imported_no_one

Soft skin, *****SPOILERS***** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Let me just say that I tried to play this one PBEM as the germans.The first battle was fog,and for me it went from "oh,theres a armor sound contact",to "well,theres are a couple of t-34s",finally to "OMFG!!!"...then there were tons of burning german infantry.Moral of the story,dont play this op if it has fog in the first battle.It will be an absolute rout. That being said,there are many openings in the german defenses.The swamp,the gap between the swamp and the woods,and then there is the woods with the road through it.It may take until battle two,but focus on the woods.You have large calibre arty,and a huge attacking force.Advance through the woods until you advance the map far enough to bypass the trenches. From that point the rest is up to you,since I didnt make it that far. I was very disappointed by the restrictions the scenario designer placed on the german forces.Unfortunately I have become accustomed to this kind of thing [ July 02, 2004, 06:27 PM: Message edited by: no_one ]

Create a scen, lock TRPs, put a few heavies in the AI OOB then show them a few tanks on their TRPs. Then you'll know. Gruß Joachim </font>

Just wanted to add my two cents to this. I have discovered that after playing many assualt/advance ops in CMBB that you eventually get the hang of how the setup zones will get redrawn in the next battle. You have to keep in mind that the way it is redrawn is based on where you are at the end of a battle,and not so much where you've been. You've got to kinnda think of it as all of your forces need to be linked up at the end of the battle.If there are some forward forces,but arent in that great of numbers,and they are opposed by large numbers of enemy forces,the smaller group wont have as big of an influence on the setup zones.If you bring up additional forces,and begin to spread them out as resistance is met,you will be able to affect the setups zones better,and they will look more realistic. I was also under the impression that a defenders forces have a greater influence on the setup zones than does the attacker.This was supposed to better represent the gains of a counter-attack.I think it works pretty well once you get the hang of how it works.Just remember that when you are attacking,and lets say hill 150 is your personal objective for this battle,try and take the hill AND some of the surrounding countryside.This will ensure that the hill is indeed yours in the next setup pahse. Another point I wanted to add.In most ops,the battles will run something like: Battle 1: Dawn Battle 2: mid-day Battle 3: dusk etc.. It was always my understanding that in situations like this there was an implied "behind the scenes" cease fire that took place. Ground covered by each side is of course kept track of,but each side needs to fall back to regroup and re-arm.It is during this lull in activity that forward units are supposed to fall back to friendly lines(i.e. you manually bring your cut off troops back to your setup zones for the next battle,or leave them there if they are in cover),or the defender cycles in/out some fresh reserves(i.e. the defender gets to have a completely different setup for battle 2). Then once all that is done,there is another offensive launched and the cycle begins a new.When you look at it that way,there is nothing gamey about moving/placing your forces between battles.I thought this was the way that everyone looked at it.I was amazed when I read your interpretation of it. Ops in CM are not perfect,but they're not all that bad either. [ June 30, 2004, 12:58 AM: Message edited by: no_one ]

Almost never.I have worked out a way to have two windows of CM open at one time.The last movie file in one,and the orders pahse in the other.Think you missed something?Alt-Tab to the movie,then back. I also really enjoy the larger battles,they are just more realistic,and will make you learn twice(maybe three times??)as much about CM as you would in smaller battles. The trick is though,the scenario designer had better know what he is doing.If the forces arent properly provided for,gamey swarming and map edge hugging tactics can pay off on really large battles. Always provide transports for the defenders guns,and for the love of god,always give the defender TR-freaking-Ps :mad: This brings up a question.Will the AI properly use TRPs? [ June 30, 2004, 10:08 PM: Message edited by: no_one ]

Where is rexford? Was I imagining things when I read that the PzIV front turret is undermodeled in CM?(i.e. it shouldnt die as easily as it does in game) Then again though,this isnt a complaint about how unbalanced the game is for the russians so I guess its unimportant.

ANGRY OUT LOUD!!!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: This kills me.Its like when you are driving and someone in front of you hits their brakes and starts slowing down,then right before they come to a complete stop,they flick on their turn signal :mad: Send turns first,then post, Maggot :mad: *message directed all but exclusively to the map edge hugging,gamey area targeting,squads routing off the map,gamey,gamey,gamey Maggot known as Pseudo-Pod :mad:

Thank you for that info,Impudent Warwick.

Not trying to threadjack,but how did the russians do it?

I am actually glad that someone posted this as I am curious about real life German river defensive doctorine. I am playing a late war operation in which I am forced to only be able to setup on my side of the river.I simply can not believe this is the way it was done.If you defend only one side of a river you will eventually lose.Either through flat out force,or through setip zones "giving" the attacker setup zones on the other side of the river when they actually didnt earn it.Plus there is just no cushion for the defender to have any mistakes/misfortune. The smart way to defend a river is with a defensive bridgehead on the attackers side.You will want all support weapons to be able to support the troops on the other side,as well as having some re-inforcements ready to go across to help.Give the defender TRPs on all major crossings.I dont care if its a ad-hoc defense,even an idiot would have the crossings TRP'd.I had to actually rush troops across shallow fords to get this setup,but it is/was effective.It would have been very effective had I been able to actually setup that way. Look for reverse slope defensive features for your defensive bridgehead.Have all your AT assets keyholed at likely crossings.Have sharpshooters keep the tanks buttoned up,and either have your HMGs in command with a HQ that provides a plus to firepower and stealth,or have them far enough away so that they wont get spotted.Give the defender some transports that are large enough to move ATGs.If you dont,they will eventually be found and even if keyholed,can be area fired at,and KO'd,even without LOS to them. Thats the best I can give you.I look forward to hearing what real life German defensive doctorine was for river defense.

rexford(and everyone), I am going to ask the following questions/make the following comments with the assumption that you actually play this great game of CM. Now,based on the evidence provided here,I dont see the t-34 versus the Stug-G as being that large of an unbalancing issue. In the grand scope of CMBB,I dont see this as that big of a deal.Especially when you look at the undermodeled turret front of the PzIV.I mean the small size of it,plus the gun mantlet arent even taken into account,and in most years/cases it make the PzIV useless. You add to this the fact that the russians get an armor point bonus,and I still dont see how its unfair.Its ok to have t-34s go up against tigers,that have to be taken out from side/rear shots,but its not ok to have to do the same thing on a turretless vehicle that is slow turning and has a 30 degree firing arc? I just dont get it. The dude that started this thread had atleast a 4:1 advantage of t-34 versus the Stug-G's.Now I dont know about terrain,or the number of ATGs or other German AFVs,but he had smoke,and clearly to me used a bad strategy.He even later admitted that himself. The other aspect of the balanced/unbalanced issue is that most people dont look at it from a combined arms perspective.There are times that the russian forces have clear advantages over their German counterparts.It may be in a more robust infantry,or more on and off map 82mm mortar rounds,or C rounds in their t-34s.You cant win all battles with armor alone. Early war russian infantry is brittle,and more proned to panic/rout.Late war germans are the same way,as a result of the fact that around '44 a 1/3 of the german infantry was made up of ethnic germans that didnt want to die for Hitler.I am not certain that this is modeled,but I can see a difference. One important issue to remember is that you all need to be playing as large of engagements as possible.It is then that you will see how when used in a combined arms effort,there are big differences in each side depending on the year.Plus a StuG or Tiger on a hill at the back of the map will no longer be able to dominate the whole battlefield,but instead only areas of it.Flow around. I believe that any person,whn playing person versus person,has an opportunity to prevail over his opponent.Its a matter of out-wit,out-think,out-play your opponent.Can you always overcome the odds?No,and I think this is pretty realistic.Its a matter of who has the right strategy,best execution of said strategy,and he who plays to the strengths and weaknesses of his forces best.Then you sometimes get lucky/unlucky.Learn and move on. Isnt atleast some of what I say legit? [/end truncated rant] edit to add: I would also like to say that I believe highly in advance/assualt operations.They do away with the whole flag concept and put the emphasis where it should be,forces versus forces,and terrain. [ June 18, 2004, 01:35 PM: Message edited by: no_one ]

The 56K is your problem.I have a 56k also,and find that I can only play small engagements(like less than 600-700 points).The less armor the better,the less trenches,craters,and apparently dust,the better. Also,if you play infantry only battles,it will be alot faster. Ps, You play IL-2 on a 56k? :eek: I had no idea you could.

IIRC,it was 50%

JasonC, Cant the same thing be said for late war Russians?As soon as it is '44 all rusian players start buying t-34/85s and IS-2's. Where are the numbers on the late war russian fleet?

I have been told(rather gleefully,I might add)that it isnt the length that matters,its the girth

No, because I didn't whine like a little girl then. </font>

*sigh* Need i bring up the victory over the uberFinns yet again? :mad: :mad:

Ahem!More like 3:1 or atleast 2.75:1 :mad: </font>

Ahem!More like 3:1 or atleast 2.75:1 :mad:

So, I understand there were many mines there, but the text/excerpt above leans into my belief of mines being more of a nuisance/hindrance than a deadly affair. Or maybe I missed something important ? </font>

Ask the Germans at Kursk

Pseudo ,you twit,tell everyone how our huge Kursk operation turned out.Dont be shy :mad: :mad:

Perhaps you have not experienced the effect of properly deployed trenches....talk about unfair :mad: Only 15 points and there is little chance that they,like AT mines,can be rendered useless by being avoided. [ June 07, 2004, 01:54 PM: Message edited by: no_one ]

Does that by any chance mean...PBEM helper(and some of its owners/users)suck,and I should re-send the last turn...? :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: GAGHHRHRHGAAHHRHRHGAHAHHRGRHAHAGRHAH Ps, I like what you've done with the battlefiled,your dead AFVs really spruce up the place :evilgrin:

I for sure enjoyed the journey,I now fully apprecialte what both sides experienced at Kursk.The thing about not bothering though,this operation took alot of time,and effort,and that was with a very fast turn exchange rate. I like to atleast have a chance to win in every engagement I play in.I invested so much time and effort in this one,and inflicted so much on my opponent,I was just shocked that I was still somehow able to lose by that much.Not that I mind losing. This has been a tremendous learning experience,I just wish I didnt have to learn the hard way that I apparently dont like the concept behind the assualt/advance operation.No way is it ever a bad thing to inflict so much harm on the enemy. To all new players out there: Even when not in doubt,RTFM! [ June 07, 2004, 01:01 PM: Message edited by: no_one ]

Thank you for your response Yeah it was 7 battles long,so I guess thats it right there. So if its the last batle of an assualt op,and you arent 100% sure you can make the end of the map,you shouldnt even bother I guess.