Dandelion

Understandable frustration. But it is also very daring to use the Wasp in a tactical and fluid battle. Very daring indeed if you rested the responsibility of a flank on her performance in this alien role. She's really a siege weaponsystem. Or bunker-buster if one prefers that expression. Just like her German counterparts. I wonder what your opponent thought of this affaire. He must have been very confused at the continued rolling to and fro of this vehicle. Considering the drastic lack of protection: I'm pretty amazed they used them at all. Of course, assaulting with a flame equipped SPW system isn't a too encouraging prospect either. Rear of a bunker or at the side of a house where you can surpress the enemy is where they will both be best deployed. Regards Dandelion

Lee, So what's your story then? An Irishman in Texas? I thought all of them migrated to the Boston-NY-Chicago triangle, and tended to stay around there? What was the motive for migrating to Texas? Seems awfully warm for Irishmen to me, and it's not reputed for it's rich soil either, so it can't have been that luring the Irish farmhands down there. Oil industry? Cattle? Regards Dandelion

There, Now I'm back in prequel identity profile Your all Dandelion

Hey it worked. Actually, it worked after I had changed for an older model driver, namely from the latest 43something to an older, 40.72. And suddenly all problems were gone. Odd, not? Thought I'd write it here in case anyone ever has the same weird white-turns-tranpsarent problem. Cheers all Dandelion

Soveriegn disinterest in graphic appearance is a mark of a Bona Fide Grognard Regards Dandelion [ May 05, 2003, 09:52 AM: Message edited by: Dandelion ]

That's what I thought initially too, but eventually it makes perfect sense. Cheerio Dandelion

It's from a series of photo's of the US 7th armoured division. The vehicles displayed here are from 40th Tank Bn of that division. It is taken near St Vith, as has been pointed out already, immediately after the US counterattack in that area. It's cold alright, but what is a little difficult to see here is that they are all painted with whitewash, creating that totally-frozen appearance. Closer inspection will reveal that they have snow only on their flat surfaces, such as the turret roof and so on. The same series of photo's display infantrymen of the division, wearing white snow smocks. Including pants. One rarely sees Americans in snow smocks on photo. Most helmets are painted with whitewash too. Another photo displays an American tanker, admiring the ruins of St Vith, who has obviously somehow been able to steal an American Pilots jacket. Looks real warm. I'm amazed he'd let himself be photographed in it. Especially as these photo's were published. But then again one cannot see his face. It is interesting not least to compare with another series of high quality colour snapshots, taken at about the same date. This series display US paras - doesn't say which unit in my source here - in the French alps. They're out excercising some. What's interesting is that they are also wearing snow smocks, but from an entirely different cut than the 7th Amd infantrymen. Looks like real coats rather than overalls, with fur lining even. It has a hood with fur lining too. The Paras have skis on some photos, but at the risk of hurting a lot of feelings, one really really gets the impression that they'd be far better of walking Perhaps they're Texan then? Looks like real nice skis though. Nothing like the German standard issue wooden planks. Americans were always so spoiled with equipment (no Lee, we'll not discuss Panthers right now ) Wait a minute. Didn't they send the Texan division to fight in the Italian mountains? You know where it's really, really cold in winter, so cold your eyelids grow small icicles. And where temperatures never reach teen calibre in the summer... That's interesting. Did Eisenhower ever make any statements concerning Texans, like how he felt about them? Cheerio Dandelion

Ron, I've done some testing and equations here and am now able to reach a few conclusions. The basic formula the computer uses is adding all points earned for both sides and then calculating each sides share of them. So if I destroy 50 VP and my enemy destroys 150 VP, the AI sums up to 200 VP and calculate shares, with an end result of a 75-25 victory for my opponent. Exactly as you described, in other words. This is regardless of force sizes. Meaning that a larger force can theoretically loose more than it is possible to gain from a smaller foe. But that's ignoring many other variables of course. It was a bit of a (pleasant) surprise to me, who have played all these years believing the AI calculated potentials and used these as base. The "casualty value" of a unit seems integral to the "exit denial" value. My tests show that if a vehicle is denied exit, or destroyed and thus also denied exit, the amount of points awarded to the foe is the same. Thus I guess one should see it as a combined casualty-exit denial value. This was also quite a revolutionary discovery for me, and quite pleasing too. The exact relation between "casualty value" and "exit/exit denial value" is not possible to pinpoint. In my tests it has ranged from 1,5 to 4, with exit values always higher. I have not been able to identify the variable explaining this. Nor have I been able to pinpoint the exact relation between vehicle and crew casualty values. It also seems to vary, and again there must be a variable I am missing. But of course one can run any number of tests to trace those variables too. Regards Dandelion [ May 04, 2003, 04:49 PM: Message edited by: Dandelion ]

Ah, I see, I think I'm getting it. Thanks again. Now, back to the drawing board. Cheers Dandelion

Thanks Ron, I am trying to design a scenario relying heavily on exited units, but just can't seem to get it to work properly. It is primarily the '100' scale that is evading my understanding. Please bare with me for some follow-ups. I'll have to use a primitive model to illustrate my problem, as I will not otherwise understand an answer Say X has a force worth a total of 100 pts. Say that Y has a force worth a total of 1000 pts. If, during the battle, a unit worth 1 pt in purchase cost is lost by both players, is it worth more or less to either of them in terms of VP? ...and, if both X and Y are conditioned to exit, say, a unit worth 1 pt in purchase, is this one point worth more or less to any of them in terms of VP? Regards Dandelion

Hi all, 1. Is the amount of VP gained for any casualty/equipment loss always equal to the "purchase" cost? 2. The manual says "[---][victory] points, which generally add up to 100" (p.102); how does the formula look, that transforms the earned VPs to a 1-100 scale? Is it merely a percentage of the total potential amount? 3. In the manual it says that exited troops are "generally worth 2-3 times the units purchase value" (also p.102). Is there a list, where one can see more specifically how much they are worth exited? Regards Dandelion

Lee, You're not wrong, I'm German. Cheers Dandelion

Lee, I can hardly remember when last I played any other nationality than German, pbem. Strangely, as I always allow my opponent to choose sides if I can. But when I do have a choice I still choose Germans. It is not a rational and logical decision really, so I'm afraid I can't surrender any useful tip for QBs. Playing the Germans, I tend to feel all other nationalities have all the advantages. Merely a subjective feeling, but not therefore any less real to me. But I don't mind the feeling. I'm not a very competetive person. I play against myself and against my historical counterpart, rather than my pbem opponent. The rationae will be the fact that I know the German army. Through and through. All I know of tactical thinking WWII I learned from them. Their manuals, studying their performance, reading their testimonies. Naturally then, their organisation and equipment fit my playing style like hand in glove. Conversely I feel awkward and clumsy playing with other nationalities. Like a guest in a house rarely visited. But I do feel a powerkick, having control of those usually much feared nameless and faceless enemies. Cheerio Dandelion

Hear hear! :mad: And hear again! :mad: I continue to express my disappointment in not seeing any patch correcting the final bugs of CM:BO. Such comparatively base errors stands in embarrassing contrast not only to the continually expressed initial ambitions of the BTC, and to the statements in the manual now re-printed and re-released. It also casts a shadow upon the BFC in the light of the devoted, loyal and wholehearted gaming community they inherited from the BTC, and that they can visit on this forum any day of the week, year round. A shadow apparently quite unseen by the concerned. Yours Sincerely Dandelion (Yes Martin, you already know my adress)

"Mahalo"? A place where Mexicans succumbed to a massive US assault in the American-Mexican war, involving among others a famous trapper named Daniel de Cucaracha? Regards Dandelion

Ron and Lee, my sincerest thanks and my return of compliment to you both. Mattias posted? What can have annoyed him enough to break radio silence, one wonders (I mean what thread?). I'll start a thread presenting my England tour, once I've sprung it on my wife here and gotten some concrete plans, and call out for all the pleasant Battlefront people who happend to live in vicinities. She'll be wanting to see a lot of that much-spoked-of countryside with stone villages and manors. And vicars and women with polo sweaters and men with Landrovers, and horses and such. And rain of course. But a beer with Andreas is of course basics in any decent England trip, so we'll have to stop by London too. There's no massive popular anti-German sentiment in the UK due to the various political rows is there? :confused: Your Dandelion

Hey they published my review. Right above the Scooby Doo review totally sawing CMBO by the ankles. That'll be confusing for the readers

Martin, As I've written that in three recent threads already, and you're an administrator, I get the feeling you already know, and that your question is intended to suggest something to me. But it's no fun as I don't get it. You're with the BFC and are planning to visit me and murder me as the BFC is now fed up with my nagging? Europeans should not write reviews for US domestic market products? What? Hey wait a minute. You're not Dane are you? Does the name Carisius mean anything to you? Regards Dandelion

Sanman I do prefer monster operations, the bigger the better (if it includes allowed time also). My machine is all rubber. It's just that I am one of those semi-retarded people who are unable to enjoy anything but historically accurate operations So, dive deep in research and gimme such a one, and I'll play it anytime. Regards Dandelion

Yeah I wrote one too, that will convince all those of like mind to mine. If it is published. I was of course using lots of words as usual. ...and I still insist Battlefront should release or sell a patch fixing accuracy and machineguns for CMBO. I'll keep nagging until they either strangle me or do. Regards Dandelion

Guess who just stopped by and always play German. :cool: Yes, these are normal amounts of HE. The Germans weren't short of HE, but they did not believe in using armour to kill infantry as a rule. Nor did they ever use Panzers in infantry support roles. That was the job of the infantry (and supporting them were infantry artillery such as assault guns and to some extent SPA, although the SPA were actually primarily PD elements also). Panzers and assault halftracks were found only in Panzer Divisions (and independent Corps or Army units, and a handful of independent brigades). Panzer Divisions were intended for battling enemy equivalents. It was a finished concept for which vehicles were purpouse designed, built and equipped to fit. It was just like the British Infantry Tank - Cruiser Tank dicotomy, except the German Infantry Tanks were not really tanks, but StuGs. I believe you'll find few HE in cruiser tanks also. Although Mattias can give more exact figures, my qualified guess is that Battlefront are being slightly too generous with HE for German Panzer Division elements as it is. Which would be a reasonable playability concession. But HE was intended only for self defence and the destruction of encountered enemy PaK. And other antitank systems of course. Hey Lee, is this Moneymaxx guy, who is having such pun with words, the one who keeps defeating you? No wonder you have that feverish ambition. I can see how this will eventually break a man down completely

Lee, Generally, combat is a series of combinations of firepower, movement and protection. It is a zero-sum game, as you raise one you decrease the other. Master military minds know - by education or instinct - exactly the right combination for each occasion. Myself I am a dilletant, and tend to always lean toward protection and firepower, sacrificing mobility if I must (and I must). That was a complicated way of saying that if you run, you gain speed, but loose protection and firepower, and I find the exchange unfavourable. Not that I never run. I just avoid it if I can. About pace: My normal advance speed with the main body of troops is actually move command, or sneak if need be. The time limit of scenarios can stress me into running, but I truly detest it. The men being tired reduces not only capacity, but also firepower and morale. It can become that small edge the enemy needs to win a contact. Scouts advance in the pace allowed by terrain. I fear for their safety, so yes I sneak and crawl a lot. I also sit still a lot and can spend a minute like that with one or more of them, watching and listening. Spotting capacity increases when they sit still, I think quite dramatically so. In the case of deep penetration scouts, I also use loops every now and then while infiltrating, meaning the men advance in half a circle forward and then observe rear. Anybody following me will be detected. Yes, it happeneds that they follow me, the devious little monsters Deep penetration scouts I position where they can monitor a key point and preferrably I do not move them again for the duration of the game. Even a very short strip of key road monitored will reveal everyone using the road. All of this takes time of course, and again it is the time limit of the scenario that is the ultimate regulator of scouting capacity. I start any game with the sending out of scouts, as it takes a few turns just to deploy the main body of troops intelligently for an orderly advance. Of course, there is such a thing as combat recon too, where one simply darts down a road until contact. That is the other extreme, used when I am very stressed. I don't like it, but it's better than having the main body run into the ambushes. This on infantry. Motor reconnaissance is an armoured formation thing, and we haven't even begun discussing motorised operations yet About support: Support moves slowly and this is frustrating. That's what I meant with not agreeing that the added punch of 81mm makes up for the sad mobility - I'd much rather have US 6cm mortars and I admire the British knee mortars for their usefulness. But I feel I really need support, even when so slow, so I am forced to adapt. I advance in leaps, usually about 150-300 long. I try and identify a good defensive position and use it as objective, so the advance is more like moving into new positions. Normally, I will have scouted ahead and know what to expect, or just about anyway. So the advance is either opposed, harassed or unopposed in my reckoning. Unopposed is no problem, support can't quite keep up but they jog along with the others. Upon reaching new positions, the main body awaits their catching up. Harassed means weak enemy forces are in my way. I use rapid combat advance with the alternating squad movement that we've discussed. Support has no role in such a running battle, and so they tag along, again falling behind and again being awaited at objective. Opposed is attacking enemy positions. Advance is slow, alternating movement and using primarily sneak (but I crawl a lot too). So support has no problem keeping up. Immediately upon contact, support is deployed. I treasure company support, they give me the edge needed to create local superiority. One 81mm shell landing close to an enemy squad changes everything. And the smoke enables crossings of open ground under fire and can immediately disarm an extremely threatening situation, allowing me to depart. As for machineguns, I think the thing I like about them most (as they are really grossly underestimated in the CMBO engine) is their capacity to engage and pin large enemy forces. They can easily keep an entire enemy platoon quite busy (if not too close) and hinder them from intervening effectively at a critical point in space and time. And they easily stop enemies advancing in the open, forcing them to crawl, again denying area and time to the enemy. About High and Low line: High line means creasts, summits, second floors and other dominant places from where you can project your firepower freely, causing damage and denying enemy freedom of mobility. The Panther did this to you in your recent scenario. If you are inferior in firepower and try doing this, you will only put yourself in a position where everyone can and will kill you from all over the map. Low line is reverse slope, bottom floors, depressions, river valleys and gullies. Any place where it is impossible to see you from afar really. In order to kill you, the enemy must close in, thus exposing himself to your point blank fire (where your inferiority will be less noticeable and your first salvoe invaluable as edge) and he will be unable to take you out at long range with heavier barrels than yours. You can both defend and advance in High and low. Advancing in Low means crawling a lot, using gullies and so forth. Advancing high means not caring about crossing escarpments, creasts or other very dangerous stuff. About second lines and firepower in defense: The second line I use is a direct adoption of the German "Aufnahmelinie". It's not a defensive line as such, as it is manned only by support units (mortars, spotters etc) plus some close protection (machineguns, mayhap antitank). As a battle progresses, scattered and shattered units routing from the HKL - MLR in English - will fall back upon this line and also man it. Inevitable enemy penetrations will be halted here and prevented from rolling up your line by flanking thrust. When things get serious and you have to pull out all along the line, everyone can fall back to this line and hold it, while a new proper line is prepared behind it. So it is a bit like that metal rod that you Americans have along your bars, where people rest their feet. You can't rest both feet there, but it can still be important for balance as night falls I do use two proper defensive lines if I can though. As defender, I will be inferior in firepower (or the enemy will not attack). Thus regardless of how much I put up front, he will be stronger. The balance between the three combat elements then shifts over from firepower to protection for me instead. The enemy can use his firepower on your front. Artillery and aircraft can project it into your rear as well, but players (in my experience and including me) tend to want concrete results and not use harassing or anti-movement fire, so most of that will be spent on your front as well. You don't want to get hit by this irestorm. So by deploying the way I mentioned, with frontal protection, limited field of fire et cetera, you are in effect reducing the front along which it is meaningful for the enemy to project his firepower. Or even eliminating it, as is the case with successful flanking fire and reverse slope positions. This way, you negate his advantage in power. Having a second defensive line is much the same logic. The first line then only blunts and reduces his onslaught, it does not actually stop it. So you don't want precious antitank weapons and the like there, as they will be overrun. Weakened, with a lot of already spent firepower and with support lagging behind, he breaks through to your second line of rested, well placed troops. Works really well, but I almost never get enough troops and narrow frontage enough to do this. Regards Dandelion Phew, that's my longets post ever I believe. Now I'll go watch some TV. Brendan, you're not reading this are you?

Ron, I was not offended. Reading your post, and then re-reading my own post above, I can clearly see why you think I was, and I wish to apologise. My text looks argumentative and quarrelish to me now, and I am not sure how I conceived this goblin. The intent was to be camaraderish and relaxed, challenging you to solve Lee's impossible problem or to concede defeat, and as you can see it was written immediately after my other post above it, which I think in a more detectable manner relays how tired and giggle-ish I was at the time. I think I'll not use numbered lists or jokes about sending files when in the future I wish to come through as a friendly person. It just seemed practical at the time. I am natively German and Swedish speaking, having roots, family and history in primarily these countries. Dandelion is a translation of my mothers maiden name, Löwenzahn. First name is Tommy and Maurice (Moritz to Germans) in that order. But I use them alternatively myself and my circle of friends and family do likewise. Now we have been properly introduced But I am uncertain as to whether my background can explain how it is that I am slowly losing my grip completely on not only contemporary English, but even basic cultural understanding of English communication. Since moving East and working with EU or domestic issues, English has fallen into disuse, and I never meet any British anymore. Used to encounter them regularly and always took the opportunity to have a chat if I could. But years go by, and suddenly I find that I don't understand part of the texts posted here (lexically I do, but not the real meaning), and you are not the first native Englishspeaker to find me unpleasant when I did not desire it. My language is becoming increasingly archaic and intermixed with German grammar and clause elements. Time for a trip to England I guess. Haven't been there for years. My wife is a hopeless Anglophile, able to qouote any Shakespear play like running water - and she's a Jane Austen fan as well. She always talks about the English countryside. But we've never been there together. Looks like a good idea to do something about it. Regards and again my apologies Dandelion

"failing to provide an AAR for the ROW tourneys" LOL! What's this ROW business that people keep mentioning? Thanks for the update King, English for non native speakers can be a minefield of unknown subtleties. One picks up slang perhaps creating the illusion to natives of ones better understanding of his language than is actually the case, thus persuading him refuse to accept that one does not really understand the subtle and underlying meanings he has assumed one is using. It can be as trivial as an adress. I had posts deleted from the BBC debate board for using Sir and Mr too often. Admins told me I was using inflammatory language, being superior and sarcastic simply by using Sir and Mr too often in my texts. It really (again) made me seriously insecure in contacts with Brits. In what other ways was I insulting them when trying to be nice? The BBC never answer questions, so I asked the British Consule here how I should properly adress my British peers and elders in a conversation, if I do not know them and they are generally older than I. And the Consulate answered "With 'Sir', Sir". I still haven't figured that one out, but I am convinced it all makes perfect logic to Englishmen. I was banned altogether from an American forum for asking a man if he was a patriot. It turns out there is a KKK group calling themselves this, making much noise at the time, and everybody knew this except me and everybody assumed I was making reference to them, and thus insulting the poor fellow. I had to write the man personally to explain, and then he got me back in. An Australian pen-pal of mine wrote me that he felt uneasy with my calling him Sir (he's twice my age) and felt it a bit haughty, reaffirming his prejudice of many Europeans being snobs. He found it much nicer when I just called him Tom, even when we first met in Prague, all four (with wives) lost in a suburb and having an amusing adventure finding our way back. Problem is, calling my elders by first name on the first meeting would be so uncouth that in fact I have severe feelings of shame when adapting to not saying it even knowing how Tom perceives things. One never really learns a foreign language. Thus I say Lingua Franca English speakers must have lots of slack in the stop-bad-language rules. So to the administrators I would like to suggest: 1. If a Lingua Franca Englishspeaker ever appear to be using offensive or abusive language, they are probably not aware of it and are using it in the meaning found in a dictionairy. 2. If a Lingua Franca Englishspeaker ever appear uncouth, it probably is involontary and will stem from shortcomings in their contemporary English. 3. If You ever feel a Lingua Franca Englishspeaker is about to be banned, please grant them the benefit of doubt. Regards Dandelion

Thanks Lee, anytime. It's German line of thought but I can't see why it wouldn't work with Americans. I assume you'll be having questions, as I am being brief, and if you do just shoot. No pun intended. Some other thoughts about stuff that actually works came to mind at breakfast. I was thinking about a much admired opponent that I had several years ago. In any scenario, there is a time limit and this is usually cut surprisingly short. Time to deploy intelligently, to scout and probe positions and utilise detected weakness, is in very short supply at best. Especially when forced to deploy in curious positions by the deigner. My opponent noted this and therefore always performed delaying actions in defense. He used two basic methods, extreme range combat and ambush. Ambushes rarely succeeded (I scout a lot) but their presence slowed me down. The extreme range combat caused no casualties, but it actually caused delay and confusion. Someone got pinned here, a thinskin vehicle replotted orders there, and I got jumpy. It also inevitably angers you to receive fire minute after minute without being able to reply. Anger is a fearful enemy. I adopted these methods and use them with in my opinion good effect. He also used pickets, another method I found so successful that I adopted it. With pickets I mean platoons (will work with single squad in small scenarios if regular or better) positioned in ambush well ahead of your defensive position (300 meters is a good norm I think). They have several purposes. One is to ambush enemy scouts. Another is stationary reconnaissance, monitoring enemy advance (but mobile patrols do this better). Another is to lure an advancing enemy into believing he has encountered your HKL - MLR in English - and waste a lot of artillery on you. The latter will only work if the former two are successful. A picket I evacuate immediately after first contact, as he used to do, regardless of success in that contact. If available, vehicles will be positioned rear of the position and close by, ready to dart off. Staying is dying. He also taught me never to believe what I see. His master deception was provoking me to attack an almost empty position, with his real deployment in my flank, resulting in massacre. It was severely humiliating. He achieved this by deploying perhaps two platoons along a 600 or so meter front, in terrain very suitable for defense. He split them into half-squads and spread them thin. As I advanced, he opened up with every one at extreme range, some 700 meters. At this range I was unable to identify targets, and from my end it looked like every team and command team were full squads. I could only assume there were more of them, not firing. With the width of his front corresponding to one company normal maximum defense width, or two companies comfortable defense width, it had all appearance of being his main position. I carefully planned and executed the attack. Artillery, smoke and the works. And then I was mowed down by withering flanking fire, with my support so placed that it could not intervene. It was experiences like this that made me such a fanatic scouter. This opponent was a Royal (yes I now know it's not actually Royal) Army officer. Then he got a civilian job, and then he got promoted on that job and since years no longer has time to play. A sad day for CMBO and myself. Regards Dandelion