Jump to content

Freyberg

Members
  • Content Count

    788
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Freyberg reacted to Vacilllator in FB versus FI   
    Okay, let the blood and tears commence...
    Thanks to @BFCElvis for a pain-free purchase and install (not to mention my 300 Mbps broadband), I now have the CMFI bundle .
    We may be in for a 'dark winter', but I will be consoled by travelling to Italy's warm and sunny climes.  When I'm not in Normandy or on the East Front of course...
    KG Peiper will have to wait for now 😮
  2. Like
    Freyberg reacted to Vacilllator in FB versus FI   
    Thanks my friend, will give it a go 👍. 
    Hang on, I don't have a 'Welcome to Sicily' campaign, unless it's the 'Invasion at Gela'?
  3. Like
    Freyberg reacted to Vacilllator in FB versus FI   
    Got it thanks plus a lot more.  Also went back to CMMODS3 which has a lot more vehicles and other stuff than CMMODS4?  I am using every vehicle of Aris' that I could find, I think I'm still short of a few but it's a good start.  Oh and got Juju's UI working nicely, with Ithikial's R2V addon.  Apart from that Aris' smoke and dust, Mord's portraits and Umlaut's loading screen picture compilations.  A busy download and install session.  Happy days 😁.
  4. Like
    Freyberg got a reaction from John1966 in FO/HQ assets   
    I think 81mm mortars, which have a limited range, are assumed to start on the edge of the map.
    You'll occasionally find angle of fire will affect artillery, including off-map artillery.
  5. Like
    Freyberg got a reaction from umlaut in FB versus FI   
    I've played a little FB, but I love FI - mainly, it has to be said, because of the British, Commonwealth, Free French and other forces.
  6. Like
    Freyberg got a reaction from Falaise in shells density to have an efficient fire   
    Assuming you have about eight gun firing, 'Heavy, Maximum' would look really cool.
    If the target is in strong buildings, you'll cause serious damage and a lot of casualties; if the target is in anything but strong buildings, you'll utterly obliterate it.
  7. Like
    Freyberg got a reaction from IanL in FB versus FI   
    I've played a little FB, but I love FI - mainly, it has to be said, because of the British, Commonwealth, Free French and other forces.
  8. Like
    Freyberg reacted to MikeyD in High casualty rates in CM games   
    What were the casualty statistics for the Battle of the Bulge? Roughly 200,000 casualties, 1300 tanks lost and 1800 aircraft lost. All over the course of just 5 weeks, give-or-take. How many CM battles would it take to reach 200,000 casualties? 
  9. Upvote
    Freyberg got a reaction from IanL in High casualty rates in CM games   
    That's a really good point. The mention of suicide attacks made me wonder...
    If the question is: is CM a realistic WWII simulation with respect to casualties? - we can look at some of the historical battles where the commanders did act like CM players, for example the Japanese on Guadalcanal, in which case, I reckon the casualty rates in CM are probably about right.
     
     
  10. Like
    Freyberg reacted to landser in High casualty rates in CM games   
    I often find myself having an inner debate about these sorts of things. And something like the quote above is one. Due to a combination of the scale (both time and area), the AI and how things work in Combat Mission generally, there is no prospect of forcing a tactical withdrawal. A strong point in actual warfare is a key defensive position, and there will be times the enemy will hold at all costs, but in the main, even these sorts of positions will be abandoned when a penetration occurs elsewhere along the line and the troops on the strong point are threatened with envelopment. I suppose a scenario designer can trigger this sort of behavior if enemy troops reach a certain line on the map? But in general this sort of thing doesn't occur in Combat Mission. There's little in the way of tactical fluidity, of reinforcements sealing a penetration, of withdrawals or exploiting a breakthrough if it occurs other than perhaps where a designer foresaw it. So in Combat Mission we must assault that position, come hell or high water, because they're not going anywhere and it's a victory location after all. There is little to 'unhinge' a defensive position and force it's retreat.
    I try to make it a point not to criticize a game for what it is not. In most cases it isn't fair. You don't buy a coupe and complain it's not a convertible after all. But at the end of my inner debates I find myself hoping that these are the areas where the next steps in Combat Mission's evolution occur. That we eventually see a computer opponent that is able to think on its feet, to react and exploit, or to save its hide or push for victory through prudent recognition of the ebb and flow of a tactical battlefield. I sometimes feel like we have all the tools aside from any sense we are playing a human opponent because the computer is so rigid in its conduct. And AI that could at least approximate this would go far in making Combat Mission's single player a much better experience than it already is.
    in terms of the topic this sort of withdrawal could go a long way to preserving force strength, but then again it would simply push them toward the back edge of the map as there's no escape, where it would likely be even easier to rack up high kill counts, away from suitable terrain and prepared positions. Perhaps there could be a retreat off map option for the computer opponent, but maybe the game loses some appeal as it's not so compelling if you force the enemy in to a pell-mell race for the exits. It might come down to the player's expectations, as some would see this as a realistic reaction to a disintegrating defense and some would lament the loss of the drama or challenge they expect from a given scenario. "All I did was drive my tank platoon through the gap and ten minutes later the scenario ended".
    I don't know what the right answer is, and what I want out of the game is not what the next man wants. Until it can be worked out though we'll continue to see casualty percentages far in excess of what would be tolerable to a battalion commander. Stand and die is not all that rare in history as well all know, but in Combat Mission there really isn't any alternative.
  11. Like
    Freyberg reacted to MikeyD in High casualty rates in CM games   
    Another example of real world casualties exceeding CM would be the siege of Poznan, February 1945, which  saw seventeen thousand KIA and an uncounted number of wounded over approx a 4 weeks. (I threw together a scenario covering that for Fire and Rubble.)
    In CM we're witnessing the 'tip of the spear'. We don't see the logistics tail stretching back a dozen miles where basically nobody dies. Its like the NFL. Statistically, a very low percentage of NFL company employees find themselves being tackled. The few NFL employees that we see on TV, though, experience it on a regular basis.
  12. Like
    Freyberg reacted to danfrodo in High casualty rates in CM games   
    losing 200K soldiers is easy in CM.  just give me 400K and give the enemy artillery and spotters and I'll do my usual impetuous, ill-advised moves.
  13. Like
    Freyberg reacted to RepsolCBR in High casualty rates in CM games   
    I've just finished reading David Glantz, Zhukovs greatest defeat - operation mars.
    The russians that had the missfortune to participate in that operation would probably have been more then happy with CM casualyy levels...🤕☠
  14. Like
    Freyberg got a reaction from John1966 in Mortar targeting   
    That's interesting - I'm gonna try using 'target' and see if that makes them more accurate - I'd always accepted a bit of spread, but maybe the two commands are set up differently.
  15. Like
    Freyberg reacted to SimpleSimon in Still loving Commonwealth forces   
    That's what I'm seeing too akd.
    Machine Gun Battalion, Infantry Division, 1944 (niehorster.org)
    Updated ToE for 1944. The Battalion was now distinctly organic to the Division it was attached to (I think previously they were an independent formation?) and resembles something more like a reinforced Heavy Weapons Company. A number of the machine guns were traded in for 4.2in heavy mortars, while the usual rearmament trends in the British Army meant things like more Brens, PIATs, and Universal Carriers all around. The way the 1944 formation is organized seems distinctly like a support-group thing to be detached to Rifle Regiments as needed. 
  16. Like
    Freyberg reacted to akd in Still loving Commonwealth forces   
    From 1943 on sub-units of MGs and mortars were generally parceled out to brigades as “brigade support groups,” e.g.:
    https://www.saskatoonlightinfantry.org/during-the-war.html
  17. Like
    Freyberg reacted to Erwin in Still loving Commonwealth forces   
    As with ATR's, MG's don't seem that useful when alone, and one wonders why where they ever used. But when you have a platoon's worth or at least half a dozen focused on a target, only then one sees their effectiveness and value.
  18. Like
    Freyberg reacted to Vergeltungswaffe in Still loving Commonwealth forces   
    Played a pbem fairly recently with vet and crack FJ versus Brits with quite a few Vickers and was really surprised how well they performed.
  19. Like
    Freyberg reacted to SimpleSimon in Still loving Commonwealth forces   
    It's hard to tell how those huge MG Battalions were used, and i've heard enough arguments both ways to say that there was no specific manner in which they used. Sometimes the guns and crews would be parceled out among infantry formations, sometimes they'd be used as you use them in "battery" all massed on a specific objective. 
    Here's a TOE
    Infantry (Machine Gun) Battalion, 06.04.1938 (niehorster.org)
    Motorized too, trucks directly attached to the formation, also note large distribution of Boys Rifles for self-protection from armor. 
    They seem to have been a holdover of the First World War Machine Gun Corp in which many Armies still used MG formations like artillery groups. The Red Army maintained Machine Gun Companies for the war too, but as I heard they were almost never used en masse but usually parceled out to locations not in the Russian's main path of maneuver in order to prevent or attrition movement as economy-of-force. ie: The Russians using the cheapest reasonable means for an objective such as flank screening. 
    The Italian Army also had Machine Gun Companies but I don't have any specific on how they were used. I wouldn't be surprised to find out they were frequently withheld by Division HQ to protect Division HQ while the infantry could just screw off with their awful Breda MGs. 
  20. Like
    Freyberg got a reaction from Warts 'n' all in Mortar targeting   
    Target Briefly with on-map mortars:
    If you have a red targeting line at the end of a turn, and you do not adjust it, but simply click 'target briefly' to extend the mission, then once on target, it will remain on target.
    If you interrupt the mission in any way (i.e. if you 'break' the red targeting line by moving it or allowing it to expire), then the mortars will need to do ranging shots again.
  21. Like
    Freyberg reacted to IanL in Mortar targeting   
    I am fond of target light - which for mortars is a slower rate of fire. That way you can let the team zero on the target without burning through their whole ammo supply.
  22. Like
    Freyberg reacted to John1966 in Mortar targeting   
    Apologies if this is a much-covered thing but I'm sure this has been tested by someone.
    Since the introduction of "target briefly", I use it a lot.
    In fact I often click 4 times to give a full minute of firing (which I repeat in the next turn if required). The reason I do that is in case I forget the "clear target" and empty the ammo box on a long since neutralised target (which I often used to do).
    But I've noticed that with "target", mortars will hone in on the target until they're getting it right in the pickle jar (or foxhole/trench/whatever).
    With "target briefly", they never seem to get closer, even if the fire is continuous for several minutes.
    Have I noticed this correctly or is it a figment of my imagination?
  23. Like
    Freyberg reacted to Wicky in Scam Battlefront download?   
    I'd scan your puter for a virus / dodgy browser extension.
  24. Like
    Freyberg got a reaction from quakerparrot67 in 50mm ATG issue?   
    I remembered the thread from way back because it was so interesting
  25. Like
    Freyberg got a reaction from quakerparrot67 in 50mm ATG issue?   
    It's correct - it's a particular type of HEAT round these guns could fire.
     
     
×
×
  • Create New...