atiff

Perhaps they figured the gunners needed something to shoot. I think I read that in Italy the NZ AT Regt never fired a shot in anger? (As much a testament to the fact the division was always on attack, and not that they never faced tanks.)

SNIP The other option is to reduce the scale fo the figures/terrain by a factor of 4 (or so). Everything becomes smaller, the tiles become 80x80m, etc. Sure, graphics quality of individual models (vehicles, etc) might go down, but CM is more about gameplay than graphics. I'm not saying it's a good option, just *an* option.

Are you sure it wasn't an Italian Solothurn? Those were big puppies....

Thanks, I should have remembered that

Found it eventually, here: ... - McIntyre, Brig ‘Mad’ (RA), 473 - ‘Mac Troop’ (RA), 473, 476, 481, 488–9, 491, 493, 501, 511, 532 - McIntyre, Capt P., 8n ... Not where I expected it, maybe my page is formatting differently to yours. Anyway, thanks. I mean, airburst can be done with a fairly flat trajectory and still be self-observed. Ie, you can use it to fire (and detonate) over the heads of troops, which maybe you can't see because of trees, bush, etc. In the post above, I mean high-angle fire, such as over intervening hills/forests, in a traditional 105mm manner, utilising a forward observer.

IDF = InDirect Fire, doesn't it? Like DF = Direct Fire. I've been using both for years with no questions. JonS - can't find Mac Troop for some reason - can you give a more direct link? Anyway, I understand the airburst idea, but that can be done with "almost-LOS" (ie just fire over their heads a bit, even if you can't quite see them). But what about IDF in the sense of "HE lobbed at some significant angle, coming into contact with the ground and throwing mud everywhere"?

Hi all, We've all heard the stories of German "88 artillery" in NW Europe but I haven't got any real proof that late-war 88's were used as IDF artillery. Can someone point me to some? (for me and someone else I'm talking to about this) Was the gun and ammo used "straight out of the box" or was the standard HE round depowered to reduce velocity and hence provide more "fall" fo the projectile?

Yes, this is what I have been doing (some manual editing for the worst parts). All this is for a campaign I am running at Band of Brothers. Ideally, I would be using Mapping Mission to make the campaign maps but no CMAK version exists yet. Still have to investigate (very carefully!) the possibility of using CMBB Mapping Mission files to make CMAK maps (mouse clicks are mouse clicks, just have to make sure they rae in the right places) Andrew [ April 09, 2004, 10:22 PM: Message edited by: atiff ]

No, with the Sand setting instead of Arid Rocks I get the same amounts of Rough tiles (tested over a dozen or so auto-gen maps). I believe the Sand/Arid Rocks/Dirt setting only affects the qualities of the ground with respect to traction, bogging, speed of infantry moving over it, etc. Yes, this is my understanding too. What doesn't gel with me is that there is so much of this "rock" on a auto-gen CM map which is impassable to vehicles. I get the impression that tracked vehicles could pretty much go where they liked - or, perhaps more accurately, I *don't* get the impression that they had to avoid lots of impassable places (with the frequency they show up on CM auto-gen maps). Also, I can't think of many scenarios where the designer has put out as much Rough as I have seen on auto-gen maps, and I am assuming they have researched their terrain. What I am wondering is if the Rough is overdone, and perhaps Rocky would be a better representation of what was/is out there. Your thoughts?

Hi all, I've been making up a lot of maps lately using the auto-generator with North Africa/Arid Rocks setting, and been getting a lot of Rough ground (like groups of 20-30 Rough tiles). Now I haven't been to Libya or Egypt, but it seems like there is too much to my eye - especially as it is impassable to vehicles. I can understand how it might be programmed that way as a game issue, as Rough gives good cover to infantry, but if it isn't what is really out there then.... it doesn't seem right. I've been replacing a lot of the Rough with Brush or Rocky tiles, still gives some concealment (admittedly not much cover) for infantry but not vehicle-impassable. Any thoughts?

Found a bug in 1.01 as follows: I was making up campaign scenarios in a fashion like RobO's Quick Campaign. I made a scenario file (Dec 40, NA) with a slightly-edited 2k x 2k random map, custom setup zones, and certain troops that I wanted. The problem/bug was, the Allied troops I purchased in the QB appeared not in the setup zone (which was easily large enough to accomodate them), but appeared in two "neutral" map locations; all of the vehicles (tanks and trucks) at one place, and all of the rest (infantry, guns, etc) in another place. And when I say one place, I mean it - the units were stacked directly on top of each other! (In fact, at first I though I only had one vehicle and one squad) I have the file if anyone want me to send it to someone.

In a related vein, any word on a new version of Mapping Mission for CMAK?

Hi all, Just a note for those of you using Fuerte's PBEM Helper in Fast & Trust mode - I did a test today of how to apply the patch to an ongoing Fast & Trust game and keep it working. It seems to have worked fine (not "prettily", but it works). I've sent the results to Fuerte, and am awaiting his reply, after which either he or I will post the method here.

Well let me be the first, then. Totally excellent dude! Honestly I can't compare with the original sounds, as I'm not going to troll through each file and compare, but I just played through a few PBEM turns with your mods installed and the sounds were great. This one is defintely a "keep 'er".

Hi all, Just a question, really; were German 37mm gun Pz III's in NA at all? I see you can buy them in the Editor, but I seem to remember reading in Jentz (not here with me, it's in another country) that all the Pz III's shipped to NA were 50L42 from the get-go.

Thanks Jason, good link. Pity it only deals with 7th Armoured in greater detail. More info still appreciated.

Thanks, that helps. Anything more out there from anyone?

(double post)

Hi all, I'm wanting to find some info about tank numbers and models in the various battalions of the RTR in the North African campaign (specifically from Sept 1940 to the start of Op Crusader/end of 1941). Basically, I want to know which battalions were equipped with what tanks (light tanks, models of Cruisers, or Matilda IIs or Valentines, etc). Any pointers to websites or just general info posted here would be greatly appreciated. [ December 28, 2003, 05:53 AM: Message edited by: atiff ]

I read on another list that, after the Italians surrendered, there was some discussion about mounting these on the back of Panthers and Tigers for use as "lifeboats"

Bump

Hi all, (apols if this is the wrong place for this thread) I thought I had lots, but I don't. I need links to pages dealing with the Italian theatre (inc Sicily). I'm after timelines (eg, Date Z: this happened, Date Y: this happened) and general stuff about operations, etc. Any help appreciated.

Not hitting at that range can be due to many factors; target speed, dust/haze, and others. I think you might be fairly safe to hold fire until about 1 km, esp if they only have 2-pdrs to fire back with.

I'm up for it. See my mail to you.....

The Sidi Rezegh Battles was one of my major scores when shopping online. I found one from a South African book dealer for something like US$30 - I thought it was a steal. The copy was a little battered, but a great book.