Great game!

[Brian956]

I just wanted to say -

I have just bought this game (CM 3:AK), and I love it!

Great work guys.

Maybe you did too good of a job...I'm in no hurry to buy any newer game when it may come out;)

Brian956

[dieseltaylor]

Brian - you are obviously a very intelligent man : ) But what took you so long?

[Brian956]

Brian - you are obviously a very intelligent man : ) But what took you so long?

Actually - that is a very poignant question.

A decade or so ago, I could find any any computer game out there by simply doing a Yahoo search by topic (pc game, military/war game, by developer...do you guys remember what that looked like?).

The list was easy to access - every company, every game.

These days I find that unless I already know the names of companies/developers, or specific title to search for ...there is no easy-to-find-all-list - like there was before.

So literally, it took me so long to find this game because I simply never knew of it's existence, nor of the company that publishes/developed it....makes it rather hard to do a search for - compared to the old days.

[Paul AU]

I'd never heard of Battlefront, and probably still wouldn't have if I hadn't come across Combat Mission by 'accident' in a retail store years ago.

(I saw CM:SF on a retail shelf once... once).

So, sometimes you get very lucky. And BFC should maintain a (bigger) retail presence.

[JoMac]

Brian,

Glad you to have joined 'Battlefront.'

If interested in playing some PBEM ( Play-by-Email ), or IP ( Internet ) CMBB or CMAK games just let me know, and I can also help you with its mechanics.

Just PM, or email me at: i r i s h w o p 6 7 at a o l dot com.

Thanx

Joe

[Snowbart]

Seriously, I used to play these games in '02-'03 and have just come back to them b/c....Combat Mission is still the best tactical WWII game(s) out there. I believe quite a few gamers are in this same boat....coming back after seeing nothing has eclipsed the CM series, even after ~5 yrs.

[Boo Radley]

I came across Combat Mission by accident too. I'd been playing a bunch of FPS and various "click-fests" and was getting quite bored. Then one day, while looking up "War games", I saw the demo for CMBO and downloaded it. The first scenario I played was "Chance Encounter" (It still brings a tear to my eye...sniff), and I thought, "THIS is what I've been looking for!!!"

I've never gone back.

[Ales Dvorak]

Then one day, while looking up "War games", I saw the demo for CMBO and downloaded it. The first scenario I played was "Chance Encounter" (It still brings a tear to my eye...sniff), and I thought, "THIS is what I've been looking for!!!"

Hmmm....where is CMBorg now?

[Brian956]

Thanks for the offer, maybe when I get up to speed...

Brian,

Glad you to have joined 'Battlefront.'

If interested in playing some PBEM ( Play-by-Email ), or IP ( Internet ) CMBB or CMAK games just let me know, and I can also help you with its mechanics.

Just PM, or email me at: i r i s h w o p 6 7 at a o l dot com.

Thanx

Joe

[Boo Radley]

Hmmm....where is CMBorg now?

Within reach, although it's not loaded on this box.

[Bannon DC]

Welcome Brian --

Yup, it is a great game... when you do get up to speed, the best way to play it is against a human opponent.

If you haven't found them yet, there are a number of sites still around supporting the CM community.

For user made scenarios:

www.the-scenario-depot.com

For helping scenario designers and people helping to make balanced scenarios:

www.the-proving-grounds.com

And there are some good clubs like We Band of Brothers and The Blitz for folks who are fanatical about playing the game. I'm sure someone will come along and fill you in with more links.

For me, one of the great things about CM and the community is researching WWII battles and information. Keeps the history alive.

[dieseltaylor]

Look out there's one of those links now!

http://webandofbrothers.de/index.htm

for the unfanatical player.

[Brian956]

Thanks for the info and gracious reception guys.

I agree - that human opponents are THE best way to go.

Perhaps I'll look into one of those links you guys posted in a while.

I currently have an active PBEM going for "War in the Pacific"...we've been playing this particular game since early last Dec, and we have only gotten up to March 10th 1942!

CMAK must be a better LAN game than a PBEM I would think.

[Brian956]

To the makers of this great game...

I spread the word over at Matrix's "War in the Pacific" forum (by far their most active game forum).

With the interest I saw - I think you have more sales coming!

[Boo Radley]

Thanks for the info and gracious reception guys.

I agree - that human opponents are THE best way to go.

Perhaps I'll look into one of those links you guys posted in a while.

I currently have an active PBEM going for "War in the Pacific"...we've been playing this particular game since early last Dec, and we have only gotten up to March 10th 1942!

CMAK must be a better LAN game than a PBEM I would think.

It really depends on how you like to play.

Right now, I have six games going with various opponents and I usually get a turn from each of them during the day. I come home and process the moves and then send them out. Then I'm off to do other mischief.

Oops... someone just sent me a turn!

Ooooh... it's Nidan1! Let's see if I can knock out his Shermie!

[Stuka]

You idiot Boo....

[Boo Radley]

Was I talking to you?

I don't think so, because I was speaking English and not some form of idiomatic ur-language comprised of grunts and clicks.

[Stuka]

Well send me a grunting mutha-clicker of a turn then!

[Boo Radley]

Sending a turn here, Boss!

[Brian956]

Hi guys!

Ok I've been playing a while and I am enthused!

I love it!

But I have a question for you all.

I am an unashamed fan of North African tank battles.

I love US M-3 Medium Lee's (should have been in the film Patton).

I am finding that 'regular' US tankers in M3 Lee's are easily a match for 'veteran' DAK troops in Pz IIIL's and PzIVF2's....given intelligent tactics, rolling low hills, etc.

Am I delusional? Or have you guys see the same thing?

After growing up with a generation of cardboard board games that rate them sooo differently - I am glad to see that hardware and tactics really do pay off.

Comments?

Brian

[JasonC]

Grants are generally superior to Panzer IIIs, and to Panzer IV F1s but not F2s.

Against the F2s, if the German knows what he is doing the Grant should be toast.

He needs to stay far enough away that his 50mm turret front is not vulnerable to the 37mm on the Grant turret. If he does, and especially if he can fight the duel as nearly as possible hull down on both sides, he is sure to win.

If the Grant exposes its hull to allow its 75mm to fire, it has a chance but is still a large underdog. The reason is the German long 75 is a much more accurate, higher velocity gun; the Grant is a much larger target; and the German has better long range optics. Add them all up and the German is much more likely to hit first.

The German edge would be bigger with a later Panzer IV, though, one with an 80mm hull front. That would let it bounce some shot hitting the hull at long range.

Against Panzer III longs, the issue is the Grant is much better protected and the 50L60 is marginal against it at medium range, using plain AP. The Germans can succeed if they close the range to something like 300 yards, or if they have APCR ammunition available. In addition, they can win if both sides remain hull down, as the Grant's 37mm is completely insufficient against the later IIIs 70mm turret front and upper front hull.

Historically the effective counters to Grants were 88mm Flak towed, Marders (most in North Africa being the 76.2mm variety), or 50L60 towed or on III "specials" using APCR ammo. They still gave an excellent account of themselves, and the Brits were happy to get them in 1942, as it let them outrange the plain Panzers for the first time.

[Brian956]

Your answer is textbook correct.

What surprises me (and I enjoy it ) is the fact that M-3 Mediums ('Late' with the 75mm M-3 Gun) are able to successfully shoot it out with Pz IV F2's consistently at ranges of 1300 to 1600 meters - and usually win.

I always use the M-3's in as much a hull down position as possible, but that M3 75, has no problem finding and punching the 50mm armor of the Pz IV F2 at those ranges.

In fact, I'm finding that in battles with PzIIIL's and PzIVF2's, the latter are usually wiped out long before the PzIIIL's.

Oh I love this game!

Grants are generally superior to Panzer IIIs, and to Panzer IV F1s but not F2s.

Against the F2s, if the German knows what he is doing the Grant should be toast.

He needs to stay far enough away that his 50mm turret front is not vulnerable to the 37mm on the Grant turret. If he does, and especially if he can fight the duel as nearly as possible hull down on both sides, he is sure to win.

If the Grant exposes its hull to allow its 75mm to fire, it has a chance but is still a large underdog. The reason is the German long 75 is a much more accurate, higher velocity gun; the Grant is a much larger target; and the German has better long range optics. Add them all up and the German is much more likely to hit first.

The German edge would be bigger with a later Panzer IV, though, one with an 80mm hull front. That would let it bounce some shot hitting the hull at long range.

Against Panzer III longs, the issue is the Grant is much better protected and the 50L60 is marginal against it at medium range, using plain AP. The Germans can succeed if they close the range to something like 300 yards, or if they have APCR ammunition available. In addition, they can win if both sides remain hull down, as the Grant's 37mm is completely insufficient against the later IIIs 70mm turret front and upper front hull.

Historically the effective counters to Grants were 88mm Flak towed, Marders (most in North Africa being the 76.2mm variety), or 50L60 towed or on III "specials" using APCR ammo. They still gave an excellent account of themselves, and the Brits were happy to get them in 1942, as it let them outrange the plain Panzers for the first time.

[dieseltaylor]

I agree. There is a rather tedious large desert battle with if I remember correctly 15 Honey's and a similar number of Grants against IIs III's and IV's [ I am not sure if there were longs] plus the dangerous Marder [2]

The Germans were hammered. This may be due to the scenario giving me a terrain edge but this is only part of it. Honeys/Stuarts 37mm will do MkIV turrets at decent range so even longs would die soon enough.

Part of the German problem would be that the IV's neeed to stand off far enough that they do not get shot through the turret by multiple guns whilst the II's are useless, and the III's need to be close for the 50mm to damage the Grant anway. In theory on a billiard/pool table that would work fine as a theory but on a map with terrain the III's would not be able to guarantee the distant IV's would be fighting there near enemies. It was interessting to see III's actually cowering as they acknowledged that to get closer they would probably die to the Grants even if they could tough up the Honey's.

[Brian956]

I think what surprised me most was that the PzIVF2's didn't survive the long range gunfight (I would consider 1,400 to 1,600 meters long range for 1942).

I set up a scenario with 2,500 meters width (for maneuver) and 2,000 meters depth (sufficient, I thought at the time) to test tank capabilities. Parameters were: Dec 1942, damp, cool, map-rural with no trees and gentle slopes (1.25 meters).

On it I placed one PLT of (4) Pz IVF2's, one PLT(+) of (6) PzIIIL's, and one PLT of (5) PzIIF's,... all mostly veteran - arrayed against one PLT (5) M-3 Mediums (Late), and one PLT (5) M-5 Lights - US tanks 'regular'.

Not realizing that they started in sight of each other, I sent the M3's to a low rise to their front while the M5's dashed off to their flank for flank security.

The battle started with shooting on turn one (to my surprise), and was essentially over by turn #8. The M-3's had acted like a firing squad!

I checked the actual losses at the end (I didn't want detailed info during the battle) - and for zero US tank losses (although there were plenty of ricochets, armor flaking, and 1 US crew casualty) the Germans had lost all four PzIV's, three of six Pz III's and three of five Pz II's...the US M5's didn't engage at all, and the shooting was as I said - 1,400 to 1,600 meters.

This is typical of several similar battles I've messed with, and I was surprised to see the PzIVF2's take it on the chin like that.

Although in several other battles PzIVF2's did "one-shot" M-3's at long range, overall it seems to me that M-3's 'handle them' quite well.

I agree. There is a rather tedious large desert battle with if I remember correctly 15 Honey's and a similar number of Grants against IIs III's and IV's [ I am not sure if there were longs] plus the dangerous Marder [2]

The Germans were hammered. ...

[dieseltaylor]

IV's have lousy armour - particularly the turret for which a third of shots are destined unless it is hulldown : )

So with 30mm front armour a Honey will kill out to 2000metres , when the Germans have 50mm armour Honeys kill at 1000 metres. The Germans guns incidentally are a bit underpowered at 2000 metres and the Honey has all the ammo in the world to pepper them with at long range. And the Grant carries even more ammo.

The 37mm is very accurate and the high rate of fire is useful.