Ozzy

WineCape, I think those Magnificient Bastards have deserved far more than Chardonnay from Pays D'Oc. Try German Riesling instead [ May 28, 2002, 02:04 PM: Message edited by: Ozzy ]

I don't WANT a perfect game. "I wish all your dreams come true - except one. So you have always something that is worth to strive for."

John, you chief of the S.U.C.K.E.R. universe don't know if your posting (btw. many true words)was in answer to my latest posting. Maybe I have missed to explain somewhat better what I meant. While for those which want a complete military surrounding, tournaments or CMMC will be an almost perfect solution, I feel quick-battles to be not very satisfying in that question, even with rules (not to say they are not important!). However, CM offers VARIOUS options for scenario battles, which unfortunately are not always exploited by some authors. Among these are: 1) Scenario Briefing. Ahh, what a powerful tool! Many times I read three pages of the historical background, but the battle briefing itself only consists of a force composition list and "take hill X", "defend town Y". In reality, the battle briefing would provide you with terrain reconnaissance, intelligence, maybe even tactical options, would remind you of your logistical limitations and emphasize force preservation. 2) Unit Editor. Options like reducing/increasing ammo amount (supply status!!) and composition (e.g. a StuG III G (late) in an infantry support role might have more HE, as AT weapon (Panzerjäger) more AP rounds), morale/suppression and fatigue are often too less exploited. CM:BB will obviously add even more parameters here. 3) Victory flags. Was the operational objective of the mission to TAKE or to CONTROL a town/hill/etc.? Maybe I can *operationally* control a town from a hill or control a hill by blocking the only road to it WITHOUT taking the specific terrain feature. Hence scenario authors can add the operational aspect of the objective by placing victory flags not or not only on the terrain feature, but on the key locations to control the area. 4) Support. Many of the support weapons of military units are organized on Divisional level. A good example is artillery. A prepared attack or defense will always include the recording of Artillery Targets and creation of artillery outposts. However, I often cannot find TRPs (and I mean realistic Divisional recorded target areas, which are easily 10 times larger than the area covered by CM standard TRPs) or artillery outposts (instead spotters edited as moving units attached to platoons) As you can see (and Nac4 can learn), there are more than enough options, which only need to be exploited. Many of the excellent scenario editors around here do it, others not...

I saw a battle a friend of mine played with a decimated (artillery)German Pio platoon and three flamethrowers protecting the flank in the defense of a town. Just outside the town wooded terrain. An enemy company made its way through the woods, trying to penetrate and attack from that direction. My friend sent out his flamethrowers and lit the entire woodline. The flamethrowers were killed, but enemy could no longer use this axis of advance and had to choose open ground instead... :eek:

The AI is a gamey bastard regarding extreme flag rush. I want to say that he is VERY flag oriented. (a flag fetishist...? :confused: ) In a test battle I once setup a realistic WWII British Armoured Battalion with support of 1 battery 40mm Bofors to test the success of a fighter-bomber squadron (6-10 FBs) against the amd formation. I placed three large flags randomly on the map to spread out his forces. Within three or four turns he rushed 25 tanks to each flag. Of course, he lost 24 vehicles (including Gun Damage and Track Hit) to the FBs... In another occasion during a scneario testing phase I wanted to determine how many and where victory flags to place. I played defender in a small town behind a narrow river and 3 bridges crossing it, AI is attacker with dense wood on his right flank and open ground to his center and left. Initially I placed two large flags, one in the town and one on the rightmost (AI view) bridge (considered primary objective). AI has 1 rifle bn., with arty, AC, halftracks and 8 AFVs. I have two rifle coys, arty, some HMGs and handheld AT, and four Close support tanks. What was his tactic? He sent virtually ALL his vehicles full speed over the open ground, and ALL his infantry through the forest, which ended at the mentioned bridge (excellent artillery target). The test battle ended with the AI surrendering and me having lost 31 men (12 KIA)... Was pretty much a kind of turkey shooting.... Conclusion: if the scenario is designed to play against AI, place 5 or 6 small flags rather than 1-2 large ones. If not you will see REALLY foolish and unrealistic moves from the AI. [ May 28, 2002, 04:14 AM: Message edited by: Ozzy ]

Nac4 has some serious and true issues here. I myself think similar in many aspects (e.g. artillery support, casualty rate, force abd supply preservation). This is the reason why I refuse to play quick battles, but play instead historical battles which are provided by many excellent sources. That helped me a bit. But not enough.... ...until... I found Combat Mission Meta Campaign (CMMC), a massive RPG multiplayer campaign on Corps operational level. Here you can find ALL the aspects of military warfare from Company to Army level. And the battles are resolved via CM:BO, and that is why I love playing these - you know of your role, your orders, and the objectives. You note influences from sister units and unexpected enemy action, etc. etc.. :eek: But in one important aspect Nac4 is plain wrong: CM:BO is NO crappy game. If the battles are crappy, then it's because the players buy/setup/play crappy. With CMMC, the known tournaments, and rules (Fionn, etc.), you CAN create an almost realistic battle.

See, Vader, Hiroshima is an excellent example for what I am arguing for. I absolutely agree, that the two nuclear bombs have stopped the Pacific War at instance, to the benefit of hundreds of thousands of people who would have died on both sides in a home island invasion - unfortunately at a high price. As you say, the desired effect was deterrence. Where there no other targets than civilian in Japan to demonstrate the power of those weapons? If deterrence, not destruction, was the objective, the US could as well have chosen other targets. It is not that I condemn the usage of these weapons, nor the reasons for it, but the choice of the targets is questionable. Again: not WHY, but HOW?!

I speak about life and death of other people. If I have an illness and go to the Doctor, it is MY life. And a visit to hospital for cancer or AIDS patients will show us quickly that Doctors can help us to live longer, but until today they haven't defeated the death. Just like I claim to live my life according to my opinion, I must allow others to do the same. Things become critical if an opinion affects the life of others. I then have not the slightest problem with self-defense, and I believe there is even a moralic obligation to defend your life, freedom, and possess, and that of others. The question is HOW can I achieve that. The important aspect of your posting is that there are often several ways to solve a situation (e.g. go to the Doctors or try homeopathics, torture the terrorist or not). Frequently the way many people would consider intellectually the correct one is not the easiest one - THAT is the challenge. Remember that old men I told of, who fought partisans in the Balkans - he felt this absolutely correct, as those Partisans were killing his comrades, and would kill him as well if they could. He did not question WHY they fought the partisans, but HOW. Most interestingly, he once admitted he felt some sympathy for them - if his home would have been occupied, he would have displayed the same resistant attitude. That is to say, there is never black and white. Black and white is a question of the point of view. Both sides of a conflict will claim to be white and accuse the others to be black. Grey, in almost infinte shades, is the colour of this world.... [ May 27, 2002, 03:44 AM: Message edited by: Ozzy ]

Fionn and Vader, yes, I believe in my God, but that is not necessarily the reason for different morale views. Remember that most of the ethical and morale aspects which people (and governments) in Europe, the Americas, and many other places in the world commonly believe to be true, are based on religion (note I talk here of non-extremists, and doing so, you note that the Christian, Jewish, Islamic views and that of and many religions of Africa and Asia are not so different). Even atheists share many of these ethical beliefs. Nonetheless, I see the reality, and I see that there will be always Hitlers and bin Ladens (maybe of other size, but compare these two men in compassion and charisma, and you know what I mean). That is why I see the necessity of what we in Germany call an "Able-Bodied Democracy". To avoid any misconceptions about by morale views: only my health has prevented me from joining the German armed forces as Officer; I have worked as Engineer in the military industry, and I will do it again in a soon future. What I wanted to express is that IMO we cannot begin military or "police" actions against the "evil" (and the add the definition: evil = ruthless, inhumane, without respect for life or other opinions and religions, intolerance, no dignity, etc.), but use the same or similar methods like the ones we condemn. I know it is in self-defense, but if I can do it otherwise than with inhuman practics, well, why not strive for such a solution Btw: thanks, Fionn, for always posting well balanced and level-headed messages! It is a pleasure to share thoughts with you (and many others of course) :cool: [ May 27, 2002, 03:50 AM: Message edited by: Ozzy ]

Fionn, to be honest: if I would be one of the 50, I would feel guilty for the rest of my life.... Not because I tortured anybody, but because my life was saved by torturing somebody. Have some deserved to die young? No. We are just human beings, and it is not given to our hands to decide about life and death. I have a God who tells me "You shall not kill". There is no add-on like "...except if it is a terrorist." or "...except it is a SS concentration camp guard." If I have to defend my life or the lifes and homes of those next to me - I have no problem to grab a weapon and do it. If it is to stop tyranny or to maintain order, peace, justice and freedom, again I would do it - even if my opponent dies. But I did not do it intentionally, and that is the difference. Executing and torturing other human beings must be strictly condemned. How can I claim dignity and justice if I myself do not respect them in achieving my goals? I have a good friend, now already grown to the age of 78 (I think). A peaceful, nice old man, who likes to tell stories about this and that. His unit was forced to search and fight partisans in the Balkans for almost one year. All he would ever tell about this year is that it was the most horrible time of his entire life, that he has been awarded the Bandenbekämpfungsabzeichen (Anti-Partisan Badge) to his utterest disgust, and that he would give everything (including havin died on the Eastern front) for being able to change his history. [ May 26, 2002, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: Ozzy ]

Berkut, let me tell you that I as German citizen am frequently asked by many people -having our history well in mind- "How can you play CM?", or "How can you participate in CMMC?" I ask them in change: do you play Chess or Risk? Chess, Risk and many other board, card and computer games are nothing else but wargames. The only difference is that chess figures have no faces, do not scream or else. They are abstracts of soldiers or troops, but what players do is nothing else than simulating a "hostile" action against an enemy (opponent) to achieve one's goals. I have hence no problem with those games - if I would question CM, then I would have to do with almost the half of all known games of the world. I have neither a problem with military intervention where it is due and necessary to bring or keep peace, freedom and justice - despite all cruelties related to it. Unfortunately the innocent usually suffer most of military conflicts, but though I hate it I understand that this cannot be helped. What I wanted to point out is that we can PLAY whatever game we want to play, as long as it IS a game. But I cannot accept any glorification of war or so called war heroes. As I have pointed out earlier in another thread - the IMO truest heroes Germany has ever seen were our "Debris Women", who have rebuild our cities with their hands, lacking of homes, food and medical care, and with their fathers, brothers, husbands, and sons being dead or POWs. The footage of war actions might help us to remind that war in reality has nothing glorious in itself.

GG, you involuntarily started an interesting -and maybe important- discussion. The video is interesting, though it seems flawed. Being German as well, you might understand, that I do not share your opinion about German soldiers. I must say, that this is the same type of stereotype simplification which let people in the World still believe that we are swines. Nobody here does appreciate the cruelties and the repulsive crimes of the Nazi regime. But the equation German Soldier = Nazi Swine is simply and plain wrong. It was surely commonly used in WWII to make killing them easier. But instead, the absolute huge part of the German soldiers were fine young men, all of them abused by a despotic regime, and some of them mislead by a deceiving propaganda. They had no choice in joining the Armed Forces, all of them were drafted. In fact, many of the most powerful resistance movements against the regime originated in the Wehrmacht, as many leading officers were not in agreement with the war policy and the political doctrines of the Nazi regime - to mention only some of the most known: Feldmarschall Erwin Rommel, Chief of CounterIntelligence Admiral Canarius, Erwin von Witzleben, and Graf Stauffenberg. Let me emphasize that today the German people is a thankful nation, which has deep respect and heartfelt appreciation for the highest sacrifice the Allied nations made to bring freedom and peace back to the heart of Europe. We are thankful for relieving us from the bane of the Nazism, and for the efforts the free world did not stop to make to protect good part of Germany from the Stalinism (I think here especially of Berlin), as well as its support in the process of reunion of our home country. Now back to the center of the discussion - should such footage be published or broadcasted? Yes, it should. Of course NOT in the way these ill ogrish people did. Why should it be published? Let me tell you a story to explain it. A recently died good friend of my father was gunner of a PzIV in Russia 1943, being 19 years old and just married. His tank was hit by an unknown AT weapon in an ambush, and brewed up at instance. His commander and he were the only to escape from the inferno, and his commander died some days later. He himself had horrible burns in the face, on his arms, legs and his back. He stayed 3 years in hospitals, and underwent several surgeries. But as the medical possibilities in aesthetical sugery in WWII times were rather limited, the poor man had to live with a repulsively disfigured face for the rest of his life. Since these days he suffered from claustrophic attacks. Why do I tell this? Because war is NOT like most of the Hollywood pictures. War is blood, horrible wounds, suffering. And nobody should ever forget this. The younger people like me have never seen war (and I thank God for it), but if we play war like in wargames, we should never forget which reality is behind it. Thus, we should show people how cruel war is, maybe they then refrain from starting one. [ May 26, 2002, 05:31 AM: Message edited by: Ozzy ]

One major reason is also that their ammo is very limited. They will hence usually use it only against "valuable" targets, which are e.g. full squads, HQs, Tank commanders, and support weapons. I have played a battle with a 2" mortar at 50 meters range and a PIAT at 80 meters range from a sharpshooter. As I had no vehicles close, the mortar was the more threatening weapon. So I targeted the mortar. But the sharpshooter did not shoot at it, but instead chose the PIAT to fire at. After two or three turns I think having found the reason: the enemy mortar was Out of Ammo, as he had plain LOS on my inf. but did not fire (he fired smoke for many turns before). I interprete the sharpshooters behaviour as that he noticed the mortar to be no longer a valuable target, and fired on the PIAT instead.

Make the markers pink....

boy, play CMMC http://www.combatmission.com/CMMC/cmmcfront.htm

I agree. I hope we can also place AFV hulks on the field in the scenario designer as well; to simulate an area that has already been fought over at least once before. I always disliked how CMBO's battlefields looked almost new when you start a new scenario.</font>

would undoubtedly violate the GINeva Convention...

Pinned = Niedergehalten

"Bildb." is not Picture Book but short for Bilberichterstatter = war photographer

The markings and numbers on the paper as well as the propangandistic style of the text itself IMO indicate an official war correspondant document. (That's maybe as well why the young soldierboy is "happy")

1041.bmp = Ready "Kampfbereit". 1052.bmp = taking cover "volle Deckung" COOL 1062.bmp = immobile "liegengeblieben" (would be cool for vehicles, but what about HMGs or 8.8 PaK?), maybe "bewegungsunfähig" (very long indeed) or "unbeweglich" "nicht bewegbar" "ortsfest" is also possible, but is not 100% adequate 1063.bmp = bogged "festgefahren" is better 1077.bmp = routed "zerschlagen" COOL

Gunners Glow In The Dark..... :eek: [ May 10, 2002, 07:29 AM: Message edited by: Ozzy ]

will there be Borg? (definetely NOT swedish...)

Ich schlage vor statt konjugierter Verben die entsprechende substantivierte Form zu wählen! 1030.bmp = Conscript ( Rekrut ) 1031.bmp = Green (Unerfahren) 1034.bmp = Crack ( Ausgezeichnet ) 1035.bmp = Elite ( Elite ) 1040.bmp = Rested ( ausgeruht ) 1041.bmp = Ready ( bereit ) 1047.bmp = Abadonned ( aufgegeben ) 1048.bmp = Gun damaged ( Geschützschaden) 1050.bmp = hiding ( getarnt ) 1051.bmp = Delay ( Warten ) 1052.bmp = taking cover( Deckung ) 1062.bmp = immobile (unbeweglich) 1063.bmp = bogged ( festgefahren ) 1071.bmp = alerted ( gewarnt ) 1077.bmp = routed ( fliehend ) 1080.bmp = embarking ( Aufsitzen ) 1087.bmp = sound contact ( Geräusche? ) 1088.bmp = buttoned ( Luke zu ) unbuttoned = ( Luke auf ) 1089.bmp = reloading ( Nachladen )

Well, Nazis finished off with all social and cultural classes known before in Germany - and instituted new -ethnic- classes: 1) arian/germanic; the "Herrenrasse" (Leader Race) 2) caucasian/european (British, US, etc.) 3) french 4) jews (interesting: it is a religion, not a race, but it was considered such by Nazis) 5) african; "Wilde" (wild) 6) Russian; "Untermenschen" (below human) Don't know if I should really like that... **** In WWII, many of the old Prussian military traditions have been adopted by the Nazi regime - presumably to revoke gallantry and loyality among the soldiers, of which many (especially not Officers) did not agree with Nazi politics or warfare, especially not after the ruthless violations of the Eastern European countries. [ May 03, 2002, 09:46 AM: Message edited by: Ozzy ]