I'm so used to combined arms

[JoMac]

British/CW infantry have a few redeeming qualities. The Lee Endfield doesn't put out firepower like the M1 Garand and M1 Carbine, but the don't run out of ammo as quickly either. Whether they live long enough to take advantage is another story.

Overall I find CW/British forces suffer a lot of abuse in the Combat Mission world-period. This is h2h and playing battles against the AI.

In the Italy/Gustav line they are often pitted against German Paras who are not only good quality, but carry lots of automatic weapons. Usually doesn't end well for the CW side.

Some say many of the battles in Italy/and Gustav line from the CW perspective are meant to be experienced, not won.

In Market Garden the paras are superb and tote lots of automatic firepower in the form of Stens, but the odds are so stacked against them, that in the end they often get butchered.

I do recall from the book, Six Armies in Normandy, the CW took quite a beating in the battle for Normandy.

There was a general saying for the time;

The U.S. put out alot of Firepower in form of Area-Fire, the Brits put out less firepower, but were better Marksman, and the Germs where somewhere in between.

[JoMac]

The tanks seem pretty useless in tank battles as well. Had to assault a village with two Panzer VA in it. They wiped out my churchhills over and over again. I hit them from the side, I hit them from the rear. I got the bead on them first, fired first, but to no avail. Isn't a 75mm shot enough to take a panzer from the side?????? I swore it was :/.

I'm so frustrated with this campaign that I think I just can't finish it. I do not have the willpower. Panzers will take my churchhills all day long, and they will take them in ONE SHOT, whether from the front or from the side.

Ah yes, you are suffering the effects of the Brits 75mm Gun with it's none existant HE filler...Hits Harder, but does less damage.

Still, you would think after a couple hits ( especially from flank ) would be enough for a bail.

[Squallion]

Heh heh. This one continues to upset people. It got a lot of hate on release. If you hate it now, wait 'til you play 'Crescendo of Doom'.

The Cameronians are generally regular experience with Normal motivation.

The ASH are generally Green experience with Normal to High motivation.

Both have good NCOs and leadership.

There are actually a few, very good units scattered about in both infantry formations.

Churchills are definitely a bit crap when compared to Shermans and are certainly NO MATCH for Panthers. However, the OBs and match-ups in most of these campaign missions are about as historical as I could make them. The Brits didn't do very well 'Going to Church' either. The 7th and 9th RTRs were both equipped with Churchills and they did do battle with some Panthers along the way.

Yes, it's a long campaign. That's just the way I make them. It could easily have been released as two separate campaigns, one for the Cameronians, 'The Road to Grainville' and one for the ASH, 'The Road to Gavrus', but two core groups is pretty much how I've been designing campaigns from the get-go. (Hasrabit had the Republican Guards and the Special Forces)

Hi! I meant no offense, or that it's bad. I enjoy LONG campaigns as well :]. It's just that I found about every third to every other mission to be extremely difficult. I can probably come back to this when I'm a higher skill level and do a bit better. Or maybe even just immerse myself in the inferiority of the british forces and enjoy that.

[AlexUK]

The british forces do have some advantages - the bren carriers are great, not only as fairly well protected mobile MGs, but also for the ammo and other gear they carry (some have PIATs and some have mortars).

The British squad mortars are very handy, despite their low ammo.

[Paper Tiger]

Hi! I meant no offense, or that it's bad.

None taken.

I enjoy LONG campaigns as well :].

IMO, scenarios are like short stories whereas campaigns are like novels. I tend to 'write' trilogies.

It's just that I found about every third to every other mission to be extremely difficult.

I wouldn't be surprised to read that every third mission or so is extremely difficult. That's because these missions are tests. If the player 'passes', he gets to step up a difficulty level, to Veteran for example, or back to Regular if he's currently playing Green. The big flaw in this system is that people like to win every mission and will replay until they get a win instead of accepting the loss and getting to play easier missions.

I can probably come back to this when I'm a higher skill level and do a bit better. Or maybe even just immerse myself in the inferiority of the british forces and enjoy that

I try to craft my missions so that they are challenging AND fun to play. If they're not fun, what's the point? Of course, my idea of what is 'fun' is likely to differ from yours. However, I'd argue that 'The Scottish Corridor' is perhaps the least fun to play of my campaigns because the subject material, Operation Epsom, was so grim and such a hard slog.

You might indeed find the German campaign more 'fun' to play for the time being. And if you kind of like what I've tried to do with this campaign you might enjoy 'The Road to Montebourg' which was designed primarily for fun.

But whatever, I hope you have fun playing what you're playing.

[Holman]

Thanks, Paper Tiger. Please keep making them!

[A co]

Regarding the drawbacks of the British and Commonwealth infantry section's weapons- Those rifles might seem more adequate in less intense fighting. It is often noted that CM players push their units and take risks and casualties to a degree far beyond what was usually done in the actual war. If there were fewer mad assaults, less holding to the last man, and more engagements from longer, safer distances, the British weapons might make a bit more sense. Not that I would try to claim they are superior.

I do like the 2 inch mortar in the game. It's the only weapon I count on to really hurt or suppress or dislodge dangerous opponents like guns or HMG's. And if you have extra 2 inch ammo in your vehicles, so much the better.

[Wodin]

GTOS biggest failing in my opinion. Only hoping Muis Front changes this around abit.

I love the way CM gives infantry a decent shot at disabling/killing tanks with close assault. It feels pretty right to me. That's actually a huge beef I had with the Close Combat series. Infantry was totally neutered vs tanks.

In fact, I've just about given up on GT:OS after only two weeks, as it feels very much like a 3D version of Close Combat. Single tanks can wipe out vast swaths of entrenched infantry. Meh.

If anything, I'd dial up CM's infantry vs tank combat power at close assault range, assuming it was actually realistic. To those who know the real-world effectiveness of WWII infantry vs tanks under close assualt, how is CM doing in this regard?