SelfLoadingRifle
-
Posts
223 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by SelfLoadingRifle
-
-
Many thanks for your replies, you have given me plenty to think about and JonS, I can assure you that no hackles were raised:)
For the record, the speed with which I ordered my vehicles to negotiate the gap was 'slow'. However I will make sure that my orders are very, very simple next time this crops up and will observe the results with interest.
Thanks once again.
SLR.
-
I will keep this as brief as possible.
In a head to head game I played recently, I used a Rhino to burst through hedgerows. The Rhino performed as advertised, leaving Rhino sized gaps through which vehicles and infantry could pass. So far so good:)
The problem came when other vehicles that were following on attempted to pass through the gaps. About 30 - 40% of the time, the vehicles (Shermans and halftracks in this particular case) stopped at the gap and then performed a 90 degree turn, before trying to find another way past the obstacle. I found this out the hard way while giving subsequent orders to infantry. Some of the vehicles that I had previously ordered through a gap had diverted to a road that I had deliberately avoided and got themselves blown/shot up in the process:mad:
Subsequent experimentation revealed that some vehicles passed through without problem, whilst others tried to take the scenic route around. Vehicle type (tank or half-track) or training level (green and regular) didn't seem to make any difference. I raised the matter with my opponent who conducted his own tests with very similar results.
Perhaps the powers that be could take a look at this?
SLR
-
Recently, I installed CMN, CMA and CMSF on my new laptop. With the first two there was no problem. With the latter, I was successful in installing the base game, but the module discs would not work because for some reason the 'install' buttons remained inoperative.
After much tearing out of hair I took drastic action. I repurchased the modules bundle as a download. This worked like a charm although I could have done without the extra expense:(
Erwin me ole mucker, you have my full sympathy... and yes, I know this doesn't help:confused:
SLR
-
Thanks for this.
I now have The Onion bookmarked on my new laptop.
SLR
-
What a great way to christen my new laptop!
Many thanks and happy New Year.
SLR
-
Well bless their (Chinese) cotton socks!
Training value almost nil, entertainment value plenty:D:D
Now when the Chinese equivalent of Snowball strikes a deal with Battlefront to produce a People's Republic of China vs Russia, or even a P.R.C. vs Taiwan based game, I will really start to take notice!!
SLR
-
What is the German for "some of my best friends are Syrian"?
Could come in handy for this scenario:D
SLR
-
I think it would be fair to say that in military parlance, curry is a damaging/incapacitating agent.
The old trick of putting the loo roll in the fridge the night before never seems to work - at least not with me!!
SLR
-
Sakai,
Download the scenario Joint Venture (Marines and Brit modules required) Some may disagree, but I rate this as currently the best CMSF scenario bar none.
You are outnumbered and the enemy just keeps coming and coming. You are faced with one helluva fight and will be clinging on by your fingernails.
Happy Christmas,
SLR
-
'Nuff zed'.
"The rest is silence."
SLR.
-
Yes we agree here. Where we part ways is your unique perspective that - for the British - it was not always thus.
Let us go back even further to the days of pike and musket. Take for example Sir Nicholas Slanning's Regiment of Foote, another fine Cornish formation that fought on the Royalist side in the English Civil War. This was a bona-fide combat unit with Colonel Slanning as its CO.
My hypothesis still stands. British regiments were originally fighting formations, but the term 'regiment' has changed in meaning over the years and no doubt will continue to do so with the (continuing) advance of time and technology.
SLR
-
I think we are splitting hairs here. Back in the days of yore an infantry regiment, say the 32nd Regiment of Foot, would consist of two Battalions, one on active service abroad, and the other based in England, acting as a recruiting/training/holding unit whose purpose was to keep the active formation supplied with trained soldiers. Ergo, in practical terms the home Battalion was a supporting unit of the active with personnel (training cadre excepted) starting in one and moving out to the other. Technically the unit that fought at Waterloo was indeed a battalion, but it was commonly referred to as a regiment. Indeed the Wiki entry for the 32nd states: "There were 647 men of all ranks at the start of 18 June 1815, and at the end of the day there were only 131 men left standing; they suffered the greatest loss of any regiment that day." (italics mine.) The 32nd following a number of amalgamations are now part of the Rifles, who would still refer to themselves a regiment, but I'm sure that you'll agree a very different regiment in scale and concept to the original 32nd. Today non-infantry units such as the 1st Butchers, the 2nd Bakery and the 3rd Candle-stick Makery would doubtless also refer to themselves as regiments. The acid test for our purposes is how these splendid chaps would be represented in CM!!
"A moth-eaten rag on a worm-eaten pole
It does not look likely to stir a man's soul.
'Tis the deeds that were done 'neath the moth-eaten rag,
When the pole was a staff and the rag was a flag."
Onen hag ol.
SLR
-
I just want to see the "Donkey Wallopers" on parade.
They can be seen on just about any day of the week trotting up and down the Mall (outside Buckingham Palace) in their tin breast-plates.
I hasten to add that both the Lifeguards and the Blues and Royals are truly excellent regiments.
SLR
-
But no the is precisely the point it wouldn't as an Infantry Regiment is purely admin/ceremonial. The Colonel of the Regiment is usually a retired officer with the Colonel in Chief being a Royal.
All "corps pure" unit organisations stop at battalion level, it is just that battalion level units in most things other than Infantry are termed "Regiment".
I'm glad that someone finally agrees with me that in this day and age the term 'regiment' has a largely ceremonial and admin function. However I think it is fair to say that you seem to be talking about the relatively recent past. Try looking further back in history. Infantry used to fight in squares. Cavalry used to go to war on horses. The times they are a changin' and both the meaning and function of words such as 'regiment' will continue to change as the military goal-posts move.
"The desert sands are a rotten red,
Red with the wreck of a square that broke.
The Gatling's jammed and the Colonel's dead
And the Regiment blind with dust and smoke."
SLR
-
Jon,
I think it is fair to say that the word 'Regiment' has changed meaning over the years. If memory serves, didn't the Royal Hampshire Regiment once consist of a single battalion? This would of course have made the C.O. Colonel of the Regiment as well!
Yes, as you rightly say, the Royal Regiment of Scotland or the Rifles would never deploy on ops as an organic unit, but companies and battalions of them would. These days of course the British Army does its business in battle-groups. CMN would be another matter; different era and different circumstances. A full-blown world war is after all a very different kettle of fish from today's "savage wars of peace".
My question still stands, and I believe is a relevant one for scenario designers. How are higher echelon assets such as Royal Sigs, RE REME or RMP best represented in CMN/CMSF? As green infantry with low ammo scales perhaps? My added suggestion for the RMP would be all buckshee kit vanishes, morale takes a hit, and an appropriate vocal with the word "monkey" be added to the voice files!!!
To any bemused Americans reading this, the British regimental system is incredibly insular and tribal... BUT IT WORKS.
SLR
-
Oz
I stand partially corrected. For "purely administrative" read "mostly administrative".
Question: How many times do you see - for example - a squadron from The Royal Corps of Signals, or perhaps a squadron or company (unsure of the terminology they use) from the Royal Military Police actually serving in the field as an organic unit? (Agreed these people - usually higher echelon assets - might well describe themselves as coming from a regiment, although I would argue that corps is the more usual term.) Aren't they usually encountered within other formations? How would you represent the RMP or Royal Sigs in CMSF?
Sappers, the Army Air Corps, Logistics and the Gunners can certainly be found in the field as organic units. The Gunners have a major sense of humour failure if you get too near to their guns. The guns of couse represent their colours.
SLR.
-
Just to complicate matters, you have to be conversant with both British and American terminology. For example: Section (Brit) = Squad (U.S.) Platoon, Company, Battalion, Brigade and Division are the same both sides of the pond. However, the Brit Cavalry have their own set of words which you need to know as well. Troop (Brit) = Platoon (U.S.) and Squadron (Brit) = Company (U.S.) The Brit top-end collective noun for Cavalry is Donkey Wallopers... er better make that Regiment - eg The Blues and Royals or 17th/21st Lancers. But this is a purely administrative term and would not be something that you would encounter in the field. Brit Infantry Fighting Vehicles and Armoured Personnel Carriers are (I believe) classed as part of the Infantry and come in Platoons. Brit Artillery comes in Batteries. Mortars (again, I believe) are classed as part of the Infantry and come in Sections and Platoons. I'm not sure if the U.S. Artillery terminology differs. Perhaps someone could advise.
BEWARE: BOTH ARMIES HAVE THEIR OWN SETS OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS WHICH CAN BE VERY, VERY, CONFUSING!!!
S.N.A.F.U.
SLR.
-
Agreed. In CM1 I really liked those general purpose graphics that told you that you had spotted armour, but not the exact type. Another feature that could be borrowed from the old engine is that in many cases when spotted, German armour was wrongly identified as Tigers. This happened historically and IMHO should be included in CMN.
SLR
-
CMSF with all three modules added wins hands down over CMN when it comes to sheer diversity. It is also streets ahead of CMN when it comes to the number and variety of quality user manufactured scenarios that have been posted on the net.
HOWEVER... I expect CMN to make up the lost ground fast in both categories when the Commonwealth module is finally released.
SLR
-
As you can surmise, I am not a scenario designer (well not yet, but give me time!) Anyway... from the recent posts, am I right in saying that despite the maxed out ammo graphics, the riflemen are really down to about 3 mags each? Answers please Eddie and Fred.
If so, one would expect the MG ammo to be correspondingly low, so 200 - 300 rounds per gun would seem about right.
SLR
-
Serious question:
Why have the Russian MGs in this scenario been allocated so little ammunition? The 12.7mm HMG has only 300 rounds and the two PKs are even worse off with only 200 rounds apiece. This is in contrast with the riflemen who are (mostly) maxed out on ammo which would probably translate to approximately 10 mags each or in other words 300 rounds per man.
Where I come from, the gun (GPMG or LMG) represents 50% of the firepower of a section or squad. The gun team would be carrying at least 600 rounds of link ammo, and the individual section or squad members would each be carrying approximately 100 rounds of link (as well as their own ammo) to be passed to the gunner when needed.
Do the very low ammo levels of the Russian MGs reflect low historical ammo levels for these weapons in the actual battle, or is there some other reason for this?
Just curious...
SLR
-
Many thanks for this. CMA would seem to be both the most interesting AND the most under-rated of the three CM2 titles.
SLR
-
Add "SIR YES SIR" AND "HOOAAAH" to the American voice files and (in the Commonwealth module) "Jolly good show" "Top hole" and "Righty-ho" to the British.
SLR
-
1. Every once in awhile, a graphic where a soldier in the woods takes a leak on a tree.
Also included should be a graphic that is activated when soldiers are transported in a truck. This will depict a soldier having a leak over the tailgate.
MOST IMPORTANT For true authenticity the soldier should be shown aiming sideways from one corner or the other. This is to prevent the slip-stream blowing his deposit back into the truck:eek::eek:
SLR
Commonwealth any warmer?
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
I have enjoyed my attachment to you Yankee chappies immensely, but the time is fast approaching when I will have to return to the Regiment.
Keep the home fires burning and all that.
Tootle pip.
SLR:D