https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/ Thu, 30 Apr 2026 13:44:46 +0000 MyBB https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=60014 Fri, 14 Oct 2011 21:06:01 +0000 BillSirKill]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=60014
TacOps4 did a good job of detailing the ranges, armor penetration and other values that would assist a newer player during the game.

Does anyone know of a reference that has been published that address' the specs of the different units?

Thanks for you assistance,
BillSirKill (Bill B)]]>
TacOps4 did a good job of detailing the ranges, armor penetration and other values that would assist a newer player during the game.

Does anyone know of a reference that has been published that address' the specs of the different units?

Thanks for you assistance,
BillSirKill (Bill B)]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=59563 Sat, 13 Aug 2011 01:44:18 +0000 Fusilier9]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=59563
Anyone else feeling this or maybe I am doing something wrong?]]>
Anyone else feeling this or maybe I am doing something wrong?]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=58051 Mon, 31 Jan 2011 22:11:57 +0000 Jobu88]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=58051
Do you call it in early in the game to soften up the defender?

Or do you set it for later turns to support the final advance to the flags?

I have tried it both ways with mixed results.

If there's not too many terrain features at the defender's disposal, I will usually time it for, say, Turn 18 of a 25-turn game, with the notion of having it land on those key positions as my boys are making the final push.

If the map allows the defender too many options for where to position his forces for the above approach to be practical, I will sometimes use artillery to clear the route of advance.


But anyway -- I would like to hear other members' thoughts about pre-planned artillery supporting attacks.]]>
Do you call it in early in the game to soften up the defender?

Or do you set it for later turns to support the final advance to the flags?

I have tried it both ways with mixed results.

If there's not too many terrain features at the defender's disposal, I will usually time it for, say, Turn 18 of a 25-turn game, with the notion of having it land on those key positions as my boys are making the final push.

If the map allows the defender too many options for where to position his forces for the above approach to be practical, I will sometimes use artillery to clear the route of advance.


But anyway -- I would like to hear other members' thoughts about pre-planned artillery supporting attacks.]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=57206 Sat, 30 Oct 2010 02:37:01 +0000 Ratzki]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=57206
Carl von Clausewitz
1780-1831

I thought that I would kick off the defensive strategies with a little quote from Clausewitz. What he says rings so true in Combat Mission. When you start a quick battle, both you and your enemy know that the player on the defensive side will have fewer points to spend on his forces then will the attacking player. If you have set up any other parameters, there too, the attacker will know just how and where your forces will be limited. Set-up zones, flag position, battle maps with an edge are just some of the facts that we have to deal with during play. On defence, we must be able to overcome these and other limitations so that we might be victorious. “The Perfect Economy Strategy” might just be the most important strategy we must master in order to be successful playing Combat Mission.
What is the perfect economy?... in short, it is managing your forces in order to get the most effect while using the fewest resources. Skills will only take us so far, we teeter with disaster by trying to surpass our limits. Seduced by the flags of victory, we overextend our forces, and our electronic soldiers end up spent, exhausted and vulnerable to enemy actions. You must know your forces limits, pick your fights carefully, consider the total cost of taking the flag or controlling that building. Do you have enough time, how about ammunition, can you afford to lose those men in order to gain or keep the objective. Everything must be considered before you start shooting. Is it better to wait for several turns or push for a head on counterattack, either way, you have to aim for your enemies weaknesses. Everything that you do on the battlefield has a cost, be it in time, ammunition, and of course casualties. Make the battle expensive for your opponent and cheap for you, this is fighting with “perfect economy”.
In 281 BC a war broke out between Rome and the city of Tarentum. The city, not known for it's military, hired King Pyrrhus to fight for them. Pyrrhus had a great reputation, he claimed to be directly descended from Achilles and was a cousin of Alexander the Great. King Pyrrhus crossed into Italy with what was the largest Greek army ever to do so, he had 20,000 foot soldiers, 3,000 cavalry, 2,000 bowmen and 20 war elephants. This army met the Romans near Heraclea, Pyrrhus was outnumbered and at one point in the battle, near defeat. Only the war elephants were able, at the last moment to turn the tide and send the Roman army into chaos. It was a great victory, but King Pyrrhus worried about his battle loses. Many veteran officers and soldiers had been killed, but the king pressed on and Rome responded by sending another army to meet Pyrrhus' forces. Next to the town of Asculum the foes met for the second time. Pyrrhus pulled out all the stops and after personally leading a violent charge managed to again defeat the Roman army. But the king's loses had been terrible, the ranks were decimated, and he too, was wounded from the fighting. When asked about his great victories, King Pyrrhus commented “If we defeat the Romans in one more such battle, we shall be totally ruined.” Truth be told, the king was already ruined. His remaining forces were too few and his Italian campaign was over.
From the battle at Asculum comes the term “Pyrrhic victory”. How often do you find yourself in the same condition as King Pyrrhus during a CM battle? You are able to push the enemy back, take or keep the objective, but with your ranks decimated, you are unable to hold on. Eventually, you yield the ground and flags to the enemy. If everyone was polled, how often do you think that players would report this happens?... I bet it is more often then we all imagine it could be. How do we let ourselves get into this position time and time again?... Is it the excitement of the prospects of gaining victory, do we only see what we want to see, ignore the difficulties and focus on only the gains. The farther that we go, the harder it is to step back and rationally reassess the situation. Everything seems well at first, but our costs mount and quickly spiral out of control, more poor choices lead to more mistakes, which lead to new and unforeseen problems, which in turn lead to more costs. Soon, any victories that we manage along the way become meaningless.
The more that you want the prize, the more you must examine what it will take to get it. This is where we can apply the “perfect economy” to our CM battle. As the defender, you will be tasked with preventing the enemy from gaining control of the victory flags, limiting your losses, and maximizing enemy losses. We have several weapons at our disposal to accomplish this task. Every weapon, every squad, every vehicle has a value. There is no such thing as a useless unit and combinations of different units can become very potent weapons when used together. Every force has a weak point, an Achilles heal, and every force has a strength somewhere, something that can be built on and if used effectively can contribute to your defence. The trick is to find the strengths of your force and place them where they can be of the most use. Usually, as the defender, going at the enemy toe to toe, strength against strength is not the path to victory. You may well score devastating blows on your enemies forces, but usually the devastation will have spread to your forces as well. With the differences in attacking and defending forces costs, you will often come out on the losing end as the attacker possesses more resources and can trade blow for blow and still win the battle. We must find a way to even the score up somewhat before the battle begins.
A good way to start is by quickly determining what units the enemy has brought to the battle. Usually the attacking player has a fair bit of ground to cover before he can threaten your defences, use this time to hold off exposing your positions by shooting at extreme ranges and make careful note as to what types and numbers of men and equipment is moving your way. Assess the enemy's strengths and expose his weaknesses by attacking his weakest units with your strongest. Avoid fighting outnumbered or outgunned, it is you that must always outnumber and outgun the enemy. Doing so should cost the enemy more then it does you, and if this can be repeated over and over again, victory will be yours.
Every battle is a balance between ends and means, you can have a great plan to achieve a certain end, but unless you have the means to accomplish it, the plan is totally worthless.

“Every limitation has its value, but a limitation that requires persistent effort entails a cost of too much energy. When, however, the limitation is a natural one (as for example, the limitation by which water flows only downhill), it necessarily leads to success, for then it means a saving of energy. The energy that otherwise would be consumed in a vain struggle with the object is applied wholly to the benefit to the matter in hand, and success is assured.”

The I Ching
China, circa eighth century B.C.

We must avoid coming up with a plan on paper, and instead look deeply into what tools you have. These tools consist of the units you have, weather, terrain, number of game turns, ect. Think of the skills that you have, the quality of your troops, the knowledge of your opponent from past battles, how creatively you can use all your means at your disposal. Then, out of this let your plans form.
“Perfect economy” means finding a golden balance, where your blows count but do not wear you out. Over economizing will wear you out more as you will never be able to deliver the knock out punch. CM is like any sport, you must not let the other player/team stay in the game, giving them hope that allows them to carry on with the battle. This way they always think that they are just one move away from changing the battle in their favour. If they are allowed to proceed this way, they often will find a way to accomplish their goals. We must put them out of the game as soon as we get the chance to. Hit them hard so that their force is unable to continue, or that the enemy is convinced that they have no chances here on this part of the map.
There are three ways to help us economize during a battle and yet still deliver the big blows that will get the win. First, deception. Most often, attacking players are ready to meet a static defence, what happens when they see a force moving around? Are you coming at them, should they hold off for a few turns to gather more information about your intentions? Should they divert some of their attacking forces in order to deal with what they perceive to be a threat? The questions and actions are unlimited. Even if no shots are fired by either side, you can usually shed a couple turns off the game's length while they reorganize, and in this way add a cost to the enemy in reduced available turns. You might be able to take part of the enemy force out of the action entirely and never fire a shot as he will have to provide flank protection for his units against a perceived threat. If a unit does not fire or take part in a battle it is as good as dead.
Second, look for opponents that you can beat. Don't fight fair, outnumber and outgun the enemy forces. If you question the effects that this can have, start the editor and place one squad from each side in scattered trees at 100m apart and let them go head to head for several turns and count the losses. Then add a field gun to one side and run the same number of turns, again check the losses for each side. Add another squad to this side, maybe a light mortar and so on each time recording the losses by both sides. You will find that the enemy losses go up exponentially and yours will decrease. You will also notice that the time it takes to start causing significant losses to the enemy will decrease as well. This is another economizing tactic in that you save ammunition and of course casualties not taken are a direct saving.
Third, we have to know when to stop. Pyrrhus did not know when to stop, we must avoid doing the same. I think players, including myself like to use hit and run tactics often, the problem is we forget the run part. Our hidden units bloody the enemy, we stay in position, forgetting or choosing not to run, the next thing we know, the attacker has adjusted to the threat and brings forces quickly to the area, decimates what units we have there and moves on. We turn a victory in this part of the map into a loss by figuring that we can soldier on, when we should have gotten our guys the heck outta there and taken up new positions that the attacker must again locate and deal with.
I said that I would try to mention players here that I have faced that are good examples of what I am writing about. I know that there are several out there that are good at this, but one that comes to mind is herroburst. My battles with him have been very entertaining, I should play him more often. He seems to have the ability to put together small battle-groups that compliment each other to the fullest. His forces are just the right blend to have just enough to push through defences and hold off a stiff counterattack. Tanks are supported by infantry, infantry protect the tanks and fringe units are used to their maximum effectiveness. I would say that this is what perfect economy looks like, nothing is wasted and everything is used to it's best effects. Considering that he usually has about a thousand games on the go at any one time, this is quite a skill, I would hate to be his opponents if he ever decided to play just two or three games at a time.
I think this starts to cover the “perfect economy” strategy in CM, when I get around to it again, I will present the next strategy, “The Counterattack”. I again look forward to what everyone has to say, I am trying to keep the length down and just hit some of the high points on each of the topics, volumes could be written.]]>
Carl von Clausewitz
1780-1831

I thought that I would kick off the defensive strategies with a little quote from Clausewitz. What he says rings so true in Combat Mission. When you start a quick battle, both you and your enemy know that the player on the defensive side will have fewer points to spend on his forces then will the attacking player. If you have set up any other parameters, there too, the attacker will know just how and where your forces will be limited. Set-up zones, flag position, battle maps with an edge are just some of the facts that we have to deal with during play. On defence, we must be able to overcome these and other limitations so that we might be victorious. “The Perfect Economy Strategy” might just be the most important strategy we must master in order to be successful playing Combat Mission.
What is the perfect economy?... in short, it is managing your forces in order to get the most effect while using the fewest resources. Skills will only take us so far, we teeter with disaster by trying to surpass our limits. Seduced by the flags of victory, we overextend our forces, and our electronic soldiers end up spent, exhausted and vulnerable to enemy actions. You must know your forces limits, pick your fights carefully, consider the total cost of taking the flag or controlling that building. Do you have enough time, how about ammunition, can you afford to lose those men in order to gain or keep the objective. Everything must be considered before you start shooting. Is it better to wait for several turns or push for a head on counterattack, either way, you have to aim for your enemies weaknesses. Everything that you do on the battlefield has a cost, be it in time, ammunition, and of course casualties. Make the battle expensive for your opponent and cheap for you, this is fighting with “perfect economy”.
In 281 BC a war broke out between Rome and the city of Tarentum. The city, not known for it's military, hired King Pyrrhus to fight for them. Pyrrhus had a great reputation, he claimed to be directly descended from Achilles and was a cousin of Alexander the Great. King Pyrrhus crossed into Italy with what was the largest Greek army ever to do so, he had 20,000 foot soldiers, 3,000 cavalry, 2,000 bowmen and 20 war elephants. This army met the Romans near Heraclea, Pyrrhus was outnumbered and at one point in the battle, near defeat. Only the war elephants were able, at the last moment to turn the tide and send the Roman army into chaos. It was a great victory, but King Pyrrhus worried about his battle loses. Many veteran officers and soldiers had been killed, but the king pressed on and Rome responded by sending another army to meet Pyrrhus' forces. Next to the town of Asculum the foes met for the second time. Pyrrhus pulled out all the stops and after personally leading a violent charge managed to again defeat the Roman army. But the king's loses had been terrible, the ranks were decimated, and he too, was wounded from the fighting. When asked about his great victories, King Pyrrhus commented “If we defeat the Romans in one more such battle, we shall be totally ruined.” Truth be told, the king was already ruined. His remaining forces were too few and his Italian campaign was over.
From the battle at Asculum comes the term “Pyrrhic victory”. How often do you find yourself in the same condition as King Pyrrhus during a CM battle? You are able to push the enemy back, take or keep the objective, but with your ranks decimated, you are unable to hold on. Eventually, you yield the ground and flags to the enemy. If everyone was polled, how often do you think that players would report this happens?... I bet it is more often then we all imagine it could be. How do we let ourselves get into this position time and time again?... Is it the excitement of the prospects of gaining victory, do we only see what we want to see, ignore the difficulties and focus on only the gains. The farther that we go, the harder it is to step back and rationally reassess the situation. Everything seems well at first, but our costs mount and quickly spiral out of control, more poor choices lead to more mistakes, which lead to new and unforeseen problems, which in turn lead to more costs. Soon, any victories that we manage along the way become meaningless.
The more that you want the prize, the more you must examine what it will take to get it. This is where we can apply the “perfect economy” to our CM battle. As the defender, you will be tasked with preventing the enemy from gaining control of the victory flags, limiting your losses, and maximizing enemy losses. We have several weapons at our disposal to accomplish this task. Every weapon, every squad, every vehicle has a value. There is no such thing as a useless unit and combinations of different units can become very potent weapons when used together. Every force has a weak point, an Achilles heal, and every force has a strength somewhere, something that can be built on and if used effectively can contribute to your defence. The trick is to find the strengths of your force and place them where they can be of the most use. Usually, as the defender, going at the enemy toe to toe, strength against strength is not the path to victory. You may well score devastating blows on your enemies forces, but usually the devastation will have spread to your forces as well. With the differences in attacking and defending forces costs, you will often come out on the losing end as the attacker possesses more resources and can trade blow for blow and still win the battle. We must find a way to even the score up somewhat before the battle begins.
A good way to start is by quickly determining what units the enemy has brought to the battle. Usually the attacking player has a fair bit of ground to cover before he can threaten your defences, use this time to hold off exposing your positions by shooting at extreme ranges and make careful note as to what types and numbers of men and equipment is moving your way. Assess the enemy's strengths and expose his weaknesses by attacking his weakest units with your strongest. Avoid fighting outnumbered or outgunned, it is you that must always outnumber and outgun the enemy. Doing so should cost the enemy more then it does you, and if this can be repeated over and over again, victory will be yours.
Every battle is a balance between ends and means, you can have a great plan to achieve a certain end, but unless you have the means to accomplish it, the plan is totally worthless.

“Every limitation has its value, but a limitation that requires persistent effort entails a cost of too much energy. When, however, the limitation is a natural one (as for example, the limitation by which water flows only downhill), it necessarily leads to success, for then it means a saving of energy. The energy that otherwise would be consumed in a vain struggle with the object is applied wholly to the benefit to the matter in hand, and success is assured.”

The I Ching
China, circa eighth century B.C.

We must avoid coming up with a plan on paper, and instead look deeply into what tools you have. These tools consist of the units you have, weather, terrain, number of game turns, ect. Think of the skills that you have, the quality of your troops, the knowledge of your opponent from past battles, how creatively you can use all your means at your disposal. Then, out of this let your plans form.
“Perfect economy” means finding a golden balance, where your blows count but do not wear you out. Over economizing will wear you out more as you will never be able to deliver the knock out punch. CM is like any sport, you must not let the other player/team stay in the game, giving them hope that allows them to carry on with the battle. This way they always think that they are just one move away from changing the battle in their favour. If they are allowed to proceed this way, they often will find a way to accomplish their goals. We must put them out of the game as soon as we get the chance to. Hit them hard so that their force is unable to continue, or that the enemy is convinced that they have no chances here on this part of the map.
There are three ways to help us economize during a battle and yet still deliver the big blows that will get the win. First, deception. Most often, attacking players are ready to meet a static defence, what happens when they see a force moving around? Are you coming at them, should they hold off for a few turns to gather more information about your intentions? Should they divert some of their attacking forces in order to deal with what they perceive to be a threat? The questions and actions are unlimited. Even if no shots are fired by either side, you can usually shed a couple turns off the game's length while they reorganize, and in this way add a cost to the enemy in reduced available turns. You might be able to take part of the enemy force out of the action entirely and never fire a shot as he will have to provide flank protection for his units against a perceived threat. If a unit does not fire or take part in a battle it is as good as dead.
Second, look for opponents that you can beat. Don't fight fair, outnumber and outgun the enemy forces. If you question the effects that this can have, start the editor and place one squad from each side in scattered trees at 100m apart and let them go head to head for several turns and count the losses. Then add a field gun to one side and run the same number of turns, again check the losses for each side. Add another squad to this side, maybe a light mortar and so on each time recording the losses by both sides. You will find that the enemy losses go up exponentially and yours will decrease. You will also notice that the time it takes to start causing significant losses to the enemy will decrease as well. This is another economizing tactic in that you save ammunition and of course casualties not taken are a direct saving.
Third, we have to know when to stop. Pyrrhus did not know when to stop, we must avoid doing the same. I think players, including myself like to use hit and run tactics often, the problem is we forget the run part. Our hidden units bloody the enemy, we stay in position, forgetting or choosing not to run, the next thing we know, the attacker has adjusted to the threat and brings forces quickly to the area, decimates what units we have there and moves on. We turn a victory in this part of the map into a loss by figuring that we can soldier on, when we should have gotten our guys the heck outta there and taken up new positions that the attacker must again locate and deal with.
I said that I would try to mention players here that I have faced that are good examples of what I am writing about. I know that there are several out there that are good at this, but one that comes to mind is herroburst. My battles with him have been very entertaining, I should play him more often. He seems to have the ability to put together small battle-groups that compliment each other to the fullest. His forces are just the right blend to have just enough to push through defences and hold off a stiff counterattack. Tanks are supported by infantry, infantry protect the tanks and fringe units are used to their maximum effectiveness. I would say that this is what perfect economy looks like, nothing is wasted and everything is used to it's best effects. Considering that he usually has about a thousand games on the go at any one time, this is quite a skill, I would hate to be his opponents if he ever decided to play just two or three games at a time.
I think this starts to cover the “perfect economy” strategy in CM, when I get around to it again, I will present the next strategy, “The Counterattack”. I again look forward to what everyone has to say, I am trying to keep the length down and just hit some of the high points on each of the topics, volumes could be written.]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=56539 Mon, 09 Aug 2010 20:35:26 +0000 Ratzki]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=56539
Do not Fight the Last War

“Theory cannot equip the mind with formulas for solving problems, nor can it mark the narrow path on which the sole solution is supposed to lie by planting a hedge of principles on either side. But it can give the mind insight into the great mass of phenomena and of their relationships, then leave it free to rise into the higher realms of action. There the mind can use it's innate talents to capacity, combining them all so as to seize on what is right and true as though this were a single idea formed by their concentrated pressure – as though it were a response to the immediate challenge rather then a product of thought.” - Carl von Clausewitz 1780-1831
The concept of this strategy is to not get caught using the same forces, with the same tactics and strategies over and over again, no matter how successful they once were. We often become “book smart” but “application weak”. Our mind tends to want to lean towards what we know, it does not want to wander off this path, and in this way we become predictable, varying our game-play little. We always advance through the best cover towards the flags, we only engage targets when we are totally ready to do so, and the list can go on. Now I am not talking about selecting a balanced force in a Quick Battle, or using over-watch during movement. It is not about abandoning concentration of fire or hitting the enemy in the flank. What it is about is our strategy and tactics the we employ in order to win the battle. All of the above are tools to help accomplish victory, but they are not the overall plan. The problem is that if we remain predictable our enemy can plan for our predictability, as they know what we will do before we do it. What often saves us is that they are of the same mindset, using familiar strategies and tactics that they have used over and over again. More often the not the battle is won or lost less on our tactical prowess and more on our forces abilities to hit hard and shrug off potentially deadly damage.

Having been around the Combat Mission block several times, I tried to come up with a player that best exemplifies the do not fight the last war strategy. A player that always seems able to surprise me, and keep me guessing from the start of the battle to the last turn. Someone that comes to mind is our own Der K.. His strength is being able to 'do more with less' better then maybe anyone else that I have played against. He is not predictable with his armor, he uses “hit and run” along side “run and gun”, fakes and parries, counter attacks and stands fast. The point being that you are never quite sure what is going on inside his mind and where you need to be in order to win the game. Often I have found myself reacting over and over again to his moves, which negates my ability to carry out my own plans. This is what is is meant by not fighting the last war. Make each battle different in your tactical approach. Shouldn't this happen all the time?... Isn't every map different, and every player a unique individual? Why would we then choose to fight using tactics that worked the time before, just because they worked the last time we used them. Each battle is a whole new game, often against a different opponent. What sense does it make to have one play in the playbook and use it over and over again against everyone that you face?

I think that we all try to avoid a game that turns into a face to face slug-fest that allows the outcome to be determined by the thickness of a tank's armor or how many SMG squads one has. We all have the ability to become not just good players, but great players, we just need to identify what is missing from our game play and correct it. Look at the practice that we get, compared to some of the great generals in history, Napoleon or Patton or Alexander. I bet that they did not get the chance to fight 10, 20, 50+ battles a year. Yet, I find myself going back over and over again to routines that make winning possible, why would I not want to make my chances of winning probable.
Here is a quote from Friedrich vVon Bernhardi, 1849-1930 “He (Baron Antoine-Henri de Jomini) often quite arbitrarily presses the deeds of Napoleon into a system which he foists on Napoleon, and, in doing so, completely fails to see what, above all, really constitutes the greatness of this captain – namely, the reckless boldness, where, scoffing at all theory, he always tried to do what suited each occasion best.” Der K. too, seems to view the battle as rather flexible, and is able to bend and modify his tactics as needed. I can never say “If I do this then I will win”, or that “I know exactly what he is going to do next”. Usually, I find myself fretting from turn one right through to the end of the game. This is not to say that I feel that I have no chance, I have won some as well as lost some to Der K., but I know that I have to always be at the very top of my game in order to stand any sort of chance for victory. When we meet over a game, it is always bloody, my determination to take a flag at any cost coupled with his “over my dead body” attitude, make for some of the best games I have played.
How many times have you talked to yourself after the battle has been lost and said “if only I had done this instead of that, if only I could play that turn over again.... then I would have won victory”.Just one manoeuvre, one tactic, which one would have changed it all? The problem is that we think that knowledge is what we lack. Could this be the wrong approach?...Maybe what makes us go wrong is that we listen to our own thoughts, react to things that happened in the past, we apply tactics that we learned long ago but have little to do with our present situation. The greatest generals, the most creative CM players stand out not because they have more knowledge but because they are able, when necessary, to put away preconceived notions and focus entirely on the present moment. With this they are able to spark their creativity and seize opportunities. Knowledge, experience, and theory have their place, but they are also limited and cannot prepare for every possibility in the game's battles. The great philosopher Carl von Clausewitz called this “friction”: the difference between our plans and what actually happens. The goal is to eliminate this “friction” and bring the results closer to the plan.
Now how are we going to do this?... lets see what some of the best in history have done and see if it has a place in CM. We are going to wage a Guerrilla War of our mind.
First, let all of us re-examine all our beliefs and principles about CM. ”My policy is to have no policy.”-Abraham Lincoln. Napoleon stated that he followed no principles of war. From a more familiar setting, in North Africa the British forces were well trained in tank warfare, they were indoctrinated with theories about it. Later in the campaign, the American troops joined the fight. They were much less educated in these tactics but soon adapted to this new kind of war. Erwin Rommel was to comment “the Americans... profited far more then the British from their experience in Africa, thus confirming the axiom that education is easier then re-education.” To think that strategy has a set of rules will make you rigid and static, there are hundreds of thousands of WW2 Russian soldiers that can tell you how well rigid and static tactics work. They work about as well in Combat Mission. I know that I am going to try harder to think outside the box and act on each turn as it presents itself.
Second, erase the memory of the last battle. If you won the battle, you will tend to repeat the tactics and strategies that you used, success always makes us lazy and complacent. If you lost, you will face indecisiveness, and nervousness. Both can equally be your undoing in the next game. Professional athletes are always talking about taking things one game at a time, for us it should be one turn at a time. Every turn is a new opportunity, a new situation, nothing in the past is relevant. North Vietnamese general Vo Nguyen Giap had a simple rule: after a successful battle, he would convince himself that all had actually been a failure. As a result he would never get drunk in his success, and he would never repeat the same strategy in the next battle. He forced himself to think through each situation anew.

Third, keep the mind moving. Aristotle thought that life was defined by movement. What does not move is dead. CM combat highlights this in bold colour. We should be very fluid in our plans and tactics, great players seem to be highly sensitive to dangers and opportunities. Great strategists do not act according to preconceived ideas, they respond to the moment.

Fourth, reverse course. Google the Russian writer Fyodor Dostoyevsky, a very interesting fellow. In order to regain his creative energy he would gamble away all his money, this would overwhelm him, comfort and routine would be gone, stale patterns would be broken. He was then forced to take a step back and rethink everything anew from a new perspective. This is maybe a little extreme for CM, but lets look at what he is doing as it can apply to the game. Apply no tactic rigidly, and do not settle into mentally static positions. Always be prepared to stop, and attack situations from new angles. Don't get caught doing nothing. Sometimes you have to mentally start the whole battle new after several turns, forget about the troubles you are having and call a personal mulligan, then just say “This is a new game from this point, and I am going to win it from here on.”

So now I will close and review what some great leaders have taught us:
Do not fight the last war, change things up, be cautious one time, aggressive the next. In Quick Battles choose armor heavy forces this time, infantry heavy the next game. Have your forces come through the trees in good cover in one section of the map and across open ground somewhere else.
Do not be rigid in your tactics, always be prepared to change things up on short notice.
Forget your last game. Win each battle one turn at a time, using tactics that fit the unique situations that arise from one turn to the next.
Keep moving, react in the moment to new challenges and opportunities.
Lastly, if things are not working out for your forces do not be afraid to change things up and try something new. If machine gun fire wont dislodge the enemy, maybe a light howitzer or some pioneers are what is needed. Whatever you do, don't get caught doing nothing.

I hope that this has been entertaining to read. I know that I will try to follow these bits of advice from those that fought war in the first person. For myself, being autistic makes being creative a whole lot harder then it should be, and I have carved a life out of memorizing and imitating. But as I write these, I will make a note of how they are working in my games. What should happen is my win percentage should go up. For everyone else out there, let us know what you think. As a war gaming community, there should be no lack of opinions and I look forward to any and all comments that might arise from this note. If you guys find this interesting, I have no problem with presenting more from those that wrote the books on war.]]>
Do not Fight the Last War

“Theory cannot equip the mind with formulas for solving problems, nor can it mark the narrow path on which the sole solution is supposed to lie by planting a hedge of principles on either side. But it can give the mind insight into the great mass of phenomena and of their relationships, then leave it free to rise into the higher realms of action. There the mind can use it's innate talents to capacity, combining them all so as to seize on what is right and true as though this were a single idea formed by their concentrated pressure – as though it were a response to the immediate challenge rather then a product of thought.” - Carl von Clausewitz 1780-1831
The concept of this strategy is to not get caught using the same forces, with the same tactics and strategies over and over again, no matter how successful they once were. We often become “book smart” but “application weak”. Our mind tends to want to lean towards what we know, it does not want to wander off this path, and in this way we become predictable, varying our game-play little. We always advance through the best cover towards the flags, we only engage targets when we are totally ready to do so, and the list can go on. Now I am not talking about selecting a balanced force in a Quick Battle, or using over-watch during movement. It is not about abandoning concentration of fire or hitting the enemy in the flank. What it is about is our strategy and tactics the we employ in order to win the battle. All of the above are tools to help accomplish victory, but they are not the overall plan. The problem is that if we remain predictable our enemy can plan for our predictability, as they know what we will do before we do it. What often saves us is that they are of the same mindset, using familiar strategies and tactics that they have used over and over again. More often the not the battle is won or lost less on our tactical prowess and more on our forces abilities to hit hard and shrug off potentially deadly damage.

Having been around the Combat Mission block several times, I tried to come up with a player that best exemplifies the do not fight the last war strategy. A player that always seems able to surprise me, and keep me guessing from the start of the battle to the last turn. Someone that comes to mind is our own Der K.. His strength is being able to 'do more with less' better then maybe anyone else that I have played against. He is not predictable with his armor, he uses “hit and run” along side “run and gun”, fakes and parries, counter attacks and stands fast. The point being that you are never quite sure what is going on inside his mind and where you need to be in order to win the game. Often I have found myself reacting over and over again to his moves, which negates my ability to carry out my own plans. This is what is is meant by not fighting the last war. Make each battle different in your tactical approach. Shouldn't this happen all the time?... Isn't every map different, and every player a unique individual? Why would we then choose to fight using tactics that worked the time before, just because they worked the last time we used them. Each battle is a whole new game, often against a different opponent. What sense does it make to have one play in the playbook and use it over and over again against everyone that you face?

I think that we all try to avoid a game that turns into a face to face slug-fest that allows the outcome to be determined by the thickness of a tank's armor or how many SMG squads one has. We all have the ability to become not just good players, but great players, we just need to identify what is missing from our game play and correct it. Look at the practice that we get, compared to some of the great generals in history, Napoleon or Patton or Alexander. I bet that they did not get the chance to fight 10, 20, 50+ battles a year. Yet, I find myself going back over and over again to routines that make winning possible, why would I not want to make my chances of winning probable.
Here is a quote from Friedrich vVon Bernhardi, 1849-1930 “He (Baron Antoine-Henri de Jomini) often quite arbitrarily presses the deeds of Napoleon into a system which he foists on Napoleon, and, in doing so, completely fails to see what, above all, really constitutes the greatness of this captain – namely, the reckless boldness, where, scoffing at all theory, he always tried to do what suited each occasion best.” Der K. too, seems to view the battle as rather flexible, and is able to bend and modify his tactics as needed. I can never say “If I do this then I will win”, or that “I know exactly what he is going to do next”. Usually, I find myself fretting from turn one right through to the end of the game. This is not to say that I feel that I have no chance, I have won some as well as lost some to Der K., but I know that I have to always be at the very top of my game in order to stand any sort of chance for victory. When we meet over a game, it is always bloody, my determination to take a flag at any cost coupled with his “over my dead body” attitude, make for some of the best games I have played.
How many times have you talked to yourself after the battle has been lost and said “if only I had done this instead of that, if only I could play that turn over again.... then I would have won victory”.Just one manoeuvre, one tactic, which one would have changed it all? The problem is that we think that knowledge is what we lack. Could this be the wrong approach?...Maybe what makes us go wrong is that we listen to our own thoughts, react to things that happened in the past, we apply tactics that we learned long ago but have little to do with our present situation. The greatest generals, the most creative CM players stand out not because they have more knowledge but because they are able, when necessary, to put away preconceived notions and focus entirely on the present moment. With this they are able to spark their creativity and seize opportunities. Knowledge, experience, and theory have their place, but they are also limited and cannot prepare for every possibility in the game's battles. The great philosopher Carl von Clausewitz called this “friction”: the difference between our plans and what actually happens. The goal is to eliminate this “friction” and bring the results closer to the plan.
Now how are we going to do this?... lets see what some of the best in history have done and see if it has a place in CM. We are going to wage a Guerrilla War of our mind.
First, let all of us re-examine all our beliefs and principles about CM. ”My policy is to have no policy.”-Abraham Lincoln. Napoleon stated that he followed no principles of war. From a more familiar setting, in North Africa the British forces were well trained in tank warfare, they were indoctrinated with theories about it. Later in the campaign, the American troops joined the fight. They were much less educated in these tactics but soon adapted to this new kind of war. Erwin Rommel was to comment “the Americans... profited far more then the British from their experience in Africa, thus confirming the axiom that education is easier then re-education.” To think that strategy has a set of rules will make you rigid and static, there are hundreds of thousands of WW2 Russian soldiers that can tell you how well rigid and static tactics work. They work about as well in Combat Mission. I know that I am going to try harder to think outside the box and act on each turn as it presents itself.
Second, erase the memory of the last battle. If you won the battle, you will tend to repeat the tactics and strategies that you used, success always makes us lazy and complacent. If you lost, you will face indecisiveness, and nervousness. Both can equally be your undoing in the next game. Professional athletes are always talking about taking things one game at a time, for us it should be one turn at a time. Every turn is a new opportunity, a new situation, nothing in the past is relevant. North Vietnamese general Vo Nguyen Giap had a simple rule: after a successful battle, he would convince himself that all had actually been a failure. As a result he would never get drunk in his success, and he would never repeat the same strategy in the next battle. He forced himself to think through each situation anew.

Third, keep the mind moving. Aristotle thought that life was defined by movement. What does not move is dead. CM combat highlights this in bold colour. We should be very fluid in our plans and tactics, great players seem to be highly sensitive to dangers and opportunities. Great strategists do not act according to preconceived ideas, they respond to the moment.

Fourth, reverse course. Google the Russian writer Fyodor Dostoyevsky, a very interesting fellow. In order to regain his creative energy he would gamble away all his money, this would overwhelm him, comfort and routine would be gone, stale patterns would be broken. He was then forced to take a step back and rethink everything anew from a new perspective. This is maybe a little extreme for CM, but lets look at what he is doing as it can apply to the game. Apply no tactic rigidly, and do not settle into mentally static positions. Always be prepared to stop, and attack situations from new angles. Don't get caught doing nothing. Sometimes you have to mentally start the whole battle new after several turns, forget about the troubles you are having and call a personal mulligan, then just say “This is a new game from this point, and I am going to win it from here on.”

So now I will close and review what some great leaders have taught us:
Do not fight the last war, change things up, be cautious one time, aggressive the next. In Quick Battles choose armor heavy forces this time, infantry heavy the next game. Have your forces come through the trees in good cover in one section of the map and across open ground somewhere else.
Do not be rigid in your tactics, always be prepared to change things up on short notice.
Forget your last game. Win each battle one turn at a time, using tactics that fit the unique situations that arise from one turn to the next.
Keep moving, react in the moment to new challenges and opportunities.
Lastly, if things are not working out for your forces do not be afraid to change things up and try something new. If machine gun fire wont dislodge the enemy, maybe a light howitzer or some pioneers are what is needed. Whatever you do, don't get caught doing nothing.

I hope that this has been entertaining to read. I know that I will try to follow these bits of advice from those that fought war in the first person. For myself, being autistic makes being creative a whole lot harder then it should be, and I have carved a life out of memorizing and imitating. But as I write these, I will make a note of how they are working in my games. What should happen is my win percentage should go up. For everyone else out there, let us know what you think. As a war gaming community, there should be no lack of opinions and I look forward to any and all comments that might arise from this note. If you guys find this interesting, I have no problem with presenting more from those that wrote the books on war.]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=55805 Fri, 28 May 2010 16:42:55 +0000 Pvt. Sofronije]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=55805 https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=53692 Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:20:56 +0000 PoorOldSpike]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=53692 105mm gunned versions not included.
'HVSS' stands for Horizontal Volute Spring Suspension.
'W' stands for Water-stowed ammo





]]> 105mm gunned versions not included.
'HVSS' stands for Horizontal Volute Spring Suspension.
'W' stands for Water-stowed ammo





]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=53301 Sat, 24 Oct 2009 06:26:35 +0000 Der Kuenstler]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=53301


Afterwards I ordered all three IVHs to area fire and all three got off eight rounds, so apparently losing the commander does not affect reload times either.]]>


Afterwards I ordered all three IVHs to area fire and all three got off eight rounds, so apparently losing the commander does not affect reload times either.]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=53266 Wed, 21 Oct 2009 18:59:05 +0000 Uranium]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=53266
Thanks :hissy:]]>
Thanks :hissy:]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=53170 Sat, 10 Oct 2009 18:00:32 +0000 Polo]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=53170
I was wondering if there is a difference (in term of effect on morale, casualty points or any other one) between exiting a unit to a Friendly, Neutral or Enemy map edge. Of course in the case the edge is not an "exit" edge.
Could anybody give a bit of hint?

Thank you!

Polo]]>
I was wondering if there is a difference (in term of effect on morale, casualty points or any other one) between exiting a unit to a Friendly, Neutral or Enemy map edge. Of course in the case the edge is not an "exit" edge.
Could anybody give a bit of hint?

Thank you!

Polo]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=51916 Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:30:17 +0000 Jumbo]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=51916
I'm working up some new armor values for the CS "Campaign Series" version 1.05 game. The original CS designers took a pretty simplistic approach when they calculated and provided the various tanks their protection values. Most of those original protection values appear for the most part to be pretty accurate when one compares one tanks value to another tanks value. But there are a fair number of tanks protection values that tend to lead one to scratching their head. I have seen where a tank like the T34/85 late has an Armor Quality rating of 90% and for instance a PzIVH has an Armor Quality rating of 95%. My needs are for the Armor Quality ratings found in the CM game only. Can any one provide me those Armor Quality value ratings ?. This would be a great help to me and much appreciated.

Best Regards,

Eric Applequist]]>
I'm working up some new armor values for the CS "Campaign Series" version 1.05 game. The original CS designers took a pretty simplistic approach when they calculated and provided the various tanks their protection values. Most of those original protection values appear for the most part to be pretty accurate when one compares one tanks value to another tanks value. But there are a fair number of tanks protection values that tend to lead one to scratching their head. I have seen where a tank like the T34/85 late has an Armor Quality rating of 90% and for instance a PzIVH has an Armor Quality rating of 95%. My needs are for the Armor Quality ratings found in the CM game only. Can any one provide me those Armor Quality value ratings ?. This would be a great help to me and much appreciated.

Best Regards,

Eric Applequist]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=51893 Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:14:49 +0000 antilope]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=51893
I'm rookie on blitzkrieg and I have a question which (certainly) had
been posted here.

I install CM2 and CM3 on a PC VISTA equipped and the graphics
are very bad with blocking or freezing image.

Is solution exit to play normally on Vista or not ?? :conf:

My graphic card is a NVidia 8600 GS.

( I apologise for my poor english)]]>
I'm rookie on blitzkrieg and I have a question which (certainly) had
been posted here.

I install CM2 and CM3 on a PC VISTA equipped and the graphics
are very bad with blocking or freezing image.

Is solution exit to play normally on Vista or not ?? :conf:

My graphic card is a NVidia 8600 GS.

( I apologise for my poor english)]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=50864 Thu, 09 Apr 2009 15:29:00 +0000 The_King]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=50864
1) choosing you army (since you havnt yet seen the map)

2) deploying your army (since you havnt yet seen the enemy)

from this point onwards there are logical responses to every occourance, enemy movement and spotting. but at these two steps, you are pretty much making decisions in isolation of any other infomation besides base map settings and objectives, and what you know of your opponent.

It'd be great if some of the more experienced players explained how they choose their armies (call it 2000 points), why they choose the units and levels of exp they use- what tanks they preffer and why (and how they plan to use them), how they decide on supporting units- the full shebang. atm im focusing on 1944 area (CMAK) bcause it correlates most to the lessons i learnt in CMBO, so rosters of around this time would be most helpful, but I do plan to move to 1942 next (play as australians )]]>
1) choosing you army (since you havnt yet seen the map)

2) deploying your army (since you havnt yet seen the enemy)

from this point onwards there are logical responses to every occourance, enemy movement and spotting. but at these two steps, you are pretty much making decisions in isolation of any other infomation besides base map settings and objectives, and what you know of your opponent.

It'd be great if some of the more experienced players explained how they choose their armies (call it 2000 points), why they choose the units and levels of exp they use- what tanks they preffer and why (and how they plan to use them), how they decide on supporting units- the full shebang. atm im focusing on 1944 area (CMAK) bcause it correlates most to the lessons i learnt in CMBO, so rosters of around this time would be most helpful, but I do plan to move to 1942 next (play as australians )]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=50468 Fri, 06 Mar 2009 11:22:30 +0000 Hedgehog]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=50468

Criticism is easy, achievement is difficult

Winston Churchill]]>

Criticism is easy, achievement is difficult

Winston Churchill]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=49963 Mon, 26 Jan 2009 18:10:24 +0000 Andre]]> https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=49963
download unzip and have fun :stir:

  Map Converter 1.29.zip (Size: 60.01 KB / Downloads: 49) ]]>
download unzip and have fun :stir:

  Map Converter 1.29.zip (Size: 60.01 KB / Downloads: 49) ]]>