RE: Truck use alternatives (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> John Tiller's Campaign Series >> John Tiller’s Campaign Series Support



Message

Deputy -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/7/2008 9:55:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: timshin42

Not trying to be confrontational,[sm=00000036.gif] but if you are not doing logistics, you are not doing anything that even remotely resembles combat [sm=duel.gif]. From an artillery perspective[sm=00000959.gif], managing ASR and RSR of ammunition is as important as fire planning and fire support coordination.

The original proposal for sophisticated supply truck rules is very interesting, but also very tedious [>:]and complicated for the player who thrives on pure maneuver with maybe a bit of indirect and air fire support. And there is nothing wrong with that as a personal preference.[:)]

I would welcome [sm=happy0065.gif]any features that add OPTIONAL features to enhance fire support and logistic dimensions to the combat simulations that we all obviously love![sm=love0028.gif]


Well said Tim!!! I have no objection to all this minutia that people are proposing. If they want to get into the intricate details of issuing bullets to soldiers, that's fine FOR THEM. But these ideas should remain OPTIONAL if they are included in any future patches or updates.



1925frank -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/7/2008 10:04:22 PM)

I think I first read about the Soviet penal units in a book called, "Hell in the East" or something like that.  The book was a compilation of American intelligence debriefings of Germans who fought on the Eastern Front.  It was an American attempt to gather intelligence on the Soviets and Soviet tactics and covered things like the muddy seasons, the intense cold and how best to fight in it, and, if I'm not mistaken, Soviet penal battalions.  I tried looking for the book on Amazon but didn't find it.  I've long since returned it to the used book store from which I bought it.




Jason Petho -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/7/2008 10:24:21 PM)

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Fighting-Hell-German-Ordeal-Eastern/dp/0804116989

I believe this is the book you are referring to.

Jason Petho



Tim41 -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/7/2008 10:35:12 PM)

Thank you Jason and Frank-I'll add this book to the old library.



1925frank -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/7/2008 10:38:19 PM)

Yep, that's it.  "Fighting in Hell - The German Ordeal on the Eastern Front," by Peter Tsuoras.

Tim41, read the reviews before buying it. The authors were writing to inform, not to entertain. It's informative, but it can be a dry read.



Tim41 -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/7/2008 11:35:05 PM)

Well, if I can stand Hart's arrogance-I can stand anything, but thanks for the warning. When you read commercial insurance contracts for a living, the Cornflakes box is exciting reading.



Deputy -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/7/2008 11:40:13 PM)

Yikes!!! That book sure got some mixed reviews!!! [X(]



Tim41 -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/7/2008 11:51:17 PM)

Erhard Raus' book is really my favorite read and I have always wanted to try his 'snail offensive' tactics. The Zone Defense sounds strange for a German general, but it works! Some of his tactics work well in the old version. His GROFAZ complaints are kept till the end for the most part, and the work was extensively used by the US Army during the Cold War. It's VERY readable and enjoyable. VM's Panzer Battles is great but he has his nose up Balck's behind....



1925frank -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/8/2008 12:12:36 AM)

Here's another link to the "Fighting in Hell" with some more reviews by readers:

http://www.amazon.com/Fighting-Hell-German-Ordeal-Eastern/dp/0804116989/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1204926619&sr=8-1

I think the readers were evenly split between those who loved it and those who hated it.

Isn't Raus the fellow who said putting minefields in front of your lines was a waste of time -- the Soviets would just remove them the night before the attack anyway.  Wasn't it Raus who said to put your mine fields behind your front lines?  That's where you'd find the enemy eventually, and mines behind your front lines couldn't be removed.  The Zone Defense is the absence of a continuous line, isn't it?  The idea was to allow some infiltration but to counterstrike?  I don't recall "snail offensive" tactics, so maybe I'm thinking of another author. 



Tim41 -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/8/2008 12:35:32 AM)

Page 279, "We laid no mines at all in front of our forward units, because the enemy could remove them and even use them for their own purposes before an attack opened. The main battle positionwas mined to a depth of five kilometers to the rear. Prior to First Ukrainian Front's offensive in the Lvov area that summer, First Panzer Army mined the sector in which we expected the main attack with 160,000 anti-personnel and 200,000 antitank mines within the zone defense.This was the first time that any German army had applied such zone tactics."
This was only a portion of six different problems from anaylisis of the reasons for most Soviet breakthroughs-see pages 276-285. The tactics applied were successful in the Battle of Lvov, and the breakthrough was made to the north-in another army's part of the line. In fact, he gave the Russians a good thrashing.



Tim41 -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/8/2008 12:45:28 AM)

The line was continous in depth-a checkerboard and some overrunning of the ground was allowed by armor or local penetrations, but the idea was to withdraw the forward postions just prior to the usual heavy Russian bombardment-3,000 guns at Lvov to 400 German and thus avoid casualties-that was one aspect.



1925frank -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/8/2008 12:52:12 AM)

According to one of the reviewers, Erhard Raus was one of the contributors to "Fighting in Hell."  I think Tim41 is referring to Erhard Raus' memoires, which is a separate book.



Tim41 -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/8/2008 12:58:31 AM)

The situation at the point of Lvov certainly supported mining his rear. The Soviet breakthroughs had to be slowed at least-applying the Zone Tactics to a whole army proved difficult, but again he was a favorite of Hitler because he ended up holding the same ground at the end of the fight-more than once. It was a six-fold answer to overwhelming odds. 1200 tanks to about 150 assault guns and tanks, 10 to 1 in infantry-the guns mentioned before at 3,000 to 400, and complete dominance of the air by the Russians. There was little fuel and manuever was out of the question.
If you ask me-it's a variation of an elastic line but with no tanks for the couterthrust, what could he do?
The snail tactics are during the Winter of 41-and after the Moscow retreat had somewhat stabalized the line into a bizare patch of pockets and fronts facing all directions! It involved securing and protecting a supply line to his corps and is interesting (he was by then a divisional commander).



Tim41 -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/8/2008 12:59:58 AM)

Correct.



Tim41 -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/8/2008 1:04:36 AM)

Panzer Operations, The Eastern Front Memior of General Raus, 1941-1945. compiled and translated by Steven h. Newton, C2003-Da Capo Press.
-This was his interviews with the US Army and other memoirs combined into one reading. It really gives a feeling of the tactics and relates combat examples more than those mentioned.



tide1212 -> RE: Truck use alternatives (3/8/2008 3:16:06 AM)

That is a good book. Another if you can find it is The Anvil Of War- German Generalship in Defence on the Eastern Front. Generaloberst Erhard Rauss and Generalleutnant Oldwig von Natzmer Editor Peter G. Tsouras. Greenhill Books

Although the snail offensive is in the book there are lots of other things in it to make it interesting reading.



Mraah -> Playing a DCG as AIB or Mech Battalion (3/8/2008 5:56:47 AM)

Ok, so the supply truck wasn't such a bright idea. I understand, don't go too deep into such nonsense [:-].

I want to change the subject for just a moment. Don't worry, no more ideas.

When playing a DCG I noticed we're unable to take command of either an Armored Infantry Battalion or a mechanized battalion. I did my own experimenting with the DCG and I found that to play an AIB or a mechanized battalion which falls under the OOB of either an Armored Division or a Panzer Division I had to fool the DCG and create a duplicate division and recode it as an infantry division.

Jason, in future updates do you know if we can command a mechanized battalion without having to double up the OOB?

Rob



Jason Petho -> RE: Playing a DCG as AIB or Mech Battalion (3/8/2008 6:12:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mraah

Ok, so the supply truck wasn't such a bright idea. I understand, don't go too deep into such nonsense [:-].

I want to change the subject for just a moment. Don't worry, no more ideas.

When playing a DCG I noticed we're unable to take command of either an Armored Infantry Battalion or a mechanized battalion. I did my own experimenting with the DCG and I found that to play an AIB or a mechanized battalion which falls under the OOB of either an Armored Division or a Panzer Division I had to fool the DCG and create a duplicate division and recode it as an infantry division.

Jason, in future updates do you know if we can command a mechanized battalion without having to double up the OOB?

Rob


I can create a coded Armoured Division that is coded with infantry for you.

Now is a good time to tell me, as I am wrapping up the order of battles!

Any other oob wishes, get them to me by tomorrow at the latest!

Jason Petho

Jason Petho



Mraah -> RE: Playing a DCG as AIB or Mech Battalion (3/8/2008 6:36:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

I can create a coded Armoured Division that is coded with infantry for you.

Now is a good time to tell me, as I am wrapping up the order of battles!

Any other oob wishes, get them to me by tomorrow at the latest!

Jason Petho


Wow, that was a fast reply! I was just wondering, no need to make a change like just for me since I can add that myself for my DCG.

While digging around the OOB for country 10 I did find some odd entries I could mention to see if you guys saw it. I figured since the whole team is doing such an outstanding job running a fine tooth comb through the OOB's you've probably seen it anyway. Give me a few moments and I'll post what I saw and see if it's worth checking. I don't want to bog down the process and it's no big deal.

Rob



Mraah -> Div & Bat 10 errors? (3/8/2008 7:12:09 AM)


Jason,

I stumbled upon this while looking at the 4th Armored Divison. Both the DIV 10 and BAT 10 oob's are v1.02b files, date stamp 7/30/2007 5:09pm.

-Division 10 oob -

Under the 4th Armored Divison (44 06 45 05 D1040005 7 4th Armored Division) there are 2 Battalions :

44 06 45 05 B1010010 8th Tank Battalion
44 06 45 05 B1010011 35th Tank Battalion

The reference for 8th Tank Battalion (B1010010) is duplicated 5 times in the Battalion 10 OOB in order :

42 11 45 05 B1010010 5 $ Tank Battalion (Light)
44 09 45 05 B1010010 5 3rd Tank Battalion (10th Armored Division)
44 06 45 05 B1010010 5 8th Tank Battalion (4th Armored Division)
44 09 45 05 B1010010 5 11th Tank Battalion (10th Armored Division)
44 09 45 05 B1010010 5 21st Tank Battalion (10th Armored Division)

It appears that it's selecting the "$ Tank Battalion (Light)" when it should be using B1010010 5 8th Tank Battalion (4th Armored Division). Looks like it's using the first reference to B1010010 and never gets to the correct entry.

The entry for 44 06 45 05 B1010011 35th Tank Battalion has a typo :

it reads...
44 06 45 05 B1010011 5 36th Tank Battalion (4th Armored Division)
44 06 45 05 P10305 36th Tank Battalion HQ
...when it should both read 35th.

Also, the entry for B1010023 has a typo ;

it reads ...
45 01 45 05 B1010023 5 35th Tank Battalion (8th Armored Division)
...when it should read 36th.


Thats it pretty much. I wasn't looking for errors but that's what I saw.

One other interesting note. The DCG called for some tank destroyer battalions and these entries in the Battalion 10 OOB seemed to have been REM'd out :

[44 06 45 05 B1013005 5 $(601-899) Tank Destroyer Battalion (76mm Tow AT )
[44 08 45 05 B1013002 5 $(601-899) Tank Destroyer Battalion (76mm SP AT )
[44 08 45 05 B1013003 5 $(601-899) Tank Destroyer Battalion (90mm SP AT )

I don't know if these were causing trouble in the DCG or not.

Thanks for listening and for all your great work!!!

Rob







Jason Petho -> RE: Div & Bat 10 errors? (3/8/2008 7:37:39 AM)

Hi Rob

Your above noted issues has been dealt with. Now the two armoured divisions are receiving their proper tank battalions.

I have added "Infantry" Armoured divisions to the West Front United States and East Front Germans so you can use an armoured infantry battalion as a core unit, as you suggested.

Thank you for the compliments and suggestions!

Jason Petho



Mraah -> RE: Div & Bat 10 errors? (3/8/2008 9:19:47 AM)



Jason,

Great work!!! Thank you!!

Looking forward to v1.03 !!!

Again, I appreciate all the work done and all the work in the future!!! I've been waiting since the late 90's to build a detailed Light Armored Division mod.

Rob



simovitch -> RE: Div & Bat 10 errors? (3/8/2008 9:32:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

I have added "Infantry" Armoured divisions to the West Front United States and East Front Germans so you can use an armoured infantry battalion as a core unit, as you suggested.


For Germans toward the latter half of the war especially, only one Battalion in the entire Panzer Division was mechanized with halftracks, so the player selecting his force will need to be able to tell which battalion has the halftracks.



Jason Petho -> RE: Div & Bat 10 errors? (3/8/2008 10:00:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: simovitch


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

I have added "Infantry" Armoured divisions to the West Front United States and East Front Germans so you can use an armoured infantry battalion as a core unit, as you suggested.


For Germans toward the latter half of the war especially, only one Battalion in the entire Panzer Division was mechanized with halftracks, so the player selecting his force will need to be able to tell which battalion has the halftracks.


Already thought of that [:)]

Jason Petho



anthonykevinluke -> Divisional ORBAT for DCG (3/9/2008 5:21:00 AM)

Greetings Jason,

I noticed above that you were after ORBATs that people would like. If it is possible I would like to be able to select a particular Division, start at battalion level in a DCG and work up through the ranks to command that Division. Specifically, Gross Deutschland, Wiking, Hitler Jugend, and Panzer Lehr. Is this possible? For your consideration.

Regards,

Tony



Deputy -> RE: Divisional ORBAT for DCG (3/9/2008 5:55:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tony luke

Greetings Jason,

I noticed above that you were after ORBATs that people would like. If it is possible I would like to be able to select a particular Division, start at battalion level in a DCG and work up through the ranks to command that Division. Specifically, Gross Deutschland, Wiking, Hitler Jugend, and Panzer Lehr. Is this possible? For your consideration.

Regards,

Tony


OUTSTANDING IDEA!!!!! I'll take it even further and include ALL the SS divisions and Fallschirmjager divisions too!!!! Exactly as Tony described. Start at battalion level. Of course, I'd just stay at battalion level. [:D]

Dep



Jason Petho -> RE: Divisional ORBAT for DCG (3/9/2008 11:19:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tony luke

Greetings Jason,

I noticed above that you were after ORBATs that people would like. If it is possible I would like to be able to select a particular Division, start at battalion level in a DCG and work up through the ranks to command that Division. Specifically, Gross Deutschland, Wiking, Hitler Jugend, and Panzer Lehr. Is this possible? For your consideration.

Regards,

Tony


Yes, it is possible, but for the 1.04 UPDATE, it is to far to late to make those sort of requests for the 1.03 UPDATE.

I will see about including them in the next update though.

Jason Petho



Deputy -> RE: Divisional ORBAT for DCG (3/9/2008 5:35:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho


quote:

ORIGINAL: tony luke

Greetings Jason,

I noticed above that you were after ORBATs that people would like. If it is possible I would like to be able to select a particular Division, start at battalion level in a DCG and work up through the ranks to command that Division. Specifically, Gross Deutschland, Wiking, Hitler Jugend, and Panzer Lehr. Is this possible? For your consideration.

Regards,

Tony


Yes, it is possible, but for the 1.04 UPDATE, it is to far to make those sort of requests for the 1.03 UPDATE.

I will see about including them in the next update though.

Jason Petho



Thanks Jason. I'm sure that would be fine with Tony, and it's sure fine with me [:)]
Now I am anticipating the 1.04 update EVEN MORE!!!! [image]http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/micons/m6.gif[/image]



Mraah -> RE: Divisional ORBAT for DCG (3/10/2008 2:56:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tony luke

Greetings Jason,

I noticed above that you were after ORBATs that people would like. If it is possible I would like to be able to select a particular Division, start at battalion level in a DCG and work up through the ranks to command that Division. Specifically, Gross Deutschland, Wiking, Hitler Jugend, and Panzer Lehr. Is this possible? For your consideration.



Jason,

Will the new documents for v1.03 explain how we can create Tony's suggestion before v1.04 is released?

Rob



vadersson -> RE: Divisional ORBAT for DCG (3/10/2008 3:44:39 PM)

Quick Question Guys,

What wil 1.03 do for the average scenario player?  I only play Scenarios (some against the computer, some via e-mail) and I also play LCG.  Will the OOB changes effect these games or not?  Just wondering since I don't do DCG.

Thanks,
Duncan




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.90625