Jump to content

DougPhresh

Members
  • Content Count

    740
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    DougPhresh got a reaction from dbsapp in An Expanded C2 System   
    Italy, sure. Of course Italy had problems top to bottom.
    The Soviet Forces in 1945 were perhaps the most powerful force in military history. If nothing else, Battalions were able to exercise C2 across their assigned frontage which they presently cannot do.
  2. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from Lt Bull in Map size relationship with OOB size   
    I think that the modern titles really do need maps larger than 16km2 . As you say, they are so mobile, dispersed, and possess so much firepower that many if not most scenarios and QBs were realistically be missions for platoons or companies. I think battalion-sized engagements is where all of the pieces of CM come together, and with the battalion tactical groups in Black Sea or the mechanized battalions in SF2, there's just not enough room.
  3. Upvote
    DougPhresh got a reaction from AtheistDane in CM Shock Force2 v2.03 patch has been released.   
    In the campaign, Dutch engineers with grenade launchers also carry a second C7. 

    e: Also about the Dutch, CV 90 air busting when firing at buildings is infuriating considering how much of their campaign is MOUT. The CV 90s could also probably using some tweaking to better conserve ammunition. I'm not sure if their crews doctrinally fire single shots or small bursts, but I feel like in SF2 they are firing like they have a 25mm bushmaster instead of their larger, more capable weapon. 
    Finally, and someone could clarify Dutch doctrine for me, how are squads supposed to split to employ the FN MAG and AWSM-F? I ask because if they are supposed to peel off into two-man teams, that can't be done right now. 
    I served as an artilleryman on 109's and 777's. 155mm shells will ruin your day, even under armour and I think subsystems like optics and radios should be more damaged, but there is a reason why battery anti-armour drills put most of the emphasis on the battery anti-tank weapons and not direct fire from the guns themselves. 
    Direct fire with a howitzer is not easy. They're not dual purpose guns like the 25lbr, we don't have HEAT or sabot rounds, heck we have bagged charges. Direct fire on point targets is much more effective than in the days of Wellington, but the principle is the same, and since the Boer War, whatever we are directly fire on is much better at firing directly at us, which was the whole reason for the switch to indirect fire. 
    All of that to say, there are a lot of things on a tank that will break from shell splinters. Many of those things like optics and radios probably should be more easily damaged in Combat Mission. Some of those things like pioneer tools, spare parts and jerry cans are not relevant to the time frame of a scenario. Some other effects like damage to electronics, crew stress, possibly damage to welds and seating of parts, I can't really speak to. 
    For Shock Force 2, It would be nice if the legacy "Armor" fire mission was either clarified to be HE-delay, in which case all titles should have it, retooled to DPICM, or removed. 
  4. Upvote
    DougPhresh got a reaction from IICptMillerII in New patch arty observation   
    Some shells have poor bursting and fragmentation characteristics. The Italian Brixia Model 35 for example, was known to sometimes break into only a few large fragments. For a weapon with a small blast effect that relies on fragmentation to kill, that was obviously not good. 
    There have been some advancements in shell design to create an even burst pattern with fragments of the ideal size to cause the intended effect. 
  5. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from Lethaface in CM Shock Force2 v2.03 patch has been released.   
    In the campaign, Dutch engineers with grenade launchers also carry a second C7. 

    e: Also about the Dutch, CV 90 air busting when firing at buildings is infuriating considering how much of their campaign is MOUT. The CV 90s could also probably using some tweaking to better conserve ammunition. I'm not sure if their crews doctrinally fire single shots or small bursts, but I feel like in SF2 they are firing like they have a 25mm bushmaster instead of their larger, more capable weapon. 
    Finally, and someone could clarify Dutch doctrine for me, how are squads supposed to split to employ the FN MAG and AWSM-F? I ask because if they are supposed to peel off into two-man teams, that can't be done right now. 
    I served as an artilleryman on 109's and 777's. 155mm shells will ruin your day, even under armour and I think subsystems like optics and radios should be more damaged, but there is a reason why battery anti-armour drills put most of the emphasis on the battery anti-tank weapons and not direct fire from the guns themselves. 
    Direct fire with a howitzer is not easy. They're not dual purpose guns like the 25lbr, we don't have HEAT or sabot rounds, heck we have bagged charges. Direct fire on point targets is much more effective than in the days of Wellington, but the principle is the same, and since the Boer War, whatever we are directly fire on is much better at firing directly at us, which was the whole reason for the switch to indirect fire. 
    All of that to say, there are a lot of things on a tank that will break from shell splinters. Many of those things like optics and radios probably should be more easily damaged in Combat Mission. Some of those things like pioneer tools, spare parts and jerry cans are not relevant to the time frame of a scenario. Some other effects like damage to electronics, crew stress, possibly damage to welds and seating of parts, I can't really speak to. 
    For Shock Force 2, It would be nice if the legacy "Armor" fire mission was either clarified to be HE-delay, in which case all titles should have it, retooled to DPICM, or removed. 
  6. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from Waycool in Question about Luftwaffe Infantry   
    In Fortress Italy, the troops of the Herman Goering Division display the correct white Waffenfarben in Fortress Italy, but in Gustav Line and Rome to Victory bear the green Kragenspiegel of the Field Divisions. Simply, the tropical uniform in Sicily is correct for the HG Division, but the temperate uniform for Italy and Northern Italy is, I would venture to guess, ported from Battle for Normandy or Red Thunder unmodified. The cuff title is also present in FI but disappears in the later modules.
    This seems like a pretty quick fix - just a uniform option like Greatcoat/Camouflage/etc. that substitutes white collar badges for the green and adds cuff titles for Luftwaffe troops during the dates the HG was involved in the campaign. Call it "Herman Goering" or something in line with the Gebirgsjäger option added in Rome to Victory.
    I have included sources below.




    I think a simple swap of the collars would look a bit like this:

    Compared to a Field Division Troop:

    That's a quick fix and would be entirely satisfactory. However, if BF wants to go a step further, read on:



    Working from these sources I have quickly put together some HG troops in M43 with Luftwaffe/Heer Smocks, Italian Camouflage Pants and the SS Oakleaf Smock.
     







    Official support would obviously be easier to use, higher quality, and make sure that both Field Division and HG troops can be fielded.
    With Rome To Victory, the elements of these uniforms all exist in the files already. It's just a matter of a more talented artist and researcher putting together Appearance options for Herman Goering / Herman Goering Greatcoat / Herman Goering Mixed Camo (Luftwaffe and Heer Splinter with some Italian?) / Herman Goering Oakleaf  / Herman Goering Winter or whatever the options end up being.
  7. Upvote
    DougPhresh got a reaction from c3k in Question about Luftwaffe Infantry   
    In Fortress Italy, the troops of the Herman Goering Division display the correct white Waffenfarben in Fortress Italy, but in Gustav Line and Rome to Victory bear the green Kragenspiegel of the Field Divisions. Simply, the tropical uniform in Sicily is correct for the HG Division, but the temperate uniform for Italy and Northern Italy is, I would venture to guess, ported from Battle for Normandy or Red Thunder unmodified. The cuff title is also present in FI but disappears in the later modules.
    This seems like a pretty quick fix - just a uniform option like Greatcoat/Camouflage/etc. that substitutes white collar badges for the green and adds cuff titles for Luftwaffe troops during the dates the HG was involved in the campaign. Call it "Herman Goering" or something in line with the Gebirgsjäger option added in Rome to Victory.
    I have included sources below.




    I think a simple swap of the collars would look a bit like this:

    Compared to a Field Division Troop:

    That's a quick fix and would be entirely satisfactory. However, if BF wants to go a step further, read on:



    Working from these sources I have quickly put together some HG troops in M43 with Luftwaffe/Heer Smocks, Italian Camouflage Pants and the SS Oakleaf Smock.
     







    Official support would obviously be easier to use, higher quality, and make sure that both Field Division and HG troops can be fielded.
    With Rome To Victory, the elements of these uniforms all exist in the files already. It's just a matter of a more talented artist and researcher putting together Appearance options for Herman Goering / Herman Goering Greatcoat / Herman Goering Mixed Camo (Luftwaffe and Heer Splinter with some Italian?) / Herman Goering Oakleaf  / Herman Goering Winter or whatever the options end up being.
  8. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from Ultradave in CM Shock Force2 v2.03 patch has been released.   
    I see that I had the wrong install location for the patch. 
    Gill behaviour is much improved. My mistake.
    The BMP-3 behaviour is the same as reported upthread. Oh and at a certain distance, the smoke dischargers on the BMP-1P appear to be floating above the vehicle. 
  9. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from Lethaface in CM Shock Force2 v2.03 patch has been released.   
    It seems to be acting more like a bottom attack missile than a top attack. I'll take some screenshots if I catch it in the act again. 
  10. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from George MC in Soviet Infantry Battalion Attack   
    I find Soviet Doctrine endlessly fascinating. There have been many great posts here over the years, dating back to CMBB that I wish were condensed into a PDF. The various Osprey Elite books on tactics are good reads as well. I wish I could contribute more to this thread but I'm a little tied up right now. What I will say is that the Soviet military in 1944 was a formidable fighting machine and there is a great satisfaction to learning and implementing their doctrine and tactics. I'm eagerly awaiting Fire and Rubble so I can conduct mass pre-planned fires, attack limited objectives in echelon and skillfully (I hope) use the battalion support weapons to execute the mission. 
    There are many posters here that I could swear are professional military historians or went to staff college and I'm glad that they keep contributing. 
  11. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from Lethaface in Calling for fire assistance from the experts   
    I guess as a career artilleryman I should chip in. What I would say is that our OP detachments always attempted to call for fire well away from our own position and that of friendly forces. Final Protective Fire is usually planned when a position is established, and danger close calls for fire do happen. Usually those calls come from the maneuver elements and not our own OPs. The preference is always to call for fire before the enemy is on top of you.
    Put another way, just as artillery conquers and infantry occupies, when I meet infantrymen from my tour who excitedly tell me about calling down 155mm fire 100m out from their own position, I always think that artillerymen would have placed fire on the enemy while they were 500m away. 😂
  12. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from Lethaface in Soviet Infantry Battalion Attack   
    I find Soviet Doctrine endlessly fascinating. There have been many great posts here over the years, dating back to CMBB that I wish were condensed into a PDF. The various Osprey Elite books on tactics are good reads as well. I wish I could contribute more to this thread but I'm a little tied up right now. What I will say is that the Soviet military in 1944 was a formidable fighting machine and there is a great satisfaction to learning and implementing their doctrine and tactics. I'm eagerly awaiting Fire and Rubble so I can conduct mass pre-planned fires, attack limited objectives in echelon and skillfully (I hope) use the battalion support weapons to execute the mission. 
    There are many posters here that I could swear are professional military historians or went to staff college and I'm glad that they keep contributing. 
  13. Upvote
    DougPhresh got a reaction from George MC in Calling for fire assistance from the experts   
    I guess as a career artilleryman I should chip in. What I would say is that our OP detachments always attempted to call for fire well away from our own position and that of friendly forces. Final Protective Fire is usually planned when a position is established, and danger close calls for fire do happen. Usually those calls come from the maneuver elements and not our own OPs. The preference is always to call for fire before the enemy is on top of you.
    Put another way, just as artillery conquers and infantry occupies, when I meet infantrymen from my tour who excitedly tell me about calling down 155mm fire 100m out from their own position, I always think that artillerymen would have placed fire on the enemy while they were 500m away. 😂
  14. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from benpark in Soviet Infantry Battalion Attack   
    I find Soviet Doctrine endlessly fascinating. There have been many great posts here over the years, dating back to CMBB that I wish were condensed into a PDF. The various Osprey Elite books on tactics are good reads as well. I wish I could contribute more to this thread but I'm a little tied up right now. What I will say is that the Soviet military in 1944 was a formidable fighting machine and there is a great satisfaction to learning and implementing their doctrine and tactics. I'm eagerly awaiting Fire and Rubble so I can conduct mass pre-planned fires, attack limited objectives in echelon and skillfully (I hope) use the battalion support weapons to execute the mission. 
    There are many posters here that I could swear are professional military historians or went to staff college and I'm glad that they keep contributing. 
  15. Upvote
    DougPhresh reacted to Combatintman in Soviet Infantry Battalion Attack   
    I'd give it a miss to be honest - he got banned for a reason …
     
  16. Like
    DougPhresh reacted to Freyberg in Soviet Infantry Battalion Attack   
    If this is the river crossing scenario of Hammer's Flank, that was basically how I played it. The briefing tells you not to worry overly much about losses.
    In terms of doctrine, I figure the Soviet forces guide that - they are effective at short range, so I played aggressively to get them within close range, but it was certainly not a human wave attack.
  17. Upvote
    DougPhresh reacted to General Liederkranz in Soviet Infantry Battalion Attack   
    There have been several good threads on this over the years; searching for the title of hte campaign and the scenario will turn them up. The premise of this scenario is that either the preliminary artillery was largely ineffective, or that you've been knocked off schedule so you're not following closely behind the barrage, which is why all you get is that one rocket mission. Some people have rejected that as unrealistic but it doesn't seem so to me--surely that kind of thing happened sometimes and the battalion commander had to make the best of it.
    I''m not an expert on Soviet doctrine but from what I've read, I think you'd see the 3 rifle companies attacking in column, each behind the next, each company with its three platoons on line on a front of about 250m. I do not think the Soviets would keep a whole company in reserve at this level; maybe a platoon if that. All the battalion MGs and probably the SU-76s would support from the start line, then move up. Mortars would be on call through flares or a human chain, which is simulated in CM by the slow call times (I learned the human chain method in reply to a question I posted here a year or two ago--to me the key is that it's not unrealistic or gamey to have Soviet lower HQs call in fire missions, despite the lack of radios). The lead company would advance until enemy fire is so intense they can't move forward any more; then they'd go to ground and return fire while the next company comes up and overruns the resistance. Casualties would be heavy, but a company backed by multiple MGs and SU-76s on a narrow front can put out a lot of firepower. The key is not to get pinned down by flanking fire and to move fast enough to avoid the artillery. When I've tried it this way (with some house rules to limit myself for better roleplaying) I find it works but most of my losses come from artillery hitting my second or third echelon.
     
  18. Like
    DougPhresh reacted to Lethaface in Soviet Infantry Battalion Attack   
    Try this:
     
  19. Upvote
    DougPhresh got a reaction from IanL in Fire and Rubble   
    You know this has generally been a pretty good community over the years, albeit one with a fair bit of Clean Wehrmacht apologia.
    Sure, I can see the value Sicherungs units add, and while I disagree, I can see why some may want to see Feldgendarmerie. That inclusion has never extended to entertaining the idea that they were "just like" Commonwealth Provost Wing troops or American MPs. They weren't, and anyone who can open a book can see why.
    I do not have a single kind word to say about the Waffen SS historically, but this is a wargame and they were unmistakably a major combat force. I can play Battle For Normandy and see why they were such ferocious opponents in the fight for the Carpiquet Airfield. Their massacre of Canadian prisoners there and elsewhere, to say nothing of the countless crimes of the Waffen SS as a whole are outside the scope of the game, and reasonably outside of discussion.

    The idea of the Dirlewanger Brigade as "soldiers like any other" is absolutely sickening and reprehensible. There may not have been humanitarians on the Eastern Front, but one side waged an unprovoked genocidal war of extermination - and the other did not.

    I don't want to see this thread locked, but I also don't want to read excuses for the war the Germans waged, only to see how BF is choosing to model it. To their credit, they have done a fantastic job balancing sensitivity with historicity and I expect they will do the same here. They are not in the business of morally exculpating mass murderers, just getting the colour of their tanks right, and they do it well.
  20. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from quakerparrot67 in "That's one vast valley!" - hard-edged, realistically scaled map   
    Whatever gets us better maps (across titles, please!) is okay with me.
    Something that @Battlefront.com might consider is a map showing where scenarios and QB are. http://www.combatmission.fr/fortress-italy/scenaroutai-fortress-italy/
    My thinking is that not everyone knows the typical terrain of Sicily, Central Italy, the Po Valley and so on. Having a map might also help players when they are brainstorming "what forces and missions might exist at this point in the war?". A map to connect all the dots may help explain where an American mech battalion would be fighting in August of '43 for instance.
  21. Upvote
    DougPhresh got a reaction from BletchleyGeek in Fire and Rubble   
    You know this has generally been a pretty good community over the years, albeit one with a fair bit of Clean Wehrmacht apologia.
    Sure, I can see the value Sicherungs units add, and while I disagree, I can see why some may want to see Feldgendarmerie. That inclusion has never extended to entertaining the idea that they were "just like" Commonwealth Provost Wing troops or American MPs. They weren't, and anyone who can open a book can see why.
    I do not have a single kind word to say about the Waffen SS historically, but this is a wargame and they were unmistakably a major combat force. I can play Battle For Normandy and see why they were such ferocious opponents in the fight for the Carpiquet Airfield. Their massacre of Canadian prisoners there and elsewhere, to say nothing of the countless crimes of the Waffen SS as a whole are outside the scope of the game, and reasonably outside of discussion.

    The idea of the Dirlewanger Brigade as "soldiers like any other" is absolutely sickening and reprehensible. There may not have been humanitarians on the Eastern Front, but one side waged an unprovoked genocidal war of extermination - and the other did not.

    I don't want to see this thread locked, but I also don't want to read excuses for the war the Germans waged, only to see how BF is choosing to model it. To their credit, they have done a fantastic job balancing sensitivity with historicity and I expect they will do the same here. They are not in the business of morally exculpating mass murderers, just getting the colour of their tanks right, and they do it well.
  22. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from Splinty in Fire and Rubble   
    You know this has generally been a pretty good community over the years, albeit one with a fair bit of Clean Wehrmacht apologia.
    Sure, I can see the value Sicherungs units add, and while I disagree, I can see why some may want to see Feldgendarmerie. That inclusion has never extended to entertaining the idea that they were "just like" Commonwealth Provost Wing troops or American MPs. They weren't, and anyone who can open a book can see why.
    I do not have a single kind word to say about the Waffen SS historically, but this is a wargame and they were unmistakably a major combat force. I can play Battle For Normandy and see why they were such ferocious opponents in the fight for the Carpiquet Airfield. Their massacre of Canadian prisoners there and elsewhere, to say nothing of the countless crimes of the Waffen SS as a whole are outside the scope of the game, and reasonably outside of discussion.

    The idea of the Dirlewanger Brigade as "soldiers like any other" is absolutely sickening and reprehensible. There may not have been humanitarians on the Eastern Front, but one side waged an unprovoked genocidal war of extermination - and the other did not.

    I don't want to see this thread locked, but I also don't want to read excuses for the war the Germans waged, only to see how BF is choosing to model it. To their credit, they have done a fantastic job balancing sensitivity with historicity and I expect they will do the same here. They are not in the business of morally exculpating mass murderers, just getting the colour of their tanks right, and they do it well.
  23. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from _Kraut_ in Fire and Rubble   
    You know this has generally been a pretty good community over the years, albeit one with a fair bit of Clean Wehrmacht apologia.
    Sure, I can see the value Sicherungs units add, and while I disagree, I can see why some may want to see Feldgendarmerie. That inclusion has never extended to entertaining the idea that they were "just like" Commonwealth Provost Wing troops or American MPs. They weren't, and anyone who can open a book can see why.
    I do not have a single kind word to say about the Waffen SS historically, but this is a wargame and they were unmistakably a major combat force. I can play Battle For Normandy and see why they were such ferocious opponents in the fight for the Carpiquet Airfield. Their massacre of Canadian prisoners there and elsewhere, to say nothing of the countless crimes of the Waffen SS as a whole are outside the scope of the game, and reasonably outside of discussion.

    The idea of the Dirlewanger Brigade as "soldiers like any other" is absolutely sickening and reprehensible. There may not have been humanitarians on the Eastern Front, but one side waged an unprovoked genocidal war of extermination - and the other did not.

    I don't want to see this thread locked, but I also don't want to read excuses for the war the Germans waged, only to see how BF is choosing to model it. To their credit, they have done a fantastic job balancing sensitivity with historicity and I expect they will do the same here. They are not in the business of morally exculpating mass murderers, just getting the colour of their tanks right, and they do it well.
  24. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from Anonymous_Jonze in Fire and Rubble   
    You know this has generally been a pretty good community over the years, albeit one with a fair bit of Clean Wehrmacht apologia.
    Sure, I can see the value Sicherungs units add, and while I disagree, I can see why some may want to see Feldgendarmerie. That inclusion has never extended to entertaining the idea that they were "just like" Commonwealth Provost Wing troops or American MPs. They weren't, and anyone who can open a book can see why.
    I do not have a single kind word to say about the Waffen SS historically, but this is a wargame and they were unmistakably a major combat force. I can play Battle For Normandy and see why they were such ferocious opponents in the fight for the Carpiquet Airfield. Their massacre of Canadian prisoners there and elsewhere, to say nothing of the countless crimes of the Waffen SS as a whole are outside the scope of the game, and reasonably outside of discussion.

    The idea of the Dirlewanger Brigade as "soldiers like any other" is absolutely sickening and reprehensible. There may not have been humanitarians on the Eastern Front, but one side waged an unprovoked genocidal war of extermination - and the other did not.

    I don't want to see this thread locked, but I also don't want to read excuses for the war the Germans waged, only to see how BF is choosing to model it. To their credit, they have done a fantastic job balancing sensitivity with historicity and I expect they will do the same here. They are not in the business of morally exculpating mass murderers, just getting the colour of their tanks right, and they do it well.
  25. Like
    DougPhresh got a reaction from quakerparrot67 in Fire and Rubble   
    You know this has generally been a pretty good community over the years, albeit one with a fair bit of Clean Wehrmacht apologia.
    Sure, I can see the value Sicherungs units add, and while I disagree, I can see why some may want to see Feldgendarmerie. That inclusion has never extended to entertaining the idea that they were "just like" Commonwealth Provost Wing troops or American MPs. They weren't, and anyone who can open a book can see why.
    I do not have a single kind word to say about the Waffen SS historically, but this is a wargame and they were unmistakably a major combat force. I can play Battle For Normandy and see why they were such ferocious opponents in the fight for the Carpiquet Airfield. Their massacre of Canadian prisoners there and elsewhere, to say nothing of the countless crimes of the Waffen SS as a whole are outside the scope of the game, and reasonably outside of discussion.

    The idea of the Dirlewanger Brigade as "soldiers like any other" is absolutely sickening and reprehensible. There may not have been humanitarians on the Eastern Front, but one side waged an unprovoked genocidal war of extermination - and the other did not.

    I don't want to see this thread locked, but I also don't want to read excuses for the war the Germans waged, only to see how BF is choosing to model it. To their credit, they have done a fantastic job balancing sensitivity with historicity and I expect they will do the same here. They are not in the business of morally exculpating mass murderers, just getting the colour of their tanks right, and they do it well.
×
×
  • Create New...