Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by JSj

  1. Same here. I really like the Total War series, and I own every game since Rome 1. However, I have never finished a whole campaign, though I have started many of them. The historical battles, which are both very cinematic and very intense at times, just gets repetitive and boring after a while. They are all fought in the same way: put your infantry in a battle line, use your cavalry on the flanks, and have your archers/javelinmen/skirmishers positioned so they can most effectively fire on the enemy.

    As a contrast, battles in Combat Mission are all unique, and they all need to be approached differently, depending on the exact layout of the terrain, the composition of your forces, and that of the enemy. 

  2. I concur.  My post does not say such.  It referred to the 1930's US doctrine development determining PRIMARY and SECONDARY roles assigned to US AFV's.  I continue to wonder how US tank battle history would differ if those wonderful TD high-velocity cannons had been mounted on Sherman tanks instead.

    Enjoyable video which notes so as well but elaborates in much greater detail very nicely.  Thanks for posting.

    Ok, sorry. I guess I didn't read your post carefully enough... glad you enjoyed the video too, it is indeed very interresting.

  3. Myles, thank you for that information. I was just going to ask the people here who have read this book if they had noted any political bias from Bergström. I have been staying away from his books for this very reason. His political views are extremely left leaning, and he is clearly strongly anti-U.S. (and also anti-Israeli, he is constantly spreading all kinds of garbage about Israeli atrocities against civilians on his Facebook page).

    It seems that my suspicions were correct. It doesn't matter how good research you are doing if you let your analysis of the data be affected by your political views.

  4. I just finished re-reading this book: http://www.amazon.com/Blood-Steel-Myth-II-SS-Panzer-Korps-Prochorowka/dp/0974838942/

    A somewhat smaller (but not too much) and a bit less pricey book, but still awesome. An extremely detailed account of the southern front of Kursk, busting a lot of the myths about this battle.

    Oh, and has anyone read this?: http://www.amazon.com/Demolishing-Myth-Prokhorovka-Operational-Narrative/dp/1906033897/

    I've heard a lot of good things about it, and I am thinking of getting it too.

  5. The Germans never had any chance of winning. When the Germans attacked, both sides had roughly the same number of men at the front lines, about 2 million each. In early December, the German strength was pretty much still that, but they now faced twice as many Russians, about 4 million (the Russians also had about another half million troops in reserve close behind the front. Many of these units were still being formed, but they were still close, and therefore available at short notice should an emergency arise. And many other units were of course being formed too, further inland). And all this in spite of the Red Army losses during the 6 months of fighting, a staggering 4 million casualties.


    So, even if the Germans had got another few weeks before the rain and mud made the roads almost useless, grinding their offensive to a halt, and even if that had been enough time for them to reach Moscow, it would most probably not have won war for them. They were still hopelessly outnumbered and outclassed in industrial production.


    Oh, one final thing. The Germans never planned to capture Moscow. Hitler had given orders that the city was to be surrounded and cut off, and no surrender was to be accepted. He was planning to cut off and starve the city, much like what was done to Leningrad.

  6. Very, very interresting, thanks JasonC.


    So, how useful is it to use these different tactical doctrines in CM? Will you be more successful if you use the historically appropriate ones for each side, or were these too much influenced by the overall strategic/operational situation (the US and Russia having huge amounts of artillery, for instance) for these different tactics to be the most useful for each side in a more balanced CM scenario?

  7. How did the Red Army deal with this kind of situation?


    They just rolled forward, not worrying about the casualties. Unlike your situation in this game/sim, back then there were always new units available to send forward. There is a reason why the total Russian millitary casualtes of WWII are estimated at almost 9 million men.

  8. With the goal of updating my Windows 7 installation I attempted to download Windows 10 last week. Mission failure. The result has been, apparently, to corrupt Windows Update forever. Buyer beware.


    If you have problems with Windows Update, try deleting all files in the following folder on your hard drive: C:\Windows\SoftwareDistribution\Download


    This will reset Windows Update, so when you run it again, it should redownload any waiting updates.

  9. I have updated without any issues, at least none that I have found yet. However, you might want to take a look at your privacy settings. There is a very good article about this here: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/07/30/windows-10-privacy-settings/


    Also, I would suggest that after you have upgraded (this will not work until you have done that), also make sure to create a bootable DVD or USB stick. Then you can use this when you need to make a completely new installation in the future (for when you replace your hard drive or get a new computer, for instance). If you do not have a bootable device like this available, you'll have to first reinstall the old Win 7/Win 8/8.1, and then upgrade to Win 10 again. Just follow the guide here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows10

  10. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/call/call_01-9_karagosian.htm


    This is a very interresting article that I came across. I'm posting it here because it deals with exactly the situation we encounter in CM fights, the Platoon level. Usually, as far as MOUT is concerned, the focus is mostly on room clearing and the fight inside the building, but this article shows the importance of making sure you're getting to the building in the first place. You need to not only suppress and overcome the target building, you also need to consider, and suppress, any other buildings that the enemy could be using to fire on the assaulting squad. Just what you need to master to be successful in MOUT operations in CM.

  11. A quick Googling seems to put the safety distance for own troops at 2 km for the US MLRS. I suspect the GRAD systems have similar safety distances. So, it seems these systems have little utility in battles of Combat Missions scale. They'd only be useful on the largest maps, and only if your troops are all on opposite sides of the map from the enemy.

  12. What is the safety distance for MLRS type systems to your own troops when firing? I suspect it is quite large. Are the maps in Black Sea even large enough to accomodate this safety distance? I think for the scale of this game, we can probably assume that when contact is made with the enemy, the fire from these artillery systems have already been moved to targets further away.

  13. Info about RHS here: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?184842-RHS-Escalation-%28AFRF-and-USAF%29-Release-0-3-5-%28UPDATED%29


    Also, just a few other small things. The game/sim is called Arma 3, nothing else. It is no longer an abbreviation of Armed Assault, that part has been dropped long ago. It is a combined arms simulator with an infantry focus. It does infantry better than anything else out there. The vehicles and aircraft are both quite realistic and authentic, but they are of course not up to the standard of specialized sims like DCS and Steel Beasts, which are focusing only on aircraft and armored vehicles.

  14. This might have been doable back in the Cold War days, but not today. AA like the Tunguska and other modern systems will knock aircraft down in seconds, even if they use the terrain to appear with no warning. There is a reason why the focus has moved towards precision long range missiles when it comes to air to ground weapons. Launching a cruise missile from outside the range of enemy AA is the only way to ensure survivability.


    If you want a recent real life example, look at how the Russians have pretty much closed down the airspace over Eastern Ukraine. The Ukrainians bombed the hell out of the insurgents in the beginning, then the Russians stepped in to save them and sent over both troops and lots of AA that just shot the aircraft down. I don't have a count on the numbers, but the Ukrainan losses of helicopters and aircraft were quite high until they stopped sending them to the battle zone.

  • Create New...