging dead horses ... just one example I am deeply into researching (yess getting close to playtest the campaign ) to support Jason's point. The operations of the 11th Panzer Division moving from Bordeaux to Avignon (some 600 km) with some occasional fights against the Maquis, and then retreating along the Rhône river to Lyon (some 250km) fighting off the Americans (mainly the 36th U.S. Infantry Division) and then the battle at Meximieux starting on 31. August: The division lost some 11% of its personnel, almost 60% of its Panthers and as it seem not a single of its 170 250/251 ... only during the battle of Meximieux between 31. August and 3. September the loss of 2 251s is confirmed ... On the other side: on the huge maps i designed (up to 2.6x4 kms) the 251s come quite handy to move the Panzer Grenadiers at acceptable speed.

I guess that in this particular situation, the damaged Panther should probably be taken out of the game since it would transfer as quickly as possible to the repair shops. I doubt that there would be time to swap ammo though.

+1 to this one. that would be a hell of a scenario :cool: especially at night

I am sure that some ammo swapping was done, but assuming that the tankers then and now show similar characteristics - they would need to be a bit farther away from the frontline, than in the average CMx battle to begin such a procedure and only under real emergency conditions. Just for reasons of cover and not being surprised by then enemy so close to a frontline. So e.g. averaging out the ammo between tanks between two battles in a campaign would be an interesting option (if they don't get resupplied) BFC could provide us with.

JasonC/Georgie - even during the Cold War the ammo allocation for the individual weapons for the "average" soldier was very limited - i remember something of 100+ shots in basic training. when an army still trained large amounts of soldiers it was often a cost/production issue too - you had to multiply the ammo allocation with pretty big numbers. Same was true btw for "real" ammo for LAW/ATGMs etc where the focus was on handling the weapons and correct tactical behaviour and eventually fired training ammo. So in a ww2 context i wouldn't expect zook or shreck crews to have fired a lot of shots in training either - don't know even if there was training ammo. probably a lot of "training on the job" with a good part of "black swan effects". Yes, as i mentioned a lot of holes in the air when you fire an automatic weapon - HMGs, LMGs, SMGs, assault rifles ... especially since the other side tends to return fire you try not to stay exposed for too long.

IMHO that's why MGs, SMGs and assault rifles were invented in the first place: To get an appropriate fire density into the area of a (moving) target. So that the hit probability increases - not for the single bullet, but for the burst. Semi-automatic weapons like pistols and semi-auto rifles go into the same direction: usually you would fire a quick sequence of several shots at a target.

I think that BF will have to look at this kind of complexity, if they haven't done it already. In units with a mix of weapons used on different effective ranges the soldiers should open fire only when the target is within the range of a particular weapon. This is not just true for the SMGs, but probably also for LMGs and rifles, where one could also argue that they have different effective ranges. They consider effective range already for other weapons eg the short ranged Panzerfaust or rifle grenades.

As the price doesn't change in QBs i would assume, that these paramters don't have an influence on mines and the like ... probably just something in the GUI which isn't very nice.

Yep - Back in my CMx1 times I modded the mine markers too to be visible better.

again from a RL perspective (80s to mid 90s): we sometimes selected SMGs (e.g. Uzis) instead of assault rifles when we expected fire fights to be below 100m or when we were engaging in urban areas. Usually at least one guy in a squad kept an assault rifle (normally sighted) to handle long distance and sharp shooter stuff together with the Minimi of the squad. The main advantage of the SMGs in our eyes was that they were significantly lighter and shorter than assault rifles. So they were easier to move to fight fast moving short opportunity targets - as are modern assault rifles. We trained hard (I remember quite a few days fulfilling norms on the short distance moving target range) to be consistently able to hit fast moving targets at short ranges (0-100m). There was also a feeling that the 9mm ammo the SMGs fired had a better stopping effect than the 5.56 the assault rifles we got in the 80s. Accuracy was never an issue (on distance below 100m at least). The training for SMGs as for assault rifles focussed both on firing with the shoulder support and from the hip (which was significantly harder to manage to be accurate). Coming back to CMBN So in a WW2 context we have to understand that usually the light MG was the main weapon of the squad and the SMG was around mainly (except maybe some units which were equipped heavily with SMGs - see below) for the form factor (e.g. U.S. tank crews had the grease gun AFAIK) and for NCOs to increase fire density in short range combat. I think that the same idea to increase fire density in short range combat and the form factor of the SMG was the motivation for some units to be equipped mainly or heavily with SMGs - e.g. Soviet tank riders were certainly better off with SMGs than with the longer LMGs or normal rifles. Same holds to some extent for paras which could drop with the SMGs and where it would not be a good idea to jump with the heavier LMG. Could also be that one of the ideas behind these SMG heavy units in pre-assault rifle times, was that the loss of one individual weapon (like the LMG) in a drop would not compromise the whole firepower of the squad. Anyway - to come back to the original question. Based on my own experience I assume that SMGs would rarely have been used above 100 meters in combat with an effect.

Interesting discussion - some feedback from RL. I had to do with mines quite a bit during my career. we made a difference between hidden (usually dug in) mines or openly laid mines. although openly laid mines sometimes became hidden through sand or leaves being blown over them. the engineers never mapped single mines. just the area where the mines were laid was mapped and usually marked in the terrain. But these marks often got lost over time. in order to allow own troops to pass - eg us exfiltrating from a recon mission - gaps were left in the minefield. these gaps were always covered with fire - HMGs and Mortars - and usually ran in zig zags through the minefield to make it difficult to follow them. these gaps were marked with unsuspicious objects. In CMBN you are able to create gaps in minefields as I mentioned above. At least I do this when I have larger fields.

As I said above - the enemy is the biggest game breaker

IMHO the biggest battle breaker is the enemy - w/o the enemy i could win every battle ... although :confused:

seen worse storage for weapons in the region

Sorry typo - should read Grenadier/Jäger/Gebirgsjäger-Regiment

The "faust" was called Faustpatrone and Panzerfaust and were distributed a bit everywhere. We talk about the Panzerschreck or 8.8cm Raketen-Panzerbüchse 54 - the German equivalent of the U.S. Bazooka - which were allocated differently.