Axis armor points in CMBB

[dieseltaylor]

Page 131 Two 2pdr's fire over 300 rounds apiece at ranges of 600-1000 yards in an hour and claim to kill 24 tanks - only counting burnt ones.`

Page 409 1st Armoured Brigade destroyed with 24 shermans out of 27 destroyed attacking 88's over 2000 yards [number not specified but unlikely to be as many as the tanks]

Page 393 9th April 1943. Four emplaced 6lbers take on thirteen tanks and get a two all draw and the Germans retreat.

[Kanonier Reichmann]

Unfortunately, what these AAR's don't tell you is whether the ATG batteries cheated by emplacing their guns in trenches behind crest lines. if so, the enemy should have simply packed up their bat and ball and refused to fight them anymore for using such gamey tactics.....or used artillery & mortars!

Regards

KR

[DavidFields]

Per JC: "exploiting is cheating".

It is mind-boggling how sweeping and, in my opinion, mistaken this is--both in this particular situation for ATGs in CM and historically.

Historically, whenever any side came up with a new tactic or weapon, the other side could call it "exploiting" or "cheating". Pouting, or taking your marbles and going home, were seldom, historically, effective.

Short of people breaking through the computer code to unmask FOW, or to move units around, it is hard to see how one could be a cheater in CM, or why, among experienced CM players, one would want to call someone that. Yes, two players could have an agreement about certain "house rules", but short of that, the quirks of CM are well known. Being called a cheater for knowing the quirks? Perhaps a simple "Thank you" suffices if called a cheater in that case, and file it under "Badge of Honor".

As to the specific issue of ATGs in CM, I tend to agree that they are underpowered: both because of borg spotting, the fact that the "battle space" is usually pre-known (so the element of surprise is lessened), and I think that in practice they could likely be even more hidden than we can accomplish in CM. (There is also the infantry firepower quirk calculation--something that can't be hit, such as being behind a rock, does not become more hittable with increasing infantry firepower numbers, as it does in CM).

Shame on me if, as an attacker with armor, I have not included indirect and infantry scouts in my force. Quirk/exploit or not, the counter is a reasonable facsimile of reasonable tactics--not perfectly historical, but reasonable. If the scenario/map requires that I set up my armor in an exposed position, it is just not a scenario/map that I am likely to enjoy--nothing to do with my opponent putting guns behind a crest.

As with any simulation (and the Europa Universalis series also comes to mind, and the Harpoon series), I find that occasionally taking a weeks/months break, so as to forget the quirk particulars, brings the fun back. Winning? Winning what?

I see myself having fun playing CM1 until either I have to replace my computer with something incompatible, or CM2 truly matches it for sheer fun (with the graphics not being a big issue for me)

[Joachim]

I like the posts on this page. Well done.

[Merkin Muffley]

If there's anyone who wants to see the gun/crest/kink/cheat/no-it-isn't/yes-it-is/pants-on-fire version of this thread from 3 years ago, then it is [thread=49374]here.[/thread]

Worth a visit if you are very keen. But I add it here for any readers who are yet to be persuaded one way or the other, as offering further viewpoints and voices of reason.

Note: It drifts off to start navel-gazing Tank Destroyers at some point. I can't tell you if it ever returns to guns and crests, as life is too short.

[BlackVoid]

Too bad, this thread was hijacked.

Getting back to topic. In a meeting engagement the combined arms armor ratios are even worse than in an attack-defense situation. In a recent meeting, I had a lone Stug and against it were 3 Su76s, and 1 T-34/85. Ok, I had panzerfausts and a few shrecks, but my opponent was good enough to stay out of range. I even had an ATG - that was quickly disposed of by mortars. So how is one supposed to win an encounter like this with Axis??? The map was also bad for me, so I never had a chance at all.

Smoke - you cannot have enough to matter, when your enemy is firing at your inf from 500 meters.

Inf AT weapons - very hard to get close enough

Vehicles - paper skinned, easily killed by ATGs

AT guns - in a meeting engagement they are very vulnerable and very hard to put them into a useful spot

Air power - way too expensive, especially for Axis

There is no way to counter Soviet armor in this situation, except if your opponent makes mistakes.

[dieseltaylor]

Curiously I thought we had dealt with your gripe quite swiftly in the first page of the thread. That you remain unhappy with "balance" in CMBB is up to you. There are so many things to be unhappy with in the game - "balance" rates quite low on my list.

I gave various ways to make the games more playable for my purposes - what you choose to do is up to you - but with 100+ friendly games against a large number of opponents in CMBB I think my solutions tried and tested.

However if you still want to play small games may I recommend 400 point games to you. As a canny German you can have a Marder III plus a Stummel plus three IG 75mm and in my brief test the T34 died in the first minute taking the Marder with it. Left the Stummel king of the battlefield and with the 75IG's I think my infantry platoon was reasonably happy they could walk to the flag.

[Tux]

Too bad, this thread was hijacked.

Getting back to topic. In a meeting engagement the combined arms armor ratios are even worse than in an attack-defense situation. In a recent meeting, I had a lone Stug and against it were 3 Su76s, and 1 T-34/85. Ok, I had panzerfausts and a few shrecks, but my opponent was good enough to stay out of range. I even had an ATG - that was quickly disposed of by mortars. So how is one supposed to win an encounter like this with Axis??? The map was also bad for me, so I never had a chance at all.

Smoke - you cannot have enough to matter, when your enemy is firing at your inf from 500 meters.

Inf AT weapons - very hard to get close enough

Vehicles - paper skinned, easily killed by ATGs

AT guns - in a meeting engagement they are very vulnerable and very hard to put them into a useful spot

Air power - way too expensive, especially for Axis

There is no way to counter Soviet armor in this situation, except if your opponent makes mistakes.

Blackvoid, your StuG (assuming it is a G model or later) outmatches the SU-76s and is at a slight disadvantage in a duel with a T-34/85. Use your StuG and support weapons as overwatch over one covered route of advance, up which you push your (presumably superior) infantry. Any SUs that try and intervene against your infantry are killed by the StuG. If the T-34 appears it will probably concede first shot to your StuG, which has a good chance of killing it, and anyway the T-34 is by no means certain of winning any resultant duel.

If terrain doesn't allow you to cover your advance then there is nothing you can do about it, even with a whole platoon of StuGs - the Russians will land HE amongst your men before your StuGs can eliminate the threat.

Whether terrain is favourable or not, one StuG Ausf.G versus three SU76s and a T-34/85 is an interesting and challenging matchup.

[dieseltaylor]

But one where I would back the Russians 9 times out of ten.

Terrain can be important but if you play on small maps there is not a lot of terrain to play with. In 1500 point size battlemaps I think "unfair" maps would crop up about a third of the time, slightly favouring one side would take it to about two thirds.

Of course unfair is relative to the year , weather, and a bad choice of units can make a map "unfair". Early war tanks can get quite close to each other without it being curtains - late war - distances become less important.

[Tux]

Absolutely the Russians have a large advantage: Either the StuG is keyholed and the Russians hit German infantry from positions out of the StuG's LOS, or the StuG has a wide field of view and is engaged from three separate angles by the SUs and then finally by the T-34, once the StuG is committed to engaging one of the thinner targets.

There are also, of course, a great number of other factors that will affect the situation (as you mention) but it still sounds like a fascinating challenge to me. The StuG is a powerful weapon that can kill any of the opposition from range. One of the opposition can do likewise - where's the problem?

[BlackVoid]

I admit I was being stupid a bit

The answer to the T-34 is a Hetzer (high XP).

The answer to the SU-76: Hungarian 40mm AT and Hungarian Solothurn ATR - both cheap weapons and available up to April 1945.

But if your opponent bought a pair of ISU-122s, you are totally screwed. I still do not like the armor point ratios, but some of the time it can be compensated.

Overwatching infantry with a Stug? Well, I would happy to play you. A tank in plain sight is usually an invitation to disaster. The worst thing you can do is to let the enemy know where your tank is. A seen tank can be smoked, flanked or avoided. If you are outmatched in armor, suprise is absolutely crucial.

The point difference matters most in meeting engagements and in periods when Russian armor is up to par with the Germans (early and late war). In defense you can compensate with guns + surprise, on the attack you have parity in armor.

I still think it would have been better to make Russian tanks and AT guns cheaper instead of putting in a hard-coded point difference.

[Corvidae]

Mark, your three comments in the thread have been cryptic - except possibly the last one : ). If you have a point to make on the game please feel free to expand as I am not entirely sure what you are saying about the gun problem that JC raised. Have you a solution?

Jason gets very pissy about a particular bug in the game, I dont blame him.

It IS a bug.

In reality the gun should either, have height, or be blocked from shooting.

In game we get neither.

It is a bug.

It gets exploited regularly.

At first I thought he was just spewing sour grapes... But then I tested it myself.

Turns out he was right.

The solution is to place your gun such that it is on the flat of the hill, just barely ahead of the slope.... and have it either, dug in, or in a trench.

alternately, you can give the other guy more mortars to play with.

E-mail me a turn,

CMBB

Random everything.

mr_laurier_iiooii@yahoo.com

I'll play allied