Dandelion

It's beautiful. Absolutely beautiful.

Well, I remember you all the same Steve Actually I was notably involved in a debate on tattooed bikers in bars, though not topless and not in Manhattan, thus Jon's and Michaels memories remain excellent. I scarcely think that solidly off-topic debate ever made it out of the inglorious General Forum, but it was rather amusing nonetheless. I seem to recall a Mr Dorosh being a partner in crime here. But I might be mistaken - as Jon pointed out it's been six years. What I actualy wrote to say was - Thanks for sending me my original Dandelion profile, I really appreciate it. The only thing I have from that year that will still fit me Regards Dandelion

JoM67 Seriously, do you think we're all linguering here to write endless posts on matters we are all already well familiar with? This forum is all about the exchange of knowledge. It always was. You might want to reconsider your presence here, if this offends you. Sinceriously Dandelion

Not familiar with hardcoded statistics concerning the spotting of mines, I seem to achieve satisfying success spotting mines using infantry scouting ahead, making a point of having them stationary every once in a while. Stationary meaning lingering for at least one minute, or they will not spot properly. Ordinary infantry, not engineers. Unfailingly doing this, I have actually only once ever (!) driven a vehicle into any minefield in the game. And in that scenario, there was no infantry, only tanks and desert. Then again, I have marched scouts into minefields, and more importantly perhaps I have lost scenarios beceause of elapsing timelimits. Some scenarios press the attacker for time to such an extent that he is compelled, coerced even, to victimise his armour, having no other real option but to charge full speed along roads, using tanks as point. They wil linevitably hit mines, and charge straight into various other ambushes otherwise easily brushed aside by scout infantry, such as single Panzerschreck teams or snipers taking out unbuttoned commanders. While my foes frequently suffer this, I usually scout ahead instead, avoiding the ambushes but not reaching the objective in time. Can't recall ever having spotted any minefield with a tank. Once spotted, I cannot recall a minefield ever disappearing from view again (unless of course there is nobody around with a LOS to it). Cheers D

Horrible news indeed. So we've now been hanging around here for so long that we're starting to die off of old age.

One of those authors used to be a frequent poster here at the forum. If I were you, I might try using the name Rexford in the thread name (rather than lost book) and he just might find you. He'll know. You know, something like "Looking for Mr Rexford" or the like. Cheers Dandelion

There is a command exactly the way Dook describes. It will appear whenever relevant (infantry (not exclusively engineers) equipped with Demo charges (not grenade bundles, as these are treated as antitank (antitrack) weapons in the game) within 29 meters of any enemy, and issued with a "fire" order). The range of the use of explosives is, according to previous announcements by the BFC, to reflect the men actually applying explosives. Seeing as the squad actually is supposed to disperse over an area much larger than the dot-on-the-map that it appears in the game (and within which it can be affected by firepower). The men are not meant to throw explosives at all. It certainly looks like they are throwing them, raising arms and the DC flying through the air, But no. It is applied. It is quite a challenge imagining these men applying explosives upon moving individual infantymen, but there you have it. Of course. With this function, the entire Raison Daitre of the flamethrower entirely vanishes. There is absolutely no point wahtsoever in buying any FT in any battle, when you can instead use the 29 meter ranged... applyable, DC. The sole exception being mines. Only DC will remove mines, FTs won't cut the mustard. Of course, if encountering mines, you will not be given the command option "use explosives" but simply have to wait for the men to use it on their own initative. Which might take up to five minutes or so. Chop chop D.

How about Kraut Calamity? or Bothersome Boardwalk Boche? or Fritz has a fit? or Merry Jerries assault our ferry? or Brandenburger with fries? or U-137 strikes again - the prequel? or Failed integration of heavily armed immigrant groups in the municipality of Eastport, july 1942, a US Justice Dpt Survey? or How we almost made it to Canada - a German account? or Seven Years in Maine, by Heinrich Harrer? or One Eastport too far? or The hitherto unknown second air assault landing by Rudolf Hess behind enemy lines? or This aint Kansas, Dorothy? or "The special-operations forces are capable of doing things that other forces aren't", an evaluation by Generalfeldmarschall Rumsfeld on the successful German invasion and pacification of the USA with 1500 übersupertroopers? or And Then There Were None? or I'm shooting in the rain? Seriously though, any chance of seeing the map? Never seen one using tracing. What kind of tracing? Cheers D

How did German squadlevel tactical behaviour differ from, say, US, in june 1944? And what marked consequences did the German frame of mind create? Cheers D.

Infantry training in WWII did not differ much from modern training. The components you mention were all there, and you do see a lot of it, especially fire-manoever, even in the series BoB. Of course training varied. Within Easy company, there were men with 12 months of training, others with just a few weeks. Status was the same with the opposition, German training looked much the same. Training is overrated. In peacetime professional armies, everybody tends do undergo endless series of courses, usually labelled Advanced or Modern. This - much like Red Tape - is a peacetime phenonema. Speaking the above mentioned facts in evidence, concerning line infantry, it does appear as if the wartime standards (6, 12 and 18 weeks generally speaking) are quite sufficient. Tactical behaviour is not necessarily evidence of training. Even among elite light infantry such as these paras (indeed German and US alike) the tendency to bunch up was epidemic. Guys huddle up when threatened. You read it in all accounts, of all nations. You see it on documentary reels from the war, the Korean war, the Vietnam war, always the men are bunching up and always the NCOs bark at them to spread out. Seems international and inevitable. The scene on the road in operation Market Garden was dominated by the simultaneous insight of every man in the column, that their Lt was about to get himself shot, walking in the middle of the road. It is not unreasonable to assume they might have lost focus on spacing. I for one was surprised to see how spread out the men were in the Bastogne patrol in another episode, seeing as the book clearly describes them as totally bunched up. Easy company, which at all times contained a core of very thoroughly trained men, indeed bunches up on a number of occasions during their brief war (by German standards), even under enemy fire, and make a series of other tactical blunders. Like bayoneting eachother. Some mistakes due to pressure, others due to bad leadership, and some simply because of the combat endemic confusion, or combat fatigue. I like the BoB series, though I don't think the main motive producing it was to display combat or behaviour in combat. Or even depict real events (the series diverges from the book on quite a few occasions). MHO is that you're partially correct in your assumption that the Silver Screen requires another reality than ours (thus far shooting from the hip etc). But perhaps partially also wrong, insofar that the men - or rather, the kids - of Easy company, according to themselves, very often did not behave tactically correct. Or even tactically sound. They did bunch up. They did chat and even smoke during patrols and excercised other reckless, dangerous behaviours. Cheers D

King's idea is good. Too bad you can't pit US vs US, since that would allow you to create a german Special Forces unit in US uniforms, fluent in (US) english, connecting the story to several actual german operations during the war. At any rate, you can use any of a large number of commando raids actually performed during the war, for OOB. If you want it larger scale, just simulate an invasion. You can use the landings and paradrops in and around Narvik, and adjoining archipelago, as a model. The area is not entirely unsimilar. Cheers D.

1. You write posts on this forum. 2. You are reading a book using correct foreign abbreviations for handheld automatic weapon systems more than 50 years old. 3. You're an engineer. Plus of course you have a very masculine approach to written expression. You use no capital letter att he beginning of sentences, nor dots at the end, and you get straight to your point, delivering it with absolute minimum keyboard strokes. Seriously, there are no females in here, nor has there ever been any, ever, throughout all these years. A Grognard who has Outed is 100% female repellant. You can relax, put your feet up, and be yourself in here. Cheers D

Maschinepistole. In text correctly abbreviated MPi, as Mr Sudowudo points out. The term "Schmeisser" stems from the first world war. As with so many nicknames. Actually the MPi 40 had quite a few ties to the Schmeisser brothers. Making the international (rather than specifically American) pseudonym "Schmeisser" rather reasonable. First of all, the MPi 18 of the Great War was widely internationally known and recognised (in spite of it appearing in very few numbers). Although called "Bergmann" (it being produced at the Bergman weapons factory, the employers of the Schmeisser brothers at the time) it was - for reasons eluding me - nonetheless known to a wide public as a Hugo Schmeisser design, and sometimes also referred as a "Schmeisser". The MPi 38 and following designs - being a ERMA (Erfurt Maschinefabrik) design - all used the characteristic stick magazine of the Mpi 18, which indeed was a Schmeisser design. Be it most unwilling, as he had initially insisted on the (then) more conventional box magazine. And Luis Schmeisser did design the MPi 41. Both "Bergmann" and "Schmeisser" could pass as international colloquial terms for german SMGs between and during the wars. Because of the weapon used in WWI. Same goes for MG34/42. Both were internationally referred to as "Spandau" machineguns. It was however a Rheinmetall design. Spandau was the international (the Brits started it I think) nickname for the German "08" in the Great War. It simply passed on to the next generation machineguns. And as with MG34/42, the 08 had absolutely nothing to do with Spandau. Same goes for the german aircraftmounted MGs, and so on and so on. I suspect the British to be behind most of these catchy nicknames. And faulty or not per se, they are all quite evocative. Which must have been the point. Cheers Dandelion

Yes, same animal, the biggest of the tigers. And you can say "Bengaltiger" or in German as well. But it doesn't have quite the same ring to it. "King Tiger" is quite understandable. "Royal Tiger", another common translation of Königstiger, is a bit further down the road isn't it? Cheers D

Thanks everybody, the little ones name is Sibel but I usually call her Decibel as she's quite a loud little demon I must say She's quieting down tho, get's better every week. She's just 7 weeks so far. The original Carentan CMBO operation had many virtues as playable (not all would agree) but made quite extensive compromises with historical accuracy. I found that every step back in that compromise led to a corresponding degree of lack of playability. This not just referring to correct sizes of formations, armament, terrain and distances - even the landscape as such in a topographical sense (as far as you can come using the CM terrain of course - you can never actually recreate the claustrophobic nature of the terrain in question, nor is it in any ay possible to recreate Norman villages or towns). The Elephantiasis is quite inherent, if starting with the same ambition as the original Operation it will rapidly grow quite beyond control in all asepcts. You know Carentan herself, as I found out, looks humble enough in life, as it does on a postcard or a wartime map, but projected unto a CM map it turns out to be quite a large town. Of course, there was very little fighting to speak of within the urban area itself IRL, but what is a Carentan Operation without a visible Carentan... The workable alternatives would be to either choose hotspots for scenarios, or narrow down the Operation idea. Perhaps focus the Operation on following the progress of a particular participating battallion or company. It gets easier with time. At first your scenario situation is a handful of Paras of both nationalities acting rather confused and having a number of small clashes, many of which revolve around a German machinegun blocking a road. This makes for challening designs as you'll only have a bunch of lightly armed infantry on both sides, in a sluggish and difficult terrain (and machineguns are not quite as deadly and dominant as they were IRL, are they now). Given the normal absence of support and the mutually high quality infantry, I found it extremely challenging to create anything that would not wind up in a rather boring static shootout, all ending a few minútes into battle when all infantry have emptied their magazines - or be equally boring onesided affairs. You can of course introduce tanks in their actual order of appearance in the battle but as the German paras had scarcely any antitank weaponry at all this hardly makes the design situaton any easier. As the relatively heavily armed SS arrive, and the fight moves to the semi-open landscape of Hill 30 with surroundings, your odds creating a fluent interesting Operation improve. But the battle for Hill 30 is of course merely the final chapter of this interesting operation. It is normally the fate of v.d. Heydte and his illoustrous crew rather than the somewhat anonymous 17th that catches peoples attention, and all of that'd be lost. Were I to have another go at it, I would have probably narrowed it down to an operation following the (mis)fortunes of one of the German para battallions. That'd take the battle about the same stretch as the original Operation, but using a much narrower corridor of actual terrain and, unfortunately perhaps, a much thinner list of participating units and weapon systems. And this time I'd draw the bloody map by hand first... Operation Crusader, right. I'll have a dig. Cheers D