Colin Posted October 11, 1999 Share Posted October 11, 1999 Since Operation Market Garden was in Sept '44 does that me we can play everything CC2 has in it? That would be really cool. Couldn't we also do everything in CC1? Just wondering. Can't wait for the beta demo/demo! ------------------ "I'm tired of quotes, tell me what you know" -Mark Twain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 11, 1999 Share Posted October 11, 1999 Most any battle from the time of Normandy until VE-Day can be simulated. Provided, of course, that it happened in NW Europe (i.e. not Italy or even southern France). There are some exceptions. Nothing that involved amphibious assaults greater than some assault boats can be simulated. Airdrops themselves are also out. Specialist actions, like commandos, are also not dealt with. Lots of reasons for all of these decisions. There are plenty of threads discussing the specifics so I am not going to answer them here. Stve [This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 10-11-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Peltz Posted October 11, 1999 Share Posted October 11, 1999 Market-Garden should provide myriads of scenarios that would suit CM. With regards Italy, I think a few could be concocted in the editor- I am planning on doing San Pietro myself- it is a small map, with perhaps 1-1/2 to 2 companies per side, only a handful of vehicles (Shermans/StuGs). Arty was limited to some 60mm and 80mm mortars. Should be able to dredge up everything from the CM database. The terrain was rough, and challenging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 11, 1999 Share Posted October 11, 1999 There are two major problems with doing Italian scenarios. Anything before June 44 won't likely come out too well because the German Army reorganized around this time, so obviously we don't include TO&Es from before then. Also, Commonwealth. Polish, and French forces fighting in Itally were organzied differently than the ones in France. We also don't have the many important Commonwealth forces that were in Italy since they weren't in NW France. But the other two big problems is that our terrain and weather modifiers are designed for NW Europe. January in the forests was a lot different than in Italy. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted October 11, 1999 Share Posted October 11, 1999 Looks like you'll be able to do most things in Market Garden - except blow bridges of course (Sorry, couldn't resist... ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Peltz Posted October 12, 1999 Share Posted October 12, 1999 Steve: It will work out close enough- I'll send it to you when it is done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 12, 1999 Share Posted October 12, 1999 Yeah, but other games put in bridge blowing to give their scenarios some good Hollywood feeling. We would rather stick more to reality. Not battle I know of starts out with the attacker saying "men, we have 5 minutes to take this bridge before it blows up". Steve [This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 10-11-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinM Posted October 12, 1999 Share Posted October 12, 1999 A couple of the most interesting Operation Market-Garden actions (one that did happen & one that should have been fought!) include bridges that didn't get blown. MAJ Julian Cook's 3-504 Red Devils assault crossing of the Waal to secure a bridge linking Nijmegan to Arnhem was one of the great feats during the battle. A XXX Corps - 1st Abn Div link up at the Arnhem bridge is an interesting possibility without worrying about the bridge blowing up. Martin [This message has been edited by MartinM (edited 10-12-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 12, 1999 Share Posted October 12, 1999 Ah, but the bridge blowing up was a strategic problem for XXX Corps, not a tactical one. Since CM is a tactical game, this is outside of its scope. If CM allowed a formation to travel more than a couple thousand meters in something like an hour, bridge blowing would have to be in. But the condition of something like a bridge did not change during an assault except for VERY rare circumstances (Remagen comes to mind). And in such cases either it was blown or it wasn't, so that starting the scenario either way works perfectly. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SGTRock Posted October 12, 1999 Share Posted October 12, 1999 BTS: " There are two major problems with doing Italian scenarios. " Three actually you forgot about the Italian troop manifesto: "when in doubt surrender and fight on the otherside." Actually come to think of it judging from the AARs that might be quite possible to simulate in CM. lol ------------------ Sgt. Rock Says " War is Hell, but games are fun " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted October 12, 1999 Share Posted October 12, 1999 Did anybody here just insult those brave GIs that took the main force of the German assault on their shoulders and slowed their advance towards the town? Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NameLessOne Posted October 12, 1999 Share Posted October 12, 1999 I can understand not being able to blow up bridges during a 60 turn (or so) senario, but what about campaigns? Suppose there is a campaign map with several bridges on it, and one side spends a battle advancing toward one bridge only to find that in the lull between battles, it's been blown? Isn't this the sort of thing that happened to KG Peiper during the Bulge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted October 13, 1999 Share Posted October 13, 1999 Ok Martin, it's time for our tactics talk. Last time I told you why tankers called infantry crunchies right. Well, this time we're gonna talk about using infantry as speedbumps. See Martin, I appreciate the unswering devotion to your military genius that your troops show in lying down and dying in front of my tanks but seriously wouldn't you be better just robbing me of my anti-freeze and leaving me with immobile tanks when I decide to attack? Ps. I'd like to thank Sergeants Smith, Johnson and Cole, Corporals Stenson and Smith and assorted Privates for lubricating the treads of my tanks so effectively and with such self-sacrifice. The Wehrmacht salutes your efforts to aid the advance of our Panzers ------------------ ___________ 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 October 13, 1999 Share Posted October 13, 1999 NameLessOne, Bridges were blown all the time in WWII. What didn't happen (save a handful of exceptions) was the bridge being blown up in the face of the enemy as he was attacking. Since CM only simulates battles, bridge blowing is not something that should be in the game. As for a campaign, the bridge is either going to be there or not. This is a decision for the campaign designer to make. When a bridge is rigged for demolition it is either blown up before the enemy gets there, or it wasn't. There really is no variability here. If the engineers did their jobs right, had the right quantity of explosives, and had the orders to blow it, the bridge would be destroyed before the attacker could get into position to take the bridge. If the situation did not allow for enough time to set the charges correctly, if there weren't enough explosives, or if orders got screwed up (and the local troops didn't take the initiative) the bridge would still be standing. There are a few exceptions to this, and all are outside of CM's scope. A handfull probably weren't blown for some kind of screwup or another. But we are talking a REALLY low percentage here. One or two bridges were taken before they could be blown up by some sort of sneak attack or special forces move. Neither of these are in CM's scope. CM would have to be a multi-day, operational level game for bridge blowing to be a reasonable part of the simulation. If games lower than this have bridge blowing, all I can say is Hollywood has followers in the games industry Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted October 15, 1999 Share Posted October 15, 1999 Apologies for starting the blowing bridges thing again . My comment was meant firmly tongue-in-cheek as Steve dealt with this in depth in the 'engineers and explosives' thread. I should have said 'you should be able to do most battles in *CC2* except blow bridges...' I think I got the wrong end of the stick about CM 'campaigns' until searching more thoroughly through early threads. I thought that perhaps, even if you couldn't blow a bridge during a tactical battle, a defender might be able to destroy a threatened bridge behind his lines 'between' firefights in longer campaigns. The longest dynamic campaigns seem to be 2 days max and use a 1000m X 8000m map if I've understood right so maybe this is incorrect? CC2 is a specialised campaign that includes the bridge-blowing 'gimmick' as a feature but CM seems to be generalised so you can recreate *typical* battles from NW Europe. Personally this suits me just fine. Can't wait to fight Normandy battles like Tilly-Sur-Seulles and Lingevres... Cheers. Mike O'Brien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts