Jump to content

Interlocutor

Members
  • Posts

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by Interlocutor

  1. Yes, a great novel, considered by many to be the best of the Soviet-era "socialist realism school" novels. My wife and I read it aloud to each other, evenings and car trips, over about a year or so, and enjoyed it immensely. A new autobiographical work covering Grossman's role in the war, "A Writer at War: Vasily Grossman with the Red Army, 1941-1945" was published just recently, to very good reviews.
  2. Cuirassier, I would by no means describe myself as tactically skilled at this point in my CMBB career . But for what it's worth, I was also able to "win" the "standard 110" using the tactical methods learned from Jason, but have been unable to even come close to winning after modifying 110 so that the MG faces East. Like you, I've tried several lines of approach. Like you, I've made every effort to keep the squads in command. Like you, I've made shorter advances & hid at the end of each. No luck , in spite of the aforesaid efforts I've failed each time. As I said in the original thread, in spite of these failures I believe I've learned a lot from the overall "110 exercise" . But again like you, I also would be interested in hearing from anyone who had "accomplished the mission" in an "MG facing modified" version of 110.
  3. Steve, the issue you've raised intrigued me , so I also modified 110 so the MG is facing in the Russian direction at start (called it "110bis" ). With the original 110 I was eventually able to defeat the MG by following Jason's method and internalizing his lessons. Many, many thanks to Jason for these scenarios, BTW, they have greatly increased my understanding of CMBB in particular and of WW2 era tactics in general. But I regret to say that I have thus far been unable to defeat the MG when it starts out facing toward the Soviet advance . I will keep trying, based on the assumption that it is possible and that I have simply not mastered the method yet. But regardless, the two principles which I've learned from 110 & 110bis, namely "keep squads in command" and "maintain proper intervals to avoid collateral suppression" are invaluable . I also intend to create & play "bis" versions of 111/112 as well, just for fun (and aggravation ).
  4. For my part, I was actually trying to sidestep the partisan comparisons debate, though I admit that my Parthian shot referencing Lee might have muddied the waters . Rather, I was attempting to advocate for a definition of terms, an understanding of what might constitute "greatness" in a "Great Commander" (GC). It's my guess that different folks might value various "attributes of greatness" differently , thus contributing to the sometimes heated nature of exchanges like this . If we knew what folks valued in a GC, we could discuss these attributes rather than the GCs themselves, with perhaps less partisan results. But in the ongoing exchange I must admit to some puzzlement over some of Jason's comments :confused: . And since I've always found this form of communication inherently prone to misinterpretation (that's why I use these foolish smilies a lot ), before I ask Jason to elaborate, please let me make the disclaimer that I have great respect for Jason, his intellect, and his contributions to this forum. I have only recently become a member, but I have already greatly benefited from Jason's posts. I am even now attempting to work my way through his new "Russian training scenarios", a great concept and a great service to those who play CMBB. So Jason, if you read this, and I hope you will, please know that my questions are not intended to be combative, nor as an attack on your ideas. Rather, they are my attempt to understand the concepts and opinions you are presenting in this thread. First, I am curious about your statement that you, in general, despise the worshippers of great captains. What constitutes worship of a great captain? If, as in this thread, various folks profess admiration for this or that GC, as indeed you have yourself for several, is that worship? Or is worship the advocacy for one GC over another? I am also interested in your condemnation of "maneuverist doctrine", by which I understand you to mean the currently faddish conceptual formulas which are as you have described them . I agree with you on this point. But you then seem to "retrofit" current maneuverist doctrine to long-dead GCs who likely never heard of the modern concept . Does any past GC who decided to try & outflank his superior-in-numbers opponent when faced with the necessity of attacking him merit condemnation as a "maneuverist"? At any rate, I find your opinions thought provoking, but for my part I would benefit from further definition of terms...
  5. This is a very interesting thread . It seems to me that some definition of the attributes possessed by "great commanders" might benefit the discussion. I've seen folks mention tactical, operational & strategic ability, leadership skills, political acumen, an understanding of the logistical aspects of warfare, and moral fibre, along with many other attributes which might contribute to a definition of a Great Commander. Surely there are some among us with the skills and background necessary to subject this wealth of opinion to some process of quantification ? A typology of the characteristics of Great Commanders? It's been done before, but what does this group think? It also seems to me that the estimable Count d'Ten raised an important point when he asked (I'm paraphrasing here, let me know if I got it wrong, Count ) "who would you emulate", and by extension, "why?" Answers to these questions would inform a discussion of what type of persona, which skill sets, might be most useful to a Great Commander. I noticed that only JasonC & sgtgoody responded to the Count's question, citing Blucher & Grant as role models, to be valued, as I took it, for their perseverance . Now the "Lee versus Grant, who was the Greater Commander" debate is a storied one in the traditions of ACW historiography, and I am loathe to wade deeply into those troubled waters in this thread, beyond saying that my own inclinations lean toward Lee . But in the spirit of my call for a typology of the attributes of Great Commanders, let me offer this, with a nod to JasonC, sgtgoody and US Grant. Sherman said of Grant "I tell you where he beats me, and where he beats the world. He don't care a damn for what the enemy does out of sight, but it scares me like hell..." So I submit that one attribute of a Great Commander is the ability to focus upon designing and implementing his own plan, rather than reacting to the plans of his opponent. "Do not take counsel of your fears..."
  6. In our method, we don't , which is why I wondered if anyone else has tried this; maybe someone else has a better method. The sequence we use goes like this: Player#1 issues orders to his troops, saves the game as "TurnX_A" & emails it to Player#2. Player#2 opens "TurnX_A" and issues orders to his troops, then saves the game as "TurnX_B". Then he clicks on "Go", watches the "real" TurnX movie, clicks on "Done", issues his TurnX+1 orders, saves the game as "TurnX+1_A", and emails both "TurnX_B" and "TurnX+1_A" to Player#1. Player#1 can then open TurnX_B and watch an "unreal" TurnX_B movie by clicking "Go", but it's not the "real" movie, random events will fluctuate (alternate history? ); this gives an interesting Fog of War flavor to events . He then quits the TurnX_B file, opens TurnX+1_A and issues his own orders for TurnX+1. Then he saves the result as "TurnX+1_B", clicks "Go", watches the "real" TurnX+1 movie, clicks "Done", issues his TurnX+2 orders, etc. The sequence reverses each turn, so each player gets to watch a "real" movie every other turn. The same method, by extension, could work for any number of "allied" players, though only one of them, the last to issue his orders, would get to see a "real" movie each turn. We'd like to figure a way to let both players see a "real" movie, but I don't think that's possible . With the imminent release of CMC, we want to practice our "ersatz teamwork" ...
  7. An old miniatures gaming friend of mine and I recently began a CMBB operation in which we "play on the same side" versus the AI, exchanging saved game files by email. CMBB is not really structured for this, and we've had to improvise our methods . I'm curious if anyone else has tried this, and if so, what their methods might be. [ November 19, 2005, 09:32 AM: Message edited by: Interlocutor ]
×
×
  • Create New...