at_dima
-
Posts
16 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by at_dima
-
-
Quote
Do you have sources for any of these claims? From everything I've seen, the TO&E in CMBN (and all the CM games for that matter) are extremely accurate.
of course I do as well as original German manuals for Normandy units with squad weapon allocation and tactics.
QuoteThe G43 is an interesting point, but you can limit the amount of them that appear in a unit by setting the units equipment to 'poor' in the editor. This will also reduce the amount of optics on rifles in a unit as well.
G41/43 was issued to 2i/c of PzGrens (200 per division) but not to infantry squads before Volskgrenadiere.
Quoteregarding the MG42's, I would be very interested to see the source that says there were only two of them in an entire division. The MG42 was ludicrously common throughout German units, and their entire infantry doctrine revolved around the squad level MG.
just an example of what 716.ID had on beaches on May 1st 1944
23 x MG 116(f)
22 x MG 311(f)
20 x MG 28(p)
1 x MG 08/16
10 x sMG 14(p)
6 x sMG 30(p)
5 x sMG 257(f)
9 x MG 311(f) pz turm
2 x MG 42 K
5 x GrW 203(f)
2 x GrW 210(f)
24 x GrW 278(f)
12 x PzB Boys
4 x MG 34 K
18 x MG 34 Schartenstand
20 x 2cm Flak
6 x 7.5cm Flakand because of that this static Division didn't have sKp in Inf Bats compensating that with 2 leMG per squad.
-
Quote
Now, wait to you see the U.S. Garand Allocation per-squad...For some reason, it was accurate with 1x BAR per-squad) when CMBN first came out, then it jumped to 2x BAR per-squad by v4.0
yes was quite surprised that they decided to issue all 9 un-allocated BARs in Company to squads. The thing is that it was against their basic training where Assault Team was the main shock force of squad. In reality having 2 BARs per squad would reduce squad efficiency in offence.
-
46 minutes ago, JoMc67 said:46 minutes ago, JoMc67 said:Quote
'm sure it would be hard/time consuming for BF to try and do each and every Inf Division's allocated Weapons/Vehicles, etc, but best to try and incorporate a generic stance...
yes of course but Type 43 91.LLD and 352.ID can't be same as Type 41 709 and 716.ID.
and still G.43 wasn't issued to infantry units before VG division.
-
Good day,
was hesitating for several year but finally decided to buy CMN as thought most of flaws are fixed by now.
it was quite a surprise to start a stock PLD campaign and the first thing I see was 234/1 while they got their first in October 1944.
there are very many mistakes with German units in Normandy:
1) G.43 for IDs which was not issued to them.
2) G.43 wasn't available in numbers in Normandy, f.e. 12.SS and 21.Pz had G.41 only.
3) Schiessbecher ammo is 2 but the standard bandolier fit 16.
4) K.98-ZF wasn't really issued in numbers to second line units as German industry could never cope with a production of scopes for small arms.
5) MG.42 was not common at all among second line infantry units in Normandy f.e. 716.ID had on 2 (two) MG.42s and those were static at the beaches.
and many many more
Less for the Allies.
while I like the game but Im quite disappointed with a historical accuracy...thought it would be super accurate for such a money.
anyway to mod units? as f.e. even weapon allocation for PzGren (mot) in 12.SS was different to 17.SS on squad level.
cheers,
-
Also the Germans often only had one Company in HT's even though the TOE said the whole BN due to shortages
not the case with PLD - it was the first and only true Type44 PzD with all the battalions mounted in HTs.
-
Hi all,
Are there proves 709.ID had any Mg.42?
AFAIK 709.ID had all it's sMG in static positions in bunkers along the Atlantic Wall and that's why its squads had 2 leMG compensating lack of sKp. So how could they have sMG?
-
Just a note
.For instance Panzer Lehr's halftracks were sent to the rear when the battalions were deployed to defend Caen.1) PLD lost 82 HTs in June according to N.Zetterling so its hard to believe they were sent to the rear
.2) PLD battalions have been not deployed defending Caen (city itself) as it was north of it for whole June.
.That slightly changes the make up of sections as men are providing more rifles on the "front" as opposed to manning the 251’sEven if they did sent 251s to the rear (which is very doubtfull) they'd still have to leave drivers with the HTs as the drivers were pretty rare during WW2. So the active squad couldn't have more than 9men
. -
I believe the game is awesome but there are 3 things the game lacks:
1) Stratmap.
2) H2H campaign.
3) Why can't I mod the data!!!!!???
-
Hahaha, good one
Although the first Sherman was M4A1
-
As Glukx mentioned Armored Infantry means PzGrens, both (gp) and (mot) from either PzD or PzGD. No other German WW2 formation was authorised having SPW.
Apart from that, in the case of the German armored divisions (panzer divisions), at best one of the four panzergrenadier battalions was actually mechanized (with SdKfz 251 half-tracks), the rest were just motorized (with trucks).Not entirely true for Normandy as f.e. PLD had all its 4 PzGrenBat mechanized with SdKfz 251, while 21.PzD had 2 PzGrenBat(gp) with SdKfz U304(f).
The main difference on basic level between infantry and armored infantry was squad composition and armament.
-
Close Combat is a pretty good game, Blackcat, and I wouldn't necessarily jump to any conclusions about people who play it. I've played it and enjoyed it. :-)
If you play CC, than you plrobably know some mods like Winter War, Stalingrad, Utah, GJS:TRSM which iam either creator or was part of a team.
-
You can't, to my knowledge, mod OOBs, models, or game mechanics although you can change textures, sounds etc.
Yes, figured and that doesn't sound good.
Well, CC wasn't made moddable either but the community managed to develop tools to unlock and change the data - which is the most important part of each wargame.
Textures and sounds are just a frame that doesn't affect gameplay
.Do you have sources for your claims? BF are extremely thorough in their research, and tbh, unless you back up your claims I'll take their research over your opinions, will all due respect.Wich claims - about Mp.43 with 352.ID or M4A3 for Utah beach or MG.42 in Normandy? Yes, I have some
. I even have Meldungs for June 1st for most of the German Normandy units from Utah to Sword. And training manuals for some units as well, like 12.SS-PzD and 17.SS-PzGD - and i can tell that they were trained to split different way than implemented in BN - but it doesn't make game worse
. -
Can anyone enlighten me, what is, "CC"?
Close Combat - for more info try www.closecombatseries.net
Should I be impressed that some one is a "CC player and modder"?probably you should not be impressed, but you might be interested in the details CC has in weapons and teams composition.
-
The scenarios in the demo are mostly set around the July/August period. So yeah M4A3 can be in the scenarios.
The first battle is dated June 8th. M4A3 weren't there that time.
Likewise German MG42s.unlike shown in SPR, MG.42 wasn't the main MG for the German IDs stated at the Beach.
It is possible to have a mix of MG42s and MG34s or have all MG34s or have all MG42s - that mix to some extant can be chosen by the scenario designer.I will definetely check the editor but as I mention MG.34/42 was the main MG of the German units in Normandy. Mg.116(f) was more common for instance.
Not sure about what you mean with the scout teams having MP40s?Where would they get 3 MP? Take from NCO?
I'd be reeeeal careful about the parameters and certainty of statements like that. Given the amount of research BFC have done over the more-than-a-decade they've been producing WW2 games, and the level of detail provided, there's a pretty high chance that any error lies either in an assumption you've made about the circumstances or in your own research.Iam carefull, Iam, f.e. i don't state that 352.ID should not have RpzB although there are no proves in tables they had. Well, no proves they didn't anyway.
Anyway, I've been playing CM H2H since the first one and I do know that the data could be better in all versions, and I do know that it wasn't moddable before - that's why i ask about modding possibilities in BN.
Admittedly, there are some decisions that've been made for development reasons, like the exclusion of some unit types which were present but in insignificant numbers (but may be included in a later module). Those aren't 'mistakes' though.if 352.ID units have MP.43 in BN that's a mistake. If 4th ID has M4A3 as support that's a mistake.
I don't argue about amount of ammo for schiessbecher f.e. as it could vary although standard load was much higher for both HE and HEAT. They even had special bandolier for that.
Just a word to the wise. If you've got good sources and are actually correct, in the context, "the management" are big enough boys to admit it.That's why my first question was about modding as I prefer to fix it myself instead of waitng "big enough boys to admit it"
. -
Hi all,
Do I understand right that CM:BN doesn't offer data modding?
When i played the Demo, beeing CC player and modder, i could see alot of mistakes in weapons and teams for Normandy time.
Like 352.ID units having MP.43 and all MGs beeing Mg.42
.US units having M4A3 with landing units
.Scout team with 3 MP.40 is funny as well, where did they get those SMGs?
.
.
.
History accuracy
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
well I do understand your point but what I mean is that when I paid quite a money for a special game I was expecting it would be super accurate historical wise. Again, I liked the game but my question is why there are so many mistakes in TOEs.
there wasn;'t 461.ID in Normandy but 716.ID did use Russian Maxims that is pictured in the British memoirs "that bloody great thing on wheels that killed my group" (IIRC)