Infantry Smoke

[Matt]

I just finished a search regarding this topic and didn't come up with much. My question is whether BTS is going to include the use of infantry smoke cannisters. I believe both sides used them - the Americans more than others due to high supply levels most of the war.

This would really help my infantry get across that uncomfortably flat open ground.

Also, on a smaller note. I think the Allies used Willie Pete (white phosphorus) smoke cannisters as well. WP burns until it runs out of oxygen so if you get it on you it really makes you have a bad week. Is WP modeled?

Thanks,

Matt

[rwcanuck]

I hope smoke from rifle grenades, etc. will be included in the final release too.

I am so used to using smoke for my infantry in other games such as Close Combat that I find it awkward that I cannot use smoke in CM. MY smoke source from Tanks and Arty get used up so fast.

[Guest KwazyDog]

This has been talked about in the past if I recall, but it was a while ago. I *believe* the result of the conversations was this..

Although everyone agreed that smoke was carried by infantry, it could not be proven that using smoke as cover was standard operating procedure, and thus it was felt that its inclusion would lead to unrealistic use of it (ie. people creating smoke screens with infantry when in WW2 this wasnt done). If you guys have any references to where it was used this way then Im sure the guys at BTS would like to hear about it...

Anyways, as I said it was a long time ago, and I could be way off with that comment, but I think that was how the discussion went Im sure Steve will correct me if Im wrong when he has the time, hehe.

[This message has been edited by KwazyDog (edited 12-06-99).]

[Rommel]

The allies used it in small amounts i do believe, but the german infantry not much at all.

Gotta remember the smoke canisters were larger than grenades, were hard to carry, and could only be thrown about 10-20 feet?

The only time this might have helped was in very very close house fighting.

What was a common thing was for arty to pepper an area with smoke rounds, there are many many mentions of this in historical texts, even for something as small as a company.

Just think of "last defense" if your the germans, about to charge from the treeline, if anything a smoke canister would announce your presence. Just remember that most of the fighting in Western europe was done in more open territory where little canisters of smoke wouldn't have helped, and would have dissapated quickly.

[Cormand]

Nooooo, the WP discussion all over again...

[Lee]

Oh no, it's the return of the WP monster, ruuun!

[howardb]

Our second lieutenant once said to me on a maneuver "Look at this sorry mortar smoke, it's more smoke in a pack of cigarettes".

[Los]

Well let me say this. BTS is right about one thing. There isn't a pervasive amount of anecdotal evidence that infantry smoke was used in WW2 to the extent that you see players in say ASL using smoke. (That doesn't mean not having infantry smoke is justified or unjustified, it means that some more diligent research is required.)

There is a lot of data about the millions of smoke greandes produced and used by each side, some colored for marking, some WP for offensive purposes and some plain old smoke for masking. But not a whole lot on them actualy being used, in what situations etc etc. (To some extent there's a caveat about applying current smoke usage standards back to WW2.) There is _some_ anecdotal evidence on usage (in fact after some conversations with me, Ray Tapio from Critical Hit while interviewing Bob Murphy, an old 505th Vet from Normandy who wrote "No Better Place to Die", had some detailed and interesting conversations on smoke.)

However there will be no infantry smoke in CM. There is vehicle smoke, guns and mortars, so realistically you have a smoke capability. Having been playing tons fo CM now for a few months I can say it does not diminish my capabilities at all. And franlkly BTS is busting their ass to get the game out he door right now.

I have had a number of extensive conversations (before we got down to the serious work of final testing) on this issue. One thing for sure, the whole lack of information on smoke is quite fascinating, given some of he anecdotal evidence, production figures and SOP materials found on the subject. If someone is looking for a fresh field to do a historical thesis I would recommend "smoke usage in WW2 for masking purposes."

Anyway, this whole thing has become somewhat of a side hobby with me. There are so many differnt aspects of WW2 histry (or any history for that matter) which we take for granted or assume, sometimes based on some data which turns out to be wrong or incorrect or only applicable to a certain time frame during the war. This is what makes digging for this stuff so fascinating.

Anyway, here's what I propose. Anyone who finds or has data pro or con for infantry smoke usage should send it to me at los@cris.com. I have been talking with Steve and Charlie about this issue (though not now, we are busying getting CM tested!) Whatever you send (include refrences) I will add to the data I have already collected and as soon as possible AFTER CM is out the door will present the information to them (and you guys) in a comprehensive format.

One thing for sure, if any of you are in the enviable position of being on speaking terms with WW2 infantry/armor vets please question them about this.

Please do not post findings to this BBS as it will just bog us down in lots of contradiction and other stuff. If you have findings/data/ anecdotes form books whatever, send them directly to me. Thank you.

Los

P.S> I looked back at the WP discussions and saw a lot of very erroneous supposition about WP. Do you guys understand that WP, even today, is one of the primary smoke generating agents used for masking purposes? (For instance even today there are no "smoke" rounds in the US mortar inventory. The mortar "smoke" rounds are actually WP.)

So you can send your WP findings/musings to me too. Thanks.

[Guest Pham]

This may be a dumb question, but since the topic of smoke came up...

Why is there no smoke produced or LOS lost when you park a tank or two(or five, for that matter) and pump out rounds from the main gun as quick as you can? I would think that would produce a hell of a lot of smoke, but it never seems to effect anyone's LOS.

[Guest Big Time Software]

Los, very well put. The basic problem we had is ASL/CC/etc. on one hand, and lack of direct evidence of use on the other.

I think we can safely say that smoke for squads was not used for concealment to the degree that other games allow you, so this means restricting it in CM. Since we think that the use was *so* limited, we decided it was best to leave it out altogether. The few cases we could find where SOP and accounts went hand in hand in support of smoke grenades was during planned bunker cleaning by carefully executed and time consuming tactics (i.e. not on the fly like CM simulates).

One reason why I personally feel smoke for concealment was, in practice, quite rare is that the smoke produced from them was of limited use unless several were used in circumstances that were favorable (i.e. no wind, not in the open, etc.) I know that the German Squad Manual talks about shooting blindly into smoke when it appears, and that could also be a BIG reason why it wasn't used like other games would have you believe. Hell, if I was an MG gunner, and I saw smoke pop in a position that I knew the enemy was in, I would unload in that area for sure!

Anyhoo, if anybody can convince us to add smoke later, it will be Los His research skills are excellent, as is his dedication to find out what really went on.

Steve