Motorcycles, and bikes in CM2

[Luftwaffe]

Motorcycles and bikes where used very often on the eastern frot but i dont think they'll be in CM2, they should though.

[edgars]

Did troops went into combat riding bikes and motorcycles?

Answer this question and it will be clear why they are not in CM:BO and won't be included in CM:BB.

[KiloIndiaAlpha]

recce elements, on motorcycles, did.

[Sergei]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Answer this question and it will be clear why they are not in CM:BO and won't be included in CM:BB.<hr></blockquote>

Hint: before presenting rhetoric questions, know the right answers. In 1941 Finnish recon units and Jägers often advanced on bikes until they got into contact with the enemy. There was no sense to walk the vast distances the Red Army withdrew during that year. It was dangerous for the forward elements, and it is a shame that it won't be reflected. Neither is cavalry, hopefully they can get them to the engine rewrite (doing Poland 1939 without them would be foolish).

[edgars]

Well, BTS, IIRC, has clearly stated that motorcycles and cycles are out of the scope of the game.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> Hint: before presenting rhetoric questions, know the right answers. In 1941 Finnish recon units and Jägers often advanced on bikes until they got into contact with the enemy. It was dangerous for the forward elements, and it is a shame that it won't be reflected<hr></blockquote>

The reccoinaisance has ALREADY been done when you start a CM battle, a contact has been made and this has to be reflected in scenario briefing.

I can't imagine thou, how walking can be more dangerous than riding on the bike.

[Tero]

Originally posted by ciks:

Well, BTS, IIRC, has clearly stated that motorcycles and cycles are out of the scope of the game.

That does not mean they are 100% correct.

The reccoinaisance has ALREADY been done when you start a CM battle, a contact has been made and this has to be reflected in scenario briefing.

Oh, goody. The old "recce already done, in contact" routine.

The situation described by Sergei is a pursuit/exploitation situation. Troops are advancing at high speed (best possible speed) towards an objective after the enemy positions have been overcome and the enemy is retreating. There is no way of knowing what kind of assets the enemy has in the area and how much time there has been for setting up a hasty defensive/delaying position.

It that sense it could be said it happens AFTER the CM battle is over.

The Finnish infantry units still had to ride them bikes to be able to reach the position they started out from in their pursuit/exploitation mission.

The Finnish infantry was not motorized so it had to use what ever means available to get the necessary speed to fully expoit the breach. And the terrain was mostly lone roads running through densily forrested moderate hills. Many times they had to carry their bikes along when they had to perform outflanking manouvers throught the woods.

[ 11-07-2001: Message edited by: tero ]</p>

[Michael Dorosh]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Sergei:

[QB]

Hint: before presenting rhetoric questions, know the right answers. <hr></blockquote>

You might want to follow your own advice.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>

In 1941 Finnish recon units and Jägers often advanced on bikes until they got into contact with the enemy. <hr></blockquote>

What does that have to do with CM?

[Tero]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

What does that have to do with CM?

It is pertaining the question about what kind of battles can you set up with CM engine.

Even in the CMBO world the battles were not fought as pitched battles. There were many pursuit/delay situations that pitted the attacker against an enemy of undetermined makeup and strenght in unspotted positions.

If the CM premise of universal soldier is correct the only real difference is the terrain. Even the boggace terrain is very open compared to the forests of NE Europe. Imagine each type of CM battle taking place in the Ardennes (only the hills are a bit lower and the forest a bit thicker).

The other factor is the Finnish infantry (and much of the Red Army infantry until ~1943-44) being almost entirely non-motorized. With only one armoured formation there was not much trafic going on in the frontlines that did not involve the bicycle and the horse (I bet you did not see that one coming. )

[ 11-07-2001: Message edited by: tero ]</p>

[Sergei]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by ciks:

I can't imagine thou, how walking can be more dangerous than riding on the bike.<hr></blockquote>

No, I said the opposite of that. Walking is just S.L.O.W.E.R, that's why it isn't done.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

What does that have to do with CM?<hr></blockquote>

CM battles don't generally start from contact with the enemy. Or they do in the sense that you know the enemy is somewhere on the map, but you still need to locate the positions. And if you think about cases where the forward element meets a small-ish delay force, do you think they will may-day for support or just force their way through? Of course, when talking of East Front, we could take out all the infantry and still have a game with lots of value. Just that many battles would have to be left out. (Okay, bikes/mc's aren't really the same scope of importance, but one has to exaggerate in order to get to heaven...)

[edgars]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by tero:

That does not mean they are 100% correct. <hr></blockquote>

HOW DARE YOU TO THROW DOUBT UPON DECISION OF GODS???

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> Oh, goody. The old "recce already done, in contact" routine. <hr></blockquote>

Can you present the argument, that this is not true? I had a feeling that everyone agrees on that (at least in this BBS)?

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> The situation described by Sergei is a pursuit/exploitation situation. Troops are advancing at high speed (best possible speed) towards an objective after the enemy positions have been overcome and the enemy is retreating. There is no way of knowing what kind of assets the enemy has in the area and how much time there has been for setting up a hasty defensive/delaying position.<hr></blockquote>

I see. But this kind of battle isn't modelled in CM:BO, i'm sure you know there's only Attack/Deffend, Probe, Assault and ME. Question is will there be more types of battles in CM:BB and what should there be?

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> The Finnish infantry was not motorized so it had to use what ever means available to get the necessary speed to fully expoit the breach. And the terrain was mostly lone roads running through densily forrested moderate hills. Many times they had to carry their bikes along when they had to perform outflanking manouvers throught the woods.

<hr></blockquote>

CM basicaly is about "You are on this end of the map, enemy is on another, go and kick those bastards back to hell". Actions of larger scale like outflanking and exploiting the breach isn't really modelled, don't you think? You may imagine off course that you are the spearhead of attack or attacking into depth of enemy front, but in fact CM doesn't model these operational (?) level actions.

[edgars]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> No, I said the opposite of that. Walking is just S.L.O.W.E.R, that's why it isn't done. <hr></blockquote>

I do not want to get into endless argument and fingerpointing but you said:

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> ...There was no sense to walk the vast distances the Red Army withdrew during that year. It was dangerous for the forward elements... <hr></blockquote>

How should we understand this?

[MrSpkr]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by ciks:

Can you present the argument, that this is not true? I had a feeling that everyone agrees on that (at least in this BBS)?<hr></blockquote>

Don't trust your feelings. There are many of us who feel that motorcycles/bicycles/horses have a place in CM and their omission leaves a gap in the game. As for 'recce already done, advance to contact', well, that makes a nice excuse for omitting these elements, but it is still garbage. The small scale of CM makes these types of reconnaisance actions fairly easy to recreate, if given the proper materials to do the job. The real problem is the game engine, not whether or not these alternative forms of transportation existed on the battlefield.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>I see. But this kind of battle isn't modelled in CM:BO, i'm sure you know there's only Attack/Deffend, Probe, Assault and ME. Question is will there be more types of battles in CM:BB and what should there be?<hr></blockquote>

Actually, one of the operations ("A Day in the Cavalry") that came on my CMBO disk portrayed EXACTLY this kind of battle - 'continue to advance towards this village, we don't expect much enemy resistance' captures the gist of the Allied briefing.

Again, this type of battle is exactly what CMBO should be focussed on. CMBO cannot recreate the larger battles well because of limitations on purchasing artillery; reflecting terrain damage, casualties and morale problems arising from sustained pre-attack barrages; etc. At best, CMBO can run battalion size actions in a vaccuum.

This is not a slam on BTS, they have made some design decisions based on preference and game engine limitations. However, to suggest that reconnaisance actions are outside the scope of the game is simply ludicrous.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>CM basicaly is about "You are on this end of the map, enemy is on another, go and kick those bastards back to hell".<hr></blockquote>

Again, you are incorrect. As far as the Western Allies are concerned, the sort of attack you describe would be preceded by artillery barrages and would be supported by aircraft.

[ 11-07-2001: Message edited by: MrSpkr ]</p>

[Sergei]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by ciks:

"It was dangerous for the forward elements..."

How should we understand this?<hr></blockquote>

Okay. If you look at the end of the verse:

"...and it is a shame that it won't be reflected."

you'll notice that this "it" won't be in the game. Which means that "it" is bicycle troops.

Anyway, I had to flee from computer before I could really finish my last post, so I'd like to finish it: While I think BTS's decision means that some things will be dumped out, I don't necessarily want them to change it. They must have their own reasons. For example, if your guys would draw fire, would they jump out of their "personal vehicles"? If so, can they mount the bikes again later? And how to implement this? It might be difficult and time-consuming, and therefore cannot be done (now, I hope). I just don't accept as a reason a historic explanation that isn't correct. True, BTS have devotion to realism and details, but some things have been and will be left out. Even if you added bikes, female soldiers, mine dogs and everything, it would still be a game.

But what a game.

[MrSpkr]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Sergei:

For example, if your guys would draw fire, would they jump out of their "personal vehicles"? If so, can they mount the bikes again later? And how to implement this? It might be difficult and time-consuming, and therefore cannot be done (now, I hope).<hr></blockquote>

I would think the bikes/cycles would be treated exactly like boats are in CMBO.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>True, BTS have devotion to realism and details, but some things have been and will be left out . . . female soldiers . . . What a game.<hr></blockquote>

That is what the modding community is for. You just need a modder who can create the illusion of, err, 3D surfaces, on a single .bmp and you are ready to go.

[Michael Emrys]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by ciks:

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

Oh, goody. The old "recce already done, in contact" routine.

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

Can you present the argument, that this is not true?<hr></blockquote>

I think I can. If any preliminary reconnaisance had been done, than the attacking player would have a pretty good idea of the enemy dispositions, at least where the prepared positions, wire, and minefields were laid out. In CM, this is practically never the case. Usually everything has to be discovered during play.

So CM is neither quite fish nor fowl. It doesn't quite come to grips with the reality of a set piece attack nor does it present us with convincing goals for a recce scenario. I don't mean that in a condemnatory way; in the time they had available, BTS made a huge advance in computer wargame design. But in order to take the next step forward, we need to be frank about CM's shortcomings.

Michael

[Tero]

For example, if your guys would draw fire, would they jump out of their "personal vehicles"? If so, can they mount the bikes again later? And how to implement this? It might be difficult and time-consuming, and therefore cannot be done (now, I hope).

One way of doing it would be a class of infantry as a vehicle like unit with bicycle speed as its best possible speed.

The problem would be the graphics. It would look silly having them "run" around along suitable terrain (mainly roads) like the birds in Viley. E. Coyote

I just don't accept as a reason a historic explanation that isn't correct. True, BTS have devotion to realism and details, but some things have been and will be left out.

Sometimes it is forgotten that the truth is not an universal constant. Bikes, bicycles and horses are out because there is no evidence in the Anglo-American WWII history writing of them ever being in the frontlines. The burden of proof has been placed on us and while we know it to be true we can not prove it because in the Finnish history writing it is taken for granted that the bicycles and horses were in the frontlines so it has not been necessary to state the obvious for the record.

But what a game.

The best you can do at home with your pants on is to play with it.

[Tero]

Originally posted by ciks:

HOW DARE YOU TO THROW DOUBT UPON DECISION OF GODS???

Can you present the argument, that this is not true?

Michael summed it up pretty well.

I had a feeling that everyone agrees on that (at least in this BBS)?

In the words of MrSpkr Don't trust your feelings., young padawan.

You have missed a few very good debates on the subject, judging by your apparent ignorance of the subculture that swims in the undecurrent.

I see. But this kind of battle isn't modelled in CM:BO, i'm sure you know there's only Attack/Deffend, Probe, Assault and ME. Question is will there be more types of battles in CM:BB and what should there be?

Hmmmm.... all the present forms of battle imply prepared positions. No fluid situation is provided for, nor are any specific missions like Bypass and Delay. All you are expected to do is Engage and Hold Objective.

CM basicaly is about "You are on this end of the map, enemy is on another, go and kick those bastards back to hell". Actions of larger scale like outflanking and exploiting the breach isn't really modelled, don't you think? You may imagine off course that you are the spearhead of attack or attacking into depth of enemy front, but in fact CM doesn't model these operational (?) level actions.

Even an operational level action requires some troops actually take it.

The CM game engine as it is now is fully capable of simulating these types of actions, only the restrictions set on the maps are the limiting factors.

[MrSpkr]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by tero:

[qb]Sometimes it is forgotten that the truth is not an universal constant. Bikes, bicycles and horses are out because there is no evidence in the Anglo-American WWII history writing of them ever being in the frontlines. The burden of proof has been placed on us and while we know it to be true we can not prove it because in the Finnish history writing it is taken for granted that the bicycles and horses were in the frontlines so it has not been necessary to state the obvious for the record.<hr></blockquote>

Actually, there are several anecdotal accounts of horses being used for various purposes by the German army on the Western Front. The most common use was pulling supply carts, artillery pieces, and hauling men who were tired of walking everywhere. Although the latter use might be curtailed somewhat in a combat environment (although the Germans fleeing the Falaise Pocket had no qualms about accepting rides from horse-drawn carts while in or near the combat zone), the animals were certainly used by German field artillerymen while in the combat zone and occasionally under fire. Read Charles MacDonald for various accounts.

[Stuka]

If Steve and Charles code the bikes to do wheelies and jumps, we can organise races during lulls in the battle.

Now don't tell me that didn't happen all the time during WW2.

Veteran units should be coded to pull off awesome mid-air stunts which would so depress the enemy because of their riding inabilities that their moral would suffer and mass surrenders would instantly result.

BTS should fix or sumfink!

[Tero]

Originally posted by MrSpkr:

Actually, there are several anecdotal accounts of horses being used for various purposes by the German army on the Western Front.

That is the operating phrase: anecdotal account.

Hard cold facts are needed, no adectotal (hear say) evidence is admissible in these mens court.

[MrSpkr]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by tero:

Originally posted by MrSpkr:

[qb]Actually, there are several anecdotal accounts of horses being used for various purposes by the German army on the Western Front.

That is the operating phrase: anecdotal account.

Hard cold facts are needed, no adectotal (hear say) evidence is admissible in these mens court. [/QB]<hr></blockquote>

I am using anecdotal in the general sense, i.e., based on or consisting of reports or observations of usually unscientific observers. That fact that someone is not a scientific observer does not deter his ability to look across a field and see horses being used to limber guns or to pull carts. If you are looking for quantitative evidence, review German military records relating to the number of horses (in broad terms) used on teh Western Front. Note also that many German infantry divisions had staff veterinarians whose job was to take care of the horses.

However, if 'anecdotal' causes you problems, then let me rephrase, at least as far as MacDonald is concerned:

There are EYEWITNESS accounts related BY THE AUTHOR involving the use of horses.

Other EYEWITNESS accounts regarding the Faliase Pocket action have described not only the use of horses, but the horrid stench from the large number of horses and men butchered in the Allied shelling.

So, if you believe anecdotal was a poor term, substitute 'eyewitness'. Eyewitness works much better, thank you.

[ 11-07-2001: Message edited by: MrSpkr ]</p>

[Panzer Leader]

If motorcycles were not used in combat, then why did the sidecars have MG34's mounted?

As for horses, Cossack cavalry, weilding SMGs, firing from the horse, charged alongside the T34s against the Hungarian Troops in Operation Uranus. I can give the reference from both William Craig (Enemy at the Gates) and Anthony Beevor (Stalingrad) where they refer to this ACTUAL, NON-ANECDOTAL occurance.

Sadly horses are out, as per BTS, not because of their supposed non-usage in battle, but due to modelling and coding difficulties. After all, think how long it took for someone to realize that when a horse runs, all its legs are simultaneously off the ground...

[Moon]

Panzer Leader: "If motorcycles were not used in combat, then why did the sidecars have MG34's mounted?"

For self-preservation while moving in rear areas and/or during scout operations when running into unexpected enemy and trying to get away, but certainly not as an assaulting weapon I would say.

[gatpr]

Isn't running into unexpected enemies sort of the whole crux of the recon idea?

[Moon]

No, the idea (as in "ideal" ) is to find them and observe them, gather intelligence and then get the heck out without being seen. Few recon formations are equipped to actually fight what they find, and if that's indeed the mission (combat recon) than you can be certain they'd send in armored cars and light tanks instead of motorcycles