When WW2 CMx2

[David Chapuis]

Originally posted by Sergei:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by David Chapuis:

Dorosh you get the 2007 JasonC gold-standard award for that long post.

Not even close. Dorosh only wrote a list, not an essay that mentions every object in that list in a meaningful way.

That'll be his homework. </font>

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by David Chapuis:

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

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by David Chapuis:

Dorosh you get the 2007 JasonC gold-standard award for that long post.

Not even close. Dorosh only wrote a list, not an essay that mentions every object in that list in a meaningful way.

That'll be his homework. </font>

[David Chapuis]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Not at all, Dave - you won that one fair and square. Never been much for anthropomorphoid pornography myself, but like I said at the awards banquet, your charcoal sketches of reptilian gentitalia would have put Rick Baker to shame.

I just think it's a shame that the judge wasn't willing to listen to your explanation of how it ended up in the hands of all those kindergarten kids. [/QB]

Well I really thought you were a shoo-in after photo-shopping the Daytona Beach Bikini Team in with your sten guns and piats. But reptilian porn is the fastest growing fetish in Canada - so what can I say.

And kindergarten isnt too old to start teaching anatomy. By the age of two kids know elbow, eye, mouth, tummy, etc.

[Michael Dorosh]

Sergei has asked me to expand on what would need to be added in CMX2 to be able to adequately portray Second World War combat in Normandy. I'm presuming a US vs. German title would be first.

<font color="blue">Water</font>

Water would be first, naturally. Since CM no longer uses 20 metre tiles, there would need to be some extensive sort of modelling - not just of stuff that looks like water, but acts like water. CMX2's engine models the position of the sun, shadows cast by clouds in the sky, the position of the stars, wind direction and strength, so it makes sense that tides would be modelled, as well as current strength and direction.

With water comes bridges; what we haven't seen yet in CM are suspension bridges; these are fun to look at, and would provide infantry with cover during assaults - don't forget the 1:1 modelling. We would need animations for infantry assaulting such a structure. Did such structures play a role in the fighting in the US campaigns early in Normandy? We would definitely need them for Remagen, Nijmegen or Arnhem later on.

And while on the subject of Nijmegen, we come to boats. Do we want the amphibious "full Monty" in CM? The hazards of such an undertaking are many.

http://www.canadiansoldiers.com/mediawiki-1.5.5/index.php?title=Landing_Craft

Firstly, the variety of landing craft used provides a layer of complexity. Do we want the larger vessels included? If CMX2 is firmly company based, probably not. That still leaves a variety of smaller craft. Then there are the Duplex Drive tanks. And the bugbear of the CM world, assault boats, which were handled poorly in CM. They need to modelled as vehicles, but they also need to be able to be portaged like a support weapon - so that they don't just sit stupidly once they have crossed whatever water obstacle you have needed them for, with an inherent driver also stupidly sitting there unable to move. The new engine's fidelity to detail demands it.

<font color="green">Land Terrain</font>

Bocage is the big concern; this was never properly addressed in CM either. Real bocage was photographed by a few helpful CMers; very narrow lanes impossible to replicate with 20 metre tiles, with dense earthen mounds laced with roots and overarching shrubbery overtop.

The problem with the bocage was not just how hard it was to move infantry through; tanks had a hard time crossing from field to field, and in going overtop the mounds, exposed themselves to underbelly hits (see a sequence of this in Band of Brothers in the Carentan episode). You would need to program the Tac AI to be smart enough to take enough such shots realistically.

To prevent the need to drive over the hedgerows and expose themselves to underbelly hits, a US engineer sergeant welded pieces of angle iron to the lower hull of tanks; the eponymous Culin hedgerow device was modelled in CMBO abstractly - all AFVs after a certain date were considered to have them, and IIRC, performance of the vehicle wasn't realistically effected while driving through hedges with them.

Typical European terrain that would not be present in CM:SF includes sloping roofs on houses (very common in Europe), church steeples with bell towers (commonly used as observation points for artillery observers, when they were daring enough to do so, knowing full well that enemy observers knew enough to shoot them out of their posts at the slightest provocation). Everything from Sgt. Rock comics to the back of the Squad Leader boxtop to episodes of COMBAT! (In Color!) depict the lone enemy sniper in the bell tower. Was it true?

Cellars or root cellars were also common. Despite admonitions and standing orders not to use their vehicles as bulldozers, tanks were often used to drive through buildings as situations demanded. Falling through to a cellar was a possibility; they were also converted by infantry into strongpoints on occasion.

Tactics

While modern squads split into two-man fireteams, practice in the Second World war was to divide the infantry squad into larger teams, usually two, a fire team and a maneuver team. The former usually had the squad's automatic weapon and a small support crew, the latter had the squad leader, his submachine gun, and the majority of the squad's riflemen. It varied from army to army and could be changed around according to the practice in different units.

How they operated on the battlefield also differed from army to army; this would need to be simulated in a 1:1 representation. The German Army preferred that the LMG do the work of the squad; the riflemen fired in support of the LMG. The British/CW did things in reverse - the LMG supported the riflemen, who used maneuver to close with and destroy the enemy with grenades, the Sten Gun, or the bayonet. The US Army was hampered by lack of a light machine gun and had only the BAR for a section automatic, however, the increased firepower of the M-1 semi-automatic, and the greater squad size made up for it. On paper, a US squad has 12 men by 1944, the British 10, the Germans 9. In reality, British squads rarely went into action with more than 6 men; the situation was probably not different in the German Army. The US situation I'm not sure of. Perhaps JasonC could discuss.

Armour

The entire question of armoured warfare would be modelled entirely different in a Second World War setting. Firstly, the question of engagement ranges would be paramount. A Sherman crew in 1944 wouldn't dream of opening fire on enemy tanks at a range of 1000 metres; an M-1 Abrams crew wouldn't think twice about it. A 75mm Sherman might pass on the opportunity of firing at 300 metres.

The Gyrostabilizer used in some US-built tanks was much different than modern gun stabilizers; it only levelled the gun vertically; horizontal tracking was done manually by the gunner traversing the turret. Training in the use of the gyrostabilizer was time consuming and many crews lacked proficiency in it. Apparently many units removed the equipment altogether. This would need to be modelled.

Bow machine guns were common in Second World War era AFVs - another change from modern AFVs. How useful were they? Well, the US models didn't have gunsights. The gunner observed the flight of tracers through a small periscope and corrected by eyeball. Were they used often?

The Germans used a wide range of anti-tank weaponry, most of which we saw in CMX1. With 1:1 modelling, we now need animations for all of this and a tracking system for ammunition. This includes the Panzerfaust anti-tank magnetic mines (including a morale model to let the Germans use them) and Teller mines as improvised anti-tank devices.

Aside from engagement ranges, there is the shot trap on the Panther and other desperation acts such as deliberate immobilization attempts. US crews would sometimes fire smoke, White Phosphorous or high explosive at Panther and Tigers to try and fool the crew into bailing out by setting his stowage on fire or filling the ventilator with fumes. At least one British Sherman crew in Normandy rammed a King Tiger in desperation. The disparity in equipment - real or imagined - had a very pronounced impact on how the crews actually operated it in the field, and should be reflected in the game - and would result in a much different gameplay experience than a 2007 US-Syrian matchup, or should do.

[Axel]

I know there might be more to it but shouldn't it be StG 44, Sturmegewehr 44?

[Sequoia]

MD, I'm surprised you included landing craft on your list as you have often pooh-poohed their necessity in a Western European game since they were only really used on one day.

Also Battlefront has said we won't have amphibious landings in the game. The best D-Day fans can hope for is that some day Battlefront will do a WWII pacific game and then, with the coding done, make a D-Day module for the WWII France 1944 game.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Sequoia:

MD, I'm surprised you included landing craft on your list as you have often pooh-poohed their necessity in a Western European game since they were only really used on one day.

Oh?

Landing Craft were used at Dieppe on 19 August 1942, as well as in several Commando Raids, not to mention the landings in Southern France, and at Walcheren Island in November 1944. Now, perhaps only Walcheren counts as being "ETO 1944-45" proper. Depends how strict you want your definition to go. Certainly Southern France could be included, and there were some interesting actions there, though how many opposed beach landings there were, I don't know. I am guessing few or none?

While not landing craft per se, some amphibious vehicles like the Terrapin and Buffalo were used in the Scheldt and Rhine fighting, notably Breskens Pocket (3rd Canadian Division), South Beveland (52nd Lowland Division), and the fighting in the Rhineland as well as, naturally, the Rhine Crossing itself. The US Army used LVTs (Buffalos) as well for operations across rivers - I think the Roer comes to mind?

Certainly the assault boats used at Nijmegen was a classic, just as much as Rommel's own crossing of the Meuse in 1940.

I certainly don't see the need for any Omaha Beach scenarios, but some of the amphibious stuff in the Scheldt would be of interest. As computers grow more powerful, I'm hoping CMX2 will expand to become a good battalion level game and perhaps we can see, for example, the Nijmegen Bridge battle portrayed - both the river crossing a mile west, and the final tank battle in the city at the main bridge - preferably on the same map, at the same time, multi-player. I think we'll see it some day, perhaps not for many years.

[ May 31, 2007, 09:53 AM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[Sergei]

Very good, Michael. Now if that only had been a slight bit more prosaic in character - currently it still 'only' seems like an expanded list, and what is more important, I could read through it without falling asleep. The third version will be solid gold, I'm sure!

Now, as for tides - yes, these are a must have, since Operation Flashpoint had them, what, like five years ago. Rivers don't have tides (except close to the sea), but for those we need seasonal flood modelling, as melting snows in spring and then the autumnal rains fill the rivers. The attacker should also be given the option to wait for 1-6 months before crossing a river.

[C'Rogers]

I'm hoping CMX2 will expand to become a good battalion level game

This actually has more of a chance then you may think when you consider the possibility of multi-multi play (more than two players). 3 vs 3 (or much more if you can assign forces to a computer, or just pretend to have a lot of friends into CM) and you are quickly seeing a battalion level game. If this turns out to be a nice bonus (ala red vs red) or something that BFC would actually go all out on (thus specifically support and put in battalion level assets) is another issue.

[Reichenberg]

Originally posted by Becket:

Sure. Get rid of the US and Normandy, replace it with the Soviets and Bagration.

Would be my first choice too - unfortunately (and understandable) I think BF has to go the Normandy way to attract more customers in NA and GB. And that still is the main goal.

Hopefully they move on to the eastern front early.

Uwe