PEB14
-
Posts
736 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by PEB14
-
-
On 4/20/2024 at 7:50 PM, Myles Keogh said:
If there is an upcoming CMFI battlepack, then I hope is that it features more fighting from late 1943/early 1944 which was arguably the embodiment of the war in Italy (mountains, mud, bad weather, and not yet a strategic backwater) and is currently not very well-represented in the game.
The New Zealanders and Indians at Cassino?
The Free French leveraging the Gustav Line?
The Canadians at Ortona?
The Americans at San Pietro which was made famous by the 1945 John Huston documentary film?
I think we already have the Polish in Cassino, so it's likely we won't get another Cassino campaign...
A French campaign sounds very exciting...
-
I think to remember that mortar teams will not fire "offensively". I mean that they will fire only through TacAI, not by player's order.
But I'm absolutely not sure of that...
-
Presently playing 3 PBEM (1 CMFI, 1 CMRT, 1 CMFB) with another CMFi about to start.
Turn rates ranges between 1-2 per week to 1-2 per day.
Looks like 4-5 PBEM is standard for most of us...
-
@George MC The post title was nearly a direct call at you, George...
In fact I'm right now fighting my way through your SPW and Tank lessons scenarios, trying to learn how to best use these damn PzGr squads.... Blood and tears and even more blood...
On 4/15/2024 at 11:48 PM, George MC said:I think previous posts have covered your query in detail. This vid I made gives an overview of how the Germans viewed the SPW and panzer grenadiers being used.
You mean that you also recommend to scout using a full PzGr 4-men PzGr team, supported by the other team and the SPW itself? (I know the vid, I've watched all your vids carefully!
)
On 4/15/2024 at 2:11 PM, Anthony P. said:There's no reason not to use scout teams with Panzergrenadiers. If you're sending a single squad off to, sure, you'll have problems... but is lone squads out on their own being vulnerable really a problem unique to Panzergrenadiers?
Send a platoon instead and detach a scout team from one of its squads.
I think I miss your point. During WW2 the smallest tactical unit both in CW, US and German armies were squads, not platoons. (What you refer to is more in line with the Soviet doctrine.) So squads shall be able to manoeuver (fire/support) on their own. By mid 1944, the German units are even more flexible from that point of view, as all teams are equipped with their own LMG and may thus assume alternatively the fire support role.
IMHO the issue is that, in CM, the scout team count as a whole team, while in RL it probably didn't (the two-teams structure of the PzGr squad was probably retained, 3-men LMG teams each, while the scouts were away).
On 4/15/2024 at 2:11 PM, Anthony P. said:The issue is that in the West and Normandy in particular, the Panzergrenadier divisions were desperately thrown into the line instead of being kept in reserve to make up for the lack of infantry divisions.
Well, I'm talking about offensive use of the PzGr, not defensive. So precisely the way they're supposed to be used.
-
Thank you gentlemen. So no scout team for the Panzergrenadiere, only half-squads and SPW support. Up to now I hadn't much luck playing this way (true, I didn't really use the SPW as a base of fire squad), though…
3 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:If you have Kubelwagen, they can be used as Ersatz scouts.
Oh please @Bulletpoint !
I used to use my destroyed Panzer crews for scouting, but out of shame I don't do it anymore…
-
3 hours ago, domfluff said:
The panzergrenadier squad has three elements, not two, and understanding how best to use that is critical.
They consist of two symmetric fireteams, and the halftrack, each with an MG42. All three elements need to work in concert for them to function well.
I get your point, but I think you're slightly "off-doctrine" here. IIRC the halftrack is not supposed to be a weapon but only a transport mean (providing the mobility you're rightfully claiming). Nothing forbids to use the SPW as a third MG support team, but that's not what it's designed for. And I still don't know how I'm supposed to scout with those damn Panzergrenadiere…
-
Thanks, @Brille.
Given the choice I obviously won't use PzGr to clear forest or rural areas. But I must do with the tools I get… and more than once I have to do that kind of stuff with PzGren...
But even aginst the US or the Brits, the problem is the same: using scouts ruins the potential of a PzGr squad once they're gone… I've not played German tanks campaigns in the Bulge or in Normandy, but given the heavily forested/hedged terrain I know I'll have to face this kind of situationsthat I've yet been unable to solve satisfactorily in individual scenarios…
-
I know there are many fans of the aforementioned PanzerGrenadier, hence the topic title is deliberately provocative…
…but not untrue.
In fact, I don't like playing PzGr. Let me explain why, and please provide me with some advice…
IMHO, the problem lies in their binary structure. Two LMG, two groups: nothing to complain about. The problem is: what are you supposed to do with that kind of squad when facing close terrain like forest or buldings? With the Brits, the US, plain German infantry or even the Soviet, no problem: you split a two-man scout team and overwatch it with your remaining two teams. Fine.
But what about the two-groups PzGr squad? If you do split a 2-man scout team, the remaining 6 men get stuck into one huge, unwieldy group of 6 men, crammed together in an action tile, ripe for a lost shell or a Soviet sMG burst. And if your scout team gets killed, you're stuck with that "big blob team" FOREVER. No more fire and support. Only fire OR support. Great!!!
So what's the alternative? Using a full 4-man group as a scout team. You're 99% sure to bear more losses than with a dedicated, 2-man scout team, but at least your squad is not worthless anymore: the survivors still can manoeuver.
I've experimented both alternatives. I hate both. Whatever option I do chose, PzGr squads manpower gets consumed a lot faster than any other squads in the game, while it's supposed to be a top-notch offensive unit…
(I completely understand that the issue is a consequence of the CM game engine limitations. In RL, sending a 2-man scout teams did not reduce the remaining squad to a single group, the 2-groups structure was obviously kept as long as there were 4 remaining men in the squad to serve both LMGs; similarly, in the US and British squads, the 3-groups structure wasn't altered by scouting…)
I'm curious to learn what are the advice of the PzGr fans on the forum…
-
On 4/8/2024 at 2:35 AM, Halmbarte said:
The Germans responded by 'holding to the last man' and 'take not one step back', which didn't work out too well for them.
It's like Hitler & Stalin had switched roles by the end of WWII. Which is another reason you shouldn't fight the same people for too long: The survivors are liable to get good.
H
That's not completely true: the "not one step back" was Hitler's motto from the beginning of WW2 'til the end, with first practical application in December 1941 (and with positive results in this particular occasion as, according to many historians, the "not one step back" order saved the Wehrmacht from another Napoleon-like Berezina disaster).
So it's more like the Stavka did LEARN during WW2, while the OKW didn't.
-
News from Vire:
A Panther roams at th end of the street…
Fierce fighting have also occured in the cemetary:
Even the surrounding countryside is not spared…
-
Indirect fire with on map assets is really a mess. The only reliable way I ever managed to use it is to have the observer at voice distance of the guns (generally mortars).
I've played several times with German, on-map 81 mm mortars, and I've never been able to use them in indirect fire mode. They usually come with a battery HQ (or whatever is is called) with no radio; keeping it close to the mortars is not enough to call their fire from any other HQ. I've also tried to keep the next HQ (in rank), with a radio, close to the gun (an the battery HQ), but I've not been able to call these mortars with another radio equipped HQ either.
While using off board artillery is very simple, I don't understand why on-board artillery is so difficult to activate.
-
16 hours ago, Erwin said:
?? One has to assign all "prep fire" in the setup turn. The only choice (for offmap arty) is whether it is "immediate" or starts 5, 10 or 15 minutes later. Prep fire from an onmap gun is always "immediate" (onmap arty fire cannot be delayed).
Yes, sorry, that's basically what I meant: firing during the set up turn shall never be considered gamey for the attacker. On another hand, it always should be for a defender...
-
15 hours ago, Centurian52 said:
I have sometimes seen people refer to sending jeeps out front to get shot at as 'gamey'. That caught me by surprise the first time I came across it. Especially since I thought reconnaissance was one of the many roles jeeps were meant to fill.
I think it depends on which jeeps we are talking about... The cal.50 jeeps of US recon units are obvioulsy dedicated for the task, but the ones included in the British infantry companies are not...
-
8 hours ago, Probus said:
What is y'alls opinion of pre-planned artillery not in setup zones but on routs of advance? For instance a road through the woods that you are planning on going down or suspect the enemy is going to use to advance to your location? Not exactly 'recon by fire' but could be a tactic to break up ambushes or nail possible convoy routs. Would that be considered too 'gamey'?
The situation I'm considering is a ME in which a small town is the central battle zone. So wouldn't it be wise to blast all the roads into the town with pre-planned artillery?
It sounds 100% realistic to me as long as it it "preparatory fire", that is before starting to move your forces...
-
On 3/29/2024 at 9:45 PM, Brille said:
The thing is that CM don´t reflect the blindness of tanks and lack of situational awareness (when closed up) in this way...or let me say with players bypassing the spotting system it hardly feels that realistic.
You're right, of course. But neitehr does the game offer the possibility to reproduce the way troops behaved to reduce this lack of situational awareness. By example, the one-man scout crewman I mentioned is not getting out of my imagination, it was a widespread tactic (according to the books dedicated to the French 2nd Armored Division I've recently read - and as I doubt the French invented the concept in 1944, it was probaly widespread at least among Western Allies).
There is another reason why I'm reluctant to add lots of restrictive house rules.
1) IMHO in CM the attacker is at a disadvantage. Lethality being unrealistically high, and TacAI being quite poor at using terrain features, as an attacker you really need some help… (Obviously this is not relevant for Meeting Engagements.) This is even more relevant for scenarios designed to be played against a defending AI, in which the defending side is buffed up to provide some challenge when playing against the AI.
2) Scenarios are designed with the rules as they are, not for house rules… All house rules aiming at more realism will fatally result in slower attacking paces. And because of the clock limit, it puts the attacker at yet another disadvantage.
But in fact I completelt understand @Artkin position. It is certainly not pleasant to play against players who use completely gamey tactics. But I feel that adding tons of houserules kill the game more than it adds pleasure to it (at least for me).
Hence the key is more to find players whose playing style fits yours. I'm glad I did and I sincerely thank the guys I'm presently playing against for that!
Just to add one cent in the machine: IMHO for added realism one should consider a houserule banning the use of offboard artillery for the attacking side in WW2 games, except for:
- mortars;
- preplanned (1st turn) bombardments.
As a matter of fact, considering the very limited time frame of most CM games (less than two hours), calling regimental or divisional artillery to fire accurately on targets 50 or 100 meters in front of moving infantrymen… I'm still looking for such references in the literature!
-
11 minutes ago, Centurian52 said:
So I think the obvious conclusion at this point is that the rules are whatever you and your opponent agree to beforehand. I don't think it's possible, or even desirable, to have universal community-wide rules for H2H play.
And the less home rules, the less risk of cheating - even unwillingly: "oops, I think I think I just broke rule #12.5..."
-
22 minutes ago, Artkin said:
If you have an infantry team get into a fight with another infantry team, and you use your tank 1km away to snipe that enemy team the very next turn - this is completely unrealistic and sets CM on a lower bar than armored brigade for realism... which is already a really low bar.
I 100% agree with you there; but that's also where my post is relevant: by forbidding this (compleately unrealistic) behaviour, you also forbid more relevant ones, the kind of which I mentioned in my post.
22 minutes ago, Artkin said:Or if you use a tank with destroyed optics to area target the enemy's locations. Even if the commander is turned out.
That's where I'm starting to lose you. What's "completely destroyed optics", CM wise?
Practically, I'm not able to target vehicles anymore, but area fire should remain possible even without periscopes and lenses... With a loss of precision, of course...
-
16 hours ago, Vacillator said:
+1 to that, doesn't take long - perhaps a turn or two.
I can take a very long time... Apparently, they will disappear from map (white flag) only if 1) there are enemy troops very close, AND 2) if there is no friendly troops (which are not surrendering themselves) nearby. The latter condition can take ages in close terrains like dense forest (recent experience of mine...).
-
32 minutes ago, Erwin said:
In RL probably. Not sure how the game handles their state.
Aren't they broken by the time they un-surrender?
-
My post below refers to WW2 games only (I don't play modern titles).
Well, I understand the interest to add house rules for balance and fair play, but as far as realism is concerned, I really feel most are pointless in a CM game context...
I mean, however realistic CM is, it still lacks some very basic mechanisms or components which would make all those "realistic house rules" necessary or even relevant.
The C2 chain by example : you lack field phones, which remained an important C2 component until the end of the war. Radios are always OK, while they were particularly unreliable (I don't think I've ever read a WW2 book not mentioning radio troubles). And CM misses one of the most important C2 component during WW2: the runner!
Considering all these missing components, why put a house rule forbidding to area fire on a position where the player knows there is an enemy? In RL, the firing tank or squad would get the information, because some runner from a nearby squad would relay it, especially to a tank! In CM I shall move an entire team to reliably convey the information to a nearby tank, while only ONE runner would do the job. I personally don't and just shoot. Is it THAT unrealistic? I don't think so.
Regarding armor fighting in closed terrain (basically: all CMFI and CMBN scenarios), CM definitively lacks the one-man scout: the tank leader getting out of his tank to scout on the ridge or at the street's edge; the tank leader or foot soldier, hidden 10-50 meters in front of the tank, who directs its fire, hidden behind the crest, on a soft target that the gunner barely sees (or doesn't see).
And so on, so forth.
In conclusion, I generally only one house rule: no artillery fire on round 1, except for the attacker on a set-up position. And I've started to apply another one: surviving AFV crews shall move only towards the closest cover, and thereafter only towards the friendly edge. No more suicide tank scout-crews!
-
19 hours ago, Vacillator said:
I agree, but what is 'the Crunch' - do you mean a Crunchy bar? I would be frustrated if I lost a Crunchy bar.
Mr Vacillator, I'm very disappointed. Quoting Wikipedia:
QuoteThe traditional name for the annual England versus France rugby union match in the Six Nations Championship as used on both sides of the English Channel is Le Crunch, used since at least 1981
Last occurence: March 16, 2024. France 33-31 England.
Everything's said!
-
Well, it's the first major campaign I played so it's difficult for me to compare it with other ones, but I was able to play it and win it without going back to save files. And I'm no crack player, I play only since a little more than one year... You can afford to lose missions and still soldier on, which is pretty cool (I suffered two Major Defeats out of 15 missions).
But a frustrating campaign, sure it is!
British are frustrating anyway (except when they lose the Crunch, obvisouly...
). I mean, playing WW2 British in CM is frustrating, of course... 
-
-
I understand @AdamPraha ordered movement from point A on the road to point B on another part of the road usi, with some road turns in between, using only one movement order. Definitively doesnt work in CM...
But that's only my guess...
I just HATE playing those PanzerGrenadiers…
in Combat Mission Red Thunder
Posted
So basically the optimal range is between 200 m and 300 m:
- below 200 m the Soviet smG get the upper hand ;
- beyond 300 m the German LMG effciency goes down.
Do I get your point?