FEBA Posted October 18, 2002 Share Posted October 18, 2002 If you play a quick battle and select some armored infantry forces the organic transport provided is not sufficient to load all the foot elements. For example, in June 1941, select a Wehrmacht armored rifle platoon. The toe is: 1 x platoon hq 3 x panzer rifle squads 1 x 50mm mortar team 3 x SPW 251/1 halftrack 1 x SPW 251/10 halftrack There is no combination of mounting the foot units in the vehicles that lets them all be mounted. Very odd. Is this accurate or have I missed something? Maybe an organic truck was historically used to move the 50mm and trucks are not included, just as they are not for 'motorized' units. (Don't think this is the case, because I've never seen this in any other published wargame.) Any ideas? I don't know if this is a bug, but it seems so. (I can't believe no one has noted this before, but I did a search and was unable to find any reference.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FEBA Posted October 19, 2002 Author Share Posted October 19, 2002 *bump* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gpig Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 Hey FEBA. What is the 251/10? I always thought that you could fit an HQ AND a Mortar team into a 251/1 together. But that must not be the case, according to your post. What makes the "10" in the 251/10? I guess one unit (either the HQ or the Mortar) gets left on foot in your force mix, right? Hmmmm. That's too bad. I'll have to have a look once back at the homestead. Gpig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 251/10 is the command HT with a 37mm PAK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FEBA Posted October 19, 2002 Author Share Posted October 19, 2002 Right. The panzer rifle sqd can't load into the 251/10 and only one can load into a 251/1. Neither the hq or mortar can load into a 251/1 that already has a sqd in it. The hq and mortar won't both fit in the 251/10. At least one unit is let "hoofing it". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt. Ryan Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 The 251/10 wasn't in CMBO so you got four 251/1s and had no trouble transporting a whole platoon. Do you get extra transport if you buy a whole company? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxbat Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 That's historical realism for you In reality it would fit of course as the mortar team would be split among the 3 squads.. I guess BFC will just have to throw in a Kubelwagen for the HQ [EDIT]Crud, the HQ goes in the Command HT of course. And a truck is overkill for one mortar (and with 3 mortars/company trucks integral to the company is odd too ). I guess you could split one inf squad and leave a half-squad behind to 'bring up the rear'. [ October 18, 2002, 08:56 PM: Message edited by: Foxbat ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSpkr Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 No, the historical realism is that many of the German troops, particularly in the early war (as well as the mid and late war) either walked or rode horses. Read 'Soldat' by Sigfried Knappe for good descriptions of Wehrmacht mobility. Contrary to the popular belief, most German units relied very heavily on horses for transportation. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Leader Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 Well, regardless of the fact that "The Germans were strapped for transport" an armoured platoon should be able to fit in its vehicles, it seems to me. I think the idea of a split squad is the best workable one (or hopefully you are playing with casualties, and maybe you'll get a really weak squad ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxbat Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 Originally posted by MrSpkr: No, the historical realism is that many of the German troops, particularly in the early war (as well as the mid and late war) either walked or rode horses.While that is true I doubt that that is the reason that 3 guys of the platoon don't get a ride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxbat Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 Originally posted by Panzer Leader: Well, regardless of the fact that "The Germans were strapped for transport" an armoured platoon should be able to fit in its vehicles, it seems to me. I think the idea of a split squad is the best workable one (or hopefully you are playing with casualties, and maybe you'll get a really weak squad Look Hans we know about your leg, but you got to ride in France, now it's your turn to walk. And if you don't we'll have to start the mission with enough casualties to make room in the vehicles... and you know what that means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 Actually, the trouble is in part the engine, but I also bet it is realistic -- Germans never had the stuff they were suppose to have in their TOE. At the start, the guys got shoe horned in with the mortar and bombs -- somehow. But soon things seemed kinda roomy, course Fritz and Hans are one with yesterdays snows and only half of Karl was ever found, so the mortar crew fits right in... To give it some realistic side notes, US Tank battalions acquired extra half tracks because their TOE could not all fit in the basic vehicles. US armored divisions by the end of the war had in some cases twice their TOE, the only way to make the whole division mobile at once. US recon companies often also got ahold of extra tracks, and US medical units used hundreds of captured German halftracks through out the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarquelne Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 Originally posted by MrSpkr: [QB]No, the historical realism is that many of the German troops, particularly in the early war (as well as the mid and late war) either walked or rode horses.So - those "foot elements", in real life, _wouldn't_ be able to fit in the vehicles they come with in CMBB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 Another though just struck me, those transport elements for the extra men could be at a higher echelon. Although likely it is just a limitation of the game engine (in real life you can shoe horn in another guy even into a time Halftrack body) it could be that in practice the companies had transport help from higher echelon units and the only limitation is that we are seeing only the tactical transport. After all, how many time did German mechanized troops have to "Climb on ze tanken" to ride into battle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 I think that adding a kubelwagon would be out of the 'realism' range for an armored unit. Perhaps we can hope for cool like like splitting up a mortar team into three halftracks in CM2, but for now, you have to make due. I never buy armored infnatry, so it works for me Chad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 If you insist on all your guys riding in tracks, just buy an extra one. What's the problem? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 Originally posted by Chad Harrison: Perhaps we can hope for cool like like splitting up a mortar team into three halftracks in CM2...This is CM2, Chad. Perhaps you mean CMII? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FEBA Posted October 19, 2002 Author Share Posted October 19, 2002 Originally posted by Michael emrys: If you insist on all your guys riding in tracks, just buy an extra one. What's the problem? MichaelWell, in reality, I think an armored platoon would all fit into the halftracks assigned toe. Seems unlikly the germans would design a mobile force and fail to give them enough equipment to fulfill their role. The current situation makes it impossible for me to have the unit transported in the manner it was historically. Sure, an extra 1/2 track could be bought (or assigned in a scenario design), but then the unit would have more stuff than it had historically. I ran into this problem trying to design a scenario with the intent it have historical forces. My design idea is to create a blitzkrieg post-break thru in '41 where a german armored force is pushing fast past soviet rear echelon elements. The german player is fighting the clock by speeding by to cross a long map and subduing only those forces necessary to get by. To accomplish this mobility is necessary. I wanted the german force to be historically correct in terms of equipment. I am worried this is not possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 Okay, I get your point and agree that it's a shame that we can't get a more perfect model of the reality. I guess that's just a limitation of the present game engine. I can't say how BTS will resolve this one, whether by allowing teams to split up so they can be distributed among available transport, or more simply allowing one team to ride free with one squad. Or something else. I recently began a QB on the same lines as what you are describing. Set in July, 1941, it has a company of armored infantry, a company of motorised infantry, and a company of tanks (these latter purchased by platoons), plus a bit of this and that. I had to purchase the trucks seperately for the motorised inf, but I don't think I purchased any tracks seperately. There are some extra ones that come with the company HQ, that made it just enough. I did have to get a couple of Kubelwagens for the Coy HQs though to make it all work out, and maybe that's not historical either. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdmorse Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 Also remeber that in RL™ the panzergrenadiers would dismount and attack on foot. For the scale of CMBB battles, it might be a bit unrealsitic to have the transport near the objective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 Originally posted by jdmorse: Also remeber that in RL™ the panzergrenadiers would dismount and attack on foot. For the scale of CMBB battles, it might be a bit unrealsitic to have the transport near the objective.Depends. If your PGs would have to cross a long stretch of open ground in the face of a host of MGs before they could get to a covered startline in range of their own organic weapons (as is the case in the QB I described), having them in APCs makes a lot of sense. What I plan to do is have them debus behind some trees closer to the objective and shank it from there under covering fire from tanks. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manchildstein (ii) Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 Originally posted by FEBA: I wanted the german force to be historically correct in terms of equipment. I am worried this is not possible.in the actual battles i'll bet there rarely if ever the exact number of halftracks as called for on paper... so on the one hand maybe the halftrakcs need to be tweaked by bts so they can carry the entire, on-paper platoon; heavy weapons and all... on the other hand you could design the scenarios without an historical to&e... you could go so far as to cut even more halftracks out of the mix and have some ground units riding on tanks... as it is if you design a scenario with the exact, on-paper units and plop them into an 'historical' battle somewhere, some grog is going to look at that and go, 'hmmm... i'll bet they weren't really at full strength... what's this all about?' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 19, 2002 Share Posted October 19, 2002 Originally posted by manchildstein II: in the actual battles i'll bet there rarely if ever the exact number of halftracks as called for on paper...I agree, with the proviso that the personnel strength was even more likely to be less than TO&E. What needs to be done, IMO, is that instead of limiting ridership to a fixed number of units, the program needs to make an actual count of bodies present, with heavy weapons counting as a person. You could make the "body count" a little larger than the official number, as in practice one more person or a little more equipment would often be squeezed in. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FEBA Posted October 20, 2002 Author Share Posted October 20, 2002 Originally posted by Michael emrys: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by manchildstein II: in the actual battles i'll bet there rarely if ever the exact number of halftracks as called for on paper...I agree, with the proviso that the personnel strength was even more likely to be less than TO&E. What needs to be done, IMO, is that instead of limiting ridership to a fixed number of units, the program needs to make an actual count of bodies present, with heavy weapons counting as a person. You could make the "body count" a little larger than the official number, as in practice one more person or a little more equipment would often be squeezed in. Michael</font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 20, 2002 Share Posted October 20, 2002 Originally posted by FEBA: My scenario idea was mainly to let me, in a fun way, learn more about mobile warfare in '41. Maybe my concept does not fit the scale of CM. But it seems to me in a rapid mobile advance you run as fast as possible until you meet resistance, go around it or subdue it, and keep moving. That means, to me, you are going to want to keep your troops mounted as long as possible. Maybe CM more properly models the subdueing part of mobile warfare.That is close to my idea as well. This QB is somewhat along those lines. I set it up to provide an initial test of what this might look like, with the idea of further developing it into a scenario if I maintain my interest in this particular subject. I could e-mail it to you for your consideration if you like, FEBA. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts