Jump to content

Vet 0369

Members
  • Content Count

    586
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by Vet 0369

  1. On 3/10/2021 at 11:48 PM, The_MonkeyKing said:

    Where are and how we going to be seeing this system in practice? Squad level system like the Javelin in US Army or like the Javelin with the USMC? Are all infantry going to be getting it or just mech or light infantry?

    Since the USMC are not part of CMCW, Dragon AT missiles will probably at the very least be organic at a platoon level for the US Army. AT missiles such as Dragons and Javelins are organic at the Battalion level and dispersed to Company level at the discretion of the Battalion Commander in the USMC. Marine infantry don’t need organic AT missiles other than AT4s because they have hand grenades and K-bars!😝

  2. On 3/29/2021 at 9:30 PM, Splinty said:

    The US Army by the book maximum effective range of the M16A1 and A2 is 460 Meters. In reality when we went to the range, the farthest pop up silhouette was at 300 Meters. In Desert Storm I fired my M16A2 at max 150 Meters. In my 2 tours during Iraqi Freedom I fired my M4 100- 150 Meters max. However both of those were very different from what war in the Fulda Gap would be like. 

    I’d like to add my own USMC and USMCR with the M-14 and  M-16 experiences to this discussion. I qualified with the M-14 every year from 1969 to 1973, and the M-16 from 1975 until 1980. With the M-14, we qualified at 200, 300, and 500 yards. With the M-16, we qualified at 360 meters (my memories are up to 50 years old, so please forgive me if I’m off a bit) using known distance (KD) targets. Max effective range was 460 meters (~500 yards) for the M-14, and 360 meters for the M-16. For those who don’t know the term “maximum effective range,” in the USMC it is the range at which any Marine can be expected to inflict a casualty on the enemy (which means hit, but not necessarily kill the target). We qualified with open sights (adjustable aperture and windage on the M-14, and long/short rear flip sight and bullet adjustable front sights on the M-16). We didn’t have any “glass.” Combat ranges are considerably shorter. The max effective range for my trained M-60 gun teams with tripod was 1500 yards. Bipod was probably 500 to 600 yards. In a defensive fixed position, If you can see the enemy at those ranges, you probably want to begin by dropping company level 60mm mortar rounds on them, then your M-203s, and open up with your rifles around 200. Finally, you’ll have your Pigs open up across the line from the flanks. I recommend NEVER opening up with your pigs at range. It just gives the enemy targets.

  3. 35 minutes ago, Thewood1 said:

    I have never played the Slitherine PBEM++ system.  Can you explain how the impact on uploading/downloading files sizes and storage space are impacted vs regular PBEM?

    Most of our play was on earlier iPads (iPad 1s I think), although I also played on a 2010 MacPro, and my buddy also played on a PC. I don’t really remember any issues relating to file size or download/upload times. I honestly don’t remember if the files were kept on the system or in the cloud. It’s probably been 6 or 7 years since we were able to play Battle Academy or Comander: The Great War. Ok except been gaming for the most part on a PC since 2017, but might still have the games installed on my Mac. They won’t run at all on the newer iPads. 

  4. 23 hours ago, BletchleyGeek said:

    The facts of Slitherine PBEM++ system is that you don't need Dropbox. The files are exchanged over the cloud, through Slitherine's servers. There is a matchmaking service too, where you post "challenges" which can be open to the public, or protected with a password (so your buddies can get into it but no randos). Whenever a new turn file is available, you get an e-mail letting you know about it.

    This system, in coordination with a third-party app like Discord (or even Steam internal chat system) I think is a pretty positive and a significant step forward.

    This is how I was playing Battle Academy and and a couple of other Slitherine based games with a friend. The problem with them is that if the developer changes platforms or you have issues, it is up to the developer to fix them. I don't think we'll have that problem with BFC though.

  5. On 4/1/2021 at 4:19 AM, Stardekk said:

    I bet somewhere between the 15th and the 23rd.

    I'm looking at April 19. It is a significant day. It's two weeks after my second Phiser Vacc shot (fully vaccinated) and Patriots day. What could be more appropriate!

  6. On 4/5/2021 at 11:40 AM, HUSKER2142 said:

     

    LOL, thank you for that! What great propaganda. Those aircraft were actually designed, and one or two built before the Soviets decided that they just weren't worth it. They were designed to carry tremendous loads, and skim just above the water in ground effect like pelicans. LCATs, or the Soviet versions, and the cost, quickly doomed that airplane.

  7. On 4/4/2021 at 9:49 AM, IICptMillerII said:

    As others have said, Norway. 

    Norway was extremely important to both sides in the prosecution of the war. Much of the Soviet strategy revolved around shutting down/delaying NATO (specifically the US) sea lines of communication (SLOCs) which is a fancy term for maritime resupply routes. To do that, the Soviets had a powerful combination of surface (fleet ships) sub surface (subs) and naval aviation, such as the infamous Backfire bomber. The goal was to prevent NATO from resupplying long enough to give the Soviet army the time it needed to complete its objectives in central Europe. 
    Norway, specifically the coast, would have given the Soviets much more control over the SLOCs through the Northern Atlantic had they occupied it. It would have given them air bases for their naval aviation, as well as ports and sanctuaries for their surface and sub surface forces. Plus, it would have effectively extended their effective interdiction range against NATO SLOCs. 

    NATO was quite aware of this, and the US Marines were assigned to the area. They had staged equipment in the country, much like the Army did in Germany with REFORGER. Norway was also considered their AO, which makes sense considering how hilly and mountainous Norway is, and how important amphibious operations would be there. Not even opposed amphibious operations, simple ones like redeploying or shifting forces around, and resupplying them. Both sides would have made use of naval infantry in Norway. As well as airborne and other specialized forces. 

    To this day the Marines maintain their partnership with Norway's military, and I think they still have equipment staged there as well. Every year (I think so at least) there is usually a major training exercise in Norway for the Marines, and a lot of the cool footage of Abrams drifting on snow and ice are (were) Marine tanks up there doing training. 

    Part of the Marine Corps Hymn is "From the snows of far off northern lands, to the sunny tropic scenes, you will find us always on the job, the United States Marines." Yes, you're all correct about Norway. I went there from Wichita, KS with my Marine Reserve Battalion on a NATO exercise (Operation Teamwork) in September 1976. We were told that it was the first time Marine Reserves were in an exercise outside the U.S., and at the time, it was the largest NATO exercise ever held. We operated north of Trondhiem, about 200 miles south of the Artic Circle. Our Allies were Norwegian Light Infantry, and the Aggressors were British SAS. I think the whole thing was on a hair-trigger as the Soviets massed troops on their northern border with Norway, and we had our ammunition ships sitting just off the coast from us to supply us at a moment's notice. I must admit that I was not impressed with the Marine planning staff that supposedly prepared our participation. Just before we left the states, we were issued Poplin Jungle Utilities that the U.S. troops had worn in Viet Nam. The advanced party to set up our base at Oerland was sent without the proper "colder weather" clothing or galoshes. Some ended up with trench foot so bad that toes had to be amputated, and about a dozen cases of double-pneumonia so bad they had to be medivac. We went from being used to 30C temps in Kansas and Missouri to 10-15C temps in Norway in jungle camos. Flying home, our Company was so ill that one of the flight attendants asked me if the men were really Marines because no one had made a pass at her. I explained that we had just been through a tough exercise and were all sick.

    The bright spot was that the Norwegian public treated us fantastic (something we weren't used to just three years after the war ended in Viet Nam}, and they were astonished that we were in the reserves because we wanted to be, not because we had to be. They constantly expressed gratitude that we were there, in there words "to protect them when we didn't have to be." I still have a warm spot in my heart for the Norwegian people.

  8. On 4/4/2021 at 5:57 PM, Double Deuce said:

    Probably this one?

    PS_Magazine_Cover_page_(16834901182).jpg

     

    I first saw "Connie" in the late 70's or early 80's in Blackhawk, Huey, and Armor PM series on turbine engine maintenance when I wrote engine maintenance manuals for GE Aircraft Engines. I have to say, the clothing changed greatly. In the ones I saw, "Connie" was dressed in "Daisy Duke" shorts and a halter top.

  9. On 3/28/2021 at 2:50 PM, IICptMillerII said:

    I think that might be a typo on the website. In game, it is labeled as the M224. Here is a screenshot of it. Bear in mind, the UI is still work in progress:

    P4EcsQB.png

    Also, the games timeframe is 1979-1982 🙂

    Ah, that explains it! My mortar section in 1978 had M2’s. That was in a USMCR unit. Marine reserves probably didn’t get M224’s until the M224A1’s were issued to the Army. That was how it usually happened😢

     

  10. I’ve been reading the TO&E for Cold War and have noticed a possible inconsistency with the U.S. 60mm mortar version. The TO&E lists it as an M224A1. Unfortunately, since the time frame for this release is 1979 to 1984, the M224A1 didn’t exist at that time. The M224 replaced the M2 and M19 mortars in the Mid-1970’s, but the improved M224A1 wasn’t introduced until 2011. That puts it’s introduction into service something like 17 years after the time frame of the of the Cold War module. The increased range and ammunition types of the M224A1 could adversely affect any battle fought in the 1979-1984 timeframe.

    Perhaps “M224A1” is just a typo in the TO&E list, and BFC isn’t including weapons that are almost two decades before they were actually introduced into service.

  11. 20 hours ago, Sven said:

    Hello!

    I'm playing a scenario (PBEM (which is all I ever play), not that it matters, I think)) in Red Thunder and I see my enemy advancing across a swamp/field in plain view.  I try ordering my Forward observer to open fire (with small arms, since all arty is out), but they won't and haven't for several turns.

    The same thing with my on-map-mortar. It still has 4 rounds left, but everything is "out of range" all of a sudden and they, too, won't open fire with small arms towards that same enemy unit in plain view. The mortar isn't knocked out, but has lost 1 man and has one lightly wounded. That, however, didn't stop it from firing rounds earlier in the game.

    What am I doing wrong?

    There could be any number of reasons why your FO and mortar team won’t fire, including moral factor, not being in range, no line of sight, etc. try selecting “C” and give them a “target,” “light target,” or “area” command to the icon of the enemy you want to target. If the target is reddish and black, it means something is blocking your LOS to that target. If your selected FO or mortar crew are reduced moral, broken, or pinned, etc., they might just be telling you to “bugger off, I’m not doing that.” As said previously, without more information or screen shots with the UI showing, there is very little possibility of anyone being able to help you except with a “wild-ass guess (WAG). Sometimes, and  don’t ask me how I know this, one might have reduced or turned off trees (Ctl+R I think) by accident or while trying to plot movements or something, so everything looks open when there actually trees or bushes at the troop level. Again, don’t ask me how I know this after the many times during my 13 years of PBEM play during which I was pulling my hair out trying to determine why my units weren’t firing. Regarding your mortar, the enemy might be within the minimum range of the mortar. Usually 40-50m for say a 60mm mortar.😱

  12. On 3/23/2020 at 2:18 PM, Schrullenhaft said:

    In general CM3: Afrika Korps should work on Windows 10. The problem though may be the copy-protection. Since you specifically mentioned 'CM3' I assume you have the CDV distribution of the game. If I recall correctly those copies used a disc-based copy-protection system that may not work with Windows 10 ('SafeDisc' possibly). I'm not fully aware of a work-around if that is the case. However, if you really want to play the game, then you could purchase a copy from Gog.com (Combat Mission Afrika Korps). Currently it is selling for US$2.99.

    I just installed my 2003 copy of CMAK 3 from CDV on my PC running Windows 10. I didn’t experience any issues with running it (except aspect ratios because I have a 27 inch 4K monitor with a screen resolution of 3840x2160). I’ll try some of your suggestions in other threads to resolve those issues though😊 I do need to have the disk in the reader to run it though.

  13. Another way is to buy or obtain a portable USB CD/DVD drive and use it to validate you’re install. Then, go onto the BF patch site, and patch the game to remove the need to have the disc in the drive. That’s how I did it with my Paradox versions. Be careful to not patch with the last windows patch though (I forget the name Vista or something) it screwed up my graphics some. I ran all three from Windows  95 through Windows 7 in Boot Camp on my Macs.

  14. On 2/4/2021 at 8:36 AM, 3j2m7 said:

     but we know also that a patch will follow 😂...

    But, just as a reminder to all, the patch will be only for the base game of Red Thunder for those who don’t purchase the Fire and Rubble module. It will only patch RT with the changes already patched in the other base games. It won’t allow access to the content added in F&R. F&R will already be patched, so it won’t need to be patched after activation.

  15. On 12/6/2020 at 7:22 PM, 37mm said:

    The simplistic stats I've seen indicate that the British Empire used an average of six million 0.303 rounds per day during WW1... I very much doubt they were inflicting hundreds of thousands of casualties per day.

    All of the great powers were producing SAA in the billions.

    If we take a random offensive in 1918, say the fifth battle of Ypres, the Brits expended a million rounds of artillery during a four day battle. Total German casualties (from all causes) were in the tens of thousands but far, far below any conceivable 8-1 ratio.

    In my opinion, all warfare features vast expenditures of ammunition for relatively few inflicted casualties.

    Apparently, during the Napoleonic wars, the common saying was that "to kill a man required expenditure of an amount of lead equal to his weight".

     A medieval English army of, say, 5000 archers could expend 60,000 arrows a minute in theory.

     

     

    Those “number of .303 rounds per day” doesn’t have much relationship to the  “rounds per infantryman per kill” statistic originally quoted. The Vickers MG and other lighter more mobile infantry automatic guns, including the Lewis guns in the infantry and all of the fighter aircraft and defensives of the scouts, bombers, and balloons, all fired the .303 round. That massively skews the ratios. The SMLE, M1903, and M1917 Enfield, were routinely used to qualify at 1,000 yards (914.4 meters), and that was by regular riflemen, not snipers.

  16. 2 hours ago, Erwin said:

    That's good info re RL.  However, in the CM game, am not sure if one can win some scenarios without masses of Area Fire.  Most tutorials advise "several minutes of suppressive fire, then add a lot more" to be effective.  My sense is that in-game units do not suppress as easily as in RL.

    BTW:  "Passage at Wilcox" is one of the best/most enjoyable CMSF2 scenarios.  Kudos to the designer.

    Area fire for suppression, what we usually call “base of fire before an assault,” is completely dependent on the situation and terrain, and must be determined on an individual basis. Suppressive fire on an area that’s open, but with a lot of concealment is going to be different than suppressive fire before assaulting a building in a MOUT. This is where your scouts can really help to assess what you need. Another mistake I notice is using a hunt or slow movement command after contact. You already know about where the enemy is, so try using fast movement commands. It makes your pixeltruppen much harder to hit, and is usually how you do it in real life, especially in MOUT.

    Probably the best thing I can recommend for anyone with a new title (or even an old title), is to play ALL the campaigns through. For example, over the years, I’ve played the US and Russian campaigns in CMBS. I haven’t played the Ukraine campaign because it uses basically the same equipment and tactics as the Russian, but I probably will at some point. I have a friend against whom I’ve played against since CMBB, and every title since CMBN. We switch between red and blue for each new battle. I tend to win most battles because I’ve played the campaigns of both sides and know the strengths and weaknesses of each. “The Book” is just a basic starting point, and good commanders tend to throw it away when the situation requires. Don’t be afraid to try new tactics and commands. After all, it’s just a game, and you don’t actually kill or get anyone killed. Remember, a great plan is great only until the first contract. Then you have to “adapt, improvise, and overcome.”

  17. If you go back into an earlier part of this thread (January 22, 2019), you’ll see from my calculations for squad and fire team ammo, that what you start with is about what an actual Marine squad or fire team actually has. Also, a mission usually lasts only one to two hours, and if your Marines run out of ammo in that amount of time, than you’re failing to enforce fire discipline and allowing your Marines to waste ammo. Only after we secured the position would we receive resupply by AAV, truck, helicopter, or HMMV (or in our case, Jeep). Whenever possible, you conserve your rounds for the base of fire and assault by bounding fire (leapfrogging fire teams using the assault command). Be sure to assault THROUGH the objective and have the last action point beyond the objective.  Bottom line, I don’t find CM too out of step with reality.

  18. On 12/6/2020 at 7:45 PM, THH149 said:

    To my mind, I wouldn't bother trying to apply RL to this question, the only question is how to use them to help you win the game. If casualties are not a concern, for instance, they may go places where they could well die, if that helps you spot and terminate the enemy.

    And if you're playing a game against the AI its just practice for when you play H2H. Against AI, you can try using Recon assets every which way and over and over again until you find a way that works in the scenario.

    If you do apply RL SOP and so on, then you're just using the software to simulate something (miniatures?) against AI which might be programmed to do some other thing entirely (not on the same wavelength as you).

    And of course the game itself may be quite a bit different from RL, except maybe in weapon physics, 'cos you dont have to deal with bad commanders or bad subordinates.

    THH

    Sorry for coming so late to the game this time, but here is my take on this whole question. I agree with @THH149 above.

    First to set my level of knowledge, "0369" was (since I've been out the the USMC for almost 40 years and the TO&E has probably changed) the USMC Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) code for "Infantry, Small Unit Leader" (or Platoon Sgt). Starting at the company level, we had the Commanding Officer (CO) and the Second in Command Executive Officer (XO). who controlled the battle and movement in a general way. They didn't evacuate the wounded, distribute ammo, or anything like that. They didn't issue specific instructions, just something like "First platoon is the base of fire and second platoon is the maneuver (assault) element." The Platoon Commanders of those units would provide more specific instructions to the Platoon Sgts and Squad Leaders. We would ensure that those orders were carried out. After the assault (using bounding fire), the Platoon Sgt would consolidate the position, prepare for a counterattack, collect and redistribute ammo and food, ensure that any casualties were brought in from the assault path (we NEVER stopped in our advance to give aid to casualties. that is why we had Corpsmen), and emplace any Company level attached weapons such as MG's, Mortars, and Antitank/Assault teams. When we had M-14's, we each carried 180 rounds in nine magazines, and for M-16's 280 rounds in eight magazines. if we had weapons attached such as MG's and 60mm mortars, we'd each also carry 200-400 rounds of 7.62mm (we had M-60s) and two 60mm mortar rounds. Finally, we'd usually also carry 40mm grenades for the M203s and at least one or two claymore mines. Kind of why Marines are considered "Heavy" infantry. I never even heard of a 2IC team until I started playing CM. I honestly don't know if the US Army designates one or if it's just one of those things that BF uses to give us to simplify buddy aid. Recon Teams are usually at Battalion level, the same as Javelins. We never saw them at the Platoon level. We would assign a fire team or squad to perform the recon for our advance, and to keep our flanks secure. We ALWAYS maintained our scouts in front. They are useless in the rear.

    I always try to use the above to equip and organize my Marines (and Army even though I know they are not trained the same) in CM. For me, they are tactics that I know best.

     

  19. On 12/7/2019 at 7:15 PM, z1812 said:

    I feel this way as well. Except the delay didn't bother me at all since there is so much content in the other games I have not played yet..............................the thing is I know will eventually buy it, if for no other reason but to have my collection complete. 

    There’s nothing wrong with or disloyal to decide not purchase a Family or module because it doesn’t “trip your trigger.” Both CMFI and GL were first day purchases for me, but I just recently started playing the Polish campaign in GL, and no scenarios yet. I have started playing the 10th Mountain campaign in R2V. I enjoy playing CMFI because I like to experience the changes in formations, TO&E, and tactics from 1943 to 1945.

    I guess we all have our reasons to buy or not to buy, but none of them is disloyal to BFC. I get the feeling that the next modular for CMRT will be a “first day buy” for Aragon 2002, and that’s how it should be based on his interests.

  20. M1903/M1917 vs M1 effectiveness depends more on the area of operation (AOO) and whether in defense or advance. When you’re in a defensive position with an open 1000 yard field of fire, the bolt actions are going to be more effective than the M1. That’s the type of fire for which they designed. When assaulting or defending in forested areas, urban areas, or other areas with limited ranges, the M1 takes the lead. During those assaults, soldiers and Marines learned to effectively fire from the hip. In those situations, the M1903, M1917, and K98 simply couldn’t match the M1, so that would put the Brazilians more on a par with the Axis infantry. Without a doubt though, the BAR, which was designed in WWI, was overmatched by the MG42 as an organic squad support weapon. The U.S. light MGs were part of the weapons platoon, and were assigned to rifle platoons on an as needed basis, just like the M60 MG during the Vietnam war. 

    The U.S. Marine Corp declined to receive the M1 when it was accepted because they wanted the 1000 yard range of the M1903. When the Marines landed on Guadalcanal, they carried M1903s. They fought off attacks by Japanese soldiers who were also using bolt action rifles. Then, shortly after National Guard units landed to take over the AOO, Marines “found” M1s to replace their M1903s that were “lost” in combat. I believe that says more about the effectiveness of the M1 over the M1903 in that type of combat.

    I’ve fired the M1903, M1, M-14, and M-16, and would chose an M1903 for long-range sniping, M-14 for fixed defensive positions (because of the 20-round magazine), and the M-16 for limited visibility assaults. Max effective ranges (the range at which a Marine can be expected to inflict a casualty): M1903 -1000 yards (yd), M1-600 yd, M-14 - 460 meters (m), and M-16 - 360 m.

    The effectiveness of a weapon is almost entirely dependent on the training of and use by the combatant carrying it.

     

  21. 11 hours ago, MikeyD said:

    There's a couple proper scenarios featuring Brazilians in the module. One takes place during Operation Encore when the 10th Mtn Division and Brazilian F.E.B. were cooperating in opening a route through the Apennines.

     

    Brazilians.jpg

    Ouch, Brazilians in snow! That must have been horrible for soldiers from a subtropical country.

  22. I have no doubt that he actually did it. The actions leading to an award of the Medal of Honor must be thoroughly investigated and verified. Sure, there have been some awarded for questionable merit, but that was mainly in the 19th century. Also,  Audy Murphy was the most highly decorated soldier of WWII. If I remember correctly, he was also wounded in that action that caused him to be invalided out of the Army. He wanted to make it a career.

×
×
  • Create New...