Guest Guest Posted March 12, 2005 Share Posted March 12, 2005 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halberdiers Posted March 12, 2005 Share Posted March 12, 2005 Maybe this link can help a lot to the scenario creators: -Order of Battle -Maps CARENTAN-(Band of Brothers) http://www.wargamesjournal.com/wwii/airborne.asp PHASE-1 US Forces Attacking 506th – E Company Fearless Veteran Company HQ consisting of: Company Command team – 4 figures 2ic team – 4 figures Bazooka team 3 x Platoons with each one consisting of: Platoon Commander – 3 figures 2ic – 3 figures Bazooka team – can be attached to any platoon 9 x Rifle/MG bases – four figures per base Light mortar base Machine gun platoon Light machine guns act as HMG teams with a Rate of Fire (RoF) 3 (3 when pinned, 1 when moved) 2 sections, each consisting of 1 x Command base and 2 x .30 cal in each German Forces Defending Fallschirmjaegers Fearless Veteran MG teams as standard HQ Section and Two platoons consisting of: HQ Section – two bases, three figs on each (Coy Commander and 2ic) Platoon Lieutenant – command base – three figs 3 Sections of 3 bases with 4 men on each (12 men in a section) One Pak 36 3.7mm with crew and steilgranate. PHASE-2 US Forces Easy Company Reinforcement platoons 2 x Tank Platoons each consisting of: 1 x Command tanks M4 4 x M4 Tank Destroyer Platoon 4 x M10 2 x Jeeps Armoured Infantry Platoon 1 x Command base 6 x Rifle/MG bases 3 x Bazooka bases 4 x M3 Halftracks German Forces The left over Fallschirmjaegers Panzer Grenadier Company Confident Veteran Coy HQ consisting of 1 x Command base, 1 x 2ic base and 1 x Sd Kfz 251/21 – 2cm 3 Platoons each consisting of: 1 x Command base and Sd Kfz 251/21 – 2cm plus Panzershrecke base 6 x MG bases and 3 x Sd Kfz 251 All bases are armed with Panzerfausts. Assault Gun Platoon – depleted One platoon 2 x Stug IIIG Mortar FOO in Kettankrad – 3 x 81 mm mortars (the mortars were played as being off board) Armoured support 2 Platoons of medium tanks: 3 x Panther 2 x Panzer IVJ 1 Platoon of heavy tanks 3 x Tiger [ March 12, 2005, 04:18 AM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dandelion Posted March 12, 2005 Share Posted March 12, 2005 Originally posted by AdamL: Please ! Do you mean a conversion of the CMBO Carentan battle (and/or operation), or do you mean a new design? Cheers Dandelion 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted March 12, 2005 Share Posted March 12, 2005 A CMAK conversion of Carentan has already been done. Go here 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dandelion Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 Well somebody just might The CMBO Carentan operation has stuck firmly in the roots of my CM experience. It'd be fun trying to make a "better" Carentan. Anybody have a really accurate US OOB for June 11th-13th? I know the units involved but not what shape they were in exactly, i.e. effective strength at that point. Cheers Dandelion 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 Adam, I just d/l and opended up the Op without a problem. I went as far as the German setup screen in hotseat mode. I am patched up to v1.03. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dandelion Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 Hm. Takes around 18000 point to recreate the historical US force involved June 8th to 12th. And some 9000 to recreate the German. And you need a map of minimum 3000 times 6000. 45 000 squares to fill in the CM Map editor. Cool. Nobody is going to be able to play it, and God knows if it can be done before the release of the next CM, but I'll do it nonetheless. Cheers Dandelion 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucho Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 Dandelion, in this case it is better to split one large scenario into several smaller scenarios at company level. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gpig Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 What Lucho said. At least that way, I could play some of it. (And review it at the Depot.) Thanks! Gpig 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dandelion Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 I know Batallion size (all involved Bns being as they were at reduced strength) would make for reasonable size and playability. But then it'd be just another scenario, and not really the Carentan battle. I'll see if it's possible. If not, one can always settle for St Come-du-Mont or the Ingouf farmhouse battle or something. Cheers Dandelion 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dandelion Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 Hey Adam, I'm about 80% finished. I had the bad judgement of buying and playing Brothers in Arms before finishing. Of course, every attempt at recreating the environment now seems futile and pathetic by comparison. Real killjoy in fact. On the plus side, you get to control all forces involved. But that "beautiful map" request stings a bit. You know the limitations. Roads won't angle as they are supposed to, bridges won't run at an angle at all and the houses... Anyway I'll get back to you soon with a finished job. Regards Dandelion 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 Ok Dandelion, it is about time you and I locked horns. Send me a setup of your first test version and I'll be delighted to try it out with you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dandelion Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 You're right, it is time. Though I had always imagined it to be the 12th against the 3rd in the corner of some foreign field, around Norrey or somesuch. Still, battling it out on a map and in a scenario I created would seem the odds I prefer. The map is completed. Putting together the forces now. No good source on the US forces though, I mean actual condition of the units involved. Will have to improvise some. The US OOB seems bizarre in the game. Rifle companies look a lot like machinegun companies. I get that undefined feeling somebody might have misunderstood something when looking at a OOB? A bit strange, isn't it, that both forces were actually green at Carentan, though both performed as if they were not. Cheerio Dandelion 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 The right way to do a battle this size is as a CMx10 campaign... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 Originally posted by Dandelion: The US OOB seems bizarre in the game. Rifle companies look a lot like machinegun companies. I get that undefined feeling somebody might have misunderstood something when looking at a OOB? With only 2 squads and no integral BARs, the Airborne platoons got their automatic firepower from the M1919s, essentially 1 per squad, 2 for reserve, or 4 small "MG Squads" if you want all the FP. Remember that the U.S. army called the .30cal Browning a "light" MG. Think of them as slower Panzergrenadier squads. I believe that by D-Day the TO&E was officially beefed up to 3 squads per platoon with a .30cal per squad. My sources conflict as to whether there was an "official" BAR by this point as well or whether they were simply "acquired" by certain squads. -dale 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 Also note that the 1919A6 is not a 1919A4. The former is a bipod weapon with shoulder stock (32 lbs), the latter is a tripod weapon (41 lbs). The US issued the A6 to the airborne. 43.5k were made, compared to 390k of the A4s, but there were only a few divisions of airborne and that number was perfectly adequate to equip them. http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/30cala6.htm not the same as http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/30cal.htm The A6s should really be treated as a squad SAW, not a separate team, just like the MG42 in German service. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 Originally posted by JasonC: Also note that the 1919A6 is not a 1919A4. The former is a bipod weapon with shoulder stock (32 lbs), the latter is a tripod weapon (41 lbs). The US issued the A6 to the airborne. 43.5k were made, compared to 390k of the A4s, but there were only a few divisions of airborne and that number was perfectly adequate to equip them. http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/30cala6.htm not the same as http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/30cal.htm The A6s should really be treated as a squad SAW, not a separate team, just like the MG42 in German service. Yup. I forgot to mention the A6. Thanks! -dale 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dandelion Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 Originally posted by dalem: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Dandelion: The US OOB seems bizarre in the game. Rifle companies look a lot like machinegun companies. I get that undefined feeling somebody might have misunderstood something when looking at a OOB? With only 2 squads and no integral BARs, the Airborne platoons got their automatic firepower from the M1919s, essentially 1 per squad, 2 for reserve, or 4 small "MG Squads" if you want all the FP. Remember that the U.S. army called the .30cal Browning a "light" MG. Think of them as slower Panzergrenadier squads. I believe that by D-Day the TO&E was officially beefed up to 3 squads per platoon with a .30cal per squad. My sources conflict as to whether there was an "official" BAR by this point as well or whether they were simply "acquired" by certain squads. -dale </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 Originally posted by Dandelion: Dale Am I correct in understanding that these machineguns came with extra crews, and were not platoon level weapons issued to the squads as needed? And thanks to you and Jason for the input. Cheerio Dandelion Actually I think they were not separate crewed weapons - I think that they should almost definitely be treated as the SAW, especially the A6 (the A6 was adopted in 1943 so I leave room for the possibility that the A4 models were trained on and initially TO&Ed to the PIRs, and maybe they were used differently). I truly don't know if the original TO&E with 2 squads in the platoon and 4 MGs per platoon meant 2 MGs per squad a la the German panzergrenadiers, or whether it was one MG per squad as the 1944+ TO&E seems to indicate and 2 MGs held by the platoon commander. I'd bet that it was 2 per squad at first, with each squad running as 2 LMG sections. I assume this wasn't done in CM:BO or CM:AK because either a) I'm dead wrong and it wasn't the SAW in any capacity (remember that from me, a lot of this is speculation - I'm only a "grog-light"), or there was an issue with movement rates between the .30cal and the squads. -dale 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.