Wildass69

Roger Sergie, Good reply. However a lot of truth is said in jest and humies often 'guise what they really mean with a profusion of smilies... Sincerely Wary Wildass

It's a bit weak in of it's self to imply me "weak" when all you know about me is only what I've posted here. It could also be a serious mistake... should we ever meet on the battle field. (Don't even ask because I don't play other people. I got over all that online politically driven humie crap long ago. I'd rather state my position and then cha-cha with you right here in a civilized manner.) Quite frank this is the very reason I rarely post here; somehow I tend to bring out the loveliness in people and they seem so compelled to show me how much more they know than I do - regardless of whatever experiances or investigations I've conducted. Not that I'm more than a little inclined to stick around and rub their faces in it; I won't run from a "discussion". Still I have other things to do and I'll think again about sharing my tips even though I will gladly read yours - ARF! But I'm still betting you will try my "ritual" nevertheless. Respectfully.....

Roger. And many times they don't disprove them either. I'd like to add that somewhere in the manual for the game it states that this is not like most other wargames you've played and don't expect that things you may be use to doing to work. Conversely things you would expect to work in real life probably will. Which is exactly how I found this trick. Think about how a vehicle might get stuck. Then think about it's most likely option to get unstuck. It's best option for getting unstuck is to back out the way that it came. It may or may not work but trying to find another way out is really a gamble (Living in 4x4 country teaches you that). I've tried variations on this trick. For instance adding forward movement to the reverse seems to negate the trick. In otherwords it's more likely to succeed with just the reverse in one bound straight back than any other variation. As I said I am just sharing this. No one has to use it. But I'll bet every one of you will try it - especially when the HQ vehicle of your crack panzer platoon gets stuck. You just need to be sure and keek an eye on the bog box and catch it the first turn it happens. Have fun! WA

That may be the theory and you can hang onto it if you want but I consistantly unbog vehicles by immediately throwing them into reverse. Try it. Next time you are traversing cross country in HTs or AFV keep a close eye on them. As soon as they bog cancel their forward movements and reverse straight back about 50 yards and watch how many times you get out of a jam. I've found it to be too high of a percentage to be just coincidence. I'll tell you what the superstition is; that the game engine is infalible and can't be circumvented . Maybe it's not suppose to be influenced by this "trick" but it is! But no one has to use it. I just thought you might be interested.

This may not be new but one trick I've found that "typically" works when a vehicle first bogs is to cancel all forward movement and reverse straight back. It doesn't always work and some times it takes 2 or 3 turns but I seem to have a good success rate with this. Of course the longer you wait to reverse the less likely it seems to work so you have to keep an eye on your cross country vehicles. Now a question. Has anyone successfully freed a bogged vehicle by pushing it with another vehicle? Even more important has anyone ever remobilized a vehicle that became so bogged that it became immobile by pushing it with another vehicle? The illogic of pushing a bogged vehicle with another (presumably as heavy or even heavier) vehicle is that you risk bogging the new vehicle. But that doesn't particularly happen. At least not in my experiance. I realize in the heat of battle a bogged vehicle should be left behind and that a mobile unit would not stop to unstick one of it's elements. But it does seem that the possibility should exist. I personally feel CM (in this case BB) is a little too handy with bogging. I would not expect that much mud to exist on a hot July morning in southern Russia. Yet there he is; our good ol' friend Mr. bog. But that's just me... Wildass

LOL... (Shakes head and walks away) I have 50 bucks here for the next version of Combat Mission - whatever it is - unless it's in the Pacific! All your Sabre Rattling did very little for a bunch of us!

<Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read><Read>...... wheW! I'm exhausted! Now I remember why I don't come here much. Finally we get down to looking up common language in the dictionary! Let's look up another word.... French I believe... Grognard! Grumbler. LROFLMAO!!! I went through as much of this string as I could stand in hopes there might be some hint as to what the new Engine might pertain to in way of theaters/fronts - as in Desert Warfare (hope hope hope...) Or maybe early Europe like Poland. I love to invade Poland.... Not demands at all, BFC. When I get to be better at this than you are I will publish my own games rather than rag on you about your superb efforts. Frankly, you have hit all the right nails on the head so I won't even be trying to make my own game. (Get the hint Grognards?) And moreover I couldn't care less about IS-3s and T-44s - They equate to FANTACY as far as I'm concerned and I don't play fantacy. I don't even play the "fictional battles" because I'm an historian (and sometimes an histarian). I would dare say MOST of us couldn't care less about IS-3s and T-44s. Anyway after reading all this .... Couldn't you drop a hint as to what area the new Engine/Game will be the subject of? And thanks for the right kind of effort on the first two games!!!

I read with great interest all the suggestion and I'm sure they are very valuable. Again I'm new to the game. But if I might add, the Wehrmacht employed a 3 layer defense in depth that may also help. I don't recall the terms but I think you will get the picture: The first tier was called the outpost and it consisted of a fairly sparce line of infantry with the (expendable) purposes of offereing initial resistance to the attacker and early warning. About 100 meters back was the next line of defense which consisted of more infantry, HMGs and perhaps smaller guns. This line was intended to cover the outposts and when over run it was to this line that the outposts would fall back on. Approximately 100 meters behind this second line was the third line which consisted of still more infantry HGMs and heavier ATs again covering the second and outpost lines where possible. And it was a fallback position as well. Behind this line was the smaller artillery (mortars) more guns and if time permitted strongholds (pill boxes and bunkers or hopefully at least some type of prepared positions to fall back on. Panzers and other AFVs would also be in this area where they would offer support as the opportunity arose and prepare for counter attack. They were very much a fire brigade as well (They could be moved to plug holes). Generally this is a good position to hide your heaviest AT guns and a sweet little 88 or two. Most importantly this is where your reserves are. And you need reserves even if it's only a platoon! Of course, this all depends on three factors: The terrain, the available resourses and of course the enemies attacking force. Nevertheless when properly assembled this defense is very effective. It does have a certain amount of flexabilty in that your lines can move laterally to bolster the area of attack if you feel certain a second attack in another spot is not eminant. The bane of defense is that you must defend a lot of territory with a limited amount of resourses and yet the enemy has the option of attacking with all of his force in one tiny narrow front. Sometimes he is just gonna overwhelm you - thus the importance of reserves. But with pretty much equal forces (points to buy units with) there is no reason why you should not be able to hold your position... most of the time. In the old days they use to say it took 3 to 1 ratios of attacking forces to overcome defensive forces. I would submit that this is still true. It's just that in mobile warfare an attacker can stack his forces and hit very hard in one spot. This means the defense may be faced with much greater odds than 3:1 against it. But being the new kid I may just be full of hot air....

Patrick Moore, and others, just to encourage you a little - I just finished my first Operation in CMBB ("Blitzkrieg"), a five battle operation dated 6-22-41. I did it in three Battles. I'll admit that I did restart the op once from the start, after playing to about one third of the way through battle number 2 because I realized how badly I did NOT understand the CMBB "game" mechanics (I've only been playing about a week). But my battle plan didn't change; Panzers around the south (right) side of the town in the first battle, infantry around the north side in the second, enveloping the soviets forces in and west of the town. By the end of battle number 2 I completely occupied the town. Warfare is no longer about attrition. Warfare is about maneuver and "encouraging" the enemy to surrender. I found in EF2 that I typically could win any battle 2 to 5 turns quicker if I captured rather than killed (Killing takes too much time). It seems to work here too. The Germans enjoyed "Kill" ratios as high as 20 to 1 in the summer of '41 not because they killed everyone on the battlefield but because they maneuvered in such a way that the enemy forces had no choice but to give up. In war games such as EF2 CMBO and CMBB this factor is not so apparent until you play campaigns or operations where the results of your last battle directly effects the resources available to you in the current battle. In "Blitzkrieg", battle number 3 would have been much harder if I had frittered away my forces with a frontal assault - attrition warfare - and whippin up on those KV-2s in battle number 3 would have been much harder. As it was they were nearly the only real threat on the field and my units simply rushed by them to the far edge of the map. Once they were "cut off" they weren't so fiesty! And yes infantry took all three with the help of a StugIII at point blank range in one case. Did you know a Mark IIIH 50mm shell will simply bounce off a KV-2 even at point blank range? So I guess my point is that all the stuff I said above is pretty much valid for this game. Avoid fighting tanks with tanks .... unless they are Stuarts, T-26s or BT7s.... or Mark IIs. LOL! Rats! I was suppose to get some Mark IVs in Battle Number 5 (for a night battle!) and some engineers with flame throwers in battle number 4. Oh well. Guess I'll just go have schnitzle and beer for the rest of the afternoon! [ November 04, 2002, 12:44 AM: Message edited by: Wildass69 ]

I don't know that much about CMBB or CMBO yet, as I have just started playing both. But I do know this; the subject matter of these games pertains to the very cardinal docterine of "Maneuver Warfare". And one of the principles of Manuever Warfare is that like elements do not effectively combat each other. Not optimumly anyway. In otherwords tanks should not be used as anti-tank weapons. Tanks are deep thrust attack weapons meant to shatter front lines and shred the rear eschlons of the enemy. I realize that tanks encounter(ed) tanks on the WWII battlefield and we all "nostalge" about such battles as Kursk and Targul Fumos but (imho) a pure tank battle should never happen. We often marvel at the Wehrmacht, especially in the early years of the war, at how the Germans achieved such astonishing results with, arguably inferior Panzers. We think in terms of how they were less armoured, undergunned and perhaps not even as mechanically sound {meaning too much diversity between models as well as less than optimal reliability) as many of their counterparts - yet they triumpted again and again. And we wonder how? I would argue that they were not inferior, that they were perfectly suited to their true purpose. The Germans DID understood the principles of Maneuver Warfare. Heck, they invented it! At least in it's modern form. The Panzers were well balanced between armour and firepower, and maneuverability in order to accomplish that ability to hit hard, hit fast and hit where they were least expected AND yet drive so deep so quickly as to totally disrupt the opposing army. The best weapons to deal with KV-1s and T-34s are NOT PZIIIs and PZIVs. The best weapons are infantry units equipped with anti-tank weapons able to entice the tanks into favorable ground where close assault are more likely to succeed. Engineers (Pioneers) are especially good at dispatching tanks (At least they should be - we'll see in CMBB). And a few ATs such as High Velocity 50mm and 75mm at close range or that fabulous 88 and the occational Stuka. See, it ain't a matter of pound for pound slugging it out. It's a matter of outsmarting the enemy and denying him his advantages while exploiting your own. Avoid fighting on his terms and on his ground. Draw him into your terms. Like I said I haven't been playing these games long. I'm still exploring the possiblities of the tools made available. So I can't tell you what WILL work yet. But the manuel says "...think about what would work in the real world..." so I'm suggesting to you what SHOULD work. Think in terms of combined forces. Study the terrain more closely and find ways to use it. Try to devise tactics that will put the enemy at a disadvantage and allow you to use your most optimal forces againt him. Use your Panzers to cut his heavy tanks him off from their retreat, supply and operational command rather than trying to "take them out". Let units more suited to either capturing or destroying them do the dirty work. And remember even General Heinz G. knew the only way to take out a KV-1 was to hit him in the grates. The tutorial in CMBB used the scenario based on the legendary tale of the single KV-1 holding off the German attack because none of the Panzers were capable of destroying it. You are to play this scenario as the Russian.... No sweat; try playing it as the German and figure out how to rid yourself of that KV-1 without loosing your Bat! (Hint - getting behind a KV-1 with anything makes him NERVOUS - Then he makes mistakes!) That's how the Wehrmach won in the summer of 1941 and it's how close the world came to a totally different outcome to the war. And it's how I intend to win at CMBB. If you haven't read it, every "Virtual" Panzer Leader should read, "The Art of Maneuver" by Robert Leonhard.

Not as long as we can cheat. Don't ever forget that CM AI.

Hey smart AI(ss) - oh I'm just kidding). Thanks for the tip on the "Alt A"!!! (Do Humans actually do that?) You ain't so smart after all..... Ar ar ar ar ar.