DavidFields

McIvan: thank you, and that is the "point" of tactical movement, of course. (I assume you mean "hours" or "days", instead of years.) Bloody unpleasant to be on the losing side. Costard: you make an excellent point. It is essentially anachronistic to think about modern communication, when hand signals, from people without body armor, were normal. (Anyone else freak a bit seeing WW2 movies with soldiers in fabric, compared to Middle Ages and current body armor?) Adam: The deciding factor being?

JasonC's post on realistic 1941 battles gave me a thought (but I won't clutter up his thread with it): How much of the "action" that, say, AFVs saw was not even a battle, but a slaughter? Given a fixed position, or presumed hostile structure, with inadequate anti-tank defenses, wouldn't the successful tactic be to just stay at distance and heave HE until the position was pulverized? An unbalanced slaughter, is, after all, the ultimate tactical military goal. My guess would be such actions were common. But since it is no "fun" to play them, we thus undervalue a unit such as the MkIV--a good, mobile, HE chucker which is immune to most junk weaponry. (On a similar vein, could tanks that had radios rely on distant infantry spotters to direct their fire? I was watching yet another "Hollywood German assault"--you know, a few tanks, with a bunch of infantry running next to them, over an open field, and they get all shot up and retreat. I was thinking how unnecessary it was for the infantry to be there--except to spot for the tanks. I know the commander can be unbuttoned, and I think I recall AFVs having some sort of phone for someone riding on, or next to, the tank. But those are both hazardous ways of spotting. Did they ever have a set-up, like with indirect artillery, where infantry, in cover, in a place with good line of sight, with binoculars, radioed spotting instructions?)

Yes, another very well presented AAR. Discussions on tactics can be so tricky before the outcome is known: "splitting forces to feint or flank" looks great when it succeeds, and is just "splitting the forces" if it does not. (Just as "surrounding" an adversary can be renamed "giving the enemy good lines of internal communications" if the action is unsuccessful.) I will be interested to see if your opponent is tempted to move his Tigers a lot. The defense, and the likely attack, of the woods his infantry is in, might be the most critical technical exercize in this battle. Not an easy situation.........but you always seem up to the challange.

Saw Defiance today. Though I am not Jewish, saw it in a special showing with just about everyone else in the theatre being so. Wonderful movie. But it stops me, for awhile, playing simulations like this. I kept thinking.....the Germans actually have better tactical doctine than seen in the movie....then feeling terrible about the thought, and what happened after the front-line moved forward. The Soviets, I think, actually came off rather well in this film. DF

Besides the weakness in the AI, I believe that Russian tank crews in 1941 are fairly inexperienced--and thus will be non-agressive. Thus the typical 1941 scenario: maneuvering Germans versus timid Russians--with a KV or 2 thrown into the Russian mix to at least make the Germans nervous. (and a Russian SMG or two, as a "nuke" threat to over-eager geman infantry at close quarters.

The usual counter against guns are mortars. Medium size.....even the tiny ones can be effective. It helps that most people put their guns in woods, so you get treebursts. And I don't think those 150mm infantry guns are very stealthy (unlike the Flak guns in the Crete operation, Descent on Maleme--I still have nightmares hearing but not seeing those things) So you might even be able to trick you opponent into firing at some infantry at range, with a motar/HQ combo of yours overwatching and making a deadly counterstroke.

I had the same problem, solved by the suggestion from MeatEtr. (Once I figured out that "GDF" was General Discussion Forum)

I don't use the grid mods, purely for aesthetic reasons. Certainly don't think it is unfair to use them--seeing the elevations/dips better (without so much eye strain) is certainly tempting. Similarly, for immersive reasons, I try to keep the trees as dense as possible, without it becoming too annoying at finding units. And sizing the units as small as possible (but, nevertheless, keep the "bases" on--again, to minimize the effort of finding units.) There are so many mods and possible customizations with this game, and the power of habits is so strong, that we would likely be "shocked" by the differences if we looked at someone else's monitor of the exact same map/file.

Of course, 42 in base 10 is 33 in base 13...but you all knew that. 101010....

I have no stake in the FT tank issue, but I was amused by the: "The Flammwagen had adroitly crept up on an enemy tank..." I am in no way doubting the source, but I could not keep the picture of a tank tip-toeing in the dark....quietly.....when it heard a sound, stopping, then "adroitly" creeping up to squirt the sleeping enemy tank. Really, were Flammwagen's that quiet? Maybe the enemy crew was off somewhere else? And the "88mm Flak fired at firing slits of a bunker for an hour..."--I am not looking forward to that ever being made into a scenario. File that under: war, indeed, is often tedious. Meanwhile, wasn't there an AAR going on when this fight broke out? Get the hooligans off the field, and let's get back to the game!

Ok, at the risk of asking a question that has likely recently been answered: In real life, did the Russian SMGs in 1941 cut through german squads in the woods as they do in CM? I would think the tactic for the german troops in the woods would be to stay behind large trees, close, and then pop out and take a shot--not a tactic that can be well represented with this game engine. Again, in the german troops are in good cover, the Russians could poor thousands of rounds at them and cause no casualties--which is not going to occur with CM algorithms. Although, to get to another threads questions about how realistic CM is, the tactical counters proposed on these boards in CM still seem reasonably realistic.

[double-post]

This would be my approach to answering the question: It is a realistic enough simulation such that real life tactics usually produce the best results. I think that is about the most we can ask for in a computer simulation. It is not realistic in the sense of not having the gore, tedium, pee-in-the-pants fear, and barbarity of the real thing. Whenever I start noticing simulation quirks, I figure it is time for me to go off and play something else....like Harpoon 3, or Europa Universalis II, or...heaven-help-me, Everquest 2. Then I can come back to CM with newly-novice (as far as game-mechanic-manipulation) eyes. It may make me a better "player" to know that...some AFVs may, as an odd game engine thing, be more vulnerable when hull down. But from a realism stand-point, I don't really want to remember/know that. [ May 13, 2008, 02:53 PM: Message edited by: Rankorian ]

Wow.....I know see one good effect of both sides having substantial number of heavy armor pieces--one duel does not decide an entire scenario. I just did not understand how many units you both had at the start--what a rollicking battle from A to C to B. Have I kept track correctly, that you have not lost an AFV? I would think that a couple of more AFV losses for him, and he will be in danger of being overwhelmed--his running his T-34s back and forth between C and B presages this. The Tac-AI will have his units skipping around between targets, which will reduce his effectiveness against any of them. And I don't see how he can now flank your AFVs, unless you give him a "shot" when you maneuver. I am impressed he was able to get infantry units into B, but is this going to be a reverse Stalingrad? (you hope) Oh....Do We Have All Those AFVs Buttoned Now?

To give you much deserved credit, you correctly overwhelmed the SU...both with units and morale. Well done! I would have been loathed to take the risk, but I wil admit that is was probably an extremely good risk you took. So...given that there are still a lot of turns...do you let your opponent take his risks with B (and I agree that your likely have an adequate defense), or quickly press ahead with your own attack on C? Well.. my opinion, you have a crushing position. Bring up your AFVs on C, with your infantry in the woods, pound him senseless....I do not see counter stategy for your opponent.

OK...as in another thread, multiple possible tactics. I went to the left. Stumbled into the infantry at the end of the field to the left (this was utterly blind, FOW). Used most of my infantry to remove that infantry and AT gun. THEN moved my Stug forward. My IG gun leveled the church, from turn one. Win: Major 74/26. Again, I can see how one might want to go right. But a side shot on the Stug or the half-track, and most people would punch for a replay

Vark, Congrats, but you have identified the issues correctly, as far as I am concerned. Moving right, if there were AT weapons positioned, your Stug/251 would have taken side hits. As the unit lie...and I would have to check this further...if the AT gun did not open up on your AFVs it might have been a "hide" issue---the AI hides its units initially, and does not always fire correctly. My query/response is this: If the AT unit had fired at the flank of your AFVs when you went right--and I think there is LOS in front of the building to the right of the set-up zone--might the result have been....unfortunate. But using smoke.....I could see how an assault to the right could be done....Kudos to the designer for allowing multiple...."practical" solutions. Could still see this at a West Point simulation seminar.

Relationships? Ummm...there are no ....relationships once starts seriously playing, or posting, on CM. Anyone disagree?

I had [now I can feel sheepish], but never really looked closely at the IG unit. Eventhough I well know, intellectually, that the motorization of the German army was limited, even near the end of the war, my brain still, evidently, does not completely "get it". The idea that a guy, in a powerful army, was really pushing an artillery unit down the road like it was a hot-dog stand at Coney Island......... spoiler....spoiler * * * * * BTW, I used the IG unit in the scenario mostly to bring down the church. I find a non-dug in IG in a close-range CM infantry environment does not last long, so this seemed like a low risk effective use for it. Not sure if that is the/a intended tactic for this scenario. Didn't like the idea of an enemy unit on the second floor of that church as I was swinging my infantry around the wooods to the left. Re: good tactics, I think this scenario shows the importance of scouting with your infantry before sending the armor in. In real life, if one scouted with the infantry and found, say, a platoon of T-34s in the village, one could retire from the area before anything got ugly. Similarly, I think advancing around the right wing, or the center/left, are just tactically wrong? Granted, depending on the force and deployment in the village, one might be able to get away with it, or blast one's way through. But the risk of anhilation appear higher to me than (regardless of the force and disposition) sweeping with the infantry to the left, slightly moving up the Stug for overwatch if it appears safe, and saving the HMG for targets of opportunity/routers (in the building to the right of the start up zone.) [ May 06, 2008, 02:28 PM: Message edited by: Rankorian ]

Not a whole lot of tactics in the turn coming up. This is where one wants to digitalize oneself, get into the AFVs, and when the aiming is correct, yell "pull the trigger, PULL THE TRIGGER". My guess is that your opponent is staring at his SU-152 thinking exactly that. I have no idea how this is going to turn out.............. If you survive, you will of course be in a very strong position, with his right flank being, in essence, broken, and you increasing your consolidation of the center.

Amazing picture. The german soldier in the middle of the picture is rolling what forward? Looks like a push cart. And are those horse drawn vehicles in the center? I like German scenarios which are mostly infantry, with a few infantry support AFVs. It seems to me this is where the German army most excelled (HMGs, Stug/MkIV support, company discipline and tactics), rather than slashing armor thrusts.

Superb writing, excellent pics. I agree that I think he has exposed enough unit points that I doubt the push to A was a feint. Gee, I like everything about your move except....hold on...you probably guessed it....pushing the Tiger and Stug up through that gap. Given the turn situation, I think you could have waited at least one more turn, will your infantry continues to nudge to your left. Wouldn't it be better if you knew where the SU was before you advanced. And if he has some residual squads near A, your tanks could be easily IDed gowing through that gap. (An alternate plan would be to swing under the woods with those units, start blasting C, and hopes that draws his armor forward to try to stop you--meanwhile, you are watching every move from the woods.) But.....I am perhaps too cautious. You will, we hope, nail the SU-152, machine gun straggling Russian infantry, and roll into the backs of those T-34s!

Wow, Tux. I had trouble getting the tractors to reverse to exactly the right place...but I can see how it is possible. At some point, the 88 is in LOS of the KV, while the tractor still is not. Unload. As to the rest, it speaks to our difference in styles. I would be too nervous about launching that motorized assault, worried about (at least, in a blind game) that there is too much tree line to suppress completely. (That being said, after multiple run-throughs I should have at least considered that tactic.) I like to maneuver my infantry, ahead of my AFVs. But then again, you already know that from my discussion in your AAR.

And it was a fun scenario. Thanks, that question was clearly answered: 88s were intentionally used as offensive AT weapons in 1941. spoiler spoiler * * * * * * * * * And, like the real AAR, my biggest puzzle was how to set up the 88s without getting them clobbered, and without the tractors reversing away from the KV each turn. (Swung the platoon around the left. Didn't move any AFV forward until the KV was neutralized--which was usually in the late teen turns. Used the 37s if the KV moved--to try to get a track hit. Moved infantry in on the flag only when my infantry platoon was organized appropriately.) Very nice scenario for both realistic tactics, ammo/armor match-ups, and deeper understanding of CM game mechanics.

Oh....spoiler...spoiler. Again, to old scenarios: Gefechtsaufklaerung. Eh...trenches under buildings? Is the cover/concealment totally from the trench? Or is there an additive effect? And if I "rubble" the church (which would be SOP for me in this situation) what are the effects? (A tactical smart scenario. One takes a reasonably historical mix of german units, and with reasonably historical tactics obtains a good result. No tricks! What a concept! Iron Roadblock: Were 88's purposely used in June, 1941 against KVs? I have no criticism here. This is a training scenario. I just wish to understand what the reality of the time was.