Cannon-fodder

Cobalt - I think that fanaticism is just a moral modifier - it means they simply refuse to go below 'pinned'. It doesn't have any effect on the way the unit fights, they just seem to suck up a ridiculous amount of firepower because they never get up and expose themselves as they rout.

Now I wish I knew what the sig was :/ merry Christmas

GET ME ONE! Cheers JasonC, I've been away for awhile, but haven't you been busy email me at timmygee[at]phreaker.net Thanks again!

Ah yes, you're right, googled it and this is what I got: Caliber: 5.56x45 mm NATO Action: Gas operated, rotating bolt Overall length: 838 mm in basic configuration, butt extended Barrel length: 318 mm in basic configuration; also 229 mm in Compact and 508 mm in Sharpshooter and SAW versions Weight: 2.659 kg empty in basic configuration Rate of fire: ~ 750 rounds per minute Magazine capacity: 30 rounds (STANAG) or 100-rounds double drum in Automatic Rifle/SAW role

Ah, FlamingKnives, you may be right there... can't remember where I heard that they were changing calibre. I'll just check it up...

Michael Dorosh - The M14 is very popular anyway, because of the higher calibre (7.62mm as opposed to current NATO standard of 5.56), leading to higher stopping power. A mate of mine said that this first started happening in Vietnam, because some of the guys they were facing wouldn't drop after 2-3 hits, probably due to amphetemins etc. zmoney - Looks like your wish for a higher calibre rifle will be granted, the US Army is going to be releasing into service the new XM8, which runs on 6.2mm, much like the old Browning round. Supposed to pack a mean punch, that bullet.

Great, I look forward to hearing your findings...

I think that a couple of points may have been missed in the AK variant vs. M4A2. First of all, Abbot, could the fact that you and your buddies, as well as other soldiers evidently, didn't pick up AKs be because resupply wouldn't have the right ammo to hand etc.? I can imagine it would be quite annoying for the quartermasters if they kept having to stock both 5.45mm and 5.56mm. Also, when we're talking about the Yugoslav Zastava M-variants are chambered for different ammo and have some notable differences to the AK. So, while the Zastava M70B1 chambers 7.62x39mm Soviet M1943 ammo, the later M80 chambers NATO standard 5.56mmx45mm M193/NATO. However, it is the earlier M70B1 that is the standard rifle in Serbian army as far as I know. In fact, I think they stand up to each other rather well - better accuracy and stopping power in the M70B1, but losing out in rate of fire and weight by a smaller amount. It would be interesting to know which models Glider and the other guys who have fired these prefer, since it would give us some idea of whether the original AK design is the most important factor, or whether Yugoslav modifications actually improved the rifle. When comparing the AK to the M4A2, isn't it a bit of a mistake, since (as somone said earlier) the AK-47 was designed as a LMG full automatic weapon capable of semi-automatic fire, while the M4 was designed with semi-automatic fir in mind and full auto as a later consideration (and taken out in the A2). Finally, I wonder if a lot of the guys who swapped the M4A2 for the AK were after that full auto - it's quitea comfort to some people to know they've got a lot of volume of fire at close range, and certainly not everyone gets used to/likes 3 round bursts. Just my two cents, anyway...

Well, this has been a very interesting thread, but if I could just pull it back onto the original subject: tactics/drills in Steppe against the dug-in situation JasonC originally described. What I was wondering, is what the drill for moving up the back elements - overwatch, heavy weapons etc. After all, it occurs to me that in Steppe terrain, there could be problems relocating the overwatch elements due to enemy fire. Would you just stall the entire attack while you wait for the heavy weapons to get in place for the next part? Or would you split the overwatch so that half is moving up behind the assault elements, meaning you can set up again quickly. On a related matter, what depth would achieve best results? Should the attacker attempt to keep several echelons of units, and cycle them so that the leading assault element on each stage of the attack is fresh? Thanks guys, and please relocate all the strategic squabbling somewhere else, this is an interesting subject already:)

Is reconning with infantry that gamey? I would have thought it was common sense... Tanks on overwatch with infantry probing...

wow I didn't realise I was with so many psychopaths :eek:

Retreating isn't hard as long as you're set up correctly - no perching in exposed tree islands. Make sure that you can cut LOS in about 40m - any more and you can't do it. Such a cut in LOS can be achieved either with woods/tall pines etc. or a hill line, or with, even better, a reverse slope. Simply open up at 100-150m with your infantry, then bug out the next turn. Occupy the reverse slope and then when your opponent drifts over, thinking he's forced your men to rout, hit him with everything. You aren't always in a position to do this, but it's hilarious when it works:)

As for infantry, I take almost all rifle squads - their firepower at 100-150m beats smg squads, plus they have the ammo depth to keep up the momentum in a battle. I tend to take a small reserve of SMG squads, which I use to close to 50m or less with the enemy, while my rifle squads blaze away at 100-150m. I've noticed that CM players tend to be a lot happier about high casualties than real generals, so I guess thats why SMG squads are somewhat over popular - some people I've played with just won't open up with infantry before 60m or so. As for tanks... Well, I'm not that experienced a CMBB player, and despite my wide reading on the eastern front, I tend to just go for vanilla, low rarity armour. I like T-34s throughout the war, and SUs are great once you get the really high calibres in late war:) With Germans I'm not too clued up, but I like my Stugs, Panzer IVs and Marders. Support weapons are always the area of most experimentation for me... on defence most of my budget goes on them. On defence I get plenty of HMGs to scare the enemy on their advance and hopefully tear the attack up a bit. I also invest heavily in AT guns - later I use them as low-ammo Anti Infantry guns too. I can live without flamethrowers, but on some maps it pays to come armed (cities, but then strats totally change for urban environments). I've also recently started getting sharpshooters to plink TCs. Also, have you considered 'playing blind' scenarios - where neither side has seen the scen before. I've been doing a bit of that recently and, while it can lead to some dodgy games, is also quite refreshing. Well, that's my unworthy addition to the debate... It'll be interesting seeing what some of the experts have to say!

Try playing games at night or in poor visibility. This tends to result in many of the OPFOR units not having LOS to anything by your boys, when you are on top of them. Lots more surrenders that way in my experience. On maps like this I often capture about 1/10 of the enemy force - not brilliant but I guess quite realistic. I think part of the problem with surrendering in CMBB is that in real war, often surrenders happened when a squad/platoon etc. had been on the front line for too long, were fatigued, hungry and low on morale. In CMBB, units are usually 'fit' so have high morale and are unlikely to surrender. I haven't done any tests, but I wouldn't be surprised if 'weakened' units has an effect on captures.

Yup, look in the anthology of useful posts in Tips and Tricks. Also, do a search for posts by JasonC... he's gooood:)