Doug Beman Posted September 2, 1999 Share Posted September 2, 1999 Pixman, I'm pretty sure that the VLs aren't all owned by Martin yet. Fionn should be in control of at least the bridge location, and isn't probably going to be pushed off it anytime soon. I'm pretty sure, for the AI to end the battle, all VLs have to be in the control of one force or the other; neutrals/split control means the battle goes on. This battle isn't ending until one commander or the other cries uncle. DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dar Posted September 2, 1999 Share Posted September 2, 1999 Thomm wrote: "Fionn, do not introduce that style of playing, please ! It is only a game after all !" I guess we have a name for this town after all: Malmedy. Dar Steckelberg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Oberly Posted September 2, 1999 Share Posted September 2, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>As a precaution against American shelling I have ordered the twelve American prisoners into the dip also so that the American commander will hesitate to order an artillery barrage for fear of killing his own men.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But will that really discourage him?What are the drawbacks if he were to fire regardless of the POW's? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 2, 1999 Share Posted September 2, 1999 Guys, I was just leafing through my "Handbook of German Military Forces" from the US War Department and, struck by a little curiosity as to what my artillery strike will do to Martin I began looking up "bursting charge" weights of the various types of artillery assigned to support my attack. I reckon I've been hit by two batteries of 81mm mortars and another of 155mm artillery so far so I'm going to compare the weight of my shell types with that of a 155mm shells (I only have figures for a German 150mm gun but I reckon it's got to be relatively close to the weight of the American 155mm shell.) In any case. This is only a very rough comparison.. I'm REALLY looking forward to the fireworks since in Turn 18 I decided to commit my artillery to barrage Martin's positions. Around about Turn 21/22 he's going to get a severe shock . I'm still holding a little in reserve but I'm going to fire enough to hurt him and then see if any other nice targets present themselves. Anyways here goes: American 155mm shell = approximately 100 lb shell. 81mm mortar: 7.7 lbs of TNT (Not exactly a mass killer is it? Probably it is best used to merely pin the enemy.) 120mm mortar: 35 pounds (the book says its approximately the same as a 105mm shell).. 105mm arty: 33 pounds (looks like the book was right) 210mm rocket: 248 lbs WOW !!!!! I've called down some 120mm mortar fire onto a platoon of his infantry sitting under scattered trees. I've called the 210mm rockets down onto the central apartment building. Rockets are notoriously innacurate so I hope, with that target location, to ensure the scatter falls within the town. In a test scenario I virtually wiped out an entire infantry company in the open scattered over a 100 m by 100 m area with a 210mm rocket barrage.. Something like 17 out of 162 survived. I wonder how the rockets will do in a town against dug-in troops though? So, if we're looking at this objectively the only weapons which can really hurt him in the town are the 210mm rockets. My mortars and 105mm shells can harass him some and hurt any infantry which he moves out of houses but basically if I want to wipe units entrenched in buildings out I'm going to have to rely on my 210mm rockets. I wish I had a couple more 210 or 300 mm rocket batteries. A three battery barrage of those rockets could just wipe out any town at all. In a little test I did on this scenario map (minus any troops) I fired 2 x 300mm batteries and 1 x 210mm battery at the town. End result.. 5 Houses were completely obliterated as were 3 of the big multi-story buildings in the complex. That's roughly 1/4 of the town's buildings gone in under 1 minute.. Nasty.. I won't do so well since I only have 210mm rockets but I will definitely obliterate one platoon and whatever building I aim at. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted September 2, 1999 Share Posted September 2, 1999 Fionn, do you know how many rockets will be fired at the central apartment block? I'm just wondering how much explosives will be arriving in that area. Also, when you give wide-perspective shots, could you tell us which way is north? Sometimes I have trouble determining where what you're describing is happening. DjB [This message has been edited by Doug Beman (edited 09-02-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 2, 1999 Share Posted September 2, 1999 Roughly about 8 rockets or so. Each rocket can kill a squad or most of a platoon if they're bunched up and certainly can destroy a house.. They have to be very near misses to destroy houses though. Re: Prisoner repositioning.. LOL. Aren't we all moralistic now? This is war. I HAVE to guard the prisoners (thus I want them close to me) and if, by putting them very close to me, I can dissuade some of Martin's artillery then I'll do that. One thing I have noticed from looking at the battle in the village is that Martin is placing my captured units in the church, the building overlooking the river and the central apartment building. MY responsibility is to my men. I will NOT shoot American POWs but I won't coddle them and run them to the rear when it is not in my best interests to do so. At the very worst those American POWs are taking the same risk my own Panzergrenadiers are taking. Comparisons to Malmedy are madness. I think Martin won't knowingly call fire on my troops if his troops are intermingled with them.. Gees guys, it's not like I'm driving American POWs out in front of my advancing troops to force enemy troops to fire on them if they want to be able to shoot at my troops behind. I'm simply gathering all the prisoners in the same place that my men are.. That's hardly a war crime is it? I'm calling arty down on positions which are known to be full of German POWs though since I have no choice since Martin has put my POWs in those locations. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted September 3, 1999 Share Posted September 3, 1999 Fionn, thanks for giving us unit stats, and "by the numbers" summaries of the action. Helps us when we can see the forces you have. Now that you've apparently broken the US wall line for good, your plan is to hold up for a reorg while the vehicles and arty shell the crap out of the town, right? I should say plan WAS, since you guys are into Turn ~19 now. Also, where on usenet will you be posting stuff? The more CM info I can get the better. DjB [This message has been edited by Doug Beman (edited 09-02-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dar Posted September 3, 1999 Share Posted September 3, 1999 Sorry, Fionn. Maybe my comparison to Malmedy was a little far-fetched. However, I still find you in violation of Geneva Convention III, Article 19, and possibly Articles 13 and 20. Geneva Convention III (Need Acrobat Reader) Of course, your buddy Martin may be just as guilty if he's sticking them in the church as human shields. "Gonna be a hanging, boys! Pack a lunch and grab grandma!" Dar Steckelberg [This message has been edited by Dar (edited 09-02-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 3, 1999 Share Posted September 3, 1999 Well, I hang around here LOTS . I post to war-historical on usenet and can be found at cdmag.com although I'm only there rarely now since I simply don't like the type of crowd which is appearing in thw war forum there. I just posted a message to the CM thread there letting people know AARs are up... I drop into the CC3.gamestats, and strategy usenet forums too on occasion and of course I'm on TGN's forums but for CM stuff war-historical and here are your best bets. Dar, Interesting... How so? I am only subjecting his prisoners to the same risks my men face.. Remember this is still a combat situation. As I am gathering up his prisoners Martin's Sherman is actively shelling my men in the dip. Isn't there a law somewhere to protect men accepting surrenders? I admit I'd find it absurd if the Geneva Convention objected to bringing prisoners into shelter shared by your men in the face of enemy fire which might otherwise kill both you and them. The Geneva convention is all nice in theory but in practice you just try not to shoot the captives but you can't be affording to give them all limos. Some people have FAR too idealistic a view of what war is about IMO. It's a nasty business in which the shooting of prisoners is pretty common on all sides. Dar, for some reason I can't download the Geneva Convention. Could you email me the relevant portions please? I think my treatment of prisoners is sensible and can't see anything wrong with it (they're not being used as human shields.. they're simply co-locating.) Doug: Yes, basically I want to identify martin's dispositions and I want to then shell them to pieces I'm thinking of shelling the church, the multi-story building overlooking the bridge and the apartment complex. I reckon Martin must have platoons in each of those building to guard his victory flags. I also figure he has 1 platoon in the woods to the south of the town (I saw them running over there) and another in the scattered trees near the river about 300 metres in front of the town.. One other platoon is probably scattered throughout the town. I figure my 81mm mortars can hurt his guys in the scattered trees in front of the town and then my tnks and MGs can DF him to hell. I'll fire my 210mm mortars at the building overlooking the bridge and fire my 105mm shells at the church. As this happens I will try to assault him in both the north and south flanks.. Basically I'm trying to kill or maim 3 platoons with arty, kill one using tanks and some 81mm mortars and then fight his other 2 or 3 platoons using my infantry.. If he gets more reinforcements I'm toast though. Also, my targets are all provisional. As I get a firmer idea where he is I'll change the targetting a little obviously. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers [This message has been edited by Fionn (edited 09-02-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted September 3, 1999 Share Posted September 3, 1999 I'll have to check with Charles, but I am pretty sure you will not get points for POWs that die during the battle. If this isn't the case, I am going to ask him to make it so. We don't want people to be using POWs as pawns or human shields. It did happen, but it shouldn't be any part of tactics in CM. And if Fionn and Martin are already finding ways to do this, then we need to act fast because there are more that will do the same Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 3, 1999 Share Posted September 3, 1999 Steve, 1. I amn't using them as human shields.. I'm just co-locating so they share the same fate.. You KNOW how paranoid I am about artillery by this stage of the scenario 2. If some of my men escape from Martin not only will he lose victory points for capturing prisoners but I will GAIN victory points for having these guys ready to fight in the "next battle" correct? I'm thinking of this in terms of a campaign in which rescuing friendly POWS would result in having more men available for the next battle correct? Ps. If by shooting your own men who have become POWs you can ensure that the enemy doesn't get VPs for them I can see a time when some cold-hearted person would shoot his own ex-comrades to prevent the enemy from getting the VPs for their capture. if its possible to track who kills POWs perhaps if the US shoot Americans whom the Germans have captured the Germans should get double points or something? ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted September 3, 1999 Share Posted September 3, 1999 I just checked with Charles on one point: You will want to scoot Martin's dudes off the map. You get double the points for a surviving POW that you get for a casualty (of any sort). So leaving them on map only leaves them to be either killed or recaptured by Martin. Remember, unless there are friendlies around, Martin's troops will be good little boys and march where you tell them to. Send 'em to the rear! I think you get a deduction for friendly fire casualties already. I will double check. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Fox Posted September 3, 1999 Share Posted September 3, 1999 There you go Fionn- there are no loopholes, these guys have thought of most things especially with cunning and evil individuals such as yourself in mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 3, 1999 Share Posted September 3, 1999 Simon: They know me all too well ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dar Posted September 3, 1999 Share Posted September 3, 1999 Fionn: Here's the relevant article: Article 19 Prisoners of war shall be evacuated, as soon as possible after their capture, to camps situated in an area far enough from the combat zone for them to be out of danger. Only those prisoners of war who, owing to wounds or sickness, would run greater risks by being evacuated than by remaining where they are, may be temporarily kept back in a danger zone. Prisoners of war shall not be unnecessarily exposed to danger while awaiting evacuation from a fighting zone. The URL to the menu is: http://www.unog.ch/frames/disarm/distreat/warfare.htm They're all PDF files, so you'll need Acrobat Reader. Dar Steckelberg PS-I'm just giving you crap about violating the articles! We all know it's just a game. But since you get to play it now and I have to wait, I feel compelled to torment you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted September 3, 1999 Share Posted September 3, 1999 Fionn, sounds like a plan, and I agree that if Martin gets more (esp. useful AT power) you're in serious trouble. This battle could very well end up with you cruising your tanks around the town's outskirts with impunity, but not enough infantry to go in and take it. Be sorta like the small town "hey we're bored let's drive around and around and around the town!" I write this as of Turn 15 DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 3, 1999 Share Posted September 3, 1999 Dar. No problems. As a medical student however ethics is a BIG part of my training so I'm pretty aware of the Geneva convention etc (although I think its outmoded in places). As for article 19... I'm actually being a good soldier by letting them share my shelter... Martin's actually actively firing on the woods with a Sherman . This discussion has relevance later which is why I'm giving it the time here. Doug: Correct... If Martin can kill more of my tanks then I'm in trouble since I'm counting on them to make the breaches I need in the US lines. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ssnake Posted September 3, 1999 Share Posted September 3, 1999 Fionn, I think you're perfectly right on the trouble with those POWs. After all (at least to turn 15) it's just been 2 minutes ago that you actually captured them (turn 14). As far as my army training on the Geneva convention tells me, this is by far not an outrageous long period to assemble them, before escorting them to the rear - provided that you'll do that within the next minutes (read: once you have cleared the situation at the wall line, and start to move on assaulting the town). Quite obviosly you may capture some more troops there, so it is a completely justified position to assemble all the POWs first, before bringing them backwards - in fact, your're taking them out of the reach of direct fire, that way protecting them! It'd be ridiculous to have an escort for every single POW from the very moment he surrenders. That would force anyone to completely halt his advance (and effectively withdraw), given enough numbers of prisoners. The Geneva convention doesn't forbid to lead a war, after all, but shall regulate "proper conduction" (whatever that means amidst arty barrage and intense hand-to-hand combat). I don't know what you'll do with those POWs in the upcoming turns, but based on the events until turn 15, you should not fear being condemned as a war criminal. Well then, off to my vacations. See 'ya when everything will be over - by the end of September. GWY, Fionn ! [This message has been edited by Ssnake (edited 09-03-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak40 Posted September 4, 1999 Share Posted September 4, 1999 Fionn, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak40 Posted September 4, 1999 Share Posted September 4, 1999 Fionn, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak40 Posted September 4, 1999 Share Posted September 4, 1999 Fionn, I noticed that your Stug is low on ammo, it obviously has unleashed a lot of shells within 16 minutes. Is there a way to tell your gunners/tanks to conserve ammo? If so, is it something you control or something that the computer decides once ammo reaches a low state? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted September 4, 1999 Share Posted September 4, 1999 I'm going to talk about this in Turn 17 AAR actually. I only noticed this myself when we were playing Turn 17 and I mentioned it to Steve. We found out that the Tac AI needed tweaking so that it wouldn't fire AP shells at infantry etc. End result: what caused this was identified and has already been fixed.. It doesn't stop it really affecting this game though.. StuG has NO AT rounds. The Panther has 7... Both Pz IVs have around 30 AP shells. SO, while I might have 4 tanks only 3 of them have ANY AT ability and the Panther probably won't have enough rounds to take out more than 1 or 2 Shermans at best.. Basically I am reduced to relying on my 2 Panzer IVs for AT capability... The good news for you is that this occured due to a bug which has been fixed... We've been fixing things during this AAR too .. It's not just all fun and games hehe PS. There won't be an AAR today but there will be a big article with about 35 pictures illustrating FOW and anti-tank gun ambushes.. I spent 7 hours designing the scenario, playing it, taking pictures and writing and sending it in yesterday evening ( 6pm till 1 am) so I was too tired to do any AARs... I'll try to do a couple for Sunday so that you will be pretty much caught up with us.. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dar Posted September 4, 1999 Share Posted September 4, 1999 Firing AP at infantry? I knew German optics were good, but targeting individual soldiers with cannon? Damn! Dar Steckelberg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted September 4, 1999 Share Posted September 4, 1999 Fionn ran into three different problems which conspired to sap him of AP ammo (and HE too) 1. Fionn was doing Area Fire, which means the crew just shoves 'em in and fires as fast as they can. This is OK for one turn, but if left alone can empty the unit of ammo (eventually they will stop before running out, but things get far too low). 2. The "bug" was a Fuzzy weighted value that made tanks FAR too likely to toss HE at enemy targets way off in the distance. In Fionn's case this meant "wasting" shells at 1500m distance. Fact is that Fionn scored some hits from this, but the overall effect wasn't a wise usage of ammo. The range has been shortened substantially. 3. Because of the large quantity of HE being used his HE ammo levels dropped off quickly. Therefore the TacAI switched over to using the more plentiful AP supply. The The design flaw was that it really shouldn't fire AP until HE is EMPTY. So, it was a three fold problem. Fionn was targeting too many troops with HE area fire (thus expending a lot of HE quickly), when left on its own was far too likely to toss HE at distant targets, and the TacAI was switching ammo type to AP when it shouldn't have. Should work MUCH better now Steve [This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 09-04-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatherof4 Posted September 4, 1999 Share Posted September 4, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Fionn: There won't be an AAR today but there will be a big article with about 35 pictures illustrating FOW and anti-tank gun ambushes<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Please let us know where this is when it's available Fionn. Thanks, fo4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts