Baseless Speculation on the Market-Garden Module

[Lt Belenko]

A while back BFC said CMBN Upgrade followed by new MG Module.

Any chance both at together before Christmas?

[A Canadian Cat]

A while back BFC said CMBN Upgrade followed by new MG Module.

Any chance both at together before Christmas?

Well Steve had been very quiet for the last few weeks. The last time that happened we got CMFI.

[A Canadian Cat]

I'd like to see flame weapons come back for OMG and fall operations as well.

Not to pick on @sigop22 - he was just the last one that mentioned it. BFC has been very clear modules will be restricted to content (new units, order of battle, scenarios, campaigns, terrain) while updates will be the only way to get new game mechanics and features.

There is a pending update 2.0 for CMBN which updates the game engine to add the mechanics and features from CMFI. After which the indications are that we will see the OMG module with the units, order of battle etc for Arnhem etc.

If that is correct that means there will *not* be support for flame in time for the OMG module.

[Michael Emrys]

http://wwii.ca/photos/scheldt/beveland_1.jpg

Soldier on the right is holding an interesting weapon. It looks almost like a sporting rifle. Anybody know what it is?

Michael

[Quintus Sertorius]

You mean like not starting up the game?

Or starting it up.

But I'm thinking more along the lines of what Close Combat 2: A Bridge Too Far did back in the 90s. The "throw everything at one weak point" strategy doesn't work for the Allies because they have to win every battle along the line or the operation fails. It sort-of works for the Germans, but since the Allies have air superiority they can drop some supplies to Arnhem and Nijmegen, even if they're cut off. Also, the armored push up the line gets harder for the Germans to stop the further south you go, so if they plow all their resources into that fight they won't be able to reduce the northern pockets. Market-Garden is a situation that fits operational control uniquely well, IMO.

[para]

Or starting it up.

But I'm thinking more along the lines of what Close Combat 2: A Bridge Too Far did back in the 90s. The "throw everything at one weak point" strategy doesn't work for the Allies because they have to win every battle along the line or the operation fails. It sort-of works for the Germans, but since the Allies have air superiority they can drop some supplies to Arnhem and Nijmegen, even if they're cut off. Also, the armored push up the line gets harder for the Germans to stop the further south you go, so if they plow all their resources into that fight they won't be able to reduce the northern pockets. Market-Garden is a situation that fits operational control uniquely well, IMO.

I loved CC2:ABTF

[Holman]

I doubt that we'll see a new campaign engine at any point in the CMx2 series. That's just not what they do.

What would be cool, though (as well as conceivable), would be opening save files for data export so that someone else could design an external campaign engine. Even a rudimentary operational tool would be kind of fun for PBEM play.

Some of us remember the saga of Combat Mission Campaigns, which can be found on this very forum. I wonder if something similar might be attempted in CMx2.

[MG TOW]

Hetzers. Gotta have Hetzers. Flamin Hetzers too. And the one with the remote operated mg34 on the turret. Can never have too many Hetzers. Just sell them to the Swedes when the war is over.

[Macisle]

Hetzers. Gotta have Hetzers. Flamin Hetzers too. And the one with the remote operated mg34 on the turret. Can never have too many Hetzers. Just sell them to the Swedes when the war is over.

I have fond memories of those little buggers from CMx1. Tough as nails from the front and made of glass in the rear (50 cals could take em' out from the backside close up). I sure would love to see the standard Hetzers make their debut in CMx2!

[herr_oberst]

OMG simply must include Space Lobsters of Doom (c'mon, someone had to say it).

[Macisle]

OMG simply must include Space Lobsters of Doom (c'mon, someone had to say it).

-Definitely gonna' need shooting flame and spreading fire for those!

[Baneman]

OMG simply must include Space Lobsters of Doom (c'mon, someone had to say it).

-Definitely gonna' need shooting flame and spreading fire for those!

And garlic butter !

[Agua]

OMG simply must include Space Lobsters of Doom (c'mon, someone had to say it).

You got that a few years back in the title "Drop Team".

[jakla1027]

I've been thinking but can't really think of any new small arms (other than the German FG 42) that would be in the OMG module. Can anyone else think of any new small arms that might be included?

However, i can think of one that could be included but don't know how it'd work in terms of adding it into the game due to programing....that'd be the 1897 trench gun, or any other US military shotgun. I mean hey with 2.0 engine update we got canister rounds, so maybe shotguns could be included! albeit in a very limited quantity. Just imagine house to house fighting with one guy in your squad carrying a trench gun! (plus i know trench guns were far less common in the ETO than the PTO)

Now here's a guess, on variants we might see of small arms

US small arms:

M1C sniper rifle

M2 Carbine (maybe to early for OMG module)

M3 Sub machine gun (chambered in 9mm)

[Seedorf81]

Don't know if anyone mentioned this before, but in light of the unevitable and frequent blocking of Hell's Highway by (even a single) destroyed tank(s) and or other vehicle(s), in the game I should be able to push them off the road.

So, a tankdozer should be nice, or the possibility for tanks to shove wrecks aside.

[JonS]

Seedorf81,

CMBN is a tactical game, not an operational one.

[Michael Emrys]

Seedorf81,

CMBN is a tactical game, not an operational one.

True, but you haven't made it clear how that bears on his question.

I was thinking about tankdozers the other day myself. Playing a QB in FI, I wanted to send some vehicles along a path that was blocked by a stone wall. So I bought some engineers to blast gaps in the wall. This they did handily enough, but the rubble residue still created blocks in places. A dozer could have cleared paths through the rubble, even if it had taken several minutes to do so.

Michael

[JonS]

Dozers are an operational-level asset. Battlefield and route clearance is an operational level activity.

Neither the asset nor the activity belong in a tactical game.

(and yes; I know there are examples of dozers being used in tactical battles. There are also examples of B-17s and Lancasters being used in support of tactical battles, but they don't belong in CM either)

[Lt Belenko]

Dozers are an operational-level asset. Battlefield and route clearance is an operational level activity.

Neither the asset nor the activity belong in a tactical game.

(and yes; I know there are examples of dozers being used in tactical battles. There are also examples of B-17s and Lancasters being used in support of tactical battles, but they don't belong in CM either)

So what you're saying is: I should scrap my Burma Road scenario.

[Michael Emrys]

So what you're saying is: I should scrap my Burma Road scenario.

On the other hand, things still look promising for your Burma Shave scenario.

Michael

[Broadsword56]

Dozers are an operational-level asset. Battlefield and route clearance is an operational level activity.

Neither the asset nor the activity belong in a tactical game.

(and yes; I know there are examples of dozers being used in tactical battles. There are also examples of B-17s and Lancasters being used in support of tactical battles, but they don't belong in CM either)

To put it another way -- once a wreck happens on Hell's Highway, the time it would have taken for a request for the dozer tank to make it back to Division and for the dozer to arrive and to clear the wreck would be longer than the time of your battle. And the dozers couldn't clear wrecks if the area is still under fire and not secure. So there's no need to have them in CM Market Garden. If a wreck happens on the highway, it remains a problem for the duration of the battle.

Terrain note: It will be important to simulate the effect of the raised portions of the highway, since the embankments were too steep for vehicles to use and that's what made wrecks on the highway such a problem for the Allies. I don't know if the MG module will give us a specific raised road tile with that effect, so if it doesn't I plan to line the shoulders with impassable-to-vehicles tiles -- maybe heavy forest with no trees on it.

[Erwin]

Yes, that's what campaigns simulate well.... the time between scenarios to do stuff like bulldoze wrecks/repair bridges/clear minefields/resupply etc.

[Seedorf81]

Oke, "dozering" not in the game for being non-tactical, I can understand.

But pushing or pulling aside a single stricken truck, carrier or AFV (or whatever), in order to continue an advance along THE ONLY AVAILABLE PIECE OF ROAD WITH AN URGENT TIMETABLE TO KEEP, does seem quite tactical to me.

If you have a tank nearby, and XXX-corps had a lot of them, you would be rather stupid (I know, I know, just a personal opinion) if you didn't use it to simply push the obstacle of the road and continue the advance. I think that would be as tactical as it can be.

[Michael Emrys]

Oke, "dozering" not in the game for being non-tactical, I can understand.

But pushing or pulling aside a single stricken truck, carrier or AFV (or whatever), in order to continue an advance along THE ONLY AVAILABLE PIECE OF ROAD WITH AN URGENT TIMETABLE TO KEEP, does seem quite tactical to me.

If you have a tank nearby, and XXX-corps had a lot of them, you would be rather stupid (I know, I know, just a personal opinion) if you didn't use it to simply push the obstacle of the road and continue the advance. I think that would be as tactical as it can be.

Yeah, I think we have encountered one of those fine lines where it's a judgement call on which side of the line an action falls. For instance, in the case that I cited where I would have liked to have a dozer to clear the rubble of a blown wall. Jon would be right if on the spur of the moment the wall was blown and the call had to go all the way up to division to get a dozer sent down. But in this case, blowing the wall was an integral—indeed critical—part of the whole plan. That's why the engineers were there to blow it. It does not seem unrealistic to me that a dozer tank would have already been assigned to facilitate the operation and would be on hand.

Michael

[Seedorf81]

Yeah, I think we have encountered one of those fine lines where it's a judgement call on which side of the line an action falls. For instance, in the case that I cited where I would have liked to have a dozer to clear the rubble of a blown wall. Jon would be right if on the spur of the moment the wall was blown and the call had to go all the way up to division to get a dozer sent down. But in this case, blowing the wall was an integral—indeed critical—part of the whole plan. That's why the engineers were there to blow it. It does not seem unrealistic to me that a dozer tank would have already been assigned to facilitate the operation and would be on hand.

Michael

I do not know whether it's getting a little bit boring , but I think mr. Emrys is right in regard to preparatory roadclearing equipment.

In the 1930's students at the Royal Dutch Militairy Academy had to answer a question about advancing from the South of the Netherlands to the Arnhem-Nijmegen region. The ones that chose to advance along the road that later became known as Hell's Highway failed the exam. It was considered to be "utterly not done" (understatement) to attack along a single highway were there was hardly any cover and there were no alternative routes nearby.

Though the Allies in 1944 had the advantage of airborne troops and tactical airpower over the 1930's students knowledge, the planners of Market Garden most surely must have realised that there would be German-made blockades and destroyed vehicles on that road. Which had to be removed as quick as possible, and I'm convinced that XXXcorps had the materials upfront to do so. They weren't stupid back then.

I belief that, though the decision to assign roadclearing material to assaulttroops was operational, clearing the road at that time under those circumstances was purely a tactical matter.

And therefore I think that in CMMarketGarden we should be given the possibility to shove (or push or pull or blow up) blocking vehicles out of the way.