23 May 2019, 02:50:13 *

Login with username, password and session length
Welcome to War and Tactics!    War and Tactics Forum is currently undergoing some modifications that might disable features you are used to. This is unabvoidable as we have to update the forum engine to a new structure that is incompatible with many of the features we had used so far. The good news: WaT will be more secure and stable, and most of the features we uninstalled will be a natural part of the new structure anyway. For the rest we will be looking for solutions. (APR 23, 2018)
   
  Home   Forum   Help ! Forum Rules ! Search Calendar Donations Login Register Chat  
Pages:  1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Share this topic on Del.icio.usShare this topic on DiggShare this topic on FacebookShare this topic on GoogleShare this topic on MySpaceShare this topic on RedditShare this topic on StumbleUponShare this topic on TechnoratiShare this topic on TwitterShare this topic on Yahoo
Author Topic: Battle of Graignes, France, June 10th-12th 1944  (Read 55504 times)
Koen
Poster

****

Offline Offline

Belgium

Location: Belgium
Posts: 4247




View Profile
« Reply #20 on: 28 November 2010, 15:56:32 »
ReplyReply

Report is in one of my D-day books.
Should be the same platoon responsible for the killings of civillians in neighboring villages.

Quote
what report are you talking about? post it here plz.


what will you do with the report? scan it put it online? write the most important stuff down in this topic?
Logged
Koen
Poster

****

Offline Offline

Belgium

Location: Belgium
Posts: 4247




View Profile
« Reply #21 on: 28 November 2010, 15:58:39 »
ReplyReply

We may be speaking in relative terms here, as no version of the .50 Cal. is actually light. There may be some that are lighter than others (which makes them relative) but they are all still heavy. I believe only the glider troopers used the .50 Cal. MG for that very reason. I know there was a water cooled version, much the same configuration as the .30 Cal. water cooled. If such a thing did exist, I suspect CM doesnt have them in the mix due to their rarity.


true, the 'light'version is ofcourse still heavy but lighter than the standard one... question still remains 'what is the light version'? It's not so important for the CM battle but I'm still curious to find out what they mean by it.

update: added the CMAK file

* Graignes.cmg (7.69 KB - downloaded 258 times.)
« Last Edit: 28 November 2010, 18:05:22 by Koen » Logged
stoffel
WaT supporter
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

Netherlands

Location: Eemnes The Netherlands
Posts: 1872


View Profile WWW
« Reply #22 on: 28 November 2010, 18:30:34 »
ReplyReply

Well, thats all.
A short story in the chapter of the 17th SS history, where they met a recon detachment from Das Reich.
This unit attacked with the 17th SS.
I guess that should have been the motorized or armored recon bn from Das Reich.
Of course we can let it out.
Logged

My topics are about my personal opinion, my thoughts and what I think. They do not reflect the official opinion of the ministry of defense of the Netherlands.
stoffel
WaT supporter
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

Netherlands

Location: Eemnes The Netherlands
Posts: 1872


View Profile WWW
« Reply #23 on: 28 November 2010, 18:36:09 »
ReplyReply

I think the author made an error, like people speaking about panzertanks where the mean panzers or Panthertank Smiley

The weapon was intended to be used against Light(armored) vehicles and compared to as heavy with the light .30 cal mg.
Logged

My topics are about my personal opinion, my thoughts and what I think. They do not reflect the official opinion of the ministry of defense of the Netherlands.
Koen
Poster

****

Offline Offline

Belgium

Location: Belgium
Posts: 4247




View Profile
« Reply #24 on: 2 December 2010, 22:20:03 »
ReplyReply

Stoffel, will you work on the German OOB in the editor, I attached the file

* Graignes.cmg (7.69 KB - downloaded 257 times.)
Logged
stoffel
WaT supporter
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

Netherlands

Location: Eemnes The Netherlands
Posts: 1872


View Profile WWW
« Reply #25 on: 3 December 2010, 17:19:00 »
ReplyReply

OK.
Logged

My topics are about my personal opinion, my thoughts and what I think. They do not reflect the official opinion of the ministry of defense of the Netherlands.
Koen
Poster

****

Offline Offline

Belgium

Location: Belgium
Posts: 4247




View Profile
« Reply #26 on: 3 December 2010, 21:34:26 »
ReplyReply

OK.


thx, in the meanwhile I'm building a Bocage battle, another attempt....
Logged
Koen
Poster

****

Offline Offline

Belgium

Location: Belgium
Posts: 4247




View Profile
« Reply #27 on: 3 December 2010, 21:46:43 »
ReplyReply

We may be speaking in relative terms here, as no version of the .50 Cal. is actually light. There may be some that are lighter than others (which makes them relative) but they are all still heavy. I believe only the glider troopers used the .50 Cal. MG for that very reason. I know there was a water cooled version, much the same configuration as the .30 Cal. water cooled. If such a thing did exist, I suspect CM doesnt have them in the mix due to their rarity.

Steve emailed me this report: http://www.military.com/news/article/army-working-on-lightweight-50-cal.html?ESRC=army-a.nl

quite funny, we're discussin' the if/how/when and then they come up with this....
Quote
It’s an iconic weapon whose guttural “thump-thump-thump” inspires confidence that whatever it’s shooting at is going down – in a big way.

But for the first time since World War II, the Army is working on a fundamental redesign of the venerable M2 .50cal machine gun, cutting its weight in half, increasing its accuracy and making it a lot easier to shoot for Soldiers on the move.

Dubbed the XM806, the new version of the “Ma Duce” is being developed in response to the Army’s concerns about the weight and mobility of the current M2. With a greater emphasis on light infantry tactics since 9/11, officials wanted a weapon that can be as easily mounted on a Humvee as it can a hillside.

“It is designed to augment the M2 .50 caliber machine gun, but can also be used to replace the M2 in select operational locations,” the Program Executive Office for Soldier Weapons said in an email to Military.com. “The weapon is ideal for light infantry and special operations forces, as well as for vehicles demanding more lethality but lighter weight.”

Talk about taking a diet – the XM806 with its specially-designed tripod weighs a little over 60 lbs. That’s compared to the current M2 Heavy Barrel which comes in at a portly 120 lbs. But the General Dynamics-made XM806’s advantages go deeper than its waistline, Army officials say.

With recoil 60 percent less than an M2, the new lightweight .50 allows Soldiers to fire the weapon with tactical optics, making for a more accurate shot within the first few rounds.

“Safety is improved through a manual safety and a quick change barrel that eliminates the requirement for the operator to adjust headspace and timing,” Army officials added. “The reduced recoil permits the mounting of an optic for greater lethality through increased first-burst accuracy and control.”

The Army is midway through testing the new machine gun at Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland. The service has four weapons on hand and has so far fired almost 90,000 rounds through each test weapon.

Officials say the XM806 will not replace all the Army’s M2 machine guns, but will instead be fielded to light infantry units such as the 101st Airborne, 10th Mountain and 82nd.

“There are also some discussions regarding the issue of weapons to units where a traditional heavy machine gun was impractical but long range fire is still needed, such as on tactical vehicles where weight is an issue,” Army officials added.
 
It is still unclear how many weapons the Army will buy, but if all goes according to plan, the service will begin fielding the bantam-weight .50cal in late 2012.

The Army also plans to field a new version of the M2 tripod that’s 30 percent lighter than the current one, which comes in at a hefty 44 pounds.

Logged
stoffel
WaT supporter
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

Netherlands

Location: Eemnes The Netherlands
Posts: 1872


View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: 4 December 2010, 19:38:33 »
ReplyReply

I found the answer about the 2nd div recon bn in your first posting Knipoog
17th had no armored or mechanized recon bn.

In the afternoon on Saturday, 10 June, a mechanized patrol approached a defensive position that was manned by some of 1st Lt. Murn’s B Company/501st men. They let the patrol get close, then opened fire killing four of the enemy. That night, outposts reported hearing a great deal of activity in the same vicinity and contact was made with the Germans several times. In one of those firefights, the paratroopers ambushed a convoy, killing one enemy soldier. When the troopers searched the dead German’s pockets, they discovered some documents that revealed him to be assigned to a reconnaissance battalion of an armored division – an ominous sign of what the Americans were up against.

So we have to discuss the size, how many Germans do we add?
1 bn or 1 bn with artillery and recon forces?
2 bn?
Logged

My topics are about my personal opinion, my thoughts and what I think. They do not reflect the official opinion of the ministry of defense of the Netherlands.
Koen
Poster

****

Offline Offline

Belgium

Location: Belgium
Posts: 4247




View Profile
« Reply #29 on: 4 December 2010, 19:46:37 »
ReplyReply

I would start with the American force and use them as reference of what they can take as opponent.

Since it's a battle it should be winnable by both sides. Take a look at the Americans I put on the map and build your German force in the ratio you mostly use.
Logged
stoffel
WaT supporter
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

Netherlands

Location: Eemnes The Netherlands
Posts: 1872


View Profile WWW
« Reply #30 on: 4 December 2010, 19:48:44 »
ReplyReply

There were no forces on the first file I dl-ed.
Depending on the parameters, I assume you use assault parameters?
Would be 1 to 3 or 4 %
Logged

My topics are about my personal opinion, my thoughts and what I think. They do not reflect the official opinion of the ministry of defense of the Netherlands.
Koen
Poster

****

Offline Offline

Belgium

Location: Belgium
Posts: 4247




View Profile
« Reply #31 on: 4 December 2010, 20:18:41 »
ReplyReply

There were no forces on the first file I dl-ed.
Depending on the parameters, I assume you use assault parameters?
Would be 1 to 3 or 4 %


strange, no forces in the file??? here's the file again....

maybe we should make it a US vs AI battle:
1. it should be a tense and fast battle and playing H2H is not fast at all
2. vs AI is easier to influence to create a 'few' against 'many' battle

* Graignes.cmg (7.69 KB - downloaded 251 times.)
Logged
stoffel
WaT supporter
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

Netherlands

Location: Eemnes The Netherlands
Posts: 1872


View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: 4 December 2010, 20:53:25 »
ReplyReply

If the US were defending, its better to have the US for AI.
After all a human player is better to attack against a defending AI.
Its hard to build a scenario where the AI attacks well.
Logged

My topics are about my personal opinion, my thoughts and what I think. They do not reflect the official opinion of the ministry of defense of the Netherlands.
stoffel
WaT supporter
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

Netherlands

Location: Eemnes The Netherlands
Posts: 1872


View Profile WWW
« Reply #33 on: 4 December 2010, 21:21:58 »
ReplyReply

German OOB attached.
A lot of troops if you want to maintain a 3 to 1 in points.

* Graignes.cmg (16.47 KB - downloaded 254 times.)
Logged

My topics are about my personal opinion, my thoughts and what I think. They do not reflect the official opinion of the ministry of defense of the Netherlands.
Koen
Poster

****

Offline Offline

Belgium

Location: Belgium
Posts: 4247




View Profile
« Reply #34 on: 5 December 2010, 10:54:50 »
ReplyReply

If the US were defending, its better to have the US for AI.
After all a human player is better to attack against a defending AI.
Its hard to build a scenario where the AI attacks well.

sure, but I don't want the best attacker, I want the worst one. That way the German AI attacker doesn't make the most of his overwhelming numbers.
Logged
stoffel
WaT supporter
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

Netherlands

Location: Eemnes The Netherlands
Posts: 1872


View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: 17 April 2012, 20:02:01 »
ReplyReply

First test ready attempt for this battle for Combat mission Africa Corps is ready.
Attached to this topic!

* Graignes exit.cmg (37.36 KB - downloaded 213 times.)
Logged

My topics are about my personal opinion, my thoughts and what I think. They do not reflect the official opinion of the ministry of defense of the Netherlands.
Pages:  1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Unique Hits: 24902105 | Sitemap
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines
TinyPortal v0.9.8 © Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!


Google visited last this page 6 May 2019, 06:12:05