Brent Pollock

Perhaps I should've put this in Tips and Tricks... Anyhow: for those who are interested, I did some testing on which units may use sewer movement and which may not. Some results I found surprising, others weren't. The rulebook states, at the top of p.77, that all regular units in command may use sewer movement; I confirmed that this also applies even if the HQ is Green or Conscript, even though such HQs may not go sewer diving. In the last paragraph of "Sewer Move", it states that "heavy weapons" may not use it. Tests indicate the following are heavy weapons: LMG (I was surprised, considering the squads have LMGs) MMG HMG MTR SHARPSHOOTER (another surprise) ATR FT (and another) AMPULOMET Couldn't find such a list using the search function, so here it be.

From p.79 of the CMBB rulebook: "Impassable Terrain: ...Crossing forests might be possible given ample time and caution and proper support by engineering units..." ...which seems to support the view that it represents engineered pathways. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be anything on pp. 60-62 (Fortifications) telling you that trenches and wire stamp out the Impassable Terrain restrictions from p. 79; I certainly would've liked to have seen that in the rulebook.

Okay, I searched for any of "fuel petrol gas" as titular keywords and came up "empty" I was wondering if there are any plans to incorporate fuel limits into future game "engines"? Any of you that have played ASL Kampfgruppe Peiper scenarios know what I'm driving toward: the ability to model vehicles running out of fuel mid-battle. I'm thinking of something along the lines of a gas gauge that tracks fuel just like we currently track ammo. I'd even be happy with a crude one that has a straight consumption rate based on time and speed, with no accounting for terrain slope or other loading factors.

Yah - http://www.be.wakwak.com/~khsudoh/northfox/sakuhin/doitu/doitu5.htm shows the StuIG 33B. But the main thing can't be changed, eh? Damn - I thought it would take any ".bmp" file with the right name.

Yet another lazy-assed sonofabitch posting a mod request: like they can be done in five minutes or something! For those of us lamenting the fact that the StuIG 33B seems to use the same skins as one of the StuH42 models, I'd like a scratch-built StuIG 33B mod for those of us willing to toggle it on and off for those Stalingrad fights. All I found when I searched using "33b mod" were two StuIG 33B mods that are paint jobs of the existing StuH 42 model.

I don't know if they are easier to spot, but I know I routinely blast the ever lovin' bee-jesus out of anything that looks like a likely observation post (e.g. the great big manor house that dominates the farmland). Sometimes if the ammo load on a vehicle and battle clock are sufficient, I'll even try this in high density urban areas...and, hey, how often do your AFVs run out of ammo before they run out of luck? Upper level units get a much rougher ride when the building gets demolished (CMBO Manual, p. 53: Any unit inside a 2-level building which collapses or catches fire will suffer serious casualties).

Actually, they seem to function fine. I just ran a quick test with a KV1 M41. Check its stats: it the game lists it as having a turret rear MG and also has an icon and ammo listed for it in the weapon/ammo area of the status display. I gave it a covered arc command to the rear. Next turn, I told it to area fire to the turret rear (and bow front); both the bow MG and turret rear MG fired and consumed ammo. The thing to remember about rear turret MGs is that they get operated by the same crew who are possibly busy firing the forward facing stuff. I don't know the ins and outs of BFC's approach, but in ASL you can't fire the rear MG in the same turn that you've fired the coax.

Ditto that. I was wanting to post something as well but couldn't find it. I lost quite handily as the Germans by a combination of good play by my opponent and bone-headed force spreading by me. Still fun, though.

...forgot the other blooper. QB versus the AI. I'm rolling up his (its) left flank. I've sent an AC in to overrun a MG team, with another AC...or maybe a tank....firing in support to suppress the MG team. Of course, during the overrun, the AC gets torched by the suppressing HE rounds. Learned something about Tac AI limitations that day.

I also had some rockets fall "short" in Dzerh-spelling gets-tough-without-looking-it-up Tractor Works. I think it's quite normal for that battle as the map is a tad small for rockets. I had mine targetted near the Russian rear-area factory to come in on turn 1. I lost two 50 mm Mortars and almost obliterated the Company HQ with the first few rounds. Took some other start-line casualties, too. Fortunately, I had the foresight to put my Panzers off to the left side, so at least they didn't get hit. I can't recall if those rockets hurt more Russians than Germans when I read the end game kill stats. Grand fun. Play it again in a heartbeat.

After thrashing the woods-road T34s, my KT never really made it into the town, just to the edge near the flag, where it helped an armoured infantry platoon hold on. I still held a good chunk of the town as I got in place fast and one or two of the T34s that did not have to contend with the KT went down to PSK shots. My Stummel got mauled, though.

Marxdorf isn't a night game. Plenty of wide open spaces and a tight town fight. No one else in this thread seems to be bothering with spolier warnings so I'll skip one too. My KT bagged all but two or three of the gaggle of T34/85s that came through the woods road. The others got whacked as they tried to flank it by zooming straight down the woods road; PFs from my advance infantry platoon. It was no cakewalk and plenty of teeth-gritting ricochets were endured. It even took a crew casulaty part way through becuase I kept telling the bastard to poke his head out the hatch to get a good glimpse of the action. Also, if my big kitty had been just a tad further along it might have had its flank exposed at the start of the encounter.

Although I've experienced the same problems with operations (weird set up events; oodles of reinforcements for the attacker when they get pulverized) one reason I do like operations is for this bit of strategic realism: killing crews after they abandon their vehicle or gun so they can't reman it the next day. In battles, they are pretty much a waste of ammo once their weapon or vehicle is knocked out. Similarly, trying to control the ground around abandoned weapons also is important so they cannot be recrewed the next day.

...and the ability to purchase heavy weapons in plattons, just like you may with Vehicles/Armor. I know you get platoons of ATGs and IGs with a HQ unit when purchasing higher level infantry units (usually battalion) but it'd be nice to have the option of getting the battalion gun section without having to buy the whole enchilada.

Oh yah - I like these. Perhaps this would also be a way to give infantry a Follow Trenchline order.

Some more random thoughts: - voluntary bail outs from vehicles and pillboxes/bunkers (for when you know they are in BIG trouble...like when an infantry support tank pulls up in front of your wooden MG bunker and you're fresh out of AT assets); - voluntary unit surrender(why - just because); - squad splitting either restricted to certain unit quality (e.g. regular or better) or tied to being in command of a HQ unit...or a HQ unit of a certain minimum quality; - in Operations, receive a notice during set up along the lines of "Enemy Tank noises heard" if it seems likely that the opponents reinforcing AFVs would've been heard. Brain dump ends.

Here're a couple ideas for additions to have in CMX2: In the OB section, I'd like an option for random platoons of vehicles. What I have in mind is a line that might read something like, "Heavy Tank Platoon", "Armoured Car Platoon" or "Assault Gun Platoon". Its cost would reflect the troop quality and weighted availability of all relevant vehicles. It would be a bit of a gamble; you might get the good stuff for a cut price or you might end up with crap. Also, on a more detailed level, I'd like randomly mixed vehicle platoons. For instance, if you bought a Pv IV F1 platoon, you might get a few substituted with Pz IV E. This would reflect the heterogeneity that might occur due to incomplete delivery of replacements, battle damage repair rotation or formation of ad hoc battlegroups. Similar randomisation could occur for gun sections or infantry units. For example, if you purcahsed a Rifle Company, it might have on of the platoons replaced by a SMG platoon. Too goofy?

I couldn't find anything about this topic using the search engine, so here goes... I've found that you can actually get vehicles into rubble/building/woods/etc. terrain in the scenario editor using the following procedure: 1. make the map but without the rubble/etc. tile, preferably using an obvious placeholder like a non-deep ford; 2. do the unit purchases; 3. place the vehicle on the spot where you plan on placing the rubble/etc.; 4. edit the tile to rubble/etc.; 5. view it and - voila - you've got a vehicle in rubble/etc. Such vehicles seem to be affected normally by LOS rules and may still fire if they've a LOS. They may also rotate their chassis and turret. However, they may not move forward/backward...although I haven't tried getting them set up precisely at the edge so that they might hit permissible terrain (e.g. open ground) as soon as they try to move. It seems like a useful tool for anyone trying to simulate a defender that had enough time to move their vehicles into confining terrain.

...and what did the offspring look like? Sorry...couldn't resist. My first encounter with the Nahverteidigungswaffe was in CMBO: I thought the Brits were lobbing light mortar rounds or grenades at the Tiger, until I realised the little grey shapes were STARTING at the turret and radiating out. Grand fun.

Wow - what a difference a repost makes! Thanks to all who chipped-in on this discussion. Fusing, fire direction infrastructure, ammo loadouts - those are the kind of points I was hoping people would bring to the "table". I especially appreciate Steve for giving a direct Battlefront.com perspective, which I find is one of the strengths of these fora.

Well, neither the Game User Manual nor the unit data window are very explicit about which AA/FlaK represent "dedicated" AA(Flak)" and which have been brought up specfically to smash ground targets. Again, I ask, does anyone have any solid reference material one way or the other? Either way is fine by me: we all function under the same restrications. I'm just curious why one group of designers (the ASL cabal) gets a different model from another group (Battlefront). I can live with it, just like I can live with embarked troops not being able to fire or infantry not having smoke grenades. You've got to make some design decisions based on scant information.

...so we need an offboard AA unit? Sort of a FlaK umbrella? Hmmm...cool, n'est ce pas? I just wish the rulebook would clarify what it means by "dedicated" on page 136, "Besides dedicated AA (Flak) guns, vehicles equipped with AA machine guns will engage airplanes...".

Okay, since some folks commandeered my original thread ("What part of FlaK don't the 88's understand?!"), I've got to start a new one to try and redirect the discussion. For those of you acquainted with the Holy Tome (i.e. Advanced Squad Leader Rule Book), Demoss mentioned the ASL model for AA fire. Since I'm a loooooooonnnnnnnnnnggggggggg time ASLer, this is part of the source of my confusion as to why the 88s, 76s , 90s, et cetera never fire at aircraft. In ASL, the heavy stuff gets to fire at the airplanes when they are NOT in the act of attacking. In ASL terms, the light AA fires during its own movement phase (when enemy planes may attack) and the heavy stuff blasts away during the prep and defensive fire phases (when enemy planes are presumed to be trying to sight targets or are circling for another pass). So, what we get in ASL is planes which are never immune to fire. If they're beyond light AA range, the heavy AA gets to slam away at them; if they're coming in fast and low, the light AA spits at them while the heavy AA gunners just get dizzy. So, a better way to phrase my question would've been, "why can't the heavy AA units engage the ground attack aircraft when they're searching for targets (which is what I presume is happening when you hear that "airplane" noise, the turn before they attack), or circling around for another pass"? From the behaviour I've seen (ummm...I'm talking about the game engine, not "Seanachai"), the aircraft model always treats them as being too low and fast for the heavy (medium?) AA. Does anyone have reliable sources to swing us one way or the other on the accuracy of this model? It has certainly shown a hole in my decades of reading. It seems a tad remiss of the rulebook not to have a wee note about which AA units you can expect to actually engage in AA activities. Or is it mentioned somewhere other than page 136? Is it part of the unit information?

Okay, I searched the archives and had another gander at the rule book, to no end. Why don't the 88 mm FlaK (and similar medium calibre AA like 76 mm, although I've not looked at them) shoot at incoming planes? Are they choosy, and I just haven't seen the right conditions for them to engage yet? Are they not meant for the low fast targets (this is my guess)? There's no mention in the rule book (or anywhere else that I can see) of AA fire being restricted to weapons below a certain calibre. Thoughts...comments...offers to nominate me for a Nobel... [ December 16, 2002, 11:30 PM: Message edited by: Brent Pollock ]

A half serious request, really. It's just that when those T-34s get boogying down a road, I'm curious as to just how fast they go. This would apply even more so to armoured cars on roads. On a straightaway, the scenery can really zip past.