"SMG Gap" A Proposal

[Sirocco]

I'll use the Gulf War to explain the importance of "national modifiers". How would CM handle it? You'd have the Americans with M1's and Bradley's and infantry with M16's. The Iraqi's would have T80's, BMP's and infantry with AK47's. Would it be sufficient to model the different weapons systems to obtain realistic results? Of course not. You'd find the Iraqi's would kill more American infantrymen, and knock out more Bradley's and M1's than they did historically. So modelling weapons systems, and even doctrine, isn't enough. You have to also model the strengths and weaknesses of the men themselves. You might do that, for example, by giving the Americans high morale and by making them more durable. The Iraqi's, on the other hand, might start with high morale but they might be less durable so that they would be unlikely to stand and fight in a protracted encounter. Without modifiers of that kind you're left with a contest between weapons, and numbers of men, which is easier to model, and perhaps more satisfying for those who focus purely on stats. But I'd personally prefer the added dimension that national - even unit - modifiers would produce.

To that extent I'm not sure if this issue isn't touched on in CM already. Aren't Volksturm units particularly fragile? That would be an example of a "unit modifier". But it goes further than that. An example would be the Germans use of fieldcraft in Normandy. All the reading I've done suggests the Allies were impressed by their use of cover and concealment, and I don't think that's reflected at all in CM. Spotting German units in the bocage is almost a trivial matter, even at long range.

This is a difficult and complex area, but it would add another dimension to the game, and produce results that are based more on the men behind the weapons.

[Vanir Ausf B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sirocco:

You cannot tell me that a man who has lived all his life with those conditions isn't more used to them than someone who is coming into it for the first time.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Although rather irrelevant to CM, this is interesting. I was always under the impression that German difficulties in Russian winter (especially '41) were more due to a lack of proper clothing than any innate resistance to cold Russians may have had.

Does anyone know if there have been any studies done to see if, all else being equal, people from colder climes freeze to death more slowly than their warm blooded peers? On the surface, it sounds absurd to me, but I've never really looked into it.

[ 07-08-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

[Vanir Ausf B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sirocco:

I'll use the Gulf War to explain the importance of "national modifiers". How would CM handle it?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

CM would handle it by making the Iraqi's conscript (which they were) and the US a mix of regular and veteran. Then you properly model the different levels of C&C. If the US then is allowed the same overwhelming air and artillary assets they had, the result would likely be about the same as real life.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>An example would be the Germans use of fieldcraft in Normandy. All the reading I've done suggests the Allies were impressed by their use of cover and concealment, and I don't think that's reflected at all in CM. Spotting German units in the bocage is almost a trivial matter, even at long range.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Spotting anything is CM is pretty easy, but that's a function of the Borg spotting model and can't be avoided.

You can make the Germans spot the Allies better than vice versa by making them higher expirienced in the game. That would be realistic for the ETO in summer '44 anyway.

[Andreas]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

Does anyone know if there have been any studies done to see if, all else being equal, people from colder climes freeze to death more slowly than their warm blooded peers? On the surface, it sounds absurd to me, but I've never really looked into it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tosh, as you rightly suspect. It is an issue of training, experience, and proper clothing, as well as fuel provision for heating. Of course it helps when you have grown up in the cold, because you would have grown up with the procedures that would help you cope. As John posted, about 90,000 Soviet soldiers did not cope very well either. In the Winter War, one Soviet division was sent without acclimatisation and winter clothing to Karelia from Ukraine. I think it got annihilated by Uberfinns, but not because of some genetic trait making the Finns better able to cope with the cold. My grandfather, from the mild lower Saxony area of Germany, did not suffer frost-bite - his unit was supplied with winter clothing, because he was part of Heeresgruppe Nord, and he was a farmer, so he was used to the outdoors.

As for the Iraq example, some people (tero, Sirocco) just don't get it. They also will never get it, but that's alright. For all the others who maybe taken in by the drivel they provide is the following.

The Iraqui army was made up of lowly trained conscripts, because it had been bled dry in the first Gulf War. It faced a professional army that had total control of the sky and superior equipment. As Bullethead will tell you, they fought, but they stood little chance, because of their equipment and their lack of training, and the lack of good commanders. End of story.

You can simulate this now in CMBO with the experience rating, the setting for fanaticism, and by letting a unit start e.g. exhausted, weary, broken, whatever. In CMBB you will be able to simulate it further with the fitness factor (to account for the lack of supply coming through to the Iraquis due to their supply columns being shot up by the Alliance air forces).

I don't often agree with Lewis, but he is spot-on here. When tero is getting the Uber-Finn posters, maybe someone should order a collection of GI-Joe dolls for Sirocco, so that he can simulate Uberamericans kick innately inferior Iraqui rear-ends.

Someone should close this thread. This is a tedious business, that is not getting more interesting just because it comes up time and again.

I just read an account by von Mellenthin, stating that during CRUSADER the 7th Armoured got their asss handed to them by the Italians in a bad way (you read that right). Not exactly what you would suspect, eh? Not exactly what you could simulate if Italians had the negative national modifier that I suspect some peoplen would want them to have.

[Sergei]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

CM would handle it by making the Iraqi's conscript (which they were) and the US a mix of regular and veteran.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And don't forget setting appropriate supply levels to model the interdiction of Iraqi supply lines by Allied airforces.

[Mark IV]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I don't think enough Germans would have froze to death during a 30 minute battle to model them dropping from frostbite in the middle of a firefight.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course not. They might start the 30 minute engagement Tired, or missing some guys, however. That is where the scenario designer comes in.

All of Russia isn't always cold. Even the cold parts aren't always cold. And the Russian people did not grow up in trenches and swamps; even peasants have huts and fire. They did not spend 365 days a year tending crops in sub-zero fields, as some notions seem to suggest. Their normal body temperature and their water content was the same as the Germans'. For that matter, I froze pretty convincingly over 3 German winters myself, despite having led an outdoor life in Michigan. It is always colder outside.

Zhukov makes many bitter mentions in his memoirs of the German commanders attempts to shift the blame for their defeat to the mud and snow, always pointing out that his own troops, and the hundreds of thousands of mobilized civilians working on fortifications and other logistical duties, labored under exactly the same conditions.

While these conditions arguably take a greater toll on the attacker than the defender, winter '41 saw the Soviets as the attackers and the Germans as the defenders. It was just as cold for them both. In one of Zhukov's memos to Stalin, he is requesting 100 tons of anti-freeze to be allocated to an attack preparation.

So perhaps the German national modifier should include the inability to anticipate the obvious... that winter comes every year, and that it will be cold. There does not seem to have been a Plan B for a contingency in which the Soviet Union failed to collapse on schedule.

In any case, the scenario designer uses the game tools to recreate specific historical conditions. To create a meaningful national modifier for an Army of millions of individuals from all over European Russia and Asia and all that that spans over 4 years of war would be impossible.

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sirocco:

You cannot tell me that a man who has lived all his life with those conditions isn't more used to them than someone who is coming into it for the first time.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The problem is no one lived all their life in those 'conditions' not all ther USSR is an winter climate. The Winter of 41 was one of the worst in recorded history even Soviet troops fully outfitted with winter gear suffered frostbite etc.

I'd also like your definition of 'used to' as I grew up where our winters were harsh by most of the US standards, & I never got 'used' to the cold, but I had a winter jacket toi help, just like I have never got 'used' to the heat in Florida but I have an AC unit to help . Many German tales tell of the Soviet ability to dig in,& use camoflauge, should BTS make Soviet trenches more resiliant rgwn German ones?, should BTS give each Soviet trooper an % camo/stealth bonus?.

This is akin the typical stereotype arguments Ie, you live in a wooded area, you are better at hunting/fishing then a city boy, or, you live on a river/ocean, so you must be able to swim better then someone who doesn't etc, etc, etc. None of them hold up under scrutiny.

Regards, John Waters

[ 07-08-2001: Message edited by: PzKpfw 1 ]

[Slapdragon]

One of the problems here is the different way of looking at the world Germanboy and others (including BTS) has compared to others. Germanboy is an analyst, which means he is paid to look at a pile of data and make some predictions out of it, turning it into a useful form for others. When he presents is discoveries, he cannot "fudge" major data points, only little ones.

National modifiers are a way of saying "rumor has it these guys were better, but we have no idea why they were better, so we just fudged the data." Bad design, but common in war games. Some of it is unavoidable because the data is not extant, so we create models that work all the time in a manner that is close to the real world (penetration of tank shells through armor is an example), or create templates that take care of known variables that are hard to express (morale levels in troops). To be accurate, these are applied universally to all sides.

The idea of national modifiers is like saying we cannot discover why troops performed better or worse than other troops, which is crap. There is no black helicopter flying, alien abduction, anal probe inserting, mystical truth that makes one soldier perform better than another. BTS can and in most cases have simulated the most important variables, and as the game progresses through new versions, will hit more variables. Tweek those variables in the correct manner, and Hey Presto! you have a faithful simulation of a real event.

Of course one major variable is missing, and that is the battalion commander's skill. Guess what, that is the player!!! Now, while it would be nice to have a button that says, "this group always wins" that could be pressed, it would not be reality. Saying that just because Colonel George Simpson lost to Oberst Meyer at the Rapido means the game is cracked because Simpson win in game play is silly. If it was an even scenario, then of course history may change, that is why we play the game. If we already knew Simpson was doomed, why play it unless we were historical researchers trying to find out why he was doomed.

[Sergei]

Okay, another Finn joining the thread, but please hold your fire for a brief moment at least...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

No doubt. But during a CM game? I don't think enough Germans would have froze to death during a 30 minute battle to model them dropping from frostbite in the middle of a firefight.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

(What about operations?)

If you have been outside in any cold weather, you know that clothing means more than a binaric "alive/dead" thing. It's darn difficult to operate a rifle, if your fingers don't move. I know that, because once on a winter camp I lost my leather gloves (had two sets which are used together, one of leather and one of wool), so I had to wear only one set of wool gloves. And they of course got wet right away, but not for too long because then they froze and so did my fingers. I didn't feel too Über during that week, but at least learned to look after my stuff.

And this was while I otherwise had double pantaloons, undershirt, shirt, pullover, thick sissi coat & pants, normal socks, wool socks, padded winter boots, wool skicap, hood over my head and snow camoflage suit. Had I been without those, I couldn't have been in exteriors. Even if you don't die, your body gets stiff (actually that is not because of freezing, but because your muscles work autonomously to produce the warmth your body needs) and you react slower to commands (unless the command is, "let's go to sauna"). This does have an effect on a soldier's ability to fight.

But I am not to say that this needs a special modifier. I think you can just as well lower the German fitness level for winter of 1941, as the effect is probably the same (but then again, I haven't played CM2 so I cannot tell).

A completely different matter are snow suits. Even if you're feeling warm, it doesn't change that you can be spotted very easily against a snow bank, even from a buttoned tank, unless you wear white. Are there any figures about their use in Russian and German armies (Finns, Über or not, had an abundance of them of course - unfortunately a very small portion of Finnish Continuation War was fought in winter, which explains why Soviets didn't surrender)? In CM:BO there are snow camo mods for infantry, but the game doesn't model it AFAIK (does non-moving SS currently get any stealth bonus for having camo uniforms? ). Is this matter going to be looked at by BTS?

Hopefully someone here is still willing to discuss without flaming.

[Jeff Duquette]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Michael Said: They all shat their pants the same when they got shot at - or went berserk, or some reaction in between. Men are men.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

“It's I think a little bit like a hockey game. Once you drop the puck and get going, you're all interested in what you're doing and consequently that little bit of fear sort of goes away from you, but there's no question when you're fired at first, I think everybody has a sense of fear.

Syndey Radley-Walters”

========================

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Vanir Said: The question becomes to what extent you force the player to use those tactics and prohibit him from using others. What if someone wants to use 2 of his T-34's to overwatch the other advancing. How do you stop this?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You hit the nail right on the head of what I am talking about. Beyond individual tank and individual squad units there is no reason to consider tactical attributes of differing nations. These are in the hands of the mouse-wielding player. The player acts as platoon leader, company commander and in big scenarios the battalion commander as well. He wears all these “command hats” all at the same time. He dictates platoon level movements via ordering squads about or maneuvering tanks here and there…etc. But internal to the squad he is not controlling battle drill. There are differences in squad drill between differing nations. In the “World of Combat Mission” there is no distinction between squads aside from weapons make-up and numbers of men in a squad.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>From: “German Squad Tactics in WWII” Translated by Matthew Gajkowski.

In contrast to the doctrine of other nations the German army holds that the machine gun, not the rifle is the backbone of infantry tactics (sic WWII Infantry Tactics). The German squad is built around the light machine gun. It is the squad's base of fire. The riflemen support it and provide ammunition for it. In the U.S. squad, the riflemen are the base of fire and the BAR (Browning automatic rifle) supports the riflemen. This may be one of the reasons why the Germans stayed with the K-98k rifle (designed originally in 1898 and modified last in the 1930's). In the U.S. squad the MI rifle (adopted in the 1930's) was the newer weapon while their automatic weapon, the BAR (originally an 1918 design) was old. In the German squad the MG-34 (introduced in 1936) was the new design. The Germans even came out with a replacement for the MG-34 in 1942 (the MG-42).

All German soldiers learned how to use the machine gun, but only the best marksmen were given further training on it. German soldiers were expected to be able to fire 50-60 well-aimed shots in 5-8 round bursts in 30 seconds with the MG-34.

The Germans considered the infantry to be the queen of all arms. Every soldier received basic infantry training before any other training. German officers, regardless of their specialty were taught to lead up to an infantry battalion in battle.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Slapdragon]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sergei:

Okay, another Finn joining the thread, but please hold your fire for a brief moment at least...

(What about operations?)

If you have been outside in any cold weather, you know that clothing means more than a binaric "alive/dead" thing. It's darn difficult to operate a rifle, if your fingers don't move. I know that, because once on a winter camp I lost my leather gloves (had two sets which are used together, one of leather and one of wool), so I had to wear only one set of wool gloves. And they of course got wet right away, but not for too long because then they froze and so did my fingers. I didn't feel too Über during that week, but at least learned to look after my stuff.

And this was while I otherwise had double pantaloons, undershirt, shirt, pullover, thick sissi coat & pants, normal socks, wool socks, padded winter boots, wool skicap, hood over my head and snow camoflage suit. Had I been without those, I couldn't have been in exteriors. Even if you don't die, your body gets stiff (actually that is not because of freezing, but because your muscles work autonomously to produce the warmth your body needs) and you react slower to commands (unless the command is, "let's go to sauna"). This does have an effect on a soldier's ability to fight.

But I am not to say that this needs a special modifier. I think you can just as well lower the German fitness level for winter of 1941, as the effect is probably the same (but then again, I haven't played CM2 so I cannot tell).

A completely different matter are snow suits. Even if you're feeling warm, it doesn't change that you can be spotted very easily against a snow bank, even from a buttoned tank, unless you wear white. Are there any figures about their use in Russian and German armies (Finns, Über or not, had an abundance of them of course - unfortunately a very small portion of Finnish Continuation War was fought in winter, which explains why Soviets didn't surrender)? In CM:BO there are snow camo mods for infantry, but the game doesn't model it AFAIK (does non-moving SS currently get any stealth bonus for having camo uniforms? ). Is this matter going to be looked at by BTS?

Hopefully someone here is still willing to discuss without flaming.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Having a camo rating would be a great idea, scenario designers could really work with it. Of course, you will get arguments that X army should never get a camo bonus (Germans casue they talk to much, US cause they are lazy, etc both not true -- US camoed their vehicles when needed and Germans shut up when needed) but aside from drivel camo is a variable.

The next difficulty would be in discovering who had camo when. The US did not issue camo until late for winter, but engineers and infantry in the ardennes had tiger stripe fatigues. US soldiers started stealing sheets as soon as snow started to hit the ground. If both sides get camo bonus, then it just makes the defense stronger in comparison and will require that the points formula get a tweek for when it is used.

[Sirocco]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

Does anyone know if there have been any studies done to see if, all else being equal, people from colder climes freeze to death more slowly than their warm blooded peers? On the surface, it sounds absurd to me, but I've never really looked into it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This has nothing to do with freezing to death! As a Russian, if you have experienced Russian winters - note, I used the term Russian - all your life, then you must be able to operate in those conditions better than someone who is experiencing it for the first time. Why do athletes go to acclimatise in a foreign climate that they're going to compete in? Because they're not physically used to it.

They would be at a disadvantage otherwise!

[ 07-08-2001: Message edited by: Sirocco ]

[Sirocco]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy:

As for the Iraq example, some people (tero, Sirocco) just don't get it. They also will never get it, but that's alright.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're a smart boy, Germanboy. Pity you can't debate something in an adult fashion, but, as you say, that's alright.

I'm looking to discuss ways to improve the engine, not score points off people to make myself look good, or smart. I suggest you grow up a little and drop the tone.

It's clear there's no room for debate here.

[Slapdragon]

Brazillian scientist who work in Antartica, including overwinter there, generally take 1-3 weeks to aclimatize to weather far more severe than Russia has ever seen outside of the artic. These are scientist who never before experienced weather below 10 C, who are sleeping in a room that never goes above 0 C on the balmiest of days.

They experience a number of blood chemistry and physical changes that make their bodies run very much like Eskimos.

Perhaps someone needs to inform the Brazillian scientific community that these people cannot possibly work in the antarctic?

[Triumvir]

Lewis, don't you ever get tired of trolling here? I mean, really, it's like shooting fish in a barrel (though perhaps not so much in this thread)

My proposal for nationalistic trait modifiers; since BTS states that nationalistic modifiers applied across the board are unrealistic, how about this:

1) Create behavioural modifiers

eg - quickly suppressed

- fanatic (very deliberate choice)

- better shots

- better climbing ability

- super-duper ueber Finnish sissuhood plus 50 to stealth and combat in Karelian forests

2) Create a likelihood table for each modifier (eg 5% fanatic, 5% better shots) where each likelihood is the midpoint on a normal distribution.

3) Generate a table listing SDs for each army (eg 1SD for airborne fanatics, 5SD for Finnish ueber-sissu) to decide what the likelihood of a modifier is.

4) Randomly decide if this modifier applies to a particular unit in a game

5) Repeat 4 until all units for all armies in the game have had modifiers assigned (or not)

6) Play game, rinse, repeat.

Ideally, you could use some form of trait system to determine ROF, ammo usage, to drive just about everything, really. This would involve quantifying modifiers, so that there would be some Finns who only had plus 50 to stealth and others who had resistance to Russian sniper bullet between eyes.

Preferably, all of these should be hidden from the user's view. Ideally, I'd like to see even the command, control and stealth hidden from the user and made continuous (i.e. +1.13 command)

[dalem]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sirocco:

You cannot tell me that a man who has lived all his life with those conditions isn't more used to them than someone who is coming into it for the first time.

This whole idea of a "universal soldier" makes about as much sense as the idea that there's a "universal man", at home in all conditions.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But why wouldn't the extant Experience ratings, and the upcoming Fitness ratings, take care of this when you feel it's necessary? What's missing from the game conceptually that you can't already handle via the scenario builder?

-dale

[argie]

My RL experience with Gral Winter :

I did my conscription service in Rio Gallegos (if you care to look at a map, is the last continental city in America, going South, just North from Tierra del Fuego, and in front of Malvinas). I'm from Buenos Aires, almost subtropical climate city...

I saw some people who suffers badly from the change of temperature in March (beginning of Autumn down here), working with the frozen water to the chest making bridges in the middle of the Winter... Not ever with the aproppiatte clothing (no double stuff in anything, but maybe some nylon panties [don't tell that to anybody outside this Forum, please ]), and some of us (myself, at least) without gloves, because I feel better "touching" the heavy equipment that could hurt me badly that handling it with gloves... Most of time under -10C...

Human body is very adaptable to environment...

[Andreas]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sirocco:

I'm looking to discuss ways to improve the engine, not score points off people to make myself look good, or smart. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You've got that slightly wrong, because you are actually looking for ways to screw up the engine by introducing tosh into it that has no basis in real life. Fortunately enough BTS are not going to fall for this.

Or maybe you can just enlighten us as to what modifiers would be needed to replicate the Iraqui example of yours? I can't wait to hear all about them.

[Commissar]

[ 07-08-2001: Message edited by: Commissar ]

[Jeff Duquette]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Germanboy Said: I just read an account by von Mellenthin, stating that during CRUSADER the 7th Armoured got their asss handed to them by the Italians in a bad way (you read that right). Not exactly what you would suspect, eh? Not exactly what you could simulate if Italians had the negative national modifier that I suspect some peoplen would want them to have.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are referring to the action on 23rd November 1941?

[ 07-08-2001: Message edited by: Jeff Duquette ]

[Kingfish]

Perhaps he's referring to the 22nd Armd. brigade's charge at Bir el Gubi.

[Vanir Ausf B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Duquette:

In the “World of Combat Mission” there is no distinction between squads aside from weapons make-up and numbers of men in a squad.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree there are very real differences in squad drill. I think the problem is the level of abstraction in the game. In CM squads are a single unit. When a squad moves, everyone in the squad moves at the same time. Squads fire in "volleys", and when they fire, everyone fires and then no one fires again until it's time for the next volley. I know Steve has said they plan to increase modeling of individual soldiers when they rewrite the engine, which would help greatly. Until then, I'm not sure much could be done.

The one area where changes might be made now is in how half squads are used. When you split squads into teams you get an over watch element with the MG42/BAR and a maneuver element with rifles. This arrangement would seem to be more natural to the Germans because of the superiority of the MG42. The problem is that CM actively discourages people from doing this by giving half squads a moral penalty, as well as a global moral hit, when they split. The net effect of this is that infantry teams are only used as ambush-springers and for deception. When the bullets start flying everyone only fights with full squads since teams cannot take a punch, i.e. come under fire without suppressing and panicking almost right away.

If I were looking for better modeling of squad drill in CM in the near future, I would begin by asking BTS to consider doing away with the split squad moral penalty. Then we would see a greater use of infantry teams as they were historically used, and perhaps a greater differentiation in the performance of German and Allied squads.

[Jeff Duquette]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Kingfish Perhaps he's referring to the 22nd Armd. brigade's charge at Bir el Gubi.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You maybe right. If that is indeed the case then we are talking about one armored brigade, unsupported by Infantry or Artillery, being repulsed by the entire Ariete Armored Division. The Ariete Armored Division was arguably the most competent unit in the Italian Army of that period.

Interestingly enough Bayerlein’s account of November 19th engagement at Bir el Gubi differs somewhat from Mellenthin’s.

From: The Rommel Papers, pg 159

“The British armour advanced towards the Tobruk area in three columns, and struck our covering screen on the 19th November. The left column (sic The 22nd Armored Brigade) reached Bir el Gubi, forcing back the Ariete Division after a hot fight. The right column was checked by part of the 21st Panzer Division, and then driven back on Gabr Saleh. Meanwhile, the centre column had penetrated to the airfield at Sidi Rezegh, and established itself on the escarpment, barely 10 miles from the Tobruk perimeter.”

[ 07-09-2001: Message edited by: Jeff Duquette ]

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

If I were looking for better modeling of squad drill in CM in the near future, I would begin by asking BTS to consider doing away with the split squad moral penalty. Then we would see a greater use of infantry teams as they were historically used, and perhaps a greater differentiation in the performance of German and Allied squads.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Excelent sugestion Vanir & it would allow us to use realistic Inf tactics.

My only point would be Soviet Rifle Squads, in 1941 should suffer the penalties we have now as it would realisticly simulate the problems their squads had in 1941 - 1942, as the Soviet Rifle Sqd Co was not encouraged to let his squad out of his sight.

Regards, John Waters

[Jeff Duquette]

Good post Vanir. Agree with your insights into the game. Personally I am not arguing to change or not to change CM. I am suggesting that National Modifiers within tactical level wargames are not “Bad…Bad…Bad” anymore than they are “Good…Good…Good”. They are simply different approaches to design philosophy.

Squad Leader jumps into the deep end of national modifiers. I liked SL. ASL didn’t do much for me. But SL was brilliant. CM has done a 180 on national modifiers…I like CM as well. Both good games…both different approaches.

But it is easy enough to point out real differences in operational or tactical elements of training or doctrine between various armies. If someone came up to you on the street and implied the French Army and German Army of 1940 trained and fought in the same manner how would you respond to that?