A Quick Battle AAR: Shermans vs Pz IVs, Not Your Fathers Combat Mission

[akd]

If a soldier is wounded, buddy aid can return him to partial health or evac him from the game. he then shows up as WIA on the AAR. Of course buddy aid can't resurrect the dead ....

No, there is no return to health per se. There are three "health" states.

1. Minor wounds - no buddy aid necessary as soldier remains in his unit. These soldiers are probably best described as "beaten up.". They are capable of performing all their assigned tasks, but at reduced effectiveness.

2. Incapacitated - soldier is removed from unit and remains in place on the battlefield. Buddy aid salvages weapons and ammo, clears the soldier from the battlefield and reduces the chances of being considered KIA at the end of the battle.

3. Dead - represents either instant death or wounded beyond hope. Soldier is removed from unit and remains in place. Buddy aid only salvages weapons and ammo and clears the soldier from the battlefield. This takes much less time than aiding an incapacitated soldier.

[ClarkWGriswold]

Why are soldiers who receive buddy aid removed from the battlefield? This is something that would happen after the battle in real life, and it doesn't seem to be for framerate issues since dead, non-buddy aided bodies still remain.

[Rocky Balboa]

Thanks for the clarification, I always thought buddy aid could take a wounded/Incapacitated soldier in some circumstances (not in ever case) and change his status to minor wounded.

I stand corrected...

[akd]

Why are soldiers who receive buddy aid removed from the battlefield? This is something that would happen after the battle in real life, and it doesn't seem to be for framerate issues since dead, non-buddy aided bodies still remain.

Any body, dead or alive, disappears from the map after buddy aid so you know aid/salvage is no longer needed.

[JSj]

Hey JSj, no worries... I apologize for jumping on you.

No need to apologize, and you did put a smiley afterwards so I didn't feel "jumped on" at all.

Tell us your thoughts on the AAR so far.

I'm a simulator player mostly (Arma 2, DCS, IL-2 Sturmovik) and don't have much experience with wargames. I came here looking for something a bit more relaxed, where you have some time to think about your next move, and don't need to be so alert and totally switched on all the time. A game where you can take your eyes off the screen for a few seconds without crashing or getting killed. But I still want something more exciting and visually interresting than moving a bunch of square tiles around on a hex-map.

And I think I have found just that in the Combat Mission series! I am very impressed by the realism and attention to detail. I never played any previous game of this series, but I can't wait to get to play Battle for Normandy when it's released.

The AAR has been a great read so far, both funny and exciting. I'm looking forward very much to see how this battle is going to end.

[Asmodeus]

Minute 15

As they enter the woods, Crew 3 identified an American crew. The Americans look like they might be on hide orders.

Wouldn't you look at that. A nazi shooting at his nemesis' back!

Well, that's nothing new actually.

Just gotta love that TC's Hollywood-pose while waving his 'bringer of justice'.

And the cap. What a caricature!

Pure victory, this game.

[RogCBrand]

Hey JSj, no worries... I apologize for jumping on you.

Tell us your thoughts on the AAR so far.

Sometimes communicating this way is like talking to someone on the moon- the delay between words can sometimes create some confusion!

[Michael Emrys]

Why do the German crew still wear their headphones? Wouldn't they leave those with the tank? Has this been fixed in later builds?

Michael

[Rocky Balboa]

Why do the German crew still wear their headphones? Wouldn't they leave those with the tank? Has this been fixed in later builds?

Michael

I think its on the list with the bren tripods

[StellarRat]

It seems the key here is that Bill made better use of the woods and spent more resources scouting to determine where best position his forces. I'm impressed that CM2 has put recon into its proper and important role in warfare. Most games don't have an adequate system to do this. I can see now that light recon vehicles will be much more useful in CM2 then they used to be CM1. Bill might come out even better with some armored cars out in front.

[Bil Hardenberger]

Rocky and Michael, nah, I think they are listening to Ride of the Valkyries on their iPods.

[GhostRider3/3]

It seems the key here is that Bill made better use of the woods and spent more resources scouting to determine where best position his forces. I'm impressed that Cm2 has put recon into its proper and important role in warfare. Most games don't have an adequate system to do this.

True, in reading many books on Panzer tactics, the commanders would sometimes hop out or their gunner to check out an area first, and then use hand signals to bring the tank to a Optimum positon. I beleive the Commanders in the later part of the war were issued MP40's as I recall reading many times the commanders using them vs infantry in some cases.

I beleive even the likes of M. Wittman even as a StuG commander doing the same thing in Russia.

[Vark]

If BFBN is going to simulate battlefield confusion more realistically (and from the AAR it looks like it is)it seems that AT guns are going to be right royal pains for BOTH sides. Read an account of an Allied attack being hung up on the German Paks, it all sounded familiar, M4's burning in front of the Teutonic muzzle brakes etc, but when the Germans launched a similar sized attack over the same ground the Panthers burned in front of the Allied AT guns.

Of course the Allies will do most of the attacking, but it showed that often the terrain was the real force multiplier/detractor, not equipment or training (though they helped at the margins)

Capt, how many points for a pair of 57mm AT guns and would they have been of use? Being able to move vehicles in woods will be a big boon for AT crews and hopefully the speed at which their crews manhandle them is realistic. Hope that also applies for heavy weapons teams, out in the open, who might as well have a "shoot me sign" hanging round their neck.

Nice AAR Bil and Capt, I have been sick as a dog most of this week and your efforts have provided some much needed comfort, thanks....now when's the next one!!

[StellarRat]

Why do the German crew still wear their headphones? Wouldn't they leave those with the tank? Has this been fixed in later builds?

Michael

How else would they listen to their MP3s!?!? Haven't you been around young'uns lately? :-)

[Rocky Balboa]

Rocky and Michael, nah, I think they are listening to Ride of the Valkyries on their iPods.

Yes they need those head phones so that can radio back and tell the other tanks what they saw on their little recon mission "gamey b%#^&%d" indeed !!

Does this mean using crews for recon has become an officially sanctioned CMx2 tactic?

[StellarRat]

In CM1 bailed out crews were expensive to prevent such gamey behavior.

[Battlefront.com]

Capt, how many points for a pair of 57mm AT guns and would they have been of use? Being able to move vehicles in woods will be a big boon for AT crews and hopefully the speed at which their crews manhandle them is realistic. Hope that also applies for heavy weapons teams, out in the open, who might as well have a "shoot me sign" hanging round their neck.

While there is certainly far more flexibility about where and how to move around AT guns than we had in CMx1 (as I remember it), for a Meeting or Attack type QB (when on the offensive, obviously) having AT Guns is "dumb". The chances of getting one to a position that matters, deployed, and ready to fire WITHOUT getting shot to pieces *or* having an affect on the battle are very slim.

Steve

[Baneman]

It seems the key here is that Bill made better use of the woods and spent more resources scouting to determine where best position his forces. I'm impressed that CM2 has put recon into its proper and important role in warfare. Most games don't have an adequate system to do this. I can see now that light recon vehicles will be much more useful in CM2 then they used to be CM1. Bill might come out even better with some armored cars out in front.

I was just commenting to a CMx1 opponent that I felt Armoured Cars have always gotten the short stick in most wargames as their speed doesn't seem to affect AT guns and other tanks enough - usually they are killed in short order.

Does the speed of the target in CM:BN have a major effect on accuracy of the shooter ? ie. will a madly zigzagging AC have a good chance to cross some open terrain covered by AT assets ? Or is this just wishful thinking and AT gunners have had skeet shooting training ?

PS: What happened to the lock and thread part 2 ?

[Alan8325]

Yes they need those head phones so that can radio back and tell the other tanks what they saw on their little recon mission "gamey b%#^&%d" indeed !!

Does this mean using crews for recon has become an officially sanctioned CMx2 tactic?

I'm assuming from this post that you don't have CMSF with the Brit module.

[ChrisND]

While there is certainly far more flexibility about where and how to move around AT guns than we had in CMx1 (as I remember it), for a Meeting or Attack type QB (when on the offensive, obviously) having AT Guns is "dumb". The chances of getting one to a position that matters, deployed, and ready to fire WITHOUT getting shot to pieces *or* having an affect on the battle are very slim.

Steve

There can be limited uses for them. For example, if you want to throw through everything down one flank , you could deploy a couple of AT guns to screen your flank. They' be far enough back to not get shot up on set up, and would get the drop in on anything the opponent tries to end-run around you.

[Vark]

[quote name=' for a Meeting or Attack type QB (when on the offensive, obviously) having AT Guns is "dumb". The chances of getting one to a position that matters, deployed, and ready to fire WITHOUT getting shot to pieces *or* having an affect on the battle are very slim.

Steve[/quote']

I had quite alot of fun using AT guns in certain QB's, especially if a nice piece of woodland overlooks the victory objective, like in the AAR. I don't know how much they cost in CM:BN in comparison to infantry, in CMBB a couple of 76mm's were about half the cost of a platoon and well worth it.

[Vark]

Hmm first time using the snazzy quote function got bolloxed there, guess I just leave the brackets in?

[MarkEzra]

Hmm first time using the snazzy quote function got bolloxed there, guess I just leave the brackets in?

Practice makes perfect

[Yak Meister]

This has prolly been mentioned b4 so pls forgive me in advance for regurgitating an old idea.

Can crews of completely knocked out AFVs, Heavy Weps etc be removed from a players control? Then the AI will take over and have them just seek to hide the remainder of the game. Be it beside their unit or utilizing the nearest cover as the situation dictates.

Or perhaps only let them see enemy units that are alrdy in LOS of their sides fully functional units (AFV, Infantry etc).

However, dismounted crews from functional AFVs will have the ability to spot new enemy units but their demise will not be of no concern.

This should eliminate the gamey tactic of using disposable unmounted troops to do hazardous recon work.

[YankeeDog]

I was just commenting to a CMx1 opponent that I felt Armoured Cars have always gotten the short stick in most wargames as their speed doesn't seem to affect AT guns and other tanks enough - usually they are killed in short order.

Does the speed of the target in CM:BN have a major effect on accuracy of the shooter ? ie. will a madly zigzagging AC have a good chance to cross some open terrain covered by AT assets ? Or is this just wishful thinking and AT gunners have had skeet shooting training ?

I think your view of just how fast and agile most WWII-era armored cars could move off-road, and how quickly they could change speed and direction, may be a bit optimistic.

To use the M8 Greyhound as an example, top road speed may have been about 55mph, but speed cross country was certainly far less than that; the M8 actually didn't have a great reputation for off-road handling. And with a 110hp engine, it didn't exactly jump off the line, either. (For comparison, an M4 Sherman actually has a better hp/wt ratio than an M8)

Now, surely the M8's speed and smaller size would have at least some effect on its chances of getting hit. But in most situations I think this effect would be relatively small. And it's also much more vulnerable; in many cases, even shrapnel from a near miss or MG fire can knock it out. At long ranges and if the AC has a good long stretch of road on which to build up speed, I can see the speed/size/agility attributes being a more significant factor. But this would be a fairly rare situation, especially in Normandy.

Now, the fact that CMx2 allows us to dismount the AC crew and recon on foot should make them more useful -- race forward, get the vehicle in defilade, and send the crew on foot to peek over the rise...