LUCASWILLEN05

War is hell as they say. Play sme more of the scenarios and get used to conditions on the Russian Front, then try again. And maybe play on some of the easier settings if you can't (yet) handle the Iron Mode

TheT34/85 was designed to fght Panthers and Tigers o more even terms han the T-34/76 could. This was a valuable lesson the Red Army learned from Kursk and other battlefield experiences. Troop quality/training is likely to be a factor here as well and, by 1944 Red Army tank crews weree likely, on average, to be on a par with the Germans. As others have said the human factor is as important as he technical factor. The Germans often did have to fight outnumbered. Even with parity of training and equipment the Germans could still win but they had to do it with superior tactics in order to defeat the greater Red army numbers. In the summer of 1944 the training and technical gap between the Red Arm,my and the Wehrmachh had narrowed considerably, if not vanished entirely. So, if you have Panzer IVs you have to just do the best you can and out think and outmanouvre the Soviets. You have to do this with your Panthers and Tigers as well. However, wit a Panzer Regiment of the time having two battalions, one of Panthers and the second with Panzer IVs someone had to fight using the latter. In The Passage scenario that's you. A couple of other points. Towards the very end of WW2 the Germans adopted the 1945 TOE which gave Panzer battalions, at least in heory, a mix of Panzer IVs and Panthers although the exet to which this was actually used is another matter. We may see this organisation as an option later in the series. Secondly Stugs were sometimes used inplace of Panzer IVs due o temporary shortages. It would be nice if BF could include Stugs as an option for Panzer battalions to allow for this possiility.

[quote=Collingwood;15209 In fact, I was subjected to half an hour of prolonged death from the sky, ATGs everywhere, companies of infantry everywhere - well maybe platoons but you know how unseen infantry multiply - and more armour than you can shake a stick at. So I couldn't achieve anything with motorised infantry* until my reinforcements (tanks) arrived, and even then it was a prolonged armour duel at range before I could safely advance softer units. Briefly I thought 'WTF' but then remembered to always expect the worst - this is the kind of nasty, unexpected surprise that would have been all too common in real life. Aside from which there's no point making a scenario where it actually is a walkover. It's when things get hairy that they get challenging and therefore fun. It's a hard balance to achieve and I salute the designers who pull it off.

Bad things happen in forests. And in some areas of Russia there are lots of forests. Just be glad it is not winter....

In a military operaion at the level we play at or any other you get what you are given by your superiors to perform the task they want you o do. As a junior commander Panzer IVs were probably near to the end of their useful life in 1944 although, of neccessity, the Wehrmacht used them until the very end of the war. I am sure we would all prefer to have the Tigers and Panthers when going up against T34/85s and JS tanks. The reality was that, with only enough Panthers for one of the Panzer Division's two Panzer battalions, at least one Kaampfgruppe commander would have to draw the short straw. Then he just had to do the best he could relying on superior tactics to win battles. And, despite what we have often been led to believe, on the Russian Front it was often the Germans, not the Soviets who had the technically inferior tanks. IISS Panzer Korps in fact won a stunniing tactical success against 5th Gaurd Tank Army at Prokorovka on 12 July. And, despite what Soviet era sources tell us (based on a lie told by Rotmistrov to save his career and quite possibly his ilfe when called upon to explain his defea to Stalin) the SS were equipped with the inferior Panzer III and only had one company of Tigers in each Divsion. Despite this they eviscerated 5th Guards Tank Army as shown by the research of George Nipe (see Decisionin the Ukraine and Blood, Steel and Myth) Russian authors such as Valerit Zamulin now admit the truth of it. And the reason for the tactical German successes was often their tactical skill and maybe still a lingering advantage in training/eexperence. As the German player you have to find ways to outmanouver theSoviets and put them at a tactical disadvantage You realise also that you can at any time, pause the game, step back and make, calm, considered and rational choices based on your assessment of the overall tactical situation. This is not cheating. The game designers expects his otherwise they would not have included the pause facility. That is the way to play CM, in particular when you play the large games when you step into the combat boots of a battalion/regimental/brigade battlegroup commander. I prefer to get a little experience with the smaller scenarios of a new CM release first before I atempt either one of the larger scenarios or the cammpaigns. Maybe you should consider following suit?

Probably just as well considering the on-going real orld events. Ths in particular which may very well provide Putinwith just the excuse he is looking for if he is plnning to invade. Which I suspect many of the well informed members of ths forum have likely suspected for some weeks. http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/ukraine-crisis-pm-orders-full-scale-anti-terrorist-operation-1.2608521 Iseem to recall publishe satellite photos taken in July 1990 just before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. They looked very similar to these: http://edition.cnn.com/2014/04/11/world/europe/nato-satellite-images-russia/ Let us hope that this remains just a computer wargame. However, I have a feeling you may very well need to re-write your back story due to on-going events - or even change the scenrio to a Russian invasion of the \Baltic States depending on what happens toUkraine i the coming days and weeks.

Any chance of giving armoured units their own supply units?

I don;t understand why one would wamt a Target Carefully command. The Target Arc does this already.And if you are wanting to conserve ammo either use thhe Target Briefly Command or keepan eye on them. Oersonally I would not bother with tis and don't we have supply units now - which,in themselves could suggest some interesting scenario deas.For insance some German tanks, low on ammunition towards the end of a day's fighting are heading back o te supply trains.Unfortuneatly the Soviets have achieved a small tank breakthrough You have to protect the divisional supply trains. If these include tank ammo, and I am not sure if they do or not then maybe you could resupply your tanks on the battlefield.... Based on an dea from one of Donald Featherstone's books

ATRs like the PTRD were eessentiially outmoded by 1944. Germany stopped using themin 1943 as did Britain. Still, a very closerange flank or rear shot might ge lucky. Something like a Panzerfaust on te other hand - and didn't the Soviets start using captured Panzerfausts and Panzerschreks later in the year?I seem to recall reading somewhere that they also developed something of their own towards the very end of the war. The upshot is we cannot expect very much of Soviet ATRs in the summer of 1944 and tey probably were no that effective ayear earlier at Kursk either

I don't see why anyone should not be able to hitch a ride. Gepanzert Grenadiers and the like didn't need to being able to use their (comparativly) safe halftracks. Far beter than riding an unarmoured truck onto the battlefield which won't even give the slightest protecion against small arms or shrapnel, let alone anything bigger:D

Yes. I've noticed that. I would have thought the infanry would dismount. Let's just sy the recoil could be uncomfortable and also the fact that their ride is under fire or likely to be so in the very near future. Maybe there is a bug here or it is just too hard to code?

Allows you to select multiple batteriees at once. So, taking the Gog & Magog scenario as an example and assuming you are playing the Germans you can select your three 105mm howizer batteries and, using the Shift Click Multi battery have them all hit the same target area together.

Some Stuka Footage To be fair this next oneis German propaganda footage but still instructive as evidence http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRZ_7lZ5erM

Don't TRPs allow us to do this already? The manual specifically tells us that TRPs can be used as ambush markers allowing for improved targetting

Hod on a minute. You do realise that this is a qoute from a book by a Russian (?) author, Valeriy Zamulin, who is qouting from a Russian source. Oh, and by the way, the Russian General Staff Study often also exaggerates the number off Tigers and Panthers at Kursk. Since I was qouting a passage directly from a book I have to qoute the passage accuraely. You and I both know that those "Tigers" were in fact most likely Panzer III and IV. However, the type of German tanks used is of no relevance to the current debate which is about air strikes and specifically what the Russians called "he Devil's Wheel" which is as apt a name for what the Germans wre doing as any other. And what we see in Zamulin's qoute is a witness account from those on the receiving end. We find from this that there was both a physical impact and a psychological impact. if anything the latter is likely to be at least as signficant as the physical damage, probably more so. So, while we do need to measure the physical damage we also need to consider the degree and duration of the morale impact on units of differing levels of training and motivation. I suspect we will find thatlower quality troops with lower motivation are likely to have a far more negative and longer lasting reaction. And, if you can time The Devil's Wheel correctly the Soviets get hit by the ground troops very quickly after the air attacks before they can recover their equilibrium. Which, after all, was the whole point of this German tactic. One might get similar results from, for instance a Nebelwerfer strike which invoves a lot of HE landing around your ears in a very short space of times. Just anothe tool doing a similar job but delivered differently. Remember, though Firepower does kil, it also shocks!

OK I think i am starting to grasp the concept and capabilities of triggers. Will have to experiment with this over the weekend. They seem like a very useful tool

So I am not likely to have too many issues doing this wih a PAK screen tasked to overwatch a Kill Zone(call it "Kill Zone 1 but,I would not be able to set up a second kill zone further down a valley for example. Having said that I might not actually need to do so anyway as the anti tank guns will by now be engaging the enemy and will continue to do so until the AI calculates this is no longer neccessary. Presumeably also, if the attacker were to decide to send more tanks into the same Kill Zone (yes I know it might be a stupid thing to do ) then the AI trigger would be triggerred again unless I give instructions to thecontrary in the AI Plan. However, I would not be able to have, for example a tank company select one of two or more options such that if enemy is spotted in Area A then do X otherwise do Y. There may be a way BF will be able to allow for this in the future of course but here our AI plans would be getting really complicated:D

The Germans have Herman Goering. One suspects he would count as a drug regiment all on his own

Hmm/ Methinks the "believed wisdom" may require some revision. The German Luftwaffe cerainly seems to have been capable of using such a tactic and,based on accounts in George Nipe's "Last Victory" were certainly using such tactics at 3rd Kharkov. These tactics may well have been used even earlier i the war although further research into that period would be required to establish that. It is likely however that the Germans had worked out how to do this with great effect by the winter of 1942/3 The Western Allies' "Cab Rank" system appears very similar to the German tactic. We kow howver it took the British and Americains a couple of years to evolve their own version and it may very well be that the Russians too developed their own version by 1944. My knowledge of Russian air to ground attack tactcs is more limited but, from what Ihave read the Russian airforce were capable of making life very unpleasent for Axis troops particularly after the Luftwaffe finally lost control of the air inthe last few months

Methinks we are going to start needing an excel spreadsheet and its analytical functions pretty soon Test 1 Average 3 tanks KO Test 2 Average 3 tanks and1 AA KO Test 3 Average 3 tanks and 1AA KO Test 4 Average 2 tanks and 1AA KO Which might indicate to us that a heavy AA defence of the sort indicated in mny earlier qoute from Days of Battle (Szamveber) would certainly have an impact. And the numbers are broadly similar to those my test came up with. It would be interesting to know a couple of things 1 Did any of he KO tanks actually burn. Any that did we can assume were total wrte offsor, at the very least, would have required extensive refurbishments. 2 What the Morale impact of the air strike was against the4 target unit and how long this effect lasted

Interesting. So let's suppose I want to set up an anti tank kill zone using, for example a Soviet Infantry battalion's anti tank battery reinforced by the three batteries of the Soviet Anti tank battalion. This is a "Cat Trap" I want to se up a classic L shaped ambush to giive the cats a nasty dilemma. In the version of the AI plan I want I would paint the objective area representing my Kill Zone, give group orders to the battery I want to initiate the ambush. This might be one of the batteries placed on the long end of the L facing into my kill zone. Since I don;t want to spring the ambush to soon I set orders to "Ambush Armour 600 meters" I could then set appropriate triggers to have the other three batteries to open fire against armour if it is wihin a suitable range and the battery that triggered the ambush has fired. Thus prresenting the German armour with a fiendish problem. Do they turn toface one threat exposing their side armour in the process or do they back out. And this in turn could trigger a Soviet armoured counter attack. Ouch!

Does this mean that I can order an assigned group , for example a platoon r a company to counter attack in the event a certain position falls to the enemy. And, ifI understand this correctly it would be possible to set up something quite sophisticated involving multiple groups. For example if I triggered No 2 Company to counter attack I can set up a trigger to have a tank platoon move to a specified position to givecovering fire. And, if the opposing player moves to a position that might interefere with these actions I can set up further triggers in which a specific unit (say another tank company will move to meet that threat?

According to Brassey's EncyclopedaFirepower has two effects "Firepower has two principal effects. The first, in the pre World War 1 words of French marshal (Then cloelHenri Petai 'fire kills' In other words , firepower inficts casualties or destruction upon the target The second, and perhaps more important effect is suppression. Suppression s a psychological phenomenon, resultig from the fear induced in human beingd who are, or believe themselvest be the targets of firepower.They instinctively seek cover from hostile fire. When they take any kind of action that might expose them to hostile fire their movements are cautious, careful and usually slow.... Obviously the effectiveness of a person who is suppressed is degraded. It is generally acknowledged thast the suppressve effect of firepower degrades the perfomance of a hostile military force mre than does the casualty producing effect of that firepower" (Brasseys EncyclopediaP379) An air strike is, as we all know, one of the forms firepower can be applied to a target. Therefore, as with any otherform of firepower it will have an effect on morale and will therefore suppress the targets to some degree (ie. have a nrgative impact on their morale. So, even though the physical damage done might not be that great - and two tanks out of a company of ten is only 20% (nothing much for the air boys to boast about particularly as they were not even burning so he air boys might not even be able to claim they killed them - the ground troops however know they lost two tanks. And, again from Demolishing h Myth (Zamuli) a Russian reort from 29 Tank Corps (5th Guards Tank Army) "Losses :25th Tank Brigade - 60% of Personnel. SU-122 - 4 (left burning) SSU-76 - 4 (knocked out) Losses are primarily from enemy aviation and Tiger Tanks. ur own ground attack aviation twice bombed friendly combat formatioms And here is how Zamulin describes the specific Luftwaffe ground attack tactic we are talking about: " A 'Devil's Wheel' whirle over our position - that's how Red Army soldiers chrisened the special tactic that the German Dive Bombers used. Having arranged themselves into a circle, from 30 - 70 bombers, one after another, would lasunch heir individual strikes. They would continue this operation without interruption , as a rule from thirty minutes to wo hurs. Sevralminutes before the completionof the bombing a large group of armour, usually with heavy Tiger tanks moving in front would advance. At the moment thebombing ceased he tanks would be just several hundred metersfrom our rifle enrenchments. Th infantry, still not fully recovered from the bombing, were now compelled to repel a ground attack. It was very difficult to withstand such an attack, lacking a second line of trenches, as was the case in he vicinity of the Konsomolets State Farm The Germans first used this method of breaking thrugh combat positions at Kursk, with the aim of overcomng our well engineered and deeply echeloned defences" (P190 Demolishing the Myth Valeriy Xamulin#) Sure, in this game we are (probably) not going to be employing 30 -70 Stukas or any other aircraft for a ground attack lasting thirty minutes to two hours. But we mght well be employing up to a dozen aircraft in a shorter duration air attack so we may well expect similar results to the above albeit on a far smalller scale

Airpower was still used quite a lot and by both sides. Sometimes both sides would have air over the same battlefield at the same time if the area was judged important enough. In George Nipe's Drcision in the ukraine for instance we find that is what happened during the SS counter attack against the Soviet bridgehead o he River Mius. However, though the Soviets had not gained air dominance even at this point they could do so locally. Having said that the Luftwaffe were still quite capable of mounting their own strikes and did so certainly until the end of 1944