poppy

There were traffic jams of trucks and tanks trying to get to where ever they were supposed to get to in real world WW2 and they did make perfect targets for arty and fighter bombers. Maybe in CMx2 the scenario designer will have the ability to preplot the initial movement paths of on map and reinforcement troops and vehicles. Maybe this would help reduce unecessary traffic jams. ie tanks and vehicles milling around with no planned destination. I agree, a max level option would be a good thing also ,similar to fog of war. A lot of good suggestions on this thread. poppy

Good stuff Danielh, Especially, Bailed out crews using historically correct weapons Abandoned guns being remanned Infantry guns can do indirect fire Ammo supply points for long battles On map artillary with indirect fire on a huge map Real trenches and all the rest. I hope that all this can be done or at least most of it. Ill buy as many CMx2 titles as BF can write with these improvements. poppy

I meant Western Europe instead of Northern Europe. Another "minor theater" that might prove to be interesting is the Spanish civil war , the one that Ernest Hemingway wrote about and where the Russians tested their weapons and where the Germans tested their weapons. Just prior to WW2 by a couple of years. poppy

Hopefully BF will include in their new CMx2 for each release a major theater ie Northern Europe,Italy etc. and another theater like Korea, or Burma/Malaya WW2, in the same release. Hint Hint. poppy

BF probably intends to use CMx2 in several theaters of WW2 and in more than just WW2. Maybe another series of three like the present CM. I would like to see [CMBO] in the new CMx2 with maybe another smaller theater like Burma, which probably would not stand on its own , included in the same game. This could be done with China in WW2, the South Pacific theater which was large geographly but smaller in scope as far as the infantry goes, not much armor either, could be combined with another theater like Italy or?

Your welcome Mike, I agree with you on the.276. General Douglas MacArthur wanted the M1 but wanted it in 30-06 and got his way which also delayed the M1 program for a few years. I am still researching the M1 as to its effectivness and in the process have joined the NRA [life time membership] as the first step in obtaining an M1 thru the CMP. Gotta see how it shoots for myself, at a rifle range of course. poppy

Take a look at this write up,some good info. M1 firepower tests By Maj. G. H. Drewry, Ord. Dept.* http://www.fulton-armory.com/M1NewRifle.htm

Replenishment of ammo in long battles, could do it by ammo trucks,carriers, pack mule, or automatically as in ops if units location fits certain criteria as in ops.

I didnt think of it Tim but that would be one reason for the rate of fire to slow down after the initial firefight. poppy

To change and clarify my last post. I believe that an increase of 75percent at 100m and [35percent] at 250m would be a reasonable increase in the M1 effectivness at these ranges. Winning the initial fire fight is a very important thing for a squad to be able to do and could make the differance between winning or losing that engagement. Even more so because of the fire power of the MG34. Maybe this initial firefight and then a hunkerd down peek and shoot period will be modeled in CMx2; I got this idea form a post by one of the other forum members but cant seem to find it in order to quote directly. I have been researching the M1 as used in WW2 and Korea and have visited a hundred or so internet sites without too much success except for a headache. Any suggestions for research material will be appreciated. poppy

Thanks Pyewacket,I have converted several maps using your converter it is a great tool.poppy

Hello JonS,Hope I got the quote thing to work ok. The situation that you describe is why I believe that the M1 effectiveness at 100m and 250m needs to be increased by about 75 percent. I have found several references on the maximum effective rate of fire , one at 23rpm and another at 30 rpm. Maybe in CMx?

Is there anyone out there that agrees with me? poppy

Good front page. Definitly Korea. poppy

Hello Pyewacket, Any way to rotate the map 90 degrees?

Sorry Michael, Very rude post poppy

Sorry Michael,Very rude post poppy

No Michael, The point is the comparison of the three rifles. M1,K98 and LeeEnfield as portrayed in CM

But---In CM the artillary available to either side is not enough [hopefully] to be the dominating factor as to which side wins. So-- I still believe that the M1 is under rated in the 100m and 250m and 500m ranges. Military rifles in WW1 were all bolt action and in WW2 Great Britian and Germany still depended on the bolt action rifle. The US on the other hand developed a semi-automatic rifle of the same ballistics +- for a very good reason. It can be aimed and fired without taking your finger off the trigger for eight rounds and this is a great advantage when you are trying to hit something, especially if that something is moving.

Armoured trains

http://www.carlisle.army.mil/cgi-bin/usamhi/DL/showdoc.pl?docnum=57 This is a good site. Declassified Dept of Defense documents. Gets down to the nitygritty.

Hello KG_Steiner, If you havent already done it then give the AI a + experience bonus and the AI will give you a little more trouble. poppy

Hi flamingknives, I have a LeeEnfield,beautiful rifle with all the wood, and an excellent rifle to shoot but you still have to work the bolt and unless you are trained exceedingly well as the British expiditionary force was in very early WW1 then you would ,I think, do a lot better with a semi-auto with near the same ballistics. Thanks flamingknives, I have only been on the fourm for a month or so but I have played CM and read the fourms for several years and have learned a great deal. I appreciate the reception that I have recieved. Thanks poppy

In most CM scenarios there is very little arty support so the firepower at the squad level has more influence on the outcome and even more so if there is little or no armour involved. So the relative efectivness of each squad weapon is important to the game. The M1 is semi auto 30-06 and it seems to me that it would be a more effective weapon at 100m and 250m than it is credited with. With the K98 and LeeEnfield its aim ,fire,absorb recoil,chamber new round,aim,fire. With the M1 its air,fire,absorb recoil,aim,fire. Much faster and less chance of losing sight of your target.

Could someone besides me please throw Tim the Enchanter a bone. :)poppy