Taking prisoners

[Boris Balaban]

I am playing in the CMMC and I see a situation where I would like to take prisoners.

In a regular game it would not matter much for victory but in a campaign game it might. So to get information from a prisoner on what the opposition has would be based on his rank. You might get the OOB or gun or unit emplacements.

This is probably to late for CMBB but may be for CM2.

[Gpig]

I'm not sure what you're asking for . . .

I'm sure you know already that you CAN take prisoners in CM, so maybe your asking something else?

Are you saying you'd like to see a unit order added, like "take prisoners?" "Go get me some prisoners, sarge!"

Or are you just asking for valuable info on enemy positions/OOB/strength to pop up on your "Intel/briefing" screen, once prisoners are taken?

Ah HAH! That must be what you're asking. Hey, that is a pretty neat idea!

If you manage to capture the enemy company commander on one of his A.I. inspired banzai rushes, you could get REALLY good intel. (Assuming it wasn't just the company clerk who survived from the HQ unit.)

Hmmmm. Neat.

Gpig

[Monty's Double]

Not sure this is in the scope of the game. In a real battle, prisoners would be herded to the back and interrogated later, so getting any ifo within the scope of a 30 minute game wouldn't be realistic. As briefings between battles in an operation, well that's a different matter....

[CMplayer]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Monty's Double:

In a real battle, prisoners would be herded to the back and interrogated later, so getting any ifo within the scope of a 30 minute game wouldn't be realistic. <hr></blockquote>

Except in certain exceptional situations, such as the XXX corps breakout where interrogation officers were with the lead tanks, precisely to locate gun emplacements with the help of prisoners.

[Tanaka]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Boris Balaban:

I am playing in the CMMC and I see a situation where I would like to take prisoners.

In a regular game it would not matter much for victory but in a campaign game it might...

<hr></blockquote>

On a "regular" game prisoners do matter... they give 2 times more points then the KOed "version" of the same enemy

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

So to get information from a prisoner on what the opposition has would be based on his rank. You might get the OOB or gun or unit emplacements...

<hr></blockquote>

This, I think, is outside of the 30 to 60 minutes scope of a CM battle... Think on the time you need to take the truce out of the guy/s, (I prefer not know how do you make them talk ), and put this information to your use...

Maybe for operations... but even here, I think it would give to much work to implement.

Even the order, that maybe you are asking for, kind of "Get me some prisoners"... Is very hard to implement (code), but also, not that real... The enemy surrenders or dies, in truce his the enemy choice...not the captors (ok the captor can kill him after, but... I don't want to go that way )

[CMplayer]

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

(I prefer not know how do you make them talk )<hr></blockquote>

Stick a revolver into his groin, load him onto the lead tank and say 'tell us where the AT guns are, we start driving forwards in 5 minutes' and you're going first.

[Tanaka]

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

Stick a revolver into his groin, load him onto the lead tank and say 'tell us where the AT guns are, we start driving forwards in 5 minutes' and you're going first.<hr></blockquote>

That would be a clear violation of the Genebra convention, and you beingyourself a Swede, I think your country signed it

[CMplayer]

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

That would be a clear violation of the Genebra convention, and you beingyourself a Swede, I think your country signed it <hr></blockquote>

Genebra? Is that a Genetically modified zebra?

Anyway, I was relating the way it was actually done back in 1944, the time period of the game we're discussing

[ 11-14-2001: Message edited by: CMplayer ]</p>

[109 Gustav]

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

Genebra? Is that a Genetically modified zebra?

<hr></blockquote>

ROTFL

[Tanaka]

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

Genebra? Is that a Genetically modified zebra?

Anyway, I was relating the way it was actually done back in 1944, the time period of the game we're discussing

[ 11-14-2001: Message edited by: CMplayer ]<hr></blockquote>

Ok, I spelled it in my 1st language... being a wise guy that you seem to be, I think you got there Genebra = Genève

Back in 44 your country,(as Germany and USA for instances), was a signatory of the convention...

So maybe you are talking even earlier, like at the medieval ages :cool:

What you can say, and that is another business, is that back then every one took a dump on the convention...

PS- Notice also that I'm not defending the Geneve convention... I'm just having fun

[Holien]

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

Stick a revolver into his groin, load him onto the lead tank and say 'tell us where the AT guns are, we start driving forwards in 5 minutes' and you're going first.<hr></blockquote>

Ahhh the man who knows what sort of prisoner he has and is sure he knows the answer.

LOL

What you did not know before driving away was the man knew how to cook and that was pretty much all he knew.

Well done....

H

[CMplayer]

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

What you can say, and that is another business, is that back then everyone took a dump on the convention... <hr></blockquote>

Precisely. I'm glad we see eye to eye.

Now here are two reasons, which I have ranted about before, for including intel from prisoners in the game:

1) regarding game 'scope', if the intel came a bit too fast, compared with RL, we could chalk it up to the kind of time compression that makes the game playable. If CM were truly realistic, most of the time you fired up a scenario your orders would be 'wait here and do nothing for the next 480 turns' or 'drive between point a and point b, on a secured stretch of road. Watch out of possible interdiction fire near landmarks.' The game is a game, and the dramatic unities of time and space, while not strictly violated, are definitely stretched at times, and for good reason.

2) One of the most interesting things about the game is the gathering of information. The richer the set of ways you can make surmises about the opponent's OOB and disposition the better. Counting his revealed assets and comparing to how many points he should have is a cheesy, gamey way to do it (which I always use). Capturing infantry and finding out the approx location of assets like AT guns (which could be revealed like sound contacts) would be more realistic, even if it involved time compression. 'Go out and take some prisoners' was a very real and not uncommon mission for patrols in RL, even in the middle of an attack, as in the XXX Corps breakout mentioned earlier.

Along the lines of 2, above, I would like to rant once more about the ridiculousness of the armored hit label 'side penetration'. It should specify the left or right side. It's cool to try to guess about where that piat is hiding based on where the hole in the tank was.

To sum up, anything that varies the modes of information gathering adds interest to the game. Getting intel from prisoners would do this. Perhaps you could have to buy a special HQ unit with an interrogator to be able to do this, and move the prisoners to that HQ first.

[CMplayer]

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

the man knew how to cook and that was pretty much all he knew.

<hr></blockquote>

That's what they all say at first.

[Fairbairn-Sykes]

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

One of the most interesting things about the game is the gathering of information. The richer the set of ways you can make surmises about the opponent's OOB and disposition the better. Counting his revealed assets and comparing to how many points he should have is a cheesy, gamey way to do it (which I always use). Capturing infantry and finding out the approx location of assets like AT guns (which could be revealed like sound contacts) would be more realistic, even if it involved time compression. 'Go out and take some prisoners' was a very real and not uncommon mission for patrols in RL, even in the middle of an attack, as in the XXX Corps breakout mentioned earlier. <hr></blockquote>

Good stuff here. I agree that "Go out and take some prisoners!" is a realistic objective for a patrol, and taking into account time compression, could fit into the scope of the game. I'm not sure if it would ultimately be pragmatic within the average 30 minute tactical engagement, but i think it could be... Besides, it would be a damn cool feature.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>To sum up, anything that varies the modes of information gathering adds interest to the game. Getting intel from prisoners would do this. Perhaps you could have to buy a special HQ unit with an interrogator to be able to do this, and move the prisoners to that HQ first.<hr></blockquote>

More good stuff. Lots of ways to gather intel just makes the game even more enjoyable. Taking POWs could be a worthwhile pursuit for other reasons than point totals. It would also give the Genf Convention breakers motivation to do something besides herding the guys into a 2 story, wooden building and hosing it down with wasps or 95mm cannon...

anyway... I can see both sides of the issue on this one, I just think it could be a nice feature...

[argie]

A thing about prisoners in CM.

All we know that casualties reflects not only KIA, but also WIA in any degree from coma to twisted ankle. How many of these could be counted as POW for the winner, if he is attacking or defending?

That is something I will like to see in an AAR.

I like to ask for silly things like that

[Mikael]

I recently read a book about the SS Freiwilligen Legion "Flandern" and I clearly remember an episode where the Russians were preparing a massive attack and a company commander, desperate to get info (because he had experience of Russian maskirovka measures), asked a patrol to go out and get some Russian prisoners. The 5 man patrol approached the Russian lines at night (and thick fog too I believe), sneaked close to an isolated guard and KOed him with a rifle's butt. Then they dragged the body back to German lines. The patrol lost 1 man and another was wounded in the process.

[Holien]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by aka PanzerLeader:

I recently read a book about the SS Freiwilligen Legion "Flandern" and I clearly remember an episode where the Russians were preparing a massive attack and a company commander, desperate to get info (because he had experience of Russian maskirovka measures), asked a patrol to go out and get some Russian prisoners. The 5 man patrol approached the Russian lines at night (and thick fog too I believe), sneaked close to an isolated guard and KOed him with a rifle's butt. Then they dragged the body back to German lines. The patrol lost 1 man and another was wounded in the process.<hr></blockquote>

I don't doubt all of these types of missions but did they get anything useful?

I doubt it.

Will it be modelled in future releases?

Nope. I will bet money on that.

H

[CMplayer]

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

I don't doubt all of these types of missions but did they get anything useful?

I doubt it.

<hr></blockquote>

Is that based on your studies of WWII or just your own speculation?

[Holien]

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

Is that based on your studies of WWII or just your own speculation?<hr></blockquote>

Of course my own wild speculation which is founded on years of talking bollocks in an authoritative manner.

I see you did not argue with my second point you murderous gun waving yob.

Good job you are in Sweden and not coming to London on Saturday. I kinda like my groin as does my beloved.

H

[CMplayer]

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

Good job you are in Sweden and not coming to London on Saturday. I kinda like my groin as does my beloved.

<hr></blockquote>

Ahh! Go watch some more episodes of M*A*S*H to form your ideas of the war, ya bleeding heart softie!

[Holdit]

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

Stick a revolver into his groin, load him onto the lead tank and say 'tell us where the AT guns are, we start driving forwards in 5 minutes' and you're going first.<hr></blockquote>

If I remember correctly, Cornelius Ryan's "A Bridge Too Far" describes how one such British officer's interrogation technique involved sticking his pistol in the prisoner's belly while shouting questions into his face. Apparently it never failed.

Paul

[tss]

Tanaka wrote:

Back in 44 your country,(as Germany and USA for instances), was a signatory of the convention...

But then again, Sweden hasn't been in a war after signing of the convention nor for long time before it. [And they court-martialled their last succesful general, Georg Carl von Döbeln. Quick question to Swedes: has there been any Swedish military victory after the Hamburg affair in 1813? In particular, were there any actual combats during the occupation of Norway?]

Holien wrote:

I don't doubt all of these types of missions but did they get anything useful?

Certainly. With good luck you the prisoner you get (if you get one) will give you a detailed description of enemy positions. If nothing else, you can find out what regiment the enemy soldier belongs to and if you suddenly start to get prisoners from different divisions or even army corpses in a small area, it is a good time to start worrying.

However, relying too much on prisoner information could lead into a serious trouble. Perhaps the most famous story is about the defence of the Grain Elevator in Stalingrad (at least, I think it was that building) when one captured Soviet led Germans directly to the firing arc of the sole remaining MG. [i don't know if the story is true but it is reported in quite many books on Stalingrad].

A far more serious mistake was made by Germans (according to Clay Blair): when a downed British pilot was asked how could they locate German submarines, he claimed that they homed on emissions of their radar-detection equipment. As a result, Dönitz ordered that they should be turned off. The real cause was that the British had a newer radar that used shorter wavelenghts. [At least Heinz Schäffer, captain of U-977, still believed the radar-detector-detector claim at the time he wrote his memoirs in mid-50s.]

A third example happened at Karelian Isthmus on July 1944, when a Finnish lieutenant of JR 7 was captured and interrogated by a Soviet general. He was asked about the defence on the other side of River Vuoksi and he adviced them to attack at the point where the defences were strongest. The Soviets actually attacked there but it is not known whether the advice affected the decision since the point was strongly defended because it actually was the best point to cross the river.

I belong to that part of crowd that thinks that prisoner interrogation is out of scope for a CM game. The actual "tongue missions" (as Soviets called capture missions) are clearly out of scope for CM, since they usually involved small well-trained groups who worked individually or in pairs. The infiltration groups were about 6 men strong and there was also ~platoon-strenght fire base that opens fire only if the mission goes terribly wrong.

I would be ready to classify Soviets as the masters of snatching prisoners from enemy trenches. Their operations were generally well-planned and they didn't spare any effort to achieve a total surprise, often spending many nights clearing paths through wide minefields.

However, they sometimes also sent men to "tongue patrols" as punishment and they didn't do as well as volunteers. One abysmally failed mission resulted in capture of one of the would-be captors, a demoted communications sergeant, who knew (and told) lots of details about the preparations for Soviet offensive at Rajajoki in June 1944. That mistake might have cost a lot of Soviet blood if it hadn't happened so that in a fit of astounding stupidity Finnish commander of the army corps (Taavetti "Grandpa" Laatikainen) dismissed the information as "rubbish". [He also dismissed air recon photos the same way and believed that a single line of defence can stop any Soviet attack].

The in-battle interrogation stuff was so rare that I don't think it is worth modeling.

- Tommi

[CMplayer]

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

army corpses in a small area, <hr></blockquote>

That sounds kinda disqusting

Seriously though, I just came across a passage in 'If You Survive' where over the course of less than five minutes, the narrator's platoon captures a conscript soldier, finds out he is the lead scout of an advancing bicycle company, and redeploys to defend against them.

This was in what in CM terms would have been a meeting engagement.

It actually doesn't seem that weird to me that if you, for example, scout with a half squad, if it gets captured that the opp could (sometimes) get data revealed on the location of the half squads parent unit.

[CMplayer]

Here are excerpts from the actual quotation, now that I'm at home and have the book open if front of me:

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> Both of them dumped their bicycles and rolled into the ditch with their hands raised....Once the prisoner was convinced he was not going to be harmed, he began to talk....He told us he was the lead scout of a bicycle company coming up the road to fight us, and he said they were only a few hundred yards behind....I quickly moved my men and tanks into defensive positions hoping the Germans would blunder over the little hill to our front.

<hr></blockquote>

George Wilson, If You Survive, pp 80-81