Gamer58

There is a serious underrepresentation of artillery in almost all CM campaigns. IRL enemy positions were bombarded for hours if not days before assaults and there was a lot more arty available during assaults.

This. AT Guns in CM suck dogs ****s. They suck! 1. No mobility WTF? 2. No ability to reman them after making team move away during enemey mortar or arty attack 3. No ability to place them in buildings - even Close Combat back in 99 had that 4. No ability to use haystacks or other camp THEY SUCK

I'll post my results on Iron after some more posts. I won decisively with only a handful of casualties. However... I didn't use the default defensive layout.

All I know is that the Luftwaffe Inf. had some of the best looking uniforms. I also know that Crete was regarded as a brutal campaign and the FSJ must have done a good job as far as it could. Back to the uniforms: I'm guessing the white flashes on caps/shoulders of the LFD were not altogether a good thing in combat?

How does Axis win Vallebrucca? What changes in the defensive setup would you make over what is provided for in the default scenario?

You learn something new every day.

Im in Have CMFI Using a Macintosh Is IP/TCIP real time gameplay possible?

The 42 doesn't sound like a buzzsaw/linoleum being ripped. Im disappointed. Have no idea how the 34 sounds IRL, so no basis to be disappointed. Are the in game sounds accurate?

Apparently (from a WWII infantry weapons video available on youtube) a 303 from a Garand could pierce a sizable tree trunk from some distance and kill the guy on the other side of said tree. So why not a 30 ton tank?

Am I to understand that there are no FSJ units in CMFI (not the expansion)? Were the FSJ always part of the Luftwaffe? Were they always separate from Luftwaffe Infantry units, or were they included in these units and deployed in a similar manner on the ground?

Wasn't there a theory that hugging the enemy formations would result in enemy ship borne artillery being rendered ineffective? I understand that's easier said than done. What reasons did Rommel have for thinking that his tactics could work? Wouldn't enemy air be just as effective or dangerous against such a counter-attack as ship borne artillery?

Thank you Jason. In your estimate, how many men would they have lost trying to get back across the Med? What made Kesselring want to stay there in North Africa? How would all of this have made a difference to the war in Europe? Would Italy have stayed on as part of the Axis? Would it have resulted in a different looking Europe? Would it have made a difference to Allied command decisions or Soviet ones? At a lower strategic level, isn't there an argument that hugging the enemy on the beach is a valid way to slow or stop them, because sea borne artillery will not be used as effectively? Wasn't there something famous about Rommel's view on this on D Day? What happened during Goodwood? I can't see the point. Counterattacking is a fine art it seems and Italy has very interesting terrain. Wouldn't a bloodied nose in Italy have resulted in the Allies taking a different view of France? Were there any lessons from Italy that were transferable to the Wermacht's effort in France or were they not useful at all given the terrain or other factors?

So... What was his alternative to Tunisia? Losing half his men trying to get back across the Med... and then what? What was his alternative to counterattacking the Allies on the beach - at Gela or on the boot of Italy? Staying back and getting pounded from the air and the 6" naval artillery?

I see now. Thanks.

Or greatest German general? What say you?

How do you collect ammo from dead units?

I guess if they were placed in or near hay bales or other cover, and with a tarpaulin at the front ( to stop the upkick of dirt from the blast ) they would be practically impossible to see. There's no crew to pick out or pick off, and I guess they would have a very low profile compared to any piece of at or tracked artillery. Think of a dozen of these things as a portable, quickly deployable, localized to where the enemy is heading, Maginot Line Lite type defense.

Now we are getting somewhere. JasonC's view of Kesselring, and yours too. This is what it's all about. Italy was an essential part of the campaign, important almost as much as the Eastern Front not in scale but symbolic and strategic importance as the gateway to Vienna. Kesselring's influence over the campaign is what I and many others are interested in. Caliber of divisional commanders, influence over others through Goering, or otherwise, and ability to get the job done during the campaign. Just how good were they? What attempts did they make to ensure their front line soldiers were up to the job? There's a lot of revisionism about the quality of certain units and branches of the service, and surely the commanders did their level best to ensure that the bodies at the front line knew what they were doing. Did they?

OK, well put (and thank you for the concision). There's still one thing I don't understand: 1. What do you think of Kesselring as a ground commander 2. What were his sub-commanders like? Where did they come from? Any from the Heer? 3. Surely, even though there was jostling at the table for crumbs, Goering had a lot of say, given that he was after all, Marshal above all others and by 42? deputy Fuhrer and to Hitler in all other offices (until the revocation appointing Doenitz some years later). Would he not have had the ability to marshal more than practically everyone else, including even Geobbels/Himmler (for the Waffen/Security SS)?

Interesting. So when the took the spare Luftwaffe troops and formed them into fighting units, these guys were trained by equally inexperienced infantry commanders? I don't get why they would not be well trained - was there no interest at all in this from Goering? If so, why? Also, what are your views of Kesselring as a commander? Surely if there were guys around just like him, he would have done his best to ensure that the men under his command were beaten into shape before they hit the front lines?

As I understand it 1. Goering was the head of all marshals and generals in any service - a special rank was created for him 2. The LI got the best of equipment and was not often denied what they wanted because of Goerings position within the Reich 3. The LI were not any less well trained than the Heer, on average. Right? Wrong? Also, Kesselring was one of the better commanders in the war. What made a Heer commander transfer to the Luftwaffe? Curious as to how it worked. Thanks.

More screenshots.

You have to treat your infantry very carefully. Take small steps, not bold ones, even if there is some cover. Expose only one unit at a time, dont swarm forward in a large line if you can help it. Remember to split your squads into three if you can, and use them to pin the enemy and then maneuver with the other squad to the enemy's flank or at another angle. Here are some more screenshots from the game. I am sorry but they are a little out of order - I think in reverse chronological order. You can see that one unit made it up behind the topmost overwatching Mk IV and took it out with satchels.

I played it differently a second time, this time deploying the platoon originally deployed in the orchard to the far left of the map in the woods there. That platoon was eventually routed, but it did allow me to move up my Shermans (the three reinforcements) to the far right flank of the enemy and do substantial damage. Here's the final deployment at around 40 minutes to go. Uploaded with ImageShack.us I declared a cease fire and these were the results. Difficulty settings were on Iron. Uploaded with ImageShack.us I feel I could have lost fewer of the infantry in the counterattacks to their right flank, when I tried (sometimes successfully) to have engineers use satchels on their tanks at the very end of the battle. You can see one such team trying to run up onto the last remaining Axis vehicle, a Mk III. Uploaded with ImageShack.us I deployed the GMCs to the left and right of the villa, and they did a remarkable job on infantry and enemy armor. The heavy artillery was called in across the front of the orchard as enemy infantry had taken position but was being held back from advancing over the open ground. Remember, you may reposition your sandbags near the villa, I did for a few. Let me know what you think of my result. I'm always willing to learn something.

Playing it now. Destroyed all armor in their first attack using one of the guns. The first thing I did - withdrew the platoon on the orchard to the rear of the villa, with the exception of the rocket guys who are on the 4th floor. Hide all infantry except your platoon commanders and an MG. The M2 should do some damage on those tanks, so keep that at the ready. Reinforcements arrived. The Sherman is going on their left flank on a hill in the distance to their far right. The infantry is going to the left down the hill to the U shaped road ready to blast them. The two machine guns are heading to the foxholes at the front of the villa. I had already deployed the orchard platoon, originarlly redeployed to the rear of the villa, toward that area, near the vineyard. I have nearly two platoons about to hit them on their right flank if they decide to come close enough. The line they need to clear is now 3x longer than the front line of the villa. If they decide to go to the villa, I will roll them up from their right flank. The GMCs are going on the hill to the rear of the villa until I need them. Then they will emerge and blast anything coming close.