CM2 mod request: BMW R-75 with Sidecar

[Panther131]

I was wondering if BTS has thought about puttin in the BMW R-75 with Sidecar or any of its variants? The BMW R-75 with Sidecar was equiped with or without the mg34 making it an excellent recon vehicle. I guess the main problem would be that it is super super fast. Making it a really cool and probably too fast for its own good in the game. But nontheless, it would be fantastic to have this in the game for CM2. I havent found any info on how many of the cycles were in use on the eastern front but I have just read that 38,000 of these vehicles (variants) were made during 1939 to 1941. Just how many were used I dont know. again I think this would be a really great additionto CM. (CM2)

Additional info on the BMW R-75 with Sidecar:

Weight: 180kg

Crew: 3 men

Engine: BMW R-12 746cc / 2-cylinder / 18hp

Speed: Road: 100km/h (w/o sidecar) / 85km/h (with sidecar)

Cross-Country: --km/h

Range: Road: 230km

Cross-Country: ---km

Fuel Capacity: -- litres

Lenght: 2.10m

Width: 0.90m

Height: 0.94m

Armament: none or 7.92mm MG34

[ 04-24-2001: Message edited by: Panther131 ]

[Panther131]

I was wondering if BTS has thought about puttin in the BMW R-75 with Sidecar or any of its variants? The BMW R-75 with Sidecar was equiped with or without the mg34 making it an excellent recon vehicle. I guess the main problem would be that it is super super fast. Making it a really cool and probably too fast for its own good in the game. But nontheless, it would be fantastic to have this in the game for CM2. I havent found any info on how many of the cycles were in use on the eastern front but I have just read that 38,000 of these vehicles (variants) were made during 1939 to 1941. Just how many were used I dont know. again I think this would be a really great additionto CM. (CM2)

Additional info on the BMW R-75 with Sidecar:

Weight: 180kg

Crew: 3 men

Engine: BMW R-12 746cc / 2-cylinder / 18hp

Speed: Road: 100km/h (w/o sidecar) / 85km/h (with sidecar)

Cross-Country: --km/h

Range: Road: 230km

Cross-Country: ---km

Fuel Capacity: -- litres

Lenght: 2.10m

Width: 0.90m

Height: 0.94m

Armament: none or 7.92mm MG34

[ 04-24-2001: Message edited by: Panther131 ]

[Abteilung]

The following account is from the autobiography of Otto Carius and can be found here: www.panzer-vi.fsnet.co.uk/tales_ocarius.html

Battle of Pemvlinka........................My battalion was resting & refitting when the report came through of an enemy tank column moving into the area. We quickly climbed into our Tigers & began to move out in 3's in a v formation spaced about 100meters apart. In total we had 12 operational Tigers the other 3 were left behind & camouflaged as static defense positions. My formation broke off & headed down the right flank of the roaad at full speed. We had a spotter on a motorcylce ahead of us reporting back what he saw. After travelling about 5 Kilometers our spotter annouced the presence of around twenty T-34 & SU-122 assault guns moving cautiously through a field. We moved up towards the hedgerow & targeted the turreted T-34 tanks. They were moving quite slowly & to our knowledge were without infantry support. All 3 Tigers of my section quickly destroyed the front 3 T- 34's. The others were thrown into confusion by the surprise of our attack. They all stopped which I found to be strange, swivelling their trurrets looking for us. I ordered another quick burst of fire & informed my section to move away after they had fired their round. The spotter informed us that 2 T-34s & an assault gun were now ablaze. We split our formation up & performed a perfect encirclement manouvre whicch saw me going head on at the enemy with my gun firing as we moved. My comrades had outflanked the enemy & attacked from both sides. We destroyed all the enemy tanks within about 30 minutes of the first shot. We found out that this was the probe element & our platoon had encountered the main body which turned out to be made up of infantry mainly. After artillery support had been called to drive the Russians back we re joined & formed a defensive ring until we were given support from our infantry.

At least some proof the beemers were used in armored combat.

[Abteilung]

The following account is from the autobiography of Otto Carius and can be found here: www.panzer-vi.fsnet.co.uk/tales_ocarius.html

Battle of Pemvlinka........................My battalion was resting & refitting when the report came through of an enemy tank column moving into the area. We quickly climbed into our Tigers & began to move out in 3's in a v formation spaced about 100meters apart. In total we had 12 operational Tigers the other 3 were left behind & camouflaged as static defense positions. My formation broke off & headed down the right flank of the roaad at full speed. We had a spotter on a motorcylce ahead of us reporting back what he saw. After travelling about 5 Kilometers our spotter annouced the presence of around twenty T-34 & SU-122 assault guns moving cautiously through a field. We moved up towards the hedgerow & targeted the turreted T-34 tanks. They were moving quite slowly & to our knowledge were without infantry support. All 3 Tigers of my section quickly destroyed the front 3 T- 34's. The others were thrown into confusion by the surprise of our attack. They all stopped which I found to be strange, swivelling their trurrets looking for us. I ordered another quick burst of fire & informed my section to move away after they had fired their round. The spotter informed us that 2 T-34s & an assault gun were now ablaze. We split our formation up & performed a perfect encirclement manouvre whicch saw me going head on at the enemy with my gun firing as we moved. My comrades had outflanked the enemy & attacked from both sides. We destroyed all the enemy tanks within about 30 minutes of the first shot. We found out that this was the probe element & our platoon had encountered the main body which turned out to be made up of infantry mainly. After artillery support had been called to drive the Russians back we re joined & formed a defensive ring until we were given support from our infantry.

At least some proof the beemers were used in armored combat.

[Wesreidau]

There's been some very LONG debates on this whole thing, (also on horses and bicycles) check it out via searching.

It is unrealistic to have motorcyles advancing with your company as you attack an enemy position.

I don't recall ever reading about charging waves of motorbike troops, or even them used singularly in battle.

While indeed they may transport FOOs around we don't as a rule model a FOO a couple of Km from a fight..

Other problem is when shot at they would pretty much instantly be knocked out.. so why would anyone ever buy them, even if they were modeled?

Also people would use them as gamey scouting vehicles.. fast jeeps were bad enough, dirt cheap bikes would take me back to my command and conquer days...

they are cool yeah..

but not in CMs scale (AND no one bring up ASL or i'll throtle them).

PeterNZ

[Wesreidau]

There's been some very LONG debates on this whole thing, (also on horses and bicycles) check it out via searching.

It is unrealistic to have motorcyles advancing with your company as you attack an enemy position.

I don't recall ever reading about charging waves of motorbike troops, or even them used singularly in battle.

While indeed they may transport FOOs around we don't as a rule model a FOO a couple of Km from a fight..

Other problem is when shot at they would pretty much instantly be knocked out.. so why would anyone ever buy them, even if they were modeled?

Also people would use them as gamey scouting vehicles.. fast jeeps were bad enough, dirt cheap bikes would take me back to my command and conquer days...

they are cool yeah..

but not in CMs scale (AND no one bring up ASL or i'll throtle them).

PeterNZ

[Head Mahone]

PeterNZer did you not just read Abteilung's post? I understand both sides of this argument and whatever side BTS stands on I will most likely support it. Not having the US jeep in C.M. (as numerous as it was in WWII) would have been a bad thing. Personally I don't give a damn if the R-75 is molded or not. To say that it shouldn't be done because of its venerability to enemy fire, or gamey players is ludicrous though!

-Head

[Head Mahone]

PeterNZer did you not just read Abteilung's post? I understand both sides of this argument and whatever side BTS stands on I will most likely support it. Not having the US jeep in C.M. (as numerous as it was in WWII) would have been a bad thing. Personally I don't give a damn if the R-75 is molded or not. To say that it shouldn't be done because of its venerability to enemy fire, or gamey players is ludicrous though!

-Head

[Soddball]

I agree with Head Mahone. A complaint of "Gamey tactics" should not preclude what was clearly a widely-used widespread machine (if production figures are correct). People have a right to play the game in their own style. If you play someone who uses those tactics, and you don't like it, don't play them or organise rules beforehand so that neither player can use them in that manner.

Since they're so easy to knock out, a quick burst of MG fire would soon stop those 'gamey' vehicles anyway.

Motorbikes with sidecars would be FUN.

[Soddball]

I agree with Head Mahone. A complaint of "Gamey tactics" should not preclude what was clearly a widely-used widespread machine (if production figures are correct). People have a right to play the game in their own style. If you play someone who uses those tactics, and you don't like it, don't play them or organise rules beforehand so that neither player can use them in that manner.

Since they're so easy to knock out, a quick burst of MG fire would soon stop those 'gamey' vehicles anyway.

Motorbikes with sidecars would be FUN.

[Wesreidau]

Head

I did read the post, and noted the 'drive around for 5km' bit. That isn't a part of CM.

CM doesn't handle all the day-to-day -operational- actions of units at the front line (try the CMMC for that ).

This includes scouting, patrolling and so on.

I imagine if the guy ended up talking about the sidecar BMW more he wouldn't have said

'and as we gunned down the T34s the sidecar zoomed up and machinegunned the crew before holding off a company of infantry to the left'.

In fact, I imagine the sidecar BMW (as ALL motorbike anywhere near the front lines would do) simply hid in some woods and did nothing.

So if you're proposing "we should have the BMW bike in there so it can sit behind a house or in a barn and do nothing", well fine, you can argue that, and I'd argue that it is a waste of BTS's time..

If you're proposing "we should include the BMW bike so it can scout out positions and shoot its mg while in a CM battle", well i'd call you a gamey son-of-a- and argue there is no point in including it so people can use the BMW in such an ahistorical manner.

(Note: CM tries to be historical, aka. not gamey, it's sorta the point of the game. Try Red Alert if you want the other kind of game)

The BMW motorbike and sidecar simply wasn't a part of front-line equipment. Soldiers didn't ride into battle on them, attacking enemy lines, people didn't dig them in to hold off the Russian hordes. So why put it in CM?

Now folks could say that it would die quickly used in scouty combat so it wouldn't be gamey to include it. Which leads to the question 'well what role would you use it for?'. If it can't scout and can't fight well, and all it's good for is hidding in a barn, well it's as much use as a field kitchen. Both were in the war. But I have yet to see the point in setting up a front lines assault bakery unit. Nor have i seen the point of including motorbikes. Or horses. or bicycles. or bakery teams. or mine dogs.

Why have BTS waste their time in this kinda thing when they could add units/items of value to the game?

PeterNZ

[ 04-24-2001: Message edited by: PeterNZer ]

[Wesreidau]

Head

I did read the post, and noted the 'drive around for 5km' bit. That isn't a part of CM.

CM doesn't handle all the day-to-day -operational- actions of units at the front line (try the CMMC for that ).

This includes scouting, patrolling and so on.

I imagine if the guy ended up talking about the sidecar BMW more he wouldn't have said

'and as we gunned down the T34s the sidecar zoomed up and machinegunned the crew before holding off a company of infantry to the left'.

In fact, I imagine the sidecar BMW (as ALL motorbike anywhere near the front lines would do) simply hid in some woods and did nothing.

So if you're proposing "we should have the BMW bike in there so it can sit behind a house or in a barn and do nothing", well fine, you can argue that, and I'd argue that it is a waste of BTS's time..

If you're proposing "we should include the BMW bike so it can scout out positions and shoot its mg while in a CM battle", well i'd call you a gamey son-of-a- and argue there is no point in including it so people can use the BMW in such an ahistorical manner.

(Note: CM tries to be historical, aka. not gamey, it's sorta the point of the game. Try Red Alert if you want the other kind of game)

The BMW motorbike and sidecar simply wasn't a part of front-line equipment. Soldiers didn't ride into battle on them, attacking enemy lines, people didn't dig them in to hold off the Russian hordes. So why put it in CM?

Now folks could say that it would die quickly used in scouty combat so it wouldn't be gamey to include it. Which leads to the question 'well what role would you use it for?'. If it can't scout and can't fight well, and all it's good for is hidding in a barn, well it's as much use as a field kitchen. Both were in the war. But I have yet to see the point in setting up a front lines assault bakery unit. Nor have i seen the point of including motorbikes. Or horses. or bicycles. or bakery teams. or mine dogs.

Why have BTS waste their time in this kinda thing when they could add units/items of value to the game?

PeterNZ

[ 04-24-2001: Message edited by: PeterNZer ]

[Wesreidau]

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

A complaint of "Gamey tactics" should not preclude what was clearly a widely-used widespread machine (if production figures are correct

Motorbikes with sidecars would be FUN.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

While they would be fun, i agree (mostly for setting up stupid race course maps hehe) they are still pointless.

I believe the spoon was also produced in very large numbers during the war (I don't have figures on hand... ) yet we don't see it in CM. Why not? well because they really had no impact on front line fighting.

Some of you may argue the spoon was crucial to the war. I agree! Without spoons, heaven knows how folks would eat their puddning. That kinda frustration can take it out of your average Landser.

But for CMs scale (not being an eating sim) there is no point including the spoon.

same for motorbikes. Yes, lots were produced. Mostly they were used for messegers, and escorting generals around. they weren't used by front-line infantry companies (the above example comes from a tiger Abteilung Iimagine, these guys are not exactly your average front line troop and the bike was probably just grabbed and used for a while).

Furthermore the exception proves the rule, as they say. I am sure I could find an example of spoons used in combat too, doubt it would persuade you or BTS to include them.

If you are looking for a fantasy game, i suggest you try elsewhere. The goal of BTS has always been to create as realistic and historically accurate game as possible (despite the players), for this reason (due to the lack of bikes in front line combat), I very much doubt they will be in CM2.

Perhaps they can join me in my spoon wars game.

PeterNZ

[Wesreidau]

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

A complaint of "Gamey tactics" should not preclude what was clearly a widely-used widespread machine (if production figures are correct

Motorbikes with sidecars would be FUN.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

While they would be fun, i agree (mostly for setting up stupid race course maps hehe) they are still pointless.

I believe the spoon was also produced in very large numbers during the war (I don't have figures on hand... ) yet we don't see it in CM. Why not? well because they really had no impact on front line fighting.

Some of you may argue the spoon was crucial to the war. I agree! Without spoons, heaven knows how folks would eat their puddning. That kinda frustration can take it out of your average Landser.

But for CMs scale (not being an eating sim) there is no point including the spoon.

same for motorbikes. Yes, lots were produced. Mostly they were used for messegers, and escorting generals around. they weren't used by front-line infantry companies (the above example comes from a tiger Abteilung Iimagine, these guys are not exactly your average front line troop and the bike was probably just grabbed and used for a while).

Furthermore the exception proves the rule, as they say. I am sure I could find an example of spoons used in combat too, doubt it would persuade you or BTS to include them.

If you are looking for a fantasy game, i suggest you try elsewhere. The goal of BTS has always been to create as realistic and historically accurate game as possible (despite the players), for this reason (due to the lack of bikes in front line combat), I very much doubt they will be in CM2.

Perhaps they can join me in my spoon wars game.

PeterNZ

[Panzer Leader]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>PeterNZer:

CM doesn't handle all the day-to-day -operational- actions of units at the front line...This includes scouting, patrolling and so on.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What?!? I have seen and played many scenarios where one side or the other is supposed to be a patrol or scout party. In fact, one might assume that most battles fought in CM (if you are trying to set a parallel to reality) would be engagements of sperahead formations, scouts, and patrols.

I do not know what point you are trying to make other than you don't like it and don't want to see it in the game.

Now don't get me started on Cossacks for CM2...

[Panzer Leader]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>PeterNZer:

CM doesn't handle all the day-to-day -operational- actions of units at the front line...This includes scouting, patrolling and so on.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What?!? I have seen and played many scenarios where one side or the other is supposed to be a patrol or scout party. In fact, one might assume that most battles fought in CM (if you are trying to set a parallel to reality) would be engagements of sperahead formations, scouts, and patrols.

I do not know what point you are trying to make other than you don't like it and don't want to see it in the game.

Now don't get me started on Cossacks for CM2...

[Wesreidau]

You mistake my meaning PL.

By operational level scouting and patrol I mean when a btn sits down on a hill then sends out a couple or three half squad that spends a few hours at an OP out infront of the lines or engages in denial activities to enemy scouting units.

I have never played a scenario like this, and don't think it would be much fun and don't think CM is really designed to handle it very well. (one half squad vs. another half squad on a map wouldnt be that amusing).

What you're refering to as a ME is what might be considered a meeting of two Aufk. type forces. Light armor, supported by infantry scouting out the enemy's line.

This CM does handle well.

Furthermore, as has been convincingly argued elsewhere the whole ME thing is a bit ahistorical. More likely is a scouting force of one side meeting the defences of another side and the pulling back and waiting for the cavalry. I imagine it was fairly rare for the scouting forces of two sides to engage, (unless you have two armies marching across the land to engage each other and the fight isn't over a static front line)...

Yet, again, in the scouting units BMW motorbikes weren't used, as I understand it, in front line combat.

HTs and armored cars were used profusely, and hence make it into the game.

I'm sorry my point eludes you, but it is quiet simple.

- motorbikes weren't used in the combat CM simulates

- therefore there is no point in wasting time on including them.

PeterNZ

[Wesreidau]

You mistake my meaning PL.

By operational level scouting and patrol I mean when a btn sits down on a hill then sends out a couple or three half squad that spends a few hours at an OP out infront of the lines or engages in denial activities to enemy scouting units.

I have never played a scenario like this, and don't think it would be much fun and don't think CM is really designed to handle it very well. (one half squad vs. another half squad on a map wouldnt be that amusing).

What you're refering to as a ME is what might be considered a meeting of two Aufk. type forces. Light armor, supported by infantry scouting out the enemy's line.

This CM does handle well.

Furthermore, as has been convincingly argued elsewhere the whole ME thing is a bit ahistorical. More likely is a scouting force of one side meeting the defences of another side and the pulling back and waiting for the cavalry. I imagine it was fairly rare for the scouting forces of two sides to engage, (unless you have two armies marching across the land to engage each other and the fight isn't over a static front line)...

Yet, again, in the scouting units BMW motorbikes weren't used, as I understand it, in front line combat.

HTs and armored cars were used profusely, and hence make it into the game.

I'm sorry my point eludes you, but it is quiet simple.

- motorbikes weren't used in the combat CM simulates

- therefore there is no point in wasting time on including them.

PeterNZ

[Panther131]

Posted by PeterNZer

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Soldiers didn't ride into battle on them, attacking enemy lines, people didn't dig them in to hold off the Russian hordes. So why put it in CM?

Now folks could say that it would die quickly used in scouty combat so <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Either did Jeeps.

You have some good points but I would be ancious to see further documentation regarding the use of the BMW motorcycle's in the german armed forces.

So than the kublewagon was a waste of time for BTS?

My points is that its still very neat to have these vehicles in the game because they represent historical units in WWII. This allows CM's users to reanact WWII ideas and storylines. In otherwords in CM we can reanact the CM battlefiled as we see fit. Think for a moment about having a very cool scenario based on a scouting party that goes wrong or is surprise attacked. A scenario that has just a few weak units or, one that is making a slow withdraw from the front (away from the front lines) and comes upon allied paratroopers. This is the beauty of CM. CM can be played as a renactment of WWII using the miniturization it provides. It really is a wonderful tool. And that is the beauty that CM is and provides (among other things).

I believe that the more units we have in CM the better. Not from a game standpoint but from a historical standpoint and not ment to be used in competitve multiplay.

[Panther131]

Posted by PeterNZer

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Soldiers didn't ride into battle on them, attacking enemy lines, people didn't dig them in to hold off the Russian hordes. So why put it in CM?

Now folks could say that it would die quickly used in scouty combat so <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Either did Jeeps.

You have some good points but I would be ancious to see further documentation regarding the use of the BMW motorcycle's in the german armed forces.

So than the kublewagon was a waste of time for BTS?

My points is that its still very neat to have these vehicles in the game because they represent historical units in WWII. This allows CM's users to reanact WWII ideas and storylines. In otherwords in CM we can reanact the CM battlefiled as we see fit. Think for a moment about having a very cool scenario based on a scouting party that goes wrong or is surprise attacked. A scenario that has just a few weak units or, one that is making a slow withdraw from the front (away from the front lines) and comes upon allied paratroopers. This is the beauty of CM. CM can be played as a renactment of WWII using the miniturization it provides. It really is a wonderful tool. And that is the beauty that CM is and provides (among other things).

I believe that the more units we have in CM the better. Not from a game standpoint but from a historical standpoint and not ment to be used in competitve multiplay.

[ASL Veteran]

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

This includes scouting, patrolling and so on.

[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ummm, then why are all those armored cars etc included in CM? Or maybe you are arguing selectively here? Motorcycles are part of recon TO&Es and you don't like them so they are out. Armored Cars are part of the TO&E of recon units, but you like them so they are in. Did I get the essentials of your argument correctly?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

If you're proposing "we should include the BMW bike so it can scout out positions and shoot its mg while in a CM battle", well i'd call you a gamey son-of-a- and argue there is no point in including it so people can use the BMW in such an ahistorical manner.

[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What's ahistorical about that?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

The BMW motorbike and sidecar simply wasn't a part of front-line equipment.

[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Motorcycles were standard TO&E for early war German recon forces and served as the recon battalion's infantry in many cases. It doesn't get much more frontline than that.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

Now folks could say that it would die quickly used in scouty combat so it wouldn't be gamey to include it. Which leads to the question 'well what role would you use it for?'. If it can't scout and can't fight well, and all it's good for is hidding in a barn, well it's as much use as a field kitchen. Both were in the war. But I have yet to see the point in setting up a front lines assault bakery unit. Nor have i seen the point of including motorbikes. Or horses. or bicycles. or bakery teams. or mine dogs.

[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You really are pretty amazing in your broad sweeping statements about what is and isn't appropriate for CM. I think I've said all I'm going to say on this issue though. People seem to get pretty worked up about these things around here.

[ASL Veteran]

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

This includes scouting, patrolling and so on.

[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ummm, then why are all those armored cars etc included in CM? Or maybe you are arguing selectively here? Motorcycles are part of recon TO&Es and you don't like them so they are out. Armored Cars are part of the TO&E of recon units, but you like them so they are in. Did I get the essentials of your argument correctly?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

If you're proposing "we should include the BMW bike so it can scout out positions and shoot its mg while in a CM battle", well i'd call you a gamey son-of-a- and argue there is no point in including it so people can use the BMW in such an ahistorical manner.

[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What's ahistorical about that?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

The BMW motorbike and sidecar simply wasn't a part of front-line equipment.

[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Motorcycles were standard TO&E for early war German recon forces and served as the recon battalion's infantry in many cases. It doesn't get much more frontline than that.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

Now folks could say that it would die quickly used in scouty combat so it wouldn't be gamey to include it. Which leads to the question 'well what role would you use it for?'. If it can't scout and can't fight well, and all it's good for is hidding in a barn, well it's as much use as a field kitchen. Both were in the war. But I have yet to see the point in setting up a front lines assault bakery unit. Nor have i seen the point of including motorbikes. Or horses. or bicycles. or bakery teams. or mine dogs.

[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You really are pretty amazing in your broad sweeping statements about what is and isn't appropriate for CM. I think I've said all I'm going to say on this issue though. People seem to get pretty worked up about these things around here.

[Wesreidau]

Actually, i am in the camp that thinks trucks/jeeps/KWs aren't really needed in the game either

While i agree they make interesting units (ambushing a supply column with partisans for eg), I think i would just see them so regularly it would be annoying.

I guess i'd be happy to see them in there if it didn't mean BTS wasn't doing them insetead of, say, trenches. Also, if they were in there they should be VERY expensive to encourage their use in scenarios rather than Quick Battles.

While i could of course, just stick with people who only play a certain way, or demand rules, i much prefer just to go for it in a battle and trust the engine and the forces available to be selected to produce some kind of realistic result..

perhaps I should be more demanding of random opponents?

PeterNZ

[Wesreidau]

Actually, i am in the camp that thinks trucks/jeeps/KWs aren't really needed in the game either

While i agree they make interesting units (ambushing a supply column with partisans for eg), I think i would just see them so regularly it would be annoying.

I guess i'd be happy to see them in there if it didn't mean BTS wasn't doing them insetead of, say, trenches. Also, if they were in there they should be VERY expensive to encourage their use in scenarios rather than Quick Battles.

While i could of course, just stick with people who only play a certain way, or demand rules, i much prefer just to go for it in a battle and trust the engine and the forces available to be selected to produce some kind of realistic result..

perhaps I should be more demanding of random opponents?

PeterNZ

[Panzer Leader]

Panther131 makes a good point. THe game engine of CM makes any type of battle a possibility, and the inclusion of these motorcycles or with anything more only does one thing: add more possibilities.

I would ask you two questions PeterNZer: If they were not used in this type of combat, why did they come with (two variations!) of mounted MG? And two, if they were not used in this type of combat, what exact type of combat were they used in?

Your point does not elude me, it is just that you seem to have a very narrow focus on which type of battles and engagements the game portrays. Well, what the game portrays depends on what the scenario designer wants, and if he wants to have these things, then by all means, let him have them.

I would agree that they are not on my "hot list" of units to have, but we can surely just spout out to "our favorite wargaming company" what we want, and then let them sort out their order of importance?