Mad Russian

The saving grace for all Glantz books is the index. If you are looking for something specific you can find it. His books are histories and as such are "dry reading".

I just uploaded two Normandy operations at The Scenario Depot II. They are HSG N First Town Liberated and HSG N Battle at Vire. Enjoy.

Panzertruppen won't even mention non-tank AFV's in the OOB listings.

If you do a search for them by title and author you may find them used. There is another Soviet memoir that I particularly like..."The End of the Third Reich" by V.I. Chuikov, Marshal of the Soviet Union This book is more than likely out of print as well but it would be worth the time and effort to track it down. Good luck on your search.

All of the CMAK HSG scenarios on The Scenario Depot II with an N in the title are Normandy battles. http://www.the-scenario-depot.com/index.html Enjoy!!

Looks like what I've been needing. Thanks for all the effort.

I have used the books in the series for scenarios. I don't use them for primary sources of information if there are other sources but they are often fairly accurate on German forces. They aren't normally too accurate on Allied forces mentioned in the accounts. No maps and a complete lack of any reference or research material makes them next to impossible to use as the basic source of a historical scenario though.

H2H or vs AI scenario?

I think the action you are talking about happened on the Kerch peninsula.

How can a sound contact be compared to an ASL "?" with any real sense of accuracy? In ASL I can see the entire map. I know exactly where your units aren't. In CM the sound contact can be coming from the wrong direction and you have no idea where the real unit is. With a "?" stack I know exactly where they are. There may not be anything in there but I know where they are to fire at them with pinpoint accuracy. Yes, very different games. Neither of them is perfect. The dividing line is whether or not you like CM better than ASL. For me, CM does a better job of doing what I am looking for in a tactical WWII combat game.

It's one of Runes scenarios. That explains everything... :eek:

Where would one find this marvel of design work? You never mention where you got the scenario.

Ice will support troops not any vehicles. The temperature doesn't matter. It's the ice that matters. All troops, no vehicles. Hope this helps.

Actually a concern for me would be that I have uploaded newer versions of most of my work that used to be on the old Scenario Depot. If you upload it now it may overwrite the files I have that are the upgraded versions. I'd rather we didn't do that.

I am doing as George Mc. I am going through all my old scenarios. Those that are good enough are being posted. Those that aren't are either being upgraded or will not be posted at all. If you post my old scenarios on the site will I be able to delete them? That would allow you to go ahead and load the entire spreadsheet and I can delete any of mine that were at the old site. If I won't be able to delete them, then I don't want them loaded to the site in the first place. Most, if not all, of them need to be reworked to my current standards.

You are 100% correct. In either CM battles or operations, the object of the scenario is to fight. You know that going in. You also assume some sort of a balance to make it interesting for both gamers if it is a H2H game. In CMC the situation will be much more representative of "normal" combat. The battles and operations represent what they are our attempts to find, identify and model those actions that meet the balance issue. Whether they are historically based or fictional. Most combat isn't like that. It's based on an imbalance of forces. As you pointed out the defense is trying to be too strong and the attacker is trying to be overpowering. CMC should see those types of battles develop.And they should show the absolute requirement for a reserve of some sort for when you get into trouble. Can't wait for it to get here.

I just realized that I didn't do the Soviet side of the AAR for this. There are multiple reasons that I think this wasn't a quality playtest. None of that matters. Jason wanted to know if the scenario could be won by the German forces as they were. I agreed to playtest it against him to find out. I made a bad assumption that I could seperate his infantry and stop the attack forcing the armor to then have to try to take the objectives with vehicle strength only. That wasn't accurate. I thought that since the PxIII's only had 50mm guns that I could withstand their fire long enought to take out his infantry. That wasn't correct. The tanks were the key weapon of the battle and I let them roam free by design. So, Jason's goal was met. We proved without a shadow of a doubt that the scenario can be won by the Germans. For those knowing nothing of the forces or setup though, IMO, it would be very hard to take the objective. This is another of those sceanrios that you could play several times to "get it right"! It should prove a very good tutorial for German combined arms tactics as well as for Soviet engineers. Good learning experience for me. I'll be much more careful of the lower gunned AFV's from now on.

Give the HSG scenarios a try.(proud plug) They are all historcally based. The Knight's Cross (KC) series are mostly for vs AI play as well. That will give you somewhere to start. By the end of the week there will be more scenarios there than you will be able to play in this lifetime.

ROFL!!! Don't recommend me for any awards GJK is the force behind the new and improved Scenario Depot! Looks good so far as I can tell! Now all we need is a bit of time for some scenarios to start getting ratings and the whole system will be back in place.

Thanks stoat. I've adjusted the defense to cover that right flank attack. For some reason it was the only avenue of attack that I didn't check. The KC scenarios are known for being competitive not easy. So I'll do some playtesting on this new wrinkle and my adjustments to see if I can still beat it. I want it tough not impossible. Thanks for your comments. I appreciate it.

The scenario depot is back TODAY!! Try this on for size... http://www.the-scenario-depot.com/index.html and download to your hearts content.

I know what you mean. I don't care for them either. That's why I worked long and hard at the scoring on these. The flags mean nothing to the scoring and the Germans are expected to take losses so that is taken into account. The AI didn't seem to do much against you in this one though. I'll be interested in seein the AAR to see why. Do you have an end of game file maybe? Thanks for your comments.

ROFL!!! I'll take what I can get. I would take a full fledged AAR if you want to do one. If not I'll take the comments you did make and be glad I got those. A force bonus isn't near the same as giving the computer the experience bonus. The AI acts halfway decent with the experience bonus. With 75% more troops it is just 75% more lost. No more aggessive, no more staying power just more of the same. With the CEB the AI changes it's game play. You might try using a CEB in the future. Thanks for the comments. Happy New Year!

Did you use a Computer Experience Bonus? If so what was it? Thanks for the AAR.

Thanks David! Great work as always! Those will look good with the two new KC scenarios I just released. They both take place in Normandy!! Happy New Year!!