snake_eye

It is nearly time for me to release that scenario which has been started as a campaign in April 2012. Due to the difficulty to balance the right core forces for the subsequent battles, after numerous testing, I favored a single battle scenario, in October of 2012. Since I made again quite a few testing of the German A.I and changed some landscape features that seemed necessary. The map is 1872 m in depth and 912 m in width. That scenario will only be played by the US Forces against the German A.I and in H2H with slight modifications. I hope that the scenario will give you a good time and some surprises, since it has three A.I plans. I got myself surprised in my last testing. That scenario is based on real events that happened within Patton’s 3rd Army in Lorraine in November 1944. Besides all the books that you can read about that period, I had the benefit, while I was twenty years old to have my father recounting me its own war, viewed has an Engineer officer detailed to the Engineer commander in Patton’s HQ. That scenario was done with some emotions in his loving memory. In September 1944, the US forces were well ahead of the Overlord Phase Line being near Aachen, 233 days ahead of schedule. However, that had a reverse effect and the allied commander had to call a moratorium to all operations in order to improve the essential needed logistics before moving into Germany. In November the US forces still had difficulties in replenishing their stocks. As a matter of fact, Artillerymen, near Metz, even used German Howitzer guns (found in a wharehouse yard) and their ammo. It is at that time that the scenario 2nd battalion has been ordered to attack and take the town of Saint Jean des Clopants (fictitious name). Artillery seems sufficient even with the difficulties of appro. The air P 47D support will help and the 20 tanks and 2 Priests available will be a precious help to the Infantry. 3 bridges command the town access and to take it will allow us to use conveniently the roads leading in and out of town. Once it has been taken we will be in position to attack the west wall. Before uploading it, within 2 weeks at the most, please find these preview pictures. Cheer

I applied, while testing for George MC that battle, the same tactical moves that SLR used. Knocking down the walls with the T-72 gun and avoiding kills zones while going through the back doors. I got better results doing so and achieved major and tactical victories with only one AVL each time. The casualties amounted around 20 KIA and 20 to 30 WIA for each battle. The rebels got higher casualties , twice to three times higher. I have not tried the sound mod, but found the battle pretty much immersing. It is a difficult battle, but you can go straight down the principal avenue if you apply a move by fire drill and a careful overwatch of the leading units. But first the return fire intensity should be greatly lowered by your suppressing fire. You must in order to get that to control by fire the right suspected and potential enemy strong points. Then, it is a go for moving all the way down. If not you better, back up, while it is time and wait for a better day! Cheer

@Womble,

@wombie, Yeah, I got the Complete Defeat Medal, not really the one I wanted to pin on my jacket. To be more serious, playing it RT get you really into the battle and is close to what one could expect in a battle. You can only catch some pieces of it (FOW) and you better make the right choice at the right time. The only complaint I have is that you can not be on the left, the center and the right area of the battle at the same time. So, you are always missing something that might be important for the outcome of that battle. That is why a small map in RT is giving to the player a definite advantage. Playing Wego and or RT will be an obvious choice when you are considering all these facts. Cheer

@Bil Thanks for your laptop specs. ------------Attention Spoilers-------------------------------------------- Here after is a board showing the tanks having scored kills. The scoring of 3 tanks and above is shown in yellow Two of the Tigers are being shown even if they have not scored a kill. I have probably not seen on the AAR map all the destroyed tanks (and therefore, their score), since I have only found 2 Tigers shot by the allied for 4 being destroyed. These two might have been taken out by an ATG and or an Allied tank, that I have not seen when I took the AAR map pictures. As a matter of fact it is difficult to locate destroyed units, since there are no Icons to show them. Maybe that could be done later by BF with a color signifying that the unit is indeed destroyed. The Axis lost in the battle 41 tanks against 29 for the Allied. So the kill board is far from showing all the kills. I have not found looking at the pictures taken on the AAR map in December, which German Infantry unit, AT team and or tank did a kill on the unaccredited 14 Allied tanks. The same applies for the 15 unaccredited German tanks. The best kills were made by the Firefly of Richardson. I must point out that he was located on the far edge of the map and well hidden. He took out all the 4 Pz V Panther reinforcement, while they were moving on the wide fields seen on the right of the road. They did not return fire not seeing the firefly. The same happened to 4 Pz IV and 2 PzVI Tigers. 10 tanks bagged without any problem, by one Firefly, incredible! On the German side, one Tiger managed before being destroyed to shoot out 3 tanks, with a Firefly among them. A JGz IV did better shooting 2 Fireflies and 1 Sherman. In all 4 Fireflies out of 7 were destroyed, but the German paid a high price for them. To my feeling the Tigers did not put a fight as could be expected from them. Their dreadful ’88 was unable to find and kill the Fireflies and Shermans hidden as they were. More, the advantage given by the range of that gun was negated and the Fireflies took a huge advantage given by their hidden location and were able to engage successfully at long range the Tigers. Remember Richardson killing all the Panthers as they were moving toward him. I was really surprised and shocked to see all of them and some accompanying Pz IV being destroyed one after the other and not even seeing from where they were being fired on. I think that I am going to play it again in Wego. That way, looking again and again at the recording of the turn, I might be able to see what is going on. In RT, playing the German side I was rather a sitting duck than a Tiger and or a Panther. George MC having is own trouble playing his own scenario, I feel I can have some excuses for having had a complete defeat. My god, that was a fantastic battle George and Bil has to put all its competence to get through it and give us that wonderful AAR. Thanks to both of you Cheer

Bil I am not surprised having found by myself while I played it in R.T. I told you about earlier. Quote// @ Bil The Tigers are very good when used at long distances from a foe. The Firefly is a hard nut to crack. Especially when it is well hidden and waiting for a coming tank.......................I had been almost disappointed after repeated failed attempts to destroy the Shermans........... They were not the “Ronson lighters” so often laughed about by the German crews. End quote// Playing that scenario in RT I had a hell of a time getting to Gaumesnil and past it. I also had nearly all the Tigers attack on the right of the map, I won't say no more and let the FOW for the time being. If I can still make a bet on your losses for the Tigers I am thinking that 3 will be totally destroyed and 2 will be immobilized with tracks and later gun damage. BTW I am finding your battles pictures fantastic. What is your graphic card and computer type ? I am about to get a new desktop and would not like to miss the wrong one. Thanks in advance. Cheer

@ Bil It’s always a renewed real pleasure to read an AAR made by you. The pictures and the excellent use of Photoshop are giving us a clear understanding of the battle being fought. George MC scenario is a pretty good one, very close to what happened at the time. The Tigers are very good when used at long distances from a foe. The Firefly is a hard nut to crack. Especially when it is well hidden and waiting for a coming tank. I had somehow the same approach and got the same problems. I had been almost disappointed after repeated failed attempts to destroy the Shermans I had first to found and then destroy. They were not the “Ronson lighters” so often laughed about by the German crews. Have to leave in a hurry and will miss abroad the AAR (no mail, no computer!). I shall catch up with it when I return. I’ll do the same for Santa Maria’s battle. Cheer

That's all folks

That’s right, the movie location is in and around the village of Ksar Hadada. Its location is above Tataouine around 30 kms going North West, 10 kms after Ghomrassen . These pictures are the village surrounding, old houses and a small lane used as a model for the movie stage craftmen, the valley and the caves used for some movie shots and the tourist’s post reminding them of Star War if they did not know about it! The Jerrycan and the canister for Pak ammo (in exibit there, having nothing to do with Lucas movie)) are vintage and were initially found around the village. Rommel’s AK and the Italians retreated here and fought rearguard battles from Mareth to Gabes to slow down the 8th Army. The village is located on the Dahar hills being parallel to the sea I wrote about before. Cheer

Thanks Broadsword56, BTW # 6 has been taken in the South near Tataouine and or Douze. I did not have a GPS on my camera at the time. I shall do what I can with the map within the CMFI-GL limits. Cheer

Photo 5 Photo 6

@broadsword56 About Tunisia, the CMFI “Flanking the Fortress” landscape could be one seen there. However the landscape is quite different following the area you are traveling. The East is rather a coastal plain and it differs slightly from the North to the south. The northern part has more vegetation on the ground and bushes. In the south you will find less vegetation. But if it rains and it does rain in February the grass appear just after but does not stay too long. The vegetation is a dry one and very short. In the North and West of Tunisia there are quite a lot of mountains. Moving away from the coastal plain you get into hills and a bit farther in mountainous areas. These mountains in the west go down from the coast, along the Algerian border and toward the south where they lose height gradually. The western part in the south has arroyos, canyons and high plateau. The centre is a flat surface with the Choot El Jerid (a salt lake) and near the coastal plain you have some hills between Gabes, Mareth and Tataouine running parallel to the sea. On their right the costal plain, on their left the desert is gradually starting all the way to the Algerian border and toward the deep south.. I posted some pictures to show you these differences. The 6th one is from the Chenini Tatouine area showing the typical vegetation. I haven’t traveled to the west that time being in the south. I wanted to go to Kasserine in January 2012, but snow was falling like it never had for more than 50 years. In September 2012 the situation did not allow me to go there the way I would have liked to do it. In January and February of this year the events prevented me to do it once again. Kasserine is not that far from the Algerian border and Tebessa. You find there fantastic landscape. I shall try to get back to the scenario using V1.10 CMFI –GL and see how it goes. If I can slightly modify the landscape in a way that it looks like what we are finding over there, I shall attempt to do it. Cheer Photos 1 & 2 Photos 3 & 4

Bil, Have you seen the spare wheels on the back of the Brummbars. On the GL release, they are turning when the tank is on the move? Could you report it in such a way that they can fix it later on. Thanks a lotL Looks like you are on the move on either side of the road. The FOW as I saw it in a GL scenario is surprising. I discovered a whole platoon which should have been seen at the AAR preview map. Don't you think that the FOW tweaking is too high? Cheer

Hi Broadsword56, You are right without smoke cover the attack is rather a suicidal one. However, once you have reached the area near the cliff and between the two hills (using artillery barrage and smoke) you are, if I can say it, safe, but only If the German observers do not have registered that area. The problem then is to move away from that position. Personally, I favor the right hook movement, using the low grounds cover. But that move is only efficient if the attacking forces are not exhausted and have ammo. Usually I have a fresh platoon moving through the one being there to do the attack. At that moment I have again a need for smoke cover. That smoke cover is needed, specially, if I have platoons moving from the right hill downward and toward the attacking one to join the attack. That platoon is particularly exposed on the hill crest and on the downward slope. To resume my thoughts about the way I have handle up to now that battle, artillery is the answer. HMG are put to good effect to slow down the enemy and in putting down an interdiction fire along the hill crest. They are somehow exposed to mortar fire, if they are on a hill crest. So, it is better to move them in such a way that they are not viewed directly from the enemy. That can be done for just two or three of them. Doing so, means that you cover the right and or the left side, but not both. Is it worth doing so? What game engine improvement will we have for these MG’s ? Coming back to artillery HE barrage are not specially the answer. They seem terrific, the views of the barrages are fantastic and beautiful (to watch, not to be under) however and even on that bare and rocky ground of that Tunisian hill the casualties are rather low. In RL they could be low on some instances, but right here (with no cover), I don’t think it matches reality. Will it be better on GL ? However smoke is surely the answer and it will be considerably needed to hide the attacking forces. That does not mean that HE should not be used. It must be used at the same time. One thing I have found on GL is that the LOS is such that in one battle I did not see the enemy crouching in their foxholes dug on the top of a slope. My troops were on the other side in houses and these areas were in plain view of some of the guys. They saw a AA truck passing by, but missed the guys. I only saw them with quite a surprise in the AAR preview map. That could be an asset in the scenario, if the enemy is not able to see the US as it had before. That we will learn testing the battle with GL loaded in CMFI Could you send me the file with the added artillery or do you want me to modify the last one I had worked on the A.I? Cheer

@broadsword56 Speaking of it, I agree that with GL "Flanking the Fortress" might be different from what it was during the preceding testing. I shall give it a try in the next days and see how much it might differ. That excellent scenario deserves to be release. Let you know Cheer

Glad you enjoyed it Erwin. You contributed to the making of V2 with your sound comments about the initial setup enabling the player to attack with the force of its choice, rather than one of them chosen by the designer. That way the player can try different tactics. Cheer

Beautiful pictures George, Indeed. I had a glance at mine but they had been taken from a farther distance for testing reasons as you know and they can not offer the details and that immersive look yours have. It really looks the way it is in a Syrian avenue being probed cautiously by tanks and BMP’s crawling slowly along damaged buildings and villas. I can only wish to the players of that urban battle to take as much pleasure as I had and will have again playing it another time without no doubt. Cheer

I haven't read the article yet, but I have in mind the fact that the Panther gun was closely looked after the war by the French and slightly modified to be finally used in the AMX 13. That much to say that the gun was a pretty good one. About the fact that the Panther could pivot in place by inversing its tracks, that has been used I am certain with the AMX 30. I don't recall if it was done on the AMX 13. That pivoting was only permitted when fully stopped and on movements restricted urban position. On open grounds, there was no need to use that facility.

I have found that article very interesting. It points out what use can be done with such a simulation as well as it gives its limit. That simulation is a perfect learning tool, it allows someone to get accustomed to a good tactical unit integration and to develop a good situation awareness, that will allow him to apply the right tactical decision. That takes in account the different operational uses of the units and materials, integrating their ammo load, their mobility and firing aptitudes in defense and or offense within a specific fighting ground. That's why I enjoy so much CMSF. Thanks BF for having done it and I am much eager to play CMSF2 when it will come out

Absolutely correct Michael. I could add that the US Intel teams had a lot of difficulties once in Germany and even after the end of the war in finding the recipe of the Zimmerit, The story does not say if it was found and what arose from that eventual finding About the indirect fire support giving to a Infantry company Naturally, we have to take in account that these units would be firing on registered grounds. That would explain the short time it takes them to assist the company fire plan. In reality small observation plane (Cessna bird dog) were frequently used on the front, not without risk for the pilot, with considerable results, being sent by the artillery HQ If these were implemented in the game, then BF would have to think about the AA.. Well that is a huge work to do and a bit of dream (about the future of the game) is allowed.

About direct versus indirect fire, I just thought about the fight for the town of Metz in October '44. M12 155mm were used against some fortification with some success directly firing from very short and even point blank range. Needless to say that the Germans were barricaded in these and that they did not want to surrender despites the fact that they were unable to counter the infantry closing in, all exterior defenses having been suppressed. The M12 crew were not too exposed, that explain their close direct fire action. I still believe that BF should allow us to put some tracked units (M8, M4 105.....Brummbar and the likes) having the capacity to use indirect fire to be set out of the map, specially if that one has a small size. What more normal for a company commander to rely on indirect fire support to counter an infantry attack and or support his company assault.If that option is done, the marked units would stay the entire battle length out of the map.

Yes it does; It was done that way since, the upper part was considered to be out of reach of someone hand if he had tried to stick a mine on the side of the tank, while standing on the ground. Don't forget also that the Zimmerit applied in two coating was adding around 200 kilos of weight to the tank. So there was no need to apply it, specially if it was to be of no use

That's right. I have pictures of M8 along hedges in Normandy providing a fire base for indirect fire to assist the infantry during a German counter attack. The M 4 105 was more frequently used in indirect fire again to support infantry. Artillery FO were detached among the units and had radio link with the artillery HQ to shoot on order. That way different units in different places could fire all at the same time at the same target.

I have read a long time ago that the minimum range was something around 450 meters to 600 meters. Unable to check it again, that’s too bad. The 15 cm s.I.G.33 has a 5140 yards max range with a HE round, 5000 yards approximately for the Brummbar (15 cm Stu.H ;43 (L/12). The gun has a 73° elevation againt the 30° available on the Brummbar. We have to consider that the Brummbar was designed as a close combat artillery support for the Infantry. That means that besides a direct fire it had indirect fire as well. In many instances it was not possible to engage and or support the infantry by a direct shot, simply because the LOS did not permit, but an indirect shot. There are a lot of obstruction in a battle taking place in a city and or a small town. I shall be interested in having a correct gun data.