Jump to content

CM Final Blitzkrieg - AXIS (Attack) BETA Battle Report


Recommended Posts

RockinHarry,

attaching single tanks as infantry support in an attack AFAIK is strongly against German doctrine. Using single Jagdtigers that way I think even was explicitly forbidden.

Oh, I know a whole lot of german doctrines and my collection of books about that matter is quite extensive. :D 

http://www.spwaw.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=18276

Thus I (and you) can tell rather easily from reading many battle accounts, that late war germans didn´t give much on doctrines and had to live and work with what they had. Understrength forces with lack of everything, including well educated officers in large parts, that didn´t have same training and education as say, 1940-41 they were yet enjoying. There´s numerous accounts in german reports that tank unit officers were complaining about their subordination, or attachement to infantry units and that they weren´t employed and used properly. The only doctrine that was adhered to to the last, was (enforced) flexibility though.

We´ll see if there´s any complaints coming from that Jagdtiger commander if Oberst Baneman leads him into battle subordinated to his Volksgrenadiers. Hehe

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 549
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I recall reading about period battles where at the corp level spg's were attached to vg divisions to help out.  I don't know about panthers but the Germans were definitely shifting armour around in fire brigade fashion where the line was faltering. 

Yep, in the late war period it was oftenly the case, particularly in september-october 1944, that the german Panzer Divisions didn´t have many Grenadiers left, if any at all and the few remaining Panzers would be temporarily mated with any infantry from other Divisons (their leftovers) for given tasks. That could read in a battle account, II./16 (2nd Bn of 16th Panzer Regiment) attached to 1024th Regiment , 556th. Volksgrenadier Division, which basically meant that maybe a handful of tanks was rushed to operate with a few hundred Volksgrenadiers. And yes, corps level tank units, if available were subordinated to those divisons from the corps, where most needed. And that too meant if tank numbers were large enough, that these were usually split in company or even platoon sized groups. That was another complaint from tank unit commanders, that they´re seldomnly employed in a unified force and wasted in penny packets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yeah, good observation. I thought about that too. But I ultimately concluded that, since the battle sizes in the game are so comparatively small, there's really no other way to simulate how armor and infantry would mutually support each other. (Or does anyone here see a better way to accomplish that, using different formations and/or organization schemes?)

Either way, what Baneman has selected is definitely not too far out of bounds for an interesting and entertaining battle -- one that's appropriately demonstrative of some of this great new CMFB equipment, which is one of this battle's primary purposes, as far as I can tell.

I'm really looking forward to this DAR. (It's the first one I'll get to follow as the action unfolds. Yahoo!)

Anyway, good luck to both Baneman and Bill, and thanks for taking the time to do this.

No other way, without actually seeing CMFB OOB quick battle force selection screen. I´d guess there´s a heavy tank hunter Bn or Coy with Jagdtigers in the OOB. What could be the cost? 10000 points maybe? :D Seriously, most people wanted to see the Jagdtiger and other new toys from CMFB in action for this showcase battle and that´s all what counts. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I know a whole lot of german doctrines and my collection of books about that matter is quite extensive. :D 

http://www.spwaw.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=18276

 

That's a hugely impressive list! I have searched for H.Dv.s for years.

Have you ever thought about scanning and uploading it to archive.org?

I recently had to buy a new Canon Lide scanner and compared with my 15 year old scanner, the scanning process is very fast and can be setup that way, that it automatically combines the scanned pages into a single PDF. Very convenient to share i.e. historical books or documents with the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, here's an early teaser showing the setup zones, viewed from behind my first objectives.

Also final clarification on the weather and ground conditions ;) The heavy snow does not preclude me from being able to draw blue Targeting lines out to at least 1000m ( I just checked ). This is probably both good and bad news

 

CMFB deploy positions.png

And one for the uniform grogs - I set 1 Company to "Greatcoat" and 2 Company to "Winter".

Here is a shot showing one of each

 

CMFB uniforms.png

Edited by Baneman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Also final clarification on the weather and ground conditions ;) The heavy snow does not preclude me from being able to draw blue Targeting lines out to at least 1000m

 But is that just during set-up and when the turn begins running will the 'heavy snow' then limit visibility and engagement range?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 But is that just during set-up and when the turn begins running will the 'heavy snow' then limit visibility and engagement range?

Plus I think we have seen that blue targeting lines do not always signal good spotting ranges eeither (when visibility is reduced due to weather conditions).

Link to post
Share on other sites

 But is that just during set-up and when the turn begins running will the 'heavy snow' then limit visibility and engagement range?

I'm not 100% certain, but I do know that in snowy conditions it's possible to give a blue-line area fire order out to distances to which your troops really can't see... even to terrain right next to enemy assets that just won't ever be spotted. Meaning that the order was often disregarded....

I had this happen just the other day on a wide open map in the snow. (Gustav Line's Butera Station map, which I had modified just to do a little more wintertime experimenting.) It wasn't that the enemy was attempting to conceal himself in some other way; the inability to spot seemed to be purely a distance and snow visibility issue. Yet the line was blue there.

Maybe the blue targeting line only indicates that terrain (and tree and bush) line of sight is clear, but it disregards other 'soft' factors like weather? That would kinda fit in with what BFC has said about action spot spotting vs. troop eyeball spotting. I'm thinking specifically of BFC's comments in threads discussing the targeting of buildings whose base you cannot see.

So, unfortunately, my own impression is that there's not really a reliable correlation between how far the blue line can extend vs. how likely it is that an enemy will actually be spotted thereBut I'm not positive of that, and it'd be great to know if other players' impressions have been the same.

Edited by sttp
yeah...
Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what was against German doctrine? Do you? NOT ATTACKING!!! Get those men up and moving! If they must die, and your reputation must suffer, all for our enjoyment, well, so be it.

Still waiting.

;)

Can't count the times I've read in historical accounts "We took over the German position and awaited their inevitable counter-attack".

The first thing the Germans did when routed was turn around and attack.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not 100% certain, but I do know that in snowy conditions it's possible to give a blue-line area fire order out to distances to which your troops really can't see... even to terrain right next to enemy assets that just won't ever be spotted. Meaning that the order was often disregarded....

I had this happen just the other day on a wide open map in the snow. (Gustav Line's Butera Station map, which I had modified just to do a little more wintertime experimenting.) It wasn't that the enemy was attempting to conceal himself in some other way; the inability to spot seemed to be purely a distance and snow visibility issue. Yet the line was blue there.

Maybe the blue targeting line only indicates that terrain (and tree and bush) line of sight is clear, but it disregards other 'soft' factors like weather? That would kinda fit in with what BFC has said about action spot spotting vs. troop eyeball spotting. I'm thinking specifically of BFC's comments in threads discussing the targeting of buildings whose base you cannot see.

So, unfortunately, my own impression is that there's not really a reliable correlation between how far the blue line can extend vs. how likely it is that an enemy will actually be spotted thereBut I'm not positive of that, and it'd be great to know if other players' impressions have been the same.

The weather and how far the blue line to go definitely are tied together, its easy to see in the course of a dawn battle.  Like mission two of school of hard knocks ;) But I have also seen what your talking about so good point but I think its just that its not quite right all the time not that it doesn't work like that at all.  It could also be that we were both trying to shoot ground that was "out of weapons range", so they didn't fire, and they didn't see anyone even though they could see the ground because they just hadn't cause it was a hella hard spot.  But Ill take your word for it that they just cant se it sometimes even tho the blue bar says so that does ring true.  Honestly haven't been playing the game much for a while

Link to post
Share on other sites

The weather and how far the blue line to go definitely are tied together, its easy to see in the course of a dawn battle.  Like mission two of school of hard knocks ;) But I have also seen what your talking about so good point but I think its just that its not quite right all the time not that it doesn't work like that at all.  It could also be that we were both trying to shoot ground that was "out of weapons range", so they didn't fire, and they didn't see anyone even though they could see the ground because they just hadn't cause it was a hella hard spot.  But Ill take your word for it that they just cant se it sometimes even tho the blue bar says so that does ring true.  Honestly haven't been playing the game much for a while

No no(!), it would not be wise at all to "just take my word for it"! :lol: I've definitely seen it go both ways too. That's why I'm curious about other people's experiences. It also probably wouldn't hurt if I went and perused the manuals (for the 37th time) and maybe did a thorough forum search, too.....

That targeting line being blue is just something I've decided not to really rely on in the snow. It seems very inconsistent to me. Am I a victim of my own confirmation bias? Because it's true that the line's beautiful blueness has always seemed to let me down at the most critical times. (Ain't that always the way....)

Oh, and I never play nighttime scenarios, so hadn't considered how daylight factors in. Excellent point. So yeah, there's one more variable to add.... And I guess another would be the distinction between the targeting line being blue for troops from their current eye position, vs. being blue from a waypoint they've not yet reached. It seems and sounds like they are very, very different things.

Really, I wouldn't be surprised if the relationship between "targeting line color at point X" and "likelihood of actually spotting an enemy at point X" were much more complicated than anyone has hinted at. Maybe if we asked nicely the fine gentlemen at BFC would just go ahead and post the algorithm's source code to the forum? (:lol::lol: 100% kidding.) I guess we can take comfort in the fact that, once CMFB is released, the sample size of 'snow testers' will be much greater -- those who hate the snow now won't have a choice! -- and we'll probably be able to come to some more reliable conclusions.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...