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:)

Another very useful post, thanks JasonC. I play with greens/conscripts a lot myself, and find them really fun:) I guess that the main problem I find, however, is the low turn number in many games. This is often unrealistic, and makes it excessively difficult to play a purely attritionist game. And what with conscripts' propensity to break from piffling amounts of fire power, it can turn into a nightmare. Actually, I'm playing a PBEM right now on a map with a great big river on it. I'm attacking with Greens, and it's looking quite interesting. I'll post any particular lessons I've noticed... So far I've found that: Long range HMGs are a real problem in that they slows the advance - it's not particularly lethal, but it does slow down movement. Rivers are diabolical; I'm having to rely on really heavy overwatch, with small periodic bounds of Move to Contact so I can flush out any infantry guys. I totally screwed up with my artillery, it's out of LOS of where it needs to hit so is way off target:/ Crowding can be a big problem. Best tip there is to just keep your guys out of the combat zone.

Ah thanks guys, I just wanted some assurances on it all... to be honest, I've never used artillery out of LOS before, so shooting blindly is something I hadn't really thought about. That's probably it, thanks. Ah thanks, I hadn't thought of that, but it makes sense. Thanks everyone!

Okay, I'm just wondering if there is something a little dodgy going on in a PBEM game at the moment, and so is my opponent... Artillery barrages have been landing like 500m off target (as in the whole thing), and one of his tanks decided to drive forward for no reason - it wasn't under fire or anything. There's also something slightly weird going on with the encoding in the e-mails, which maybe is attributed to it... well this is what "CMBB PBEM game?" looks like when he sends it to me: =?iso-8859-2?Q?re?= and his zip files are also garbled in the same kind of way. I can read them, and they all work fine, and I can read his text, just not the subject and the zip files. So I just wondered if this was our game being really buggy for some reason, or if FOs tend to miss by 500m or more? Or if SP-Guns move forward a lot on their own. I've played CM for a while now, and I can't think of any situation like this.

Actually I can't think of any instances when I've really had a problem with this - I certainly hadn't noticed a difference between HQs and normal squads. This may be because I don't tend to have anything over veteran? The only units I have noticed never seem to break are HMGs (well they do break, but they last such a long time while returning fire), and this is probably realsitic. Not having fought in WW2, I wouldn't really know. But no, I haven't noticed anything particularly odd... maybe something to do with experience levels?

The biggest advantage of conscripts is that you get much higher firepower for your money, so use that to your advantage. Make sure you can mass overwhelming firepower at any unit that pops it's head up. Take your time, and don't push them into attacks unless you know the enemy is suppressed - your men can't handle being fired upon when moving over open ground. I think the secret is to mass your infantry, MGs and mortars in a position where they can annihalate the enemy in detail - sure your conscripts may not be too hot at moving, or at taking fire, but they can still give it as well as anyone else. Fear artillery, this can put paid to your bunched up men, so spread out while retaining local superiority. While conscript victories are quite possible, I think you need a substantially longer game in order to win with them - otherwise there isn't enough time to martial them and keep them happy.

Well here's a quote from Guderian's Achtung! Panzer that may shed some light on at least the doctrine: Then again, later in the paragraph Guderian asserrts that Hmmm... Still I think the point about getting out of their vehicles holds true.

Also it tends to be easier for a Russian player to get good platoons of tanks - T34 platoons are relatively cheap compared to, say, Panzer IVs.

Yup, it's a spotting disadvantage you're at when hiding. After all, if you're keeping your head down a bit, but peek up every once in a while, you can still technically _see_ as far, but you won't be using your HQ's binoculars or be oggling for the enemy as much.

Well, apart from their obvious shortcomings in the duelling department (These guys can be killed by armored cars, IIRC) they pack a pretty awsome punch. Best used hull down at range (well like a tank there really) and in large numbers so you get the odds on killing anything that sneaks into view. A bit crap on the offense though, in my opinion, since they leave no room for mistake - in a Pzkpfw. III N you can often take the first hit of an ambush from infantry, light guns etc. In a Marder you don't get that chance. So keyhole away, or use them to block off key areas to enemy armour. Just my two cents anyway

In a game I'm playing at the moment a bridge has been blown up - but by accident here. Also, bridges are often quite useful to tunnel the enemy into killzones.