Rinaldi

A week off work means a week to play the larger/more complex scenarios I've been itching to get to. "Carbide Carbide" ships with the original game, but a redux with rationalized scoring was made by George MC and is the subject of this video: The map was gorgeous; lush and an interesting mix of terrain. The defense was interesting and my casualties definitely reflect the good placement on the part of the mapmaker - blind luck is what largely prevented it from being worse. All in all a scenario that captures the essence of the breakout from 'Hedgerow Hell', and has a bit of everything - house to house fighting, combined arms attacks, plenty of artillery and, of course, the potential for some small-armor action. Edit: Known issues; pixelation of some footage. My recorder apparently does not like alot of camera movement, so I suspect I'll have to use more static cuts in further videos.

Just want to thank both you and Pnzrldr for doing these AARs. Its a shame it cut early, but if Pnzr reads this I really do hope he seriously compiles his AAR into a .pdf; it would make for good reading. I'll take the liberty of thanking you on behalf of everyone who asked questions for taking the time to answer them almost universally, no matter how incessant (Like mine!).

That doesn't mean subordinates won't, I assumed. Alot of times I've put squads to +1, +2, and will see a Private take over when casaulties pile up that has -2 leadership. I know leadership isn't universal, quite naturally, but does that extend to motivation? If motivation is attributed to individuals in a crew or squad, then that could explain it. My (rather uneducated) guess.

Shock Force without a doubt did, especially in terms of the difference between fatal casualties and incapacitated casualties. I remember an RPG-29 hitting a floor that had a Dutch fireteam in it; 2 men were incapacitated rather than killed, and the other two were only lightly wounded, and that's with a powerful thermoberic. By contrast, when I returned the favor with a few rifle grenades on a Syrian reservist group later on in the battle, carnage was wholesale, the entire squad was put down and most of them were fatalities. The body armour definitely prolongs grenade duels and the ability to stay in a building through low caliber shellfire.

Good that someone set up an actual poll. Data is my fetish, having studied stats in school for so long; I'd love to see the results in a few days when this thread picks up more traffic.

If the game wasn't meant to be played that way, it wouldn't be an option. Playing at your comfort level is never bad.

Another quick one for you all; from "Buying the Farm." I remember this mission being so much more infuriating in 1.0; then again, I also don't recall canister being in 1.0 ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

We-Go veteran. I am a simple man.

Instant bragging rights if you get a BV through a battle with a few kills to its name! Thanks for this write up, I haven't had time to purchase it yet and I'm trying to gobble up every bit of information I can.

Hope all my fellow Ukrainian Frontoviki are ready to Яemove invadeЯ or; you know, get crushed by superior Russian equipment and soldiery In my case, it'll probably be the latter, but damn if I won't feel good having it happen!

That's a pretty good rule. Our house rule within my own personal group of friends is on AttackvDefense missions only the attacker should get preplanned bombardments.

I don't know what to tell you man; I'll say the same thing to Juergen when he pointed out his spotting issues; **** happens. If it happens consistently, its either time to re-evaluate your tactics or send a letter bomb to Steve.

Your observations remind me of a complaint I've had on one of my videos viz. spotting. I suppose the person was just venting, but I asked him to elaborate: I can't help but suspect that his story is a bit in the realm of fantasy; as I've never heard of such wonkiness. I've never had trouble spotting when I hunt forward with unbuttoned crews surrounded by infantry in daytime conditions. For the record I'm generally a ****ty scout as well; I follow the maxim that the only good recce is a dead one and have still never encountered his, or yours, frustrations. You're being given good advice here: and here: and you, as is your right, choose to say the game's spotting system is wonky. When you get told to perhaps wait for an update to the capabilities to the engine, you tell him its not constructive. Well now, you've largely ignored all the constructive advice! What was your rate of advance? I can't tell if those red lines are target lines or assault lines; assaults in the game logic happen at the "Fast" or "Quick" speed and leave very little in the way of spotting. At night you might need to spend 2-3 minutes in game time spotting to actually get a spot; or a recon by fire to garner a response; in such visibility you're going to suffer at least a half dozen close range ambushes...

You already have a reader in me. I absolutely love AARs , Can't wait to read.

I'm more of the opinion that 3.0 Normandy and Red Thunder in its current form are more or less the same level of maturity and fidelity. Perhaps its because the warfare in RT is slightly less symmetrical (not to say it is fully so in Normandy, speaking relatively here) and the general scale of the game is a bit larger by definition of being on the Ost Front. I've put alot more time into Normandy, so its probably a natural bias on my own end. I can't recall who pointed it out, I believe it was sburke, but the lack of confounding hedges every 100m probably helps alot with that. Human error viz. such obstacles never helps either. Do what you love! I had a friend play the Normandy demo; he was absolutely disgusted by it. He loved Shock Force, and felt claustrophobic playing Normandy. Saying you prefer Red Thunder and believe its a better H2H experience will always remain a true statement so long as you keep believing it. I dig both equally. Its apparently not in the immediate cards, I think they're saving it for the Bulge, something something not a common occurance in Normandy. Which I disagree with, as the Canadians rode tanks constantly if the Ia of the 12.SS is a good source on this (he said it was highly effective and that the Canadians had far better co-ordination with armor as a result). We also know for a fact that the lead two companies of 22IR and the 41AIR rode bareback on tanks during the first few hours of Cobra to reduce congestion; passing through the 9th ID was painful enough, it would've been more painful with all the M3s in tow. The mounted units followed later. But hey, not my game, I just play it.

Could be colloquial. Alot of tank crews referred to a series of tanks as the same one, for example. Two prominent examples are Lafayette Pool's "In the Mood" which were numbered I-III; despite losing them to enemy action. Abrams had Tunderbolt I through VII iirc; and V-VII were all upgrades and mechanical replacements, rather than combat losses. "The same tank" may not mean physically the same one; a shot in the dark from me.

Good to know, I was eyeing it after I finish 'Buying the Farm' - my old nemesis. It looked like something worth making an AAR over. I'm usually a fan of the bigger slug fests, but small infantry actions have far more elegance required.

Deeply enjoyed that video. I chuckled at the fanatical briefing; whoever made that scenario briefing gets thumbs up, all it was missing was a reference to the "Anglo-American horde."

Thanks for the suggestion John, I'll be sure to look into it for the next bout of filming. There is a certain lack of grittiness with the default textures, I agree. For now you guys will have to make due with this video of me getting my rear handed to me by Polish Paratroopers well supported by a Squadron of (incredibly shiny) Armour; from a PBEM match that was 'tooth and nail' for quite a while but ended with a minor Polish victory as I barely clung on to the objective zone. Counterattacks with fresh platoon sized forces got nowhere fast, but he couldn't eliminate my last stubborn pockets; all given I'll live with a minor defeat. Absolutely loving 3.0 thus far, money well spent. Enjoy:

The little tidbit will make the wait all the better; enjoy yourself.

Spent some time in the CF reserves, 32Brigade Group as an "armoured" soldier; recce. If G Wagens are armour, God help us. LAVs and Coyotes are for the active recce. Still though, there were worse ways to spend a weekend.

None. Most of the men in the 14.Schiffstammabteilung were approaching middle age, or were well above it. Much akin to the French reservist formations that the Germans themselves ran right over in 1940. Forgive me if I'm not particular sympathetic to the Germans, though... The 14 in particular was acting as triple duty; coast watching, training and occupation. The fighting was all hands; Market Garden likes to get disparaged in hindsight as a bad plan but the attack at the time was powerful enough to cause some raised eyebrows from German command. The entire 6.Kompanie of the 14.Schiffstamabteilung got hurled into fighting at Arnhem and Oosterbeek; freeing up Kampfwert I and II formations for the actual counteroffensives. Oldtimers and youngsters together were expected to fight, and the 14. conducted some local counteroffensives with naturally mixed results. The 6. was apart of KG Tettau if memory serves me correctly. Here's an evaluation of the 6/14's combat effectiveness from the Ia of the 9.SS; I won't encourage you to draw wider conclusions about Kriegsmarine performance in MarketGarden off it, but its valuable for understanding, I think, just why they're so painful to play as: "14.Schiffstammabteilung...was in the area from the first day of the enemy airborne landings on 17 September and was deployed as an infantry unit with defensive and security tasks. The unit possessed a sufficient quantity of infantry weapons (686 rifles, 84 pistols, 27 machine pistols, 21 light machine guns and 5 heavy machine guns) plus 2 captured Russian anti-tank guns. Regarding leadership, the unit was not really suitable for use as infantry because the Officers and NCOs did not have the necessary training for such operations. The men's weapon control is adequate. Their battle capability is satisfactory. To sum up the unit was not suitable for offensive action...." Now I think its safe to assume that the general definition of the 14.Schiffstamm's organzation can be applied to all the others in Holland broadly -such as the 10.Schiffstamm; moderately equipped, unfit, poorly led, and Kampfwert III at best.

Sometimes not even General Winter can reverse the battle. Bil might though [commence cheerleading] Bill is your plan now to try and set up Krichek as a blocking position? You seem leery on the possibility of holding H347 with such high profile, easily spottable ATGM vehicles. Are you going to make an attempt to contest it regardless or withdraw the units from H347? Is pulling back even feasible in the long run?

A letter from c3k to the mother of one of his many pixeltruppen Dear Sir/Madam/Abstraction, I'm writing to inform you that your only son was killed in action during the regiment's drive in Holland. He died a piss poor death, having not only killed none of my opponent's men, but having never fired his gun! What a pisspot soldier. With you in sorrow, c3k. PS: If you're going to try again for another child, talk him out of a military career, clearly you don't have the genes for it!

Well; that goes both ways. American systems I'm sure are all performing at 'optimal' as well, I'd reckon.