Question about night battles in CMAK

[CMplayer]

Well two questions actually:

Will it include:

1) Ability to Area Fire beyond the restricted nighttime range of visibility? (as in at the point where you saw muzzle flashes or tracers originating)

2) Flares and illumination from fires?

Both of these seem like even more acute requirements in the North African campaign, which did have a lot of large-scale night fighting, and where the open ground made for a lot of tracers-aiming-at-tracers fighting.

[CMplayer]

Well two questions actually:

Will it include:

1) Ability to Area Fire beyond the restricted nighttime range of visibility? (as in at the point where you saw muzzle flashes or tracers originating)

2) Flares and illumination from fires?

Both of these seem like even more acute requirements in the North African campaign, which did have a lot of large-scale night fighting, and where the open ground made for a lot of tracers-aiming-at-tracers fighting.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by CMplayer:

...even more acute requirements in the North African campaign, which did have a lot of large-scale night fighting...

This statement puzzles me. Certainly there was some night fighting, and some of it was important, such as the opening of Second Alamein. But by and large, when the sun went down, everybody pulled into their laagers, brewed up, and went to bed. It was a curiously civilized nine-to-five (actually more like 0500-to-1900) kind of war in that way. My impression is that other theaters saw at least as much if not more night fighting on a somewhat regular basis.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by CMplayer:

...even more acute requirements in the North African campaign, which did have a lot of large-scale night fighting...

This statement puzzles me. Certainly there was some night fighting, and some of it was important, such as the opening of Second Alamein. But by and large, when the sun went down, everybody pulled into their laagers, brewed up, and went to bed. It was a curiously civilized nine-to-five (actually more like 0500-to-1900) kind of war in that way. My impression is that other theaters saw at least as much if not more night fighting on a somewhat regular basis.

Michael

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

My impression is that other theaters saw at least as much if not more night fighting on a somewhat regular basis.

I'd love to see illumination, and a more thorough treatment of night battles in all the other theatres as well, but since it's CMAK that's coming out next (and there are some promised 'improvements') I only asked about that one.

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

My impression is that other theaters saw at least as much if not more night fighting on a somewhat regular basis.

I'd love to see illumination, and a more thorough treatment of night battles in all the other theatres as well, but since it's CMAK that's coming out next (and there are some promised 'improvements') I only asked about that one.

[Snarker]

I'm guessing no dynamic lighting - limitation in the current game engine.

[Snarker]

I'm guessing no dynamic lighting - limitation in the current game engine.

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Snarker:

I'm guessing no dynamic lighting - limitation in the current game engine.

I'm not actually asking about dynamic lighting in the graphics(though that would be nice), but rather that the nighttime LOS rules take into account proximity to light sources (i.e. just mark an illuminated object as 'spottable' barring intervening blocking/degrading terrain/obscurants), or allowing area fire beyond the normally visible range. There might be some solutions there that could give good results within the basic framework of the current engine, or then again, there might not.

[ October 20, 2003, 08:33 AM: Message edited by: CMplayer ]

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Snarker:

I'm guessing no dynamic lighting - limitation in the current game engine.

I'm not actually asking about dynamic lighting in the graphics(though that would be nice), but rather that the nighttime LOS rules take into account proximity to light sources (i.e. just mark an illuminated object as 'spottable' barring intervening blocking/degrading terrain/obscurants), or allowing area fire beyond the normally visible range. There might be some solutions there that could give good results within the basic framework of the current engine, or then again, there might not.

[ October 20, 2003, 08:33 AM: Message edited by: CMplayer ]

[JonS]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

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

...even more acute requirements in the North African campaign, which did have a lot of large-scale night fighting...

This statement puzzles me. Certainly there was some night fighting, and some of it was important, such as the opening of Second Alamein. But by and large, when the sun went down, everybody pulled into their laagers, brewed up, and went to bed. It was a curiously civilized nine-to-five (actually more like 0500-to-1900) kind of war in that way. </font>

[JonS]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

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

...even more acute requirements in the North African campaign, which did have a lot of large-scale night fighting...

This statement puzzles me. Certainly there was some night fighting, and some of it was important, such as the opening of Second Alamein. But by and large, when the sun went down, everybody pulled into their laagers, brewed up, and went to bed. It was a curiously civilized nine-to-five (actually more like 0500-to-1900) kind of war in that way. </font>

[Sokal]

Originally posted by JonS:

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

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

...even more acute requirements in the North African campaign, which did have a lot of large-scale night fighting...

This statement puzzles me. Certainly there was some night fighting, and some of it was important, such as the opening of Second Alamein. But by and large, when the sun went down, everybody pulled into their laagers, brewed up, and went to bed. It was a curiously civilized nine-to-five (actually more like 0500-to-1900) kind of war in that way. </font>

[Sokal]

Originally posted by JonS:

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

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

...even more acute requirements in the North African campaign, which did have a lot of large-scale night fighting...

This statement puzzles me. Certainly there was some night fighting, and some of it was important, such as the opening of Second Alamein. But by and large, when the sun went down, everybody pulled into their laagers, brewed up, and went to bed. It was a curiously civilized nine-to-five (actually more like 0500-to-1900) kind of war in that way. </font>

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by CMplayer:

2) Flares and illumination from fires?

Don't those simply scare off the wolves and make them skittish and hard to approach?

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by CMplayer:

2) Flares and illumination from fires?

Don't those simply scare off the wolves and make them skittish and hard to approach?

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Seanachai:

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

2) Flares and illumination from fires?

Don't those simply scare off the wolves and make them skittish and hard to approach? </font>

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Seanachai:

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

2) Flares and illumination from fires?

Don't those simply scare off the wolves and make them skittish and hard to approach? </font>

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by CMplayer:

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

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

2) Flares and illumination from fires?

Don't those simply scare off the wolves and make them skittish and hard to approach? </font>

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by CMplayer:

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

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

2) Flares and illumination from fires?

Don't those simply scare off the wolves and make them skittish and hard to approach? </font>

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by JonS:

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

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

...even more acute requirements in the North African campaign, which did have a lot of large-scale night fighting...

This statement puzzles me. Certainly there was some night fighting, and some of it was important, such as the opening of Second Alamein. But by and large, when the sun went down, everybody pulled into their laagers, brewed up, and went to bed. It was a curiously civilized nine-to-five (actually more like 0500-to-1900) kind of war in that way. </font>

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by JonS:

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

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

...even more acute requirements in the North African campaign, which did have a lot of large-scale night fighting...

This statement puzzles me. Certainly there was some night fighting, and some of it was important, such as the opening of Second Alamein. But by and large, when the sun went down, everybody pulled into their laagers, brewed up, and went to bed. It was a curiously civilized nine-to-five (actually more like 0500-to-1900) kind of war in that way. </font>

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

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

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

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

2) Flares and illumination from fires?

Don't those simply scare off the wolves and make them skittish and hard to approach? </font>

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

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

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

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

2) Flares and illumination from fires?

Don't those simply scare off the wolves and make them skittish and hard to approach? </font>

[JonS]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

Aaarrrgh. This kind of thinking infuriates me.

why? I'm not making this up as I go along.

Also consider this, that to a much greater degree than in any other theater, the fighting in NA was motorized.

The troops were motorised, but the fighting wasn't. Getting too close to the bad people in a truck is a good way to loose that truck.

Driving in the dark, though it was done, was usually only done far from the fighting or under severe compulsion, as in the above mentioned breakout of surrounded forces. Driving at night was a sure invitation to a higher breakdown rate.

And yet, the entire approach march for Op CRUSADER, Op COMPASS, Tebaga gap, the approach to Beda Fomm, most of the positioning for the opening night of ElAl2 and Op SUPERCHARGE, crossing Wadi Akarit, and Op ORATION were all done by night. This is only six examples, but they are by no means minor or insignificant. They also encompass some of the more important Commonwealth offensives of the desert war.

Further, tanks and AT guns were almost useless without light, and those were the backbone of the fighting in NA.

Which is why they came up (or were supposed to anyway) in time for dawn. Also, that uselessness cuts both ways - attacking at night with infantry is a good way to negate the enemies advantage in armour and AT weapons.

[/qb]So in brief, that's why most everybody tucked in at nightfall. There were exceptions, but you can't generalize from those few over whole armies.[/QB]

But I wasn't talking about exceptions, and I wasn't making generalisations. Seriously - I can't think of a single attack, larger than a single bn, that 2(NZ)Div put in throughout the war in NA that opened during daylight hours. For them, if anything, attacks during daylight were the exception, not the other way around. The Kiwis are the only ones I can speak of with much confidence, but from what I've read, the same holds pretty much true for the other CW nations.

More examples: during ElAl2, all the attacks were put in at night. In daytime they waited for the Germans to counter-attack. And during the first pahse of the ElAl line in June-July all the CW attacks went in during the night. (Oh, something just occurred to me: in both cases there were armoured thrusts in the mornings following nightime infantry attacks)

I agree that there were huge periods and huge areas where nothing much happened at night. However, I strongly disagree that during periods where there was action* that it generally happened during the day. In fact, I contend that the majority of CW infantry attacks, not a few armoured advances, and many approach marches in the desert were conducted by night.

BTW, it's possibly worth noting at this point that I'm approaching this from an infantry perspective, not an armoured one. Using an armoured POV one would possibly come to a totally different conclusion.

Regards

JonS

* And lets face it, they were few and far between. During Op COMPASS there was heavy fighting on only about 10-12 days over a period of 3 months. Then Rommel counterattacked over a few days/weeks a few months later and cut off Tobruk. Then a few months later the Brits attacked for a day (BREVITY). Then a month or so later they attacked for another day (BATTLEAXE). Then the Germans attacked for a night (MID SUMMER NIGHTS DREAM). Then a month later the Brits attacked for about 3 weeks (CRUSADER). Then a few months later Rommel counter attacked for a few days and regained the Gazala line. And so it goes on. A few days or weeks action, then a few months of nothing much.