City Fighting?

[Guest KwazyDog]

Hi guys. Just another question I havnt seen mentioned before. How well does the engine currently handle battles with large towns/cities? Do you think the engine will be able to handle battles within larger urban areas well, and will systems be able to handle the playback ok as well?

I think it would be very cool to see urban fighting within the 3D environment of CM.

[Guest Big Time Software]

Yes, large urban battles are very much possible in CM. The buildings, and the fighting within, are approximations of reality, but the results appear to be quite realistic. What I mean by that is that we don't directly simulate building interiors (walls, doors, staircases, furnature, wall composition, etc.), yet the outcome of a house-to-house battle is very much what you would expect.

There are some more detailed messages on the boards, much earlier back. Use the search feature if you want to see them.

Steve

[Guest KwazyDog]

Thanks Steve. I remember reading the posts you mentioned a while back, actually. I think the abstraction is fine, because of the scope the game is covering. As long as the results realistically represent the outcome of such battle, the fact that each individual wall is not modeled is not important.

Actually, that reminds me of another quick question. Do you have different types of buildings? For example, factories, I imagine combat within a factory complex would be different to withing a resedintial building, mainly due to the larger open spaces within.

Thanks for the time

[Guest Big Time Software]

Good question. We do have different types of buildings, but not nearly as many as we would like. No, we don't have a specific "factory" type. As you say, there is likely to be some difference to the fighting in such buildings. More like battles in rough terrain at multiple levels. We'll probably HAVE to do this for the Eastern Front as they always seemed to pick a Tractor Factory to have an epic battle in

Steve

[CRourke]

Oooh oooh, what about sewer movement?

Aww, comon, it was in ASL!

No, I'm not serious.. at least not until CM2.

A serious question, do units in a multistory building occupy all the floors at once, or is it up to the player?

Chris

[Fionn]

As I understand it you can pick your units to occupy either the top or bottom floors.

[Pixman]

I am "sure" they will do sewer movement in the eastern front. I also hope that is the point at which BTS will invest major time in developing more building detail simulation. What would Stalingrad/Berlin be without it? It would be nice if these building improvements could be retropatched into CM1 for Arnhem like scenarios as well.

Just dreaming while I wait for this sucker to come out.

[Guest Big Time Software]

Sewers are going to be a real bitch to do. So much so that we will probably have to do some teleporting thing. And we aren't likely to add much interior building detail either. It is a slippery slope and (as previous threads have discussed) largely unnecessary. Sure, we all would like to see doors being kicked down, but this sort of detail isn't relevant to CM's level of simulation. So with the exceptions of sewers and large factories, you could do a great Berlin and Stalingrad scenario right now (except there are no Soviets ).

There are far more important thigns for us to invest major time in More varried building types would be something to concentrate on, not having more detailed insides. The former will have a noticable impact on the game, the latter hardly any at all.

Steve

[Renaud Dreyer]

Any chance we could see some screenshots of

street fighting in the near future? I'd really like to know how CM handles all the congestion. I'm looking forward to being

able to simulate the Arnhem bridge campaign

under CM, and see how it compares to the upcoming (official) ASL module (A Bridge Too

Far). And, hopefully, next year, Read Barricades... Ciao,

Renaud

[Guest Big Time Software]

Sure, we can create an urban landscape very easily. Don't know when we will have a chance to do one up, but I'm sure I can do one for the next batch.

Steve

[Fionn]

Does anyone know of a nice resource on the net which shows town plans of Stalingrad back then.. If anyone is going to do a Stalingrad campaign we'd need town plans to get it "just right".

Fionn "wheels spinning around an idea here" Kelly.

[Simon Fox]

Those Arnhem battles seem to hold an incredible fascination for wargamers at the tactical level. For an operation which was basically doomed from the start due to totally inadequate planning a real mystique has arisen about the valiant battles of the US and British paras. I am currently reading an outstanding and quite concise analysis of the operation, "Arnhem: a tragedy of errors" by Peter Harclerode, which I recommend to anyone. It makes your blood boil to read of the moronic decisions which sent probably the best units the British army produced in WWII into a unwinnable battle, in fact any Arnhem book makes for a pretty fatalistic read.

[Larry Marks]

Simon, I agree with you. I think Arnhem failed for several reasons. First, the British ignored intelligence reports from the Dutch Underground that there were tanks in the vicinity of Arnhem. Second, General Urquhart picked landing zones 8 miles from the Bridge. Also, Major Howard's Oxs and Bucks Light Company that siezed the Pegusas Bridge was unavailable for the operation. Can you imagine what the outcome could have been if the Bridge was taken immediately by Major Howard's unit. It then could have been reinforced by the 3 and 1/2 battalions (including the Poles) under General Urquhart. It would have been less of risk for the 1st Airborne to land closer to the Bridge if the Bridge was already in British hands. One battalion held the Bridge for four days. 4 Battalions of men (counting Major Howard's men) most likely could have held out until the tanks arrived.

It was a daring operation with many factors stacked against reaching Arnhem. Even if things I mentioned above occured, it still may have been a bridge too far.

Larry

[CRourke]

I've always been sort of curious as to what would have happened had the british army arrived in the knick of time and save the paratroopers... That still would have left an exhausted force in one heck of a salient. Admittedly, the germans would have lost a rhine bridge, but I tend to think their response to this would be a large counterattack if forces and terrain would allow.

As it was, I think the brits had to surrender many of the gains that XXX Corps made from market-garden as they were untenable.

Any of the real history buffs out there care to comment?

Chris

[Guest Big Time Software]

I think Chris is right. Even if all the bridges were taken AND held until linked up, there was still much danger. XXX Corps was pretty much beat up, exhausted, and in an exposed postion. I don't think they could have advanced further than Arnhem. It is kind of like what the Ardennes offensive would have been like if Antwerp had fallen. The pressure on the flanks would have been too much.

Up shot is that the British, and SHAEF in general, underrated the German units that were in the area. They felt they were still in pursuit of a beaten foe, but that was a huge mistake. The Germans has a lot of fight left in them.

Steve

[Thomm]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I don't think they could have advanced further than Arnhem<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, we are going to find out with Combat Mission, aren't we

[Pixman]

Steve: I fully agree on the need for more building types rather than interior detail. In fact, that is what I really meant in my post. I could care less about kicked doors, furniture, potted plants or whether the bathroom has a bidet (of course, in 1942-43 Russia it is unlikey to have a flush toilet, much less a bidet)! Sorry for the confusion on that.

I understand the sewer movement would be a bitch. Could you not tackle it similar to the way you did the walking under the bridge thing for Arnhem (he asked in total ignorance)? I know you did not really like the solution you reached there, but some simulation would be better than none at all if, in fact, sewer movement was prevalent in Stalingrad.

Obviously, we SL/ASL types are conditioned to think that Stalingrad was one big tractor works battle with sewers being the dominant mode of transport. If your research shows that this was really just an occasional novelty, then forget it. However, like the unique bridge at Arnhem, if history shows that sewer movement was prevalent, then I hope you will overcome the obstacles to simulating this so that we can capture the true flavor of that epic struggle.

Based on all I have read here, I have total faith you will weigh the trade-offs fully and make the right decision when the time comes.

[Guest Big Time Software]

Flush toilets offered a +1 defense modifier in ASL if I am not mistaken Hehe...

Sewers, to the best of our knowledge now, were an important part of combat but were NOT central to the fighting. Pretty quickly it was realized that patrols were moving around underground (er, not whole companies!) and steps were taken to seal off this threat. Mines, baracades, ambushes, and explosions were all something to contend with. Couple that with the maze of tunnels and you realize that there is NO way sewers could be anything more than a sideshow. If we have sewers in the next game we will have to make a chance of getting lost. That is going to probably piss some people off, but that's tough

Nope, we can't do sewers like the Arnhem bridge. Totally different things. The underpass is still above ground level. Plus, Charles had to hack the Hell out of the code to get it to work right, so that route is very much dead. Nope, it will most likely be teleporting (with delays) or nothing.

Steve

[Pixman]

I also agree with Chris about the British having difficulty holding the XXX corp salient. From what I have read, the Germans were increasing pressure on the column along that raised road hourly. 88s were sprouting out of the trees and picking off targets from the flank. Worse tank warfare country probably never existed (had to stick to the road in many spots) so the British could not maneuver.

I guess we'll never know. But I know I would not have wanted to be in XXX Corp trying to hold that salient and the bridges.

Renaud: What's this about ASL: "A Bridge Too Far"? Do tell.

[Guest L Tankersley]

As it happens, I'm in a playtesting group for the ASL A Bridge Too Far historical module. It's the first time I've played an ASL campaign game, and I've having a lot of fun - it's slow going, though. It's set in Arnhem and covers Frost's attack on the bridge and subsequent defense from the night of 17 September through the morning of the 21st I believe. The British hold almost all the cards on the first day, but by the 19th they're out of reinforcements and the German meat-grinder begins.

Leland J. Tankersley

[Pixman]

Thanks Leland. Is this new ASL module coming out through Hasbro? If so, when?

------------------

The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

[Renaud Dreyer]

"Thanks Leland. Is this new ASL module coming out through Hasbro? If so, when?"

MMP (which handles all things ASL for Hasbro

these days, just like they did for AH) says it's coming out for ASLOK, which I believe

is in October. The Tarawa module will be out

at the same time (hopefully, we'll have beach landings in CM's Pacific Theater module...). Ciao,

Renaud

[Guest L Tankersley]

No, Multi Man Publishing will be selling it direct I think. Check out http://www.advancedsquadleader.com

Leland J. Tankersley

[CRourke]

I was thinking about the "not modeling the interior of buildings" thing (which I totally agree with), and it got me me wonderng about just what kind of interior favors the defender most. Obviously stuff like stairs and scarce bottom floor entrances are best, but what about stuff like wall thickness? Better to be able to fire that SMG through the walls at the attacker, and risk the same from him? Would alot of small rooms be easier to defend that a few large ones? wall-to-wall carpeting vs numerous throw rugs?? Anyone with training in this area have any idea? (urban combat, not carpeting).

Chris

[Simon Fox]

Larry,

Actually Urqhuart didn't have much choice as the RAF refused to drop paratroops or gliders near the bridge being concerned about heavy flak defenses near the bridge. The latest air recon showed these were actually quite limited but this was ignored! Dropping near the bridge would definitely have made a difference, how much is a moot point as fairly powerful german forces were in the area.

There is some credibility in the idea that the operation would have had a better chance of success if carried out earlier. The failure to do this can be largely ascribed to Montgomery's personality which wasn't conducive to him getting what he wanted from Eisenhower. Eisenhower prevaricated and was half-hearted in his support until the last minute. This delay was fatal to the operation which was also given insufficient resources. There is no doubt that if the 1st Airborne had been informed of the presence of the 9th and 10th SS panzer divisions in the Arnhem area they would have canned the operation. The Allies had this information from BOTH Ultra intercepts and the Dutch resistance.

I think that XXX corps probably could have held the salient if required to. While the germans forces could probably mount a stiff defensive battle they probably lacked the punch to threaten it seriously if in was necessary to hold. The Brits were acutely aware of the dangers of the one road assault but had insufficient resources to mount more. Even so the neighbouring corps should have mounted some sort of diversionary attacks to keep the enemy guessing.