Spook Posted June 16, 2000 Share Posted June 16, 2000 Madmatt has also paid note to Christopher Hall's recent contribution (6/15) on the CM HQ site, both at the site and in his topic thread here for today. But I figured to mention this as a separate topic to give Christopher some added recognition. Anyway, Christopher, well done. It is a very solid piece of work; good use of pictures and diagrams to explain your examples of infantry maneuvers on the attack. Given the importance of infantry in both CM and the WW2 tactical scheme, your article should be great reference information at CM HQ. Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffRaider Posted June 16, 2000 Share Posted June 16, 2000 Heartily concur. Way to go!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sniperscope Posted June 16, 2000 Share Posted June 16, 2000 a must read!! sniperscope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sniperscope Posted June 16, 2000 Share Posted June 16, 2000 a must read!! sniperscope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maastrictian Posted June 16, 2000 Share Posted June 16, 2000 Thanks! Liked it enough to merit a double post huh sniperscope? --Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted June 16, 2000 Share Posted June 16, 2000 Yeah, and check out that layout!!!! Way to go Madma errr???!? oh...Hehehe That's me... Madmatt ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! CMHQ-Annex, The Alternative side of Combat Mission Combat Mission HQ CMHQ-Annex Proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted June 16, 2000 Share Posted June 16, 2000 Great article! You've covered all the bases and more, this is some good stuff! If only the layout was a little better... Martin PS. HEY! I was JOKING about the layout! Look here --> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Pattison Posted June 17, 2000 Share Posted June 17, 2000 I think this article is a good introduction; but IMHO, I think it did not go far enough and missed some things. The portions about choosing an axis of advance and movement to contact were excellent, but that only covers the opening game. What about manuvre on contact? Battle Drills? On defense, I thought his discussions about the pros and cons of forward and reverse slope defenses were good. Except in rare instances, I would not choose a forward slope defence, because it invites your opponent to scrub you off the hill with Artillery or Direct Tank fire which you should always assume the enemy has until proven otherwise. The other problem I have with the defense portion of the article is that it's discussion of defense in depth is a little thin. What he would call observers, I'd call a screen whose purpose is too force the enemy to stop and deploy for battle before the screen retires. The screen is were I'd put my MMG's and light antitank weapons that need flank shots to take out the enemy. We haven't yet seen a scenario for combat mission yet that allows us to do this. There is also another line behind the MLR that I like to call the goal line or line of last resistance. Here go typically the mortars, heavy machine guns, and heavy antitank guns. The goal line's job is to backstop the MLR if it should get breached and prevent mobile forces from exploiting the hole. And, that's my 2 cents worth. [This message has been edited by Jeff Pattison (edited 06-16-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spook Posted June 17, 2000 Author Share Posted June 17, 2000 I will confess that a few of your issues were in the back of my mind, too, Jeff, particularly the "defense in depth" note. But given that the bulk of prior CM HQ articles has been for armor, I just think it's refreshing that the far more prevalent combat arm of WW2 is getting some commentary too. I wouldn't mind a future article in which the small arms makeup of a squad/platoon would guide the tactics for each. So with that note, I should ask MadMatt for Chris Hall's e-mail and then ask Chris if he's interested in collaborating on more "infantry" pieces in the future. I don't know what alias he goes by here. Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vetch Posted June 17, 2000 Share Posted June 17, 2000 Agreed. It was a solid start and very well done as far as it went. But there is still much room for discussion in subsequent articles. 'Course, hopefully the manual will give us lots of insight into the subtle workings of some of the game mechanics. Vetch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobC Posted June 17, 2000 Share Posted June 17, 2000 OK, now I'd like to see an article on "combined arms" tactics.... using armor and infantry together. ------------------ Freedom is not a right. It is a privilege bought and paid for with the blood of patriots. Robert A. Heinlein in "Starship Troopers" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maastrictian Posted June 17, 2000 Share Posted June 17, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> So with that note, I should ask MadMatt for Chris Hall's e-mail and then ask Chris if he's interested in collaborating on more "infantry" pieces in the future. I don't know what alias he goes by here. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> crhall@fas.harvard.edu. As for all the points brought up above: yea those are all really interesting topics. I'm personally most interested in doing armor and infantry togeather, but I'm definately going to wait for my life to calm downa bit before writing anything more. Feel free to contact me if you want to think about something colabrative or you just want advice. Hey, contact Fionn and Madmatt too, they were a big help putting this togeather. (and say... editing it for spelling ) Oh yea... and that layout just brings a tear to my eye everytime... such beauty! --Chris [This message has been edited by Maastrictian (edited 06-17-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts