Gustav Line Beta AAR Round Two PEANUT GALLERY

[Michael Emrys]

;1444255']I won´t say you are right unless you do the statistics )

Lies, damn lies, and statistics, I see which you like best. You do know that 46.3% of all statistics are made up on the spot, don't you?

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

It's hard to deny that Bil has had the Devil's own luck in this battle. I tend to go along with those who say that he earned it by more thorough play, but I also think the penny may have come down heads this time a little more often than it might in another run-through.

Michael

[Ron]

Some off the cuff and ill-informed comments again on the spotting disparity - the LOS 'rules' are the same for both players, one player is simply better at working with it and the accompanying terrain. I think what's presented in this AAR is highlighting a skill mismatch between the two opponents. One orchestrates his moves several turns in advance, not fixed there's a difference, with a clearly defined goal; whereas the other plans on a turn by turn basis and moves by the seat of his pants with changing goal posts. Still interesting to watch though.

[Rocky Balboa]

Some off the cuff and ill-informed comments again on the spotting disparity - the LOS 'rules' are the same for both players, one player is simply better at working with it and the accompanying terrain. I think what's presented in this AAR is highlighting a skill mismatch between the two opponents. One orchestrates his moves several turns in advance, not fixed there's a difference, with a clearly defined goal; whereas the other plans on a turn by turn basis and moves by the seat of his pants with changing goal posts. Still interesting to watch though.

Not really a fair assessment, as the nature of defense is to react to the moves of your opponent or to stay in place and fight. Bill has the luxury of taking his time in planning his moves. GAJ must wait and respond to Bill's moves with his reserves so there's not a lot of planning GAJ can do until he see's what Bill is doing.

I do think at this point, GAJ is becoming frustrated and losing his will to fight. This results in making some careless and not well thought out decisions. For example, when moving his 2 M10's he should have timed his move so that both tracks would have arrived at a firing position at the same time giving him a better chance of at least one spotting a target before being taken out.

Of course, I've seen this frustration happen before and it's normally precipitated by a desire to not prolong the beating and get the game over with. This is also the point in most MP games when your opponent stops sending turns as quickly and eventually falls off the face of the earth. Glad to see that GAJ is made of sterner stuff.

[slysniper]

slysniper,

Am not at all sure I agree with your interpretation.

I am not disagreeing that movement should be giving units away much more than it does in the game.

I am just pointing out that in the game, units laying down have a hard time spotting units.

Anyone can run some test, but from my small sample testing. I have come to find that when i want to spot something, it does me well to give a command that gets my men in a positin to see over the grass. take that for what you will.

[MikeyD]

I think US tank gunner optics are only graded as 'mediocre' in the game, plus M10 gunner lacks the Sherman's roof mounted wide field of view periscope to increase his situational awareness. But then again, PzIV gunners also lacked wide field optics, unless they're opening that shutter on the turret face to peer directly out into the world. It is vexing that an unbuttoned open-air M10 commander receives so little spotting benefit. Basically that's all the M10 had going for it!

[Michael Emrys]

It is vexing that an unbuttoned open-air M10 commander receives so little spotting benefit. Basically that's all the M10 had going for it!

That and the 3" gun.

Michael

[dieseltaylor]

Some off the cuff and ill-informed comments again on the spotting disparity - the LOS 'rules' are the same for both players, one player is simply better at working with it and the accompanying terrain. I think what's presented in this AAR is highlighting a skill mismatch between the two opponents. One orchestrates his moves several turns in advance, not fixed there's a difference, with a clearly defined goal; whereas the other plans on a turn by turn basis and moves by the seat of his pants with changing goal posts. Still interesting to watch though.

I rather thought that a defender often does have to react to events and I am surprised that this thought was not expressed. The whole point of an attack on a big map such as this is that the attacker generally has the options and if he can command deep areas of the battlefield then he restricts the defence ability to react.

In this particular battle the defence is compromised in situational awareness by its inability to spot well. This seems to me to be function of GAJ not understanding the hiding ability of long grass/spotting effects and having inadequate points for a big map with good hidden routes.

There are a couple of other things like the M10 being unfortunately ineffective and ATG's being placed poorly. I think no doubt Bill is making far better use of the game system and equally important the lay of the land.

If one were to reverse the game with the same units I would not be surprised if GAJ would be looking a better [luckier?] general than he does now.

[c3k]

I think US tank gunner optics are only graded as 'mediocre' in the game, plus M10 gunner lacks the Sherman's roof mounted wide field of view periscope to increase his situational awareness. But then again, PzIV gunners also lacked wide field optics, unless they're opening that shutter on the turret face to peer directly out into the world. It is vexing that an unbuttoned open-air M10 commander receives so little spotting benefit. Basically that's all the M10 had going for it!

A Tank Commander with Binoculars ought to count for something. The M10 should get the TC peeking over the edge, even when buttoned. (Of course, I'll deny I said that when a Button Up order is ignored and my TC gets drilled.)

Ken

[dieseltaylor]

I was looking up binoculars on various sights[geddit] to see if there was any useful detail on optics. I know German binos were markedly superior to Allied ones but finding a side by side comparison seems impossible. I do have a US tank commander as quoted saying he was able to make out a German ATG hidden AFAIR remember .5 mile away that he could not spot with his US issue binos.

However in this instance we are really talking about situational awareness to put your binoculars looking in the right place. A human eye is able to pick up movement at well over 5 miles as I used to see trucks at that range - resolution is of course trickier.

Just for fun:

Eyeball Height in feet

5

6

10

50

100

250

500

1000

1050

5000

10000

29000

100000

500000

Miles you can see

2.65

2.9

3.74

8.37

11.83

18.71

26.46

37.42

38.34

83.67

118.32

201.49

374.17

836.66

Incidentally Olympus make a really good cheap travel compact with a zoom to 800+mm. Effectively a 17 times zoom.

[Ron]

Not really a fair assessment...

By the same token and not directed at you, explaining away the disparity with 'luck' or a 'broken engine' etc does not accurately reflect the skill of the attacker and the moves conducted. Freyberg touched on it in his post, without understanding the moves and coordination undertaken, you cannot appreciate its excellence. I'm reminded of Manstein's backhand blow and have read accounts where it is explained away by Soviet incompetence, overextension etc., yet when delved down to troop movements and timings you realize the brilliance of the operation and the man behind it.

[sburke]

A Tank Commander with Binoculars ought to count for something. The M10 should get the TC peeking over the edge, even when buttoned. (Of course, I'll deny I said that when a Button Up order is ignored and my TC gets drilled.)

Ken

M10 was moving, it raises dust. Even before cresting hill, noise and dust should alert stationary Pz crew that a vehicle is going to crest the hill in the exact location they have been told to maintain overwatch. Is there really any question why the M10 got drilled so fast? Personally I thought it was a very very poor decision. I know cause I have done it myself and paid a similar price... If GaJ really wanted to get them there, he need to provide some means of obscuring their approach or distracting any enemy units there. All he did was drive into their gun sights.

It's your fault Ken, you told him to attack.

[slysniper]

If one were to reverse the game with the same units I would not be surprised if GAJ would be looking a better [luckier?] general than he does now.

I said something along these lines before the game ever really started going, Bil should be the one with the hard side to start with. But I would like to see what forces he would select if he was playing defence, Give GAJ Bil's present forces and lets see what Bil could do to make a good fight of it. I bet he might make it pretty interesting.

I like how well planned and coordinated Bils attack is, very well done, but the game is a sleeper, pretty boring with no sight of it turning into a close battle, more like a clinic how to Coordinate a attack.

[John Kettler]

Am rather surprised there seems to be no real interest in discussing the 601st's (not 503rd as erroneously cited before) historical M10 performance at Anzio vs heavy German armor and the apparent impossibility of doing anything like this in CMFI/GL. Does anyone have anything to contribute on the apparent antitank ammo disconnect for the M10, either?

Bingo! The now declassified Ops Report, dated February 4, 1944, under underscored "e" 2, specifically talks about Shell 3" APC-BDF.

http://www.tankdestroyer.net/images/stories/ArticlePDFs/601st_TD_Jan_44_Rpt_of_Ops.pdf

This is clearly AP shell, and the BDF confirms it. Base Detonating Fuze. AP Shot has no fuze, only tracer. If the APC-T M62A1 isn't in the game, then it needs to be. Goodness knows GreenAsJade could use the help. Oh, Phil!

Nor, in that same report, can I find any mention of the destruction of a heavy tank other than a Tiger 1, which was KOed at 1000 yards by three rounds through the turret. That was January 31st 1944.

Am to the point where I don't know what to believe. The eyewitness accounts are clear, but the operations report mentions only a Tiger kill, with nothing on an Elefant/Ferdinand. Photographic evidence would be nice. From all I've seen of the APG Elefant (just reviewed 16 hi res photos), it took no kill shot. Franging the left final drive assembly appears to have disabled it, but that's hardly vehicle destroyed with only two survivors, is it?

So, if an Elefant was killed outright, it's not in the official records I have. Meanwhile, here are two groggy consolation prizes.

This pic, which I've never seen before, is an Elefant in Italy and is quite clearly in travel mode (gun secured in travel bracket).

http://wolfenkrieger.deviantart.com/art/Infantry-and-Jagdpanzer-Ferdinand-293368676

Whereas this one has hit a mine and maybe sustained other damage we cant see. Of course, if I had those wonderful Fedorowicz books, I could learn who the commander was, his favorite dish and the name of his dog!

http://wolfenkrieger.deviantart.com/art/Elefant-293320980

Anyone have a really quite sincerely dead Elefant pic from Anzio?

Regards,

John Kettler

[Rocky Balboa]

I said something along these lines before the game ever really started going, Bil should be the one with the hard side to start with. But I would like to see what forces he would select if he was playing defence, Give GAJ Bil's present forces and lets see what Bil could do to make a good fight of it. I bet he might make it pretty interesting.

I like how well planned and coordinated Bils attack is, very well done, but the game is a sleeper, pretty boring with no sight of it turning into a close battle, more like a clinic how to Coordinate a attack.

Not taking anything away from Bill, he definitely knows what he's doing and his execution aside from a couple of missteps has been excellent. I would have liked to see more of a time limit put on the attacker, this might have caused a little more excitement and a little less recon and caution.

[MikeyD]

So, if an Elefant was killed outright, it's not in the official records I have.

I believe the first Ferdinand destroyed in Italy was a self-disabled vehicle that resisted all attempts to recover until a hullside penetration persuaded the crew do abandon the vehicle. Most German reports of Elephants in Italy involve them becoming disabled here, breaking down there, running out of gas in a third place. Plus the ever-present artillery. I have a (very) thick book on Schwere Panzerjager Abteilung 653 at my elbow and am skimming through it. Reference to actually engaging in combat in Italy are very few and far between. Apparently Bill's use of his Elephant is downright reckless compared to how they were utilized in real life.

[Vark]

It's reckless because an Elephant would have broken down or bogged by now. Given Ferdinand drivers were instructed to only make shallow turns, even on roads, one can only imagine what the Italian landscape did to them.

As for spotting, most of the historical AAR's constantly refer to spotting units only after they have opened fire, perhaps GaJ should have used movie lighting to make his units harder to spot!

[Vanir Ausf B]

To be fair, both of GaJ's M10s were lost when he drove them into LOS of Bil's stationary tanks. And GaJ did get the drop on Bil's Elephant with a towed AT gun but couldn't penetrate the armor.

[John Kettler]

Vanir Ausf B,

Ref my #364 in this thread, do you happen to know what might've been the penetration had GreenAsJade's ATG been properly equipped with the APC-T, M62A1, which significantly outperforms AP-T,M79 vs face-hardened armor? Would the better round we thought was introduced later have made a difference here, or was it simply that no matter which round was used, there still was no way to do real damage to the Elefant given the specific combination of range and engagement geometry?

Regards,

John Kettler

[Vanir Ausf B]

The Elephant's frontal armor is 200mm thick, so only 76mm HVAP could penetrate it.

[John Kettler]

Vanir Ausf B,

Thanks! It looks as though that post-Kursk collar armor was a good idea, for conceivably, given where the shot cluster hit, GreenAsJade might've not killed the Elefant, but possibly damaged or even jammed its Traverse and Elevation mechanism. As it is, we'll never know, for the collar took the hits. Am still looking for any evidence of a hard kill by a U.S. M10 TD against an Elefant.

Regards,

John Kettler

[akd]

Vanir Ausf B,

Ref my #364 in this thread, do you happen to know what might've been the penetration had GreenAsJade's ATG been properly equipped with the APC-T, M62A1, which significantly outperforms AP-T,M79 vs face-hardened armor?

The Elephant's frontal armor is 200mm thick, so only 76mm HVAP could penetrate it.

And I don't think it's face-hardened, regardless.

[Vark]

I think the more 'accurate', i.e. close to a perceived reality, this game gets, the greater this disparity between 'professional soldiers' and amateurs will get. Especially as a computer engine will naturally err towards an approach that greatly favours the execution of a military METT analysis, with its precise timings and coordination.

Though we all mocked the Borg spotting, it allowed neophytes to put up a good show against the old soldiers, and an exciting time was had by all. Here it's like watching a trained swordsmen outwit and humiliate an eager novice. I don't think most of the posters here, including myself, go into such a pre-game analysis and, as a result, would probably find themselves in a similar situation to GaJ, i.e. about to loose big time. Swap roles, and Bill would have executed a frustratingly efficient defence, with alternative firing points, covered avenues of approach, key holed ATG guns and support weapons covering carefully planned obstacles and a fast mobile reserve, not penny-packeted. GaJ might have been able to raise his kill count, but would still have lost.

This then raises the question, was CM1 more fun to play for the average gamer? I'm not talking AI, which is always a good boost for the ego, but against a human opponent. A few posters have commented on the slowness of pace and sporadic clashes, get used to it.

[dieseltaylor]

This then raises the question, was CM1 more fun to play for the average gamer?

I am sure you meant IS rather than was. : )

As to

Here it's like watching a trained swordsmen outwit and humiliate an eager novice. I don't think most of the posters here, including myself, go into such a pre-game analysis and, as a result, would probably find themselves in a similar situation to GaJ, i.e. about to loose big time. Swap roles, and Bill would have executed a frustratingly efficient defence, with alternative firing points, covered avenues of approach, key holed ATG guns and support weapons covering carefully planned obstacles and a fast mobile reserve, not penny-packeted. GaJ might have been able to raise his kill count, but would still have lost.

I think overall you are right. However we must remember that this IS Bill's map and I think this is quite a big advantage. How big an advantage would depend on how much he plays with it as he builds in terms of sight lines. Obviously it would be open to anyone to peruse the map for hours and but most people do not have that kind of time or desire.

Secondly I think as a designer he probably has a far better feel for cover effects for various terrain.

He also may be better versed in the value of various equipment efficiencies and believe M-10's are not good value.

Overall if you layer this with a military training then I think Bill would better than GAJ with the same equipment. I still think that the map may favour the attacker particularly as he is using the flanks knowing there cannot be any weapons there.

[Vark]

Overall if you layer this with a military training then I think Bill would better than GAJ with the same equipment. I still think that the map may favour the attacker particularly as he is using the flanks knowing there cannot be any weapons there.

I guess the retort of the attacker would be, he is forced to assault a defensive position from the front, so the advantages even out. I do think Bill's map gives him an advantage, but I think he would clinically dissect any map and exploit all its advantages. GaJ is simply outclassed, and as history shows, this often pre-determines the result of any engagement.

Having bought a new PC I never reinstalled CM1, don't know if it would offer any real challenges and the lack of flexibility, especially in tactical choices would be frustrating.