Close Combat Series :: View topic - Gateway to Caen

Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK

through

[^/[Print]\]

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat Gateway to Caen

#1: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: TheImperatorKnight,

Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 8:06 pm
—
First Impressions Video

In the link above is my video where I tell you my first impressions of the game. In my opinion, they've done a good job Very Happy

#2: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Pzt_Kanov, Location: México

Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 8:28 pm
—
Thanks.

#3: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 8:29 pm
—
Nice video. Game looks good. Exclamation

#4: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine

Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 8:39 pm
—
Thanks allot! I will buy on Steam tonight

#5: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine

Posted: Sat Jun 07, 2014 12:40 am
—
Just bought it and played a few games... I like it. Yes its the old CC engine and yes the AI is stupid and yes its too much money...

But for us die hard CC fans...
It's pretty darn good.

#6: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: vobbnobb,

Posted: Sat Jun 07, 2014 2:48 am
—
You know people are going to try to play this without reading the manual.. I admit I did not on PITF. I Read it and was way better off and I mean wayyy.

#7: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: TheImperatorKnight,

Posted: Sat Jun 07, 2014 9:31 am
—

jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):

Just bought it and played a few games... I like it. Yes its the old CC engine and yes the AI is stupid and yes its too much money...

But for us die hard CC fans...
It's pretty darn good.

That's exactly how I feel. They didn't promise us a better AI this time around, so although it is stupid, I think they did the best they could have with it. I've actually seen it attacking (a few others have said this too) which it never did in PitF!

vobbnobb wrote (View Post):

You know people are going to try to play this without reading the manual.. I admit I did not on PITF. I Read it and was way better off and I mean wayyy.

The manuals are quite informative. The main thing is suppression. If you suppress the enemy more than they suppress you, you'll win.

#8: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Sapa,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 8:12 am
—
Thankyou for the game Very Happy

First impressions: Smaller maps (at least in the beginning of the Campaign) makes the AI better (playing as Germans), no surprise for me really Wink

The new effects, and maps looks great. One question doo..when a vehicle gets hit it has the same effect as mortar explosion..right?

seems like the "running like girls" is better (maybe because i am on defend as Germans)?

Mortar "hits 90%" seems better.

Vehicle pathing is great (why shouldnt it after all the complains and three? patches for Last Stand Arnhem.... Crying or Very sad

The vehicles and sounds is perfect, thankyou for this! Smile

#9: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Pzt_Kami, Location: IRAN

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 9:13 am
—
Once again (just like in PitF) there are no MP44 in the game ? I'm sure there were enough of this weapon at the time to be implimented in the game. PanzerShreck is also very rare ! I don't get the logic behind so many missed weapons in this game

#10: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: russ109,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 11:57 am
—

Sapa wrote (View Post):

Thankyou for the game Very Happy

First impressions: Smaller maps (at least in the beginning of the Campaign) makes the AI better (playing as Germans), no surprise for me really Wink

The vehicles and sounds is perfect, thankyou for this! Smile

Mats, I echo what you are saying after playing several battles. I have noticed on one map that the AI plays better attacking from the right to left then it did attacking from the bottom towards the top.

The AI still leaves a lot to be desired, but it always will. I have already played more games on the latest release then I have with PITS all the time I have owned that game. Gateway to Caen is a much better game then PITS In fact this has got be back in to playing CC again!

I like the sound of your mod "Operation Typhoon", look forward to playing it Smile

Take care mate

#11: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 12:32 pm
—

Pzt_Kami wrote (View Post):

Once again (just like in PitF) there are no MP44 in the game ? I'm sure there were enough of this weapon at the time to be implimented in the game. PanzerShreck is also very rare ! I don't get the logic behind so many missed weapons in this game

The first unit came to Normandy with MP.43 was 1.SS-PzD. Schrecks were rare within Pz and PzGren divisions till late July-August.

#12: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Sapa,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 2:54 pm
—
[quote="russ109";p="75352"][quote="Sapa";p="75341"]Thankyou for the game Very Happy

First impressions: Smaller maps (at least in the beginning of the Campaign) makes the AI better (playing as Germans), no surprise for me really Wink

The vehicles and sounds is perfect, thankyou for this! Smile

Why is it soo hard to name the SS units in Teams file as SS? every game i have to change the name??

I dream about all this great features in a game called Operation Typhoon with winter maps and the struggle for Moscow back in -41

Will keep om playing

Thanks again!

Mats[/quote]

Mats, I echo what you are saying after playing several battles. I have noticed on one map that the AI plays better attacking from the right to left then it did attacking from the bottom towards the top.

The AI still leaves a lot to be desired, but it always will. I have already played more games on the latest release then I have with PITS all the time I have owned that game. Gateway to Caen is a much better game then PITS In fact this has got be back in to playing CC again!

I like the sound of your mod "Operation Typhoon", look forward to playing it Smile

Take care mate[/quote]

I Love You Too Ian! <3

#13: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 4:29 pm
—

Sapa wrote (View Post):

seems like the "running like girls" is better (maybe because i am on defend as Germans)?

Did you mean this essential feature has been removed?

I hope not, this feature is very important to the AI, IMHO.

#14: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Sapa,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 5:51 pm
—
i think that this "essential feature " was the beginning of the end for CC together with mortars hitting all the time Crying or Very sad

will make an update when i get som Panthers and attacks Wink

#15: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 6:21 pm
—

Quote:

I think that this "essential feature " was the beginning of the end for CC together with mortars hitting all the time. -sapa

NO WAIT

CC continues on, with old timers (such as yourself) buying the new games. Idea

And for the record, my mortars always hit as well, and so do the off map mortar and artillery barrages. Laughing

#16: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Pzt_Kami, Location: IRAN

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 6:54 pm
—

Dima wrote (View Post):

The first unit came to Normandy with MP.43 was 1.SS-PzD. Schrecks were rare within Pz and PzGren divisions till late July-August.

Fine. But what's the reason for Churchill Crocodile's insane flamer range as well as its armour being inprevious even to Panthers powerful gun??!

#17: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 6:59 pm
—

Pzt_Kami wrote (View Post):

Fine. But what's the reason for Churchill Crocodile's insane flamer range as well as its armour being inprevious even to Panthers powerful gun??!

The game was made by Commonwealth types. Question

#18: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: johnsilver, Location: Florida

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 7:58 pm
—

Pzt_Kami wrote (View Post):

Dima wrote (View Post):

The first unit came to Normandy with MP.43 was 1.SS-PzD. Schrecks were rare within Pz and PzGren divisions till late July-August.

Fine. But what's the reason for Churchill Crocodile's insane flamer range as well as its armour being inprevious even to Panthers powerful gun??!

It's not impervious, but is a tough nut to crack, even for the Tiger 1 amd 88mm Flak36. BOTH have the "Yellow circle" on frontal shots and the AI acts like it knows what to do with those Croc's.. Push them out front of the other tanks.

#19: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 8:20 pm
—

Pzt_Kami wrote (View Post):

Fine. But what's the reason for Churchill Crocodile's insane flamer range as well as its armour being inprevious even to Panthers powerful gun??!

Probably because the brits have developed a very good heavy flamethrower with very long range?
Churchill VII frontal armour was a hard nut for 8.8cm L/56 (Tiger/Flak) at any ranges, basically inpenetratable further than 100m, but 7.5cm L/70 (Panther) could perforate it no problem at up to 500m.

Last edited by Dima on Sun Jun 08, 2014 9:05 pm; edited 1 time in total

#20: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Cathartes,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 8:56 pm
—
johnsilver and Dima are correct. The Churchill Crocodile is a beast of a tank, and for a German player it should be your priority to kill them or avoid them. They are not easy to defeat except with a Panther, but when the Germans first face them in the campaigns, it's not like they have Panthers immediately on hand to deal with them. The Churchill Mk.VII armor is exceptional (type used with Crocodile) Your best bet is to run from them or try to outflank them with other tanks or anti-tank guns. A panzerfaust will also do them in, but it's not the easy to sneak your infantry close to them with that flaming tonque of death. The British have a handful of them only spread throughout a few battlegroups, and once they are gone, they are no longer a bother. These tanks represent the support of the 141 RAC (the Buffs) present during Operation Epsom and supporting the 15 Scottish Infantry Division and 31 Tank Brigade. Historically they were only used the first couple days of Operation Epsom and then pulled back.

EDIT: and yes, the flamethrower range with this tank is very impressive.

#21: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 9:39 pm
—
Used by units of the 79th Armoured Division in concert with the Churchill AVRE, and other Funnies, the Crocodile was an effective assault weapon whose threat could induce enemy troops to retreat or surrender. The Crocodile was a specialised weapon limited by the short range of its flamethrower. -wiki

Churchill Crocodile

#22: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 9:46 pm
—

Quote:

Used by units of the 79th Armoured Division in concert with the Churchill AVRE, and other Funnies, the Crocodile was an effective assault weapon whose threat could induce enemy troops to retreat or surrender. The Crocodile was a specialised weapon limited by the short range of its flamethrower. -wiki

yes, in comparison to a main gun or even MGs Wink

#23: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: pt11070,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 9:59 pm
—
Played couple online games. Other guys hosted so I ended up being Alies both times.

Pro:
Familiar outline and look of the game
Awesome explosions
Nice improvement on with strat map movement

I did get all beat up by the German side. Allied tanks lost a lot, infantry gets overrun very easy. But overall I love it. Nothing like CC.

Compared to graphics of explosions the maps seem like they need to be sharper or more detailed.

Pt

#24: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 10:14 pm
—

Dima wrote (View Post):

Quote:

yes, in comparison to a main gun or even MGs Wink

Uh huh

[impersonating Barney the Purple Dinosaur]

Your last statement makes no sense, because the Crocodile was ALSO equiped with a 75mm gun.

Nice try. Razz

The flamethrower equipment was produced as a kit that REME workshops could fit in the field, converting any available Churchill Mk VII. The conversion kit consisted of the trailer, an armoured pipe fitted along the underside of the tank, and the projector, which replaced the hull mounted Besa machine gun. The Crocodile was therefore still able to function as a gun tank with its turret mounted Ordnance QF 75 mm gun. -wiki

And to use it as a flame tank, I thought the article said the Crocodile had to tow a beeg fuel trailer, so I am wondering if the in-game version does the same. Otherwise (in the game) to stop it (the Crocodile) from flaming, you have to kill the tank. Not very realistic, eh?

Maybe the Panzerfaust guys might try a shot at the trailer first, just for fun.

Churchill Crocodile

#25: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Cathartes,

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 10:58 pm
—
might have been possible to do a trailer for graphics, but not possible to accurately model the fuel trailer in the data without major code rewrites.

Also, oddly enough, in diaries and reports, very few fuel trailers were ever destroyed or disabled by Germans--they were relatively small and heavily armored, and for some reason, did not become a specific target in and of themselves. A lot of user reported that one of the limiting factors was running out of fuel.

#26: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 12:33 am
—

Cathartes wrote (View Post):

Also, oddly enough, in diaries and reports, very few fuel trailers were ever destroyed or disabled by Germans...

That's probably due to the fact that there is hardly a consensus in the on-line literature that Crocodile VII (flame varient) was even used in Overlord (Normandy). Question

This source left me with the impression that the AVREs (mine rollers) were present at Normandy but the flame varients appeared in Market Garden.

79th Armoured Division

#27: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:03 am
—

Cathartes wrote (View Post):

might have been possible to do a trailer for graphics, but not possible to accurately model the fuel trailer in the data without major code rewrites.

Why is that? Can't you just add the weight of the trailer to the weight of the tank? Or does CC not use weight? If not, can't you make the Churchill move slower because of the trailer and its fuel? Question

400 imperial gallons (1,800 l) of fuel and the compressed nitrogen propellant, enough for eighty one-second bursts, were stored in a 6½ ton detachable armoured trailer towed by the Crocodile. The trailer, connected to the tank by a three way armoured coupling, could be jettisoned from within the tank if necessary. -wiki

So, the trailer weighs 6.5 tons and the fuel weighs 1,800 lbs. Question

That's 400 gallons of fuel. Ordinary gasoline weighs 7.29 lbs. / imperial gallon or 2916 lbs. And all of this is supported by 2 tires (of magic).

So, the Churchill IV weighs 38.5 tons, and a Mk VII fuel trailer weighs 6.5 tons and its fuel apx 1 ton...

So, 46 tons altogether.

How Much Does a Gallon of Gasoline Weigh
Churchill Crocodile
Chruchill Tank

#28: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:04 am
—
And as one might expect with a flame device, there is a multitude of reported maximum ranges from over 80 yards to 150 yards.

Churchill Crocodile Flame-Thrower
Churchill Crocodile
Flame Tank

Other sources state the Crocodiles first entered combat on June 20th. According to Nigel Duncan in 79th Armoured Division, the flamethrowers did take part in the Normandy landings but initially had little success until it was understood that the trailers should not pressure up earlier than 30 minutes prior to an attack due to the leakage that occurred under the pressurized system. -WW2HQ

Churchill Crocodile Flame-Thrower

The pressure required had to be primed on the trailer by the crew as close to use as feasible, because pressure could not be maintained for very long. The fuel was used at 4 gallons per second; refuelling took at least 90 minutes and pressurization around 15 minutes.

Churchill Crocodile

So, since it has been stated that a user could expect 80 one second bursts with the flame, perhaps a user could expect 1 eighty second burst, that utilizes all the pressure in the trailer, and results in substantially greater range than a 1 second burst. Laughing

#29: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:49 am
—
So, the Churchill Crocodile Flame Tank enters the enchanted world of British folklore. Along side King Arthur, Merlin, Middle Earth, Narnia, Harry Potter, and the Last Dragon.

They are all good stories, but that is all they are ... stories.

Link

#30: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Bungarra, Location: Murchison region, West Australia

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 3:44 am
—
Talk about Flamers Rolling Eyes

#31: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 3:56 am
—

Bungarra wrote (View Post):

Talk about Flamers Rolling Eyes

Why? For the most part, I am just quoting articles from the Wiki.

#32: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Conrad,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 7:09 am
—
Great to hear you like the game!

#33: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 7:30 am
—
I don't have the game, and therefore do not have an opinion about it one way or another.

And just because, I mention a few things about the Crocodile, me thinks you are grasping for sarcasm.

Provided your comment was directed toward moi. Laughing

Regards,

Stwa

#34: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Pzt_Kami, Location: IRAN

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 8:02 am
—
As I expected You guys justified the Crocodile's unbelievable performance !

anyway the new interface (introduced) is not handdy ,Is it possible to add an option to use the old(classic) user interface?

#35: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Conrad,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 8:07 am
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

I don't have the game, and therefore do not have an opinion about it one way or another.

And just because, I mention a few things about the Crocodile, me thinks you are grasping for sarcasm.

Provided your comment was directed toward moi. Laughing

Regards,

Stwa

No I wasn't talking to you but rather the group

#36: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 8:51 am
—

Pzt_Kami wrote (View Post):

As I expected You guys justified the Crocodile's unbelievable performance !

what is so unbelievable in it?

#37: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 10:30 am
—

Dima wrote (View Post):

Pzt_Kami wrote (View Post):

As I expected You guys justified the Crocodile's unbelievable performance !

what is so unbelievable in it?

Jeez Dima, always the troll. Laughing

Well check this out. It looks like they are driving it around in France somewhere and decided to test it out on some messed up village.

Link

#38: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 10:40 am
—
Now, ditch the overly dramatic music, and insert a few old Brit geezers to tell us the story, and a legend is born.

Link

#39: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Bungarra, Location: Murchison region, West Australia

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 10:53 am
—
All I can say, as we.... meaning CCS as a whole, for their were all kinds as Beta testers.... meaning... if they don't know what the community want now ....they never will.

We raised the same questions that you have now...

I have to say, Carthartes & Conrad took it all on board...

But unfortunately they had to make the best of what they had...

The Churchill Flame throwers & their Range & survivability got more than a mention.... Mortars... well they were deadly...

But the one thing we all said was lets be able to choose our own forcepool as in CC5

My comment to them (Matrix) was being able to change your forcepools to manage the threat is what made CC5

I bought the game...

If they want the game to prosper...

Everything that worked was CC5 ..... Yes change it to be historically accurate.. But let us have the choice of forcepools to let the community thrive again

Last edited by Bungarra on Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:59 am; edited 1 time in total

#40: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:31 am
—
Well, the game is not going to be made or broken on one flame tank. Actually the game looked real good in TIKs vid.

But, now I am worried if Croc flame tanks were actually used in combat at all during Epsom, or Normandy for that matter. So maybe some better articles will show up.

Some article that I cited (on page 2) mentioned one Nigel Duncan who said flame tanks landed at Normandy, but maybe he meant Mk VII Chuchills and flame tank field kits landed. Maybe they even put one or two together (the 141st RAC), and found out the pressurized trailer sucked.

Anyway, I have been able to find some more info about the 31st Armoured Tank Brigade and specifically the 141st Regiment Royal Armoured Corps, and can post it tomorrow or something.

#41: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: zwizdan007,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 12:03 pm
—
Cam someone upload the manual? I would like to see what's happening before buying...

#42: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:32 pm
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

Well, the game is not going to be made or broken on one flame tank. Actually the game looked real good in TIKs vid.

But, now I am worried if Croc flame tanks were actually used in combat at all during Epsom, or Normandy for that matter. So maybe some better articles will show up.

Some article that I cited (on page 2) mentioned one Nigel Duncan who said flame tanks landed at Normandy, but maybe he meant Mk VII Chuchills and flame tank field kits landed. Maybe they even put one or two together (the 141st RAC), and found out the pressurized trailer sucked.

Anyway, I have been able to find some more info about the 31st Armoured Tank Brigade and specifically the 141st Regiment Royal Armoured Corps, and can post it tomorrow or something.

Brrr, 141RAC landed 1 troop with 3 Crocs on June 6 on Gold. In 2 weeks the rest of 141RAC landed. No other unit besides 141RAC had Churchill VII in Normandy in June.
There are both british and german accounts of Crocs been used in Normandy and then clearing Brest with americans.

#43: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Nomada_Firefox,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:38 pm
—

Quote:

Vehicle pathing is great (why shouldnt it after all the complains and three? patches for Last Stand Arnhem.... Crying or Very sad

I do not agree, it is worse. By two reasons:

First the maps elements, they are not very good. You can see your units stopped at very strange zones.

Second, the vehicles do not move with the front armor directly to the enemy. In the past, if it happened, you could fire a few shots with the tank in one direction and the vehicle put the armor in the direction from the shots. Now it does not happen. I believe that many of you did not know this tip and Steve made many changes at code for fix the pathfinding but at the end, he deleted some features.

At other point, for me the best feature at this moment are the explosion effects. The worse is the lack of blood.

#44: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:44 pm
—

Nomada_Firefox wrote (View Post):

Quote:

Vehicle pathing is great (why shouldnt it after all the complains and three? patches for Last Stand Arnhem.... Crying or Very sad

I do not agree, it is worse. By two reasons:

First the maps elements, they are not very good. You can see your units stopped at very strange zones.

Ahha, they "fixed" pathfinding in TLD same way - screwing up elements, when you get them work good again pathfinding go back to CC5 level Smile

#45: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Sulla,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 3:43 pm
—
I as most know, AM NOT a great Matrix fan ;)

However, I this is the best to date. I was always a fan of CCIII, I loved the deploy and maps etc. Why they dumped that just bcs of strat map is weird.

Hats off to Steve, this plays very slick and seems on first few plays to be much better. V slick so far. Will never understand why none of what we did for the USMC in Anti Terrorism made it into commercial!

Steve has been working on this for 6+ years now, so it should be improving. The major issue is, you can only fix so far. Its so easy to break other things when you fix one thing. However much you work on that engine now, there really is only so much you can do.

A decent strat layer and non chequer board deploy, building up units [stacking] logistics, flanking [properly] all need to be in the next engine!

But, still a well done to Steve!

Sulla

#46: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Sapa,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 4:01 pm
—
Mr Flamethrower..this thread is called FIRST IMPRESSIONS...nice of you to have them without actually play the game Very Happy

Yes i am one of the old dinosaurs and proud of it, sorry for having any opinions...

Mats

#47: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 7:14 pm
—
Now more than ever I wish the re-releases had a CCReq tool to use.

Vehicle pathing still sucks.Ofcourse I've lost a lot of Vehicles H2H and yes I keep forgetting about the Rain.

Trying to learn what BG is what is also a real pain in the arse.
On the BG screen it shows name and patch
On the scenario editor screen it has military/Nato symbols.

Visually the game is Awesome!
Sounds are good too.

If TBF can look like this and the 2nd installment of TBf has a strat map I'm all in.
No need for a Bulge related game either. Smile

#48: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Pzt_Kanov, Location: México

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 7:30 pm
—
Yeah a new CCReq tool would be awesome. Lets hope one of them young programmers are drawn towards these games again.

We need another Sgt_Wilson!

#49: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Nomada_Firefox,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 7:44 pm
—
Have you tried add a new vehicle graphic to the game?

#50: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Pzt_Kanov, Location: México

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 8:09 pm
—

Nomada_Firefox wrote (View Post):

Have you tried add a new vehicle graphic to the game?

I only know of Bel http://www.closecombatseries.net/CCS/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=10493

And well, Cathartes.

#51: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 10:56 pm
—

Dima wrote (View Post):

Brrr, 141RAC landed 1 troop with 3 Crocs on June 6 on Gold. In 2 weeks the rest of 141RAC landed. No other unit besides 141RAC had Churchill VII in Normandy in June.There are both british and german accounts of Crocs been used in Normandy and then clearing Brest with americans.

If true, then cite these souces, provide a link, you spammer. Laughing

BTW, Brest is not in Normandy, and I doubt it was an objective during operation Epsom.

The Operation Epsom Order of Battle states 2 troops (141st RAC) to one (or perhaps two) brigaded regiments it the 15th Scottish Division. I take 2 troops to be 6 tanks?

Here is a picture of an article that tries to identify all the 141st RAC tanks by name, during the time they were attached to 31st Armoured Tank Brigrade. (i.e. since June 6th 1944). Note there are Mk VIIs but only one "Funny" was mentioned, that being a Mk IV AVRE fascine tank. My guess is a facine unit is one without its mine roller which was probably robbed from this unit and sent to an assault battalion in an Engineer eschelon.

Note that the document, mentions NO flamethrower tanks, or flamethrower kits. And it doesn't mention at all if any of these tanks were in Normandy. Only Nigel Duncan's book (1972), says some where, but Duncan's book is about the 79th Armoured Division, and 141st RAC was attached to 31st Armoured Tank Brigade during this time. So my guess is, Duncan is as clueless as everyone else.

Also, note the picture of Churchill with NO flame projector and NO fuel trailer attached.

Operation Epsom Order of Battle

Last edited by Stwa on Sat Jun 14, 2014 12:55 am; edited 4 times in total

#52: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:08 pm
—

Sapa wrote (View Post):

Mr Flamethrower..this thread is called FIRST IMPRESSIONS...nice of you to have them without actually play the game Very Happy

Yes i am one of the old dinosaurs and proud of it, sorry for having any opinions...Mats

BTW, you sound like you need another nap.

#53: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 12:15 am
—

Dima wrote (View Post):

Pzt_Kami wrote (View Post):

As I expected You guys justified the Crocodile's unbelievable performance !

what is so unbelievable in it?

Dima, you are such a kidder. Laughing

Since the engines on the Churchill were never upgraded, the tank became increasingly slower as additional armour and armament was equipped and weight increased; while the Mk I weighed 39,118 kg (40 long tons) and the Mk III weighed 39,626 kg, the Mk VII weighed 40,643 kg. This caused a reduction in maximum speed of the tank from its original 26 kilometres per hour (16 mph) down to 20.5 kilometres per hour (12.7 mph). The engines also suffered from many mechanical problems.

Another problem was the tank's relatively small turret that prevented the use of powerful weapons; definitive versions of the tank were armed with either the QF 6 pounder or the derivative QF 75 mm gun. The 6-pdr was effective against armoured vehicles but less so against other targets, the 75mm a better all-rounder but lacking against armour. Although the Churchills with their 6 pounders could outgun many contemporary German medium tanks (like the Panzer IV with the short-barrel 75 mm gun and the Panzer III's 50 mm gun) and the thick armour of all Churchill models could usually withstand several hits from any German anti-tank gun, in the later years of the war the German Panther tank had a 75 mm high-velocity cannon as its main armament along with increased protection, against which the Churchills' own guns often lacked sufficient armour penetration to fight back effectively. -wiki

Churchill Tank

So, if you add a 6.5 ton fuel trailer and 1 ton of fuel to the Mk VII, me thinks the tank goes less than 10 miles per hour. Laughing

And, since the pressurized trailer only lasts for 30 minutes, the effective "combat range" of this urban legend would be 5 miles maximum. What a joke. Laughing

#54: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 3:43 am
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

Sapa wrote (View Post):

Mr Flamethrower..this thread is called FIRST IMPRESSIONS...nice of you to have them without actually play the game Very Happy

Yes i am one of the old dinosaurs and proud of it, sorry for having any opinions...Mats

BTW, you sound like you need another nap.

I like naps. Laughing

Give me enough energy for my main snooze later in the day.
And that lets me play more CC. I also too thought the thread was called 'FIRST IMPRESSIONS'

#55: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: HogansHeros,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 4:16 am
—
Here be Crocodiles

Hidden:

#56: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 4:37 am
—

jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):

I also too thought the thread was called 'FIRST IMPRESSIONS'

Hi jakebullet. Glad you are enjoying the site.

Unless someone changes it along the way. The name of the thread is usually displayed at the top of each post.

Now, go back and check out your post. Look near the top of the post and you will see the "name of the thread" as you called it.

You will notice, that name is "Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK". That is a little different than what you said.

And TIK gave his impressions in the first post, in a video. And now we are commenting about his (TIK's) first impressions. Laughing

Last edited by Stwa on Tue Jun 10, 2014 4:55 am; edited 1 time in total

#57: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 4:53 am
—

HogansHeros wrote (View Post):

Here be Crocodiles

Hidden:

HogansHeroes,

SIR - thank you so much for this information about the Crocs.

What you found in the Canadian History, that would be 15 tanks. Flails, Crocs, and AVREs. Quite an assembly of "Funnies". Very interesting!

And I agree with you on the dates. And so, for the Crocs, maybe they needed until July to get the kinks worked out in the pressurized fuel trailers?

Again, thanks for these links ... good job!

#58: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 4:05 pm
—
Stwa,

Quote:

If true, then cite these souces, provide a link, you spammer.

I know what I know, if you don't know that, be my guest to make a good research and read some books. We can return to this point in a couple of years when you found some info Wink

.
and yes, wiki is not a real source.

Quote:

The Operation Epsom Order of Battle states 2 troops (141st RAC) to one (or perhaps two) brigaded regiments it the 15th Scottish Division. I take 2 troops to be 6 tanks?

your link actually states 2 squadrons not troops but that's a mistake Smile

Quote:

Here is a picture of an article that tries to identify all the 141st RAC tanks by name, during the time they were attached to 31st Armoured Tank Brigrade. (i.e. since June 6th 1944).

that's a mistake again.

Quote:

Note that the document, mentions NO flamethrower tanks, or flamethrower kits. And it doesn't mention at all if any of these tanks were in Normandy. Only Nigel Duncan's book (1972), says some where, but Duncan's book is about the 79th Armoured Division, and 141st RAC was attached to 31st Armoured Tank Brigade during this time. So my guess is, Duncan is as clueless as everyone else.

you are probably joking as your attachment shows Crocodile = Churchill VII with Crocodile flamethrower installed.

Quote:

And, since the pressurized trailer only lasts for 30 minutes, the effective "combat range" of this urban legend would be 5 miles maximum. What a joke.

re-reading 141RAC War Diary and although they mentioned that they had to reinforce all valves and seals due to leaks no mention that pressure in trailers lasts for only 30mins....

#59: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 4:22 pm
—

Quote:

And, since the pressurized trailer only lasts for 30 minutes, the effective "combat range" of this urban legend would be 5 miles maximum. What a joke.

Oh-ho really what a joke Smile

Ok, the report on July 30th says they need to pressure up the trailers before comitting to action and it takes 30 mins Wink

.
strange that it developed in "since the pressurized trailer only lasts for 30 minutes"....

#60: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 6:24 pm
—
you are probably joking as your attachment shows Crocodile = Churchill VII with Crocodile flamethrower installed. -dima

So you just want to continue spamming. Ok fine. :lol

Wiki is a good source me thinks. You can find lots of great info on weapon systems there.

Dima+books is hard to access, it's always suspect, and is surly. Laughing

But this is part of the central problem in the literature. It says Crocodile, but if the associated units (tank, trailer) are taken apart, then what do you have? Is the fuel trailer itself refered to as a Crocodile. And they are FIELD kits after all.

And you are forgetting the fuel trailer can be jettisoned from inside the tank. So when that happens, it is no longer a Crocodile, right?

So me thinks, this is what it means:

"We have a dozen Mk VIIs and we have 1 or 2 fuel trailers (that don't work BTW), so POTENTIALLY, all of our Mk VIIs could be Crocodiles." ... just NOT at the same time. Laughing

#61: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 6:26 pm
—
you are probably joking as your attachment shows Crocodile = Churchill VII with Crocodile flamethrower installed. -dima

So you just want to continue spamming. OK fine. Razz

Wiki is a good source me thinks. You can find lots of great info on weapon systems there.

Dima + imaginary library of books is hard to access, is always suspect, and is surly. Laughing

But this is part of the central problem in the real literature. It says Crocodile, but if the associated units (tank, trailer) are taken apart, then what do you have? Is the fuel trailer itself refered to as a Crocodile. And they are FIELD kits after all.

Perhaps you are forgetting the fuel trailer can be jettisoned from inside the tank. So when that happens, it is no longer a Crocodile, right?

So me thinks, this is what Crocodle means in the tank list on the document:

"We have a dozen Mk VIIs and we have 1 or 2 fuel trailers (that don't work BTW), so POTENTIALLY, all of our Mk VIIs could be Crocodiles." ... just NOT at the same time. Laughing

BTW, most of Hobat's Funnies are also listed in this document.

Churchill Tank

Last edited by Stwa on Tue Jun 10, 2014 6:57 pm; edited 1 time in total

#62: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 6:53 pm
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

you are probably joking as your attachment shows Crocodile = Churchill VII with Crocodile flamethrower installed. -dima
So you just want to continue spamming. Ok fine. :lol
Wiki is a good source me thinks. You can find lots of great info on weapon systems there.
Dima+books is hard to access, it's always suspect, and is surly. Laughing

But this is part of the central problem in the literature. It says Crocodile, but if the associated units (tank, trailer) are taken apart, then what do you have? Is the fuel trailer itself refered to as a Crocodile. And they are FIELD kits after all.
And you are forgetting the fuel trailer can be jettisoned from inside the tank. So when that happens, it is no longer a Crocodile, right?
So me thinks, this is what it means:

"We have a dozen Mk VIIs and we have 1 or 2 fuel trailers (that don't work BTW), so POTENTIALLY, all of our Mk VIIs could be Crocodiles." ... just NOT at the same time. Laughing

yeye

Date: Night 26/27 June
Place: St.Mauvieu.
Approx number of flame shots: Considerable amount.
HE, AP and BESA also used in large quantities.
Casualties:
Tanks: 3 Mk VII - 2 with broken tracks, 1 - overturned. All 3 recovered.
Trailors: Nil.

#63: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 7:01 pm
—
Come on Dima, without a link, maybe its just more spam. Laughing

An my understanding is the Flame Projector REPLACES the BESA MG. So your scribbling looks suspect already. Laughing

But see how your own BS does not mention Crocodile, but rather "tanks and [fuel] trailors". Idea

#64: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 7:18 pm
—
And while you are "at" it. Maybe you wouldn't mind looking into your magical libarary of books ...

... And answer me these questions three, if the other side you wish to see.

What is your name? [Dima of CCS]

What is your quest? [To mess with Stwa]

What is the operational range of a fully loaded Churchill Crocodile? [I don't know that!] [AAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEE!] Laughing

#65: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 8:38 pm
—

Dima wrote (View Post):

Quote:

And, since the pressurized trailer only lasts for 30 minutes, the effective "combat range" of this urban legend would be 5 miles maximum. What a joke.

Oh-ho really what a joke Smile

Ok, the report on July 30th says they need to pressure up the trailers before comitting to action and it takes 30 mins Wink

.
strange that it developed in "since the pressurized trailer only lasts for 30 minutes"....

OK, here it is again.

Other sources state the Crocodiles first entered combat on June 20th. According to Nigel Duncan in 79th Armoured Division, the flamethrowers did take part in the Normandy landings but initially had little success until it was understood that the trailers should not pressure up earlier than 30 minutes prior to an attack due to the leakage that occurred under the pressurized system. -WW2HQ

Churchill Crocodile Flame-Thrower

This tells me, that once pressurized, the Crocodile had 30 minutes to make it's attack before the pressure in the fuel trailer fizzed away. Laughing

So, it's maximum speed is under 10 mph, so a maximum operational range of 5 miles. Shocked

#66: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 8:56 pm
—

Quote:

Come on Dima, without a link, maybe its just more spam.

told you - that's from War Diary of 141RAC in Normandy - you can check that out yourself Wink

Quote:

first 2 Crocs entered combat on June 6th and first combat using Croc's flamethrowers appeared on June 7th.

#67: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 9:01 pm
—

Quote:

This tells me, that once pressurized, the Crocodile had 30 minutes to make it's attack before the pressure in the fuel trailer fizzed away.

no, that means that after 30 mins the pressure will be not at full to fire at 80yds.

#68: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 9:11 pm
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

What is the operational range of a fully loaded Churchill Crocodile? [I don't know that!] [AAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEE!] Laughing

Stwa wrote (View Post):

So, it's maximum speed is under 10 mph, so a maximum operational range of 5 miles. Shocked

Regards to the alleged "5 miles operation range", that range wouldn’t be a problem, considering how flame tanks were used and against what.

Are flame tanks not called in to be used against fortifications, or enemy in very strong positions where other units already has failed or are expected to fail. No?

#69: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 9:25 pm
—

Dima wrote (View Post):

Quote:

The Operation Epsom Order of Battle states 2 troops (141st RAC) to one (or perhaps two) brigaded regiments it the 15th Scottish Division. I take 2 troops to be 6 tanks?

your link actually states 2 squadrons not troops but that's a mistake Smile

Uh Huh

[impersonating Barney the Purple Dinosaur]

It says "TWO TROOPS".

Ok, because I like you so much, I am going to put up several pictures that may help you to navigate articles, and footnotes when you are using the Wiki. Idea

Basically,

When you see a footnote in the main body of the article text, you can mouse over that footnote. When you do that, the system usually underlines the footnote, which means it's a link.

Then, you can click the footnote using your mouse, and the system will take you to the text of the footnote itsef. (usually at the bottom of the article)

#70: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 9:42 pm
—
Regards to the alleged "5 miles operation range", that range wouldn’t be a problem, considering how flame tanks were used and against what. Are flame tanks not called in to be used against fortifications, or enemy in very strong positions where other units already has failed or are expected to fail. No? -Stalky

In the circumstances you enumerated, then yes, the 5 miles might not be an issue.

But be aware, that while the beast is traversing these 5 miles the pressure in the fuel trailer is fizzing away into the atmosphere. Laughing

#71: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Nomada_Firefox,

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 10:37 pm
—
Is the screenshot from CCMT? I started a WWII mod at this but I do not remember because I have not finished it......I should check my files.

#72: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 2:30 am
—
Hey Firefox,

Good to see you! Hit back arrow a few times if you need to find the outer space mods. Idea

#73: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 7:08 am
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

Dima wrote (View Post):

Quote:

The Operation Epsom Order of Battle states 2 troops (141st RAC) to one (or perhaps two) brigaded regiments it the 15th Scottish Division. I take 2 troops to be 6 tanks?

your link actually states 2 squadrons not troops but that's a mistake Smile

Uh Huh

[impersonating Barney the Purple Dinosaur]
It says "TWO TROOPS".
Ok, because I like you so much, I am going to put up several pictures that may help you to navigate articles, and footnotes when you are using the Wiki. Idea

Basically,
When you see a footnote in the main body of the article text, you can mouse over that footnote. When you do that, the system usually underlines the footnote, which means it's a link.
Then, you can click the footnote using your mouse, and the system will take you to the text of the footnote itsef. (usually at the bottom of the article)

If you scroll the list down to 31st Tk Bde you would see some more Crocs there - so how many troops in a total for support of 8th Corps?

Quote:

In the circumstances you enumerated, then yes, the 5 miles might not be an issue.
But be aware, that while the beast is traversing these 5 miles the pressure in the fuel trailer is fizzing away into the atmosphere.

that's alright as after 30mins they will be able to fire at 60yds instead of 80 (if they were not lucky).
but that's alright for WW2 tank flamethrowers and was quite the same for the Germans and Soviet flame tanks.

#74: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 9:47 am
—
If you scroll the list down to 31st Tk Bde you would see some more Crocs there - so how many troops in a total for support of 8th Corps? -Dima

You are getting desperate Dima. (Dima the desperado!) Hey, lets use YOUR OWN imaginary library of books to solve this problem. Laughing

What's really pathetic, is that you already know the answer. Sorry, I digress, lets roll.

No other unit besides 141RAC had Churchill VII in Normandy in June. -Dima

your attachment shows Crocodile = Churchill VII with Crocodile flamethrower installed. -Dima

So, your library of books (the ones you have been reading for years), tells us that ONLY the 141st RAC had Chruchill Mk VII tanks in June. Presumably that covers June 26-30 (i.e. Operation Epsom).

Your library also states that to have a Crocodile, one must have a Churchill VII with flamethrower installed [which includes its trailer of fuel].

And now one other quote, from the man himself.

These tanks [the Churchill Crocs] represent the support of the 141 RAC (the Buffs) present during Operation Epsom and supporting the 15 Scottish Infantry Division and 31 Tank Brigade. Historically they were only used the first couple days of Operation Epsom and then pulled back. -Cathartes

It's Easy! So, if you see another unit (in the OOB) other than the 141st RAC, and they have some Funnies from the 79th Armoured Division in June 1944, then they can be Flails, or AVREs, but NOT Crocs, because as your REFERENCE LIBRARY tells us ONLY the 141st RAC had Chruchill Mk VII tanks in June, and you can't have a Croc without a Mk VII. Laughing

And Cathartes must have access to your library as well, because his statement says the in-game Churchill Crocs, represent those of 141st RAC.

#75: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 10:53 am
—
that's alright as after 30mins they will be able to fire at 60yds instead of 80 (if they were not lucky). -Dima

Now you are drifting into pure BS. If you really think this is true, you should edit the Wiki article, and add your quote. But you are not going to do that are you?

Because, (and this is what makes the Wiki better than your reference library), on the wiki, an article can be edited by any of their editors, at any time, and they are good a spotting pure BS like your quote. So if your quote was put into the wiki article it would eventually look like this.

...after 30mins they will be able to fire at 60yds instead of 80 (if they were not lucky).[citation needed]

So, I will make it simple. When a Wiki editor adds [citation needed] after a sentence in an article, it means the editor believes that the text which was NOT cited, is bullshit. Laughing

OK, here it is again. (for the third time)

Other sources state the Crocodiles first entered combat on June 20th. According to Nigel Duncan in 79th Armoured Division, the flamethrowers did take part in the Normandy landings but initially had little success until it was understood that the trailers should not pressure up earlier than 30 minutes prior to an attack due to the leakage that occurred under the pressurized system. -WW2HQ

This quote is expressing the fear that after 30 minutes, the flamethrower will not be combat effective.

You are trying to make it seem like it will remain combat effective after 30 minutes. In the example you gave, then there would be more time, like 45 minutes or maybe an hour. And BTW, did this quote of yours come from your fantasy reference library or are you just making this up as we go along. Laughing

#76: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 12:15 pm
—
And here is something interesting as well. It is an org chart for 31st Tank Brigade.

Pay close attention to footnote 1, which is applied to 141st RAC.

But also note the 7th, 9th, and 141st RAC, are its attached tank regiments.

And also see the REME (workshop) unit listed. These are the guys that can install the Crocodile Flamethrower kits to the Mk VII of 141st RAC.

31st Tank Brigade

Last edited by Stwa on Sat Jun 14, 2014 12:59 am; edited 2 times in total

#77: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 3:34 pm
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

You are trying to make it seem like it will remain combat effective after 30 minutes. In the example you gave, then there would be more time, like 45 minutes or maybe an hour. And BTW, did this quote of yours come from your fantasy reference library or are you just making this up as we go along. Laughing

I have no idea about the flamers. But, if I read you right Stwa…,

1) Then one may belive that all the Crocks pressurised trailers leaked at the exact same rate. Exactly the same leakage rate, no variation at all. Were the service personnel adjusting the leakage so they were all the same? If one leaked less, what did they do with it? Drilled a hole so it leaked as much as the rest?

2) So.. They were all holding pressure up to 30.00 minutes. And then one second later at 30:01 min, the pressure dropped to zero..

Ok.

BTW: Does you wiki links say that they found routines to overcome the limitation of the “30 minutes”?

#78: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 5:03 pm
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

No other unit besides 141RAC had Churchill VII in Normandy in June. -Dima
your attachment shows Crocodile = Churchill VII with Crocodile flamethrower installed. -Dima
So, your library of books (the ones you have been reading for years), tells us that ONLY the 141st RAC had Chruchill Mk VII tanks in June. Presumably that covers June 26-30 (i.e. Operation Epsom).
Your library also states that to have a Crocodile, one must have a Churchill VII with flamethrower installed [which includes its trailer of fuel].
And now one other quote, from the man himself.

Crocs were not pull back but were in reserve on a front line to deal with hard strongpoints if occure - they actually lost 2 trailers to mortar fire with some casualties while having them pressurized and ready for combat.

Quote:

It's Easy! So, if you see another unit (in the OOB) other than the 141st RAC, and they have some Funnies from the 79th Armoured Division in June 1944, then they can be Flails, or AVREs, but NOT Crocs, because as your REFERENCE LIBRARY tells us ONLY the 141st RAC had Chruchill Mk VII tanks in June, and you can't have a Croc without a Mk VII. Laughing

so funny to read your brainstorm Smile

I will make it even more easy for you below: .

Quote:

And Cathartes must have access to your library as well, because his statement says the in-game Churchill Crocs, represent those of 141st RAC.

141RAC was the only unit having Crocs in NWE till October 1944 ;)

Cool speculations actually, some quite logical Smile

Quote:

that's alright as after 30mins they will be able to fire at 60yds instead of 80 (if they were not lucky). -Dima

Now you are drifting into pure BS. If you really think this is true, you should edit the Wiki article, and add your quote. But you are not going to do that are you?

Because, (and this is what makes the Wiki better than your reference library), on the wiki, an article can be edited by any of their editors, at any time, and they are good a spotting pure BS like your quote. So if your quote was put into the wiki article it would eventually look like this.

...after 30mins they will be able to fire at 60yds instead of 80 (if they were not lucky).[citation needed]

So, I will make it simple. When a Wiki editor adds [citation needed] after a sentence in an article, it means the editor believes that the text which was NOT cited, is bullshit.

OK, here it is again. (for the third time)

Other sources state the Crocodiles first entered combat on June 20th. According to Nigel Duncan in 79th Armoured Division, the flamethrowers did take part in the Normandy landings but initially had little success until it was understood that the trailers should not pressure up earlier than 30 minutes prior to an attack due to the leakage that occurred under the pressurized system. -WW2HQ

This quote is expressing the fear that after 30 minutes, the flamethrower will not be combat effective.

You are trying to make it seem like it will remain combat effective after 30 minutes. In the example you gave, then there would be more time, like 45 minutes or maybe an hour. And BTW, did this quote of yours come from your fantasy reference library or are you just making this up as we go along.

But what they were telling in War Diary:
Trailers:

Develops a number of gas leaks resulting in a drop of pressure. Lt.Shearman suggest that all unions and valves be reinforced.
Additional leakage has been found from the inspection plates at the back of the fuel tanks. The sealing of these parts need improving. It has sometimes proved neccessary to keep the trailers pressured for up to 48 hours.

:)

#79: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: johnsilver, Location: Florida

Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 8:53 pm
—

Quote:

Perhaps you are forgetting the fuel trailer can be jettisoned from inside the tank.

You make a good point STWA regarding the trailer. I asked about it's inclusion in the game, but was told it would be difficult to include because of movement behind the Churchill itself was why.

To have the Churchill's dragging a less lightly armored and extremely flammable trailer would have been nice, had it been possible.. All reality aside.

#80: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 9:37 pm
—

johnsilver wrote (View Post):

Quote:

Perhaps you are forgetting the fuel trailer can be jettisoned from inside the tank.

Ya, but I didn't ask ANYBODY for any of that. Exclamation

I suggested to Cathartes, WAY back on maybe page 3 or something, to just make the Mk VII weigh more, or MOVE slower, to account for the weight of the trailer and its fuel.

But, with all this BS floating around this thread. This is my take away of the Churchill Crocodile during Operation Epsom, based on a limited information set.

1. The fuel trailer in the Crocodile "system" leaked like a sieve. Not just components associated with pressurization, but the steel plates forming the body of the trailer itself.

2. It normally would take 15 minutes to pressurize the fuel trailer. But others found, that you might need up to 48 hours (2 days) to complete this task. Operation Epsom lasted 5 days by comparison.

3. Only the 141st RAC had Mk VII Churchills and Crocodile fuel trailers at this time. These were supplied by 79th Armoured Division.

4. The 141st RAC had no more than 6 Mk VII Churchills at this time. It is unclear [to me] if there were in fact 6 fuel trailers.

5. I could only find one source (Dima's Library) that indicated Crocodile action (combat?) during Operation Epsom, where all 3 Mk VII tanks were disabled but recovered from the field. That leaves 3 Mk VIIs left, until these disabled tanks could be repaired.

#81: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: pvt_Grunt, Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 11:11 pm
—
It will take MORE than 30 minutes to take the pressure out of this thread!

#82: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 11:53 pm
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

Ya, but I didn't ask ANYBODY for any of that. Exclamation

But, with all this BS floating around this thread. This is my take away of the Churchill Crocodile during Operation Epsom, based on a limited information set.

[quote]1. The fuel trailer in the Crocodile "system" leaked like a sieve. Not just components associated with pressurization, but the steel plates forming the body of the trailer itself.

yes it leaked but that doesn't mean they couldn't fire flame after 30 mins Smile

Quote:

2. It normally would take 15 minutes to pressurize the fuel trailer. But others found, that you might need up to 48 hours (2 days) to complete this task. Operation Epsom lasted 5 days by comparison.

no, it took 30 mins to fully pressure trailer up and the pressure could last for several (if not many) hours but tankers asked for 48 hours pressure.

Quote:

3. Only the 141st RAC had Mk VII Churchills and Crocodile fuel trailers at this time. These were supplied by 79th Armoured Division.

In June-July 1944 141RAC was more or less independent unit attached to different formations for special tasks.

Quote:

4. The 141st RAC had no more than 6 Mk VII Churchills at this time. It is unclear [to me] if there were in fact 6 fuel trailers.

false, they had many more.

Quote:

5. I could only find one source (Dima's Library) that indicated Crocodile action (combat?) during Operation Epsom, where all 3 Mk VII tanks were disabled but recovered from the field. That leaves 3 Mk VIIs left, until these disabled tanks could be repaired.

false, there were more than 6 Crocs supporting 8th Corps Wink

#83: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 6:07 am
—
Hey,

For some reason, I am having a hard time finding real combat footage for the Chruchill Croc on YouTube. I can find plenty of American flame tanks, but just not the Croc.

So, if anyone comes across a nice vid, please post a link.

Regards,

Stwa

#84: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 10:15 am
—
I fiinally got access to the 141st RAC War Diaries, and as might be expected, Dima has been withholding some important information about the Crocodiles during Epsom.

So, I am going to revise my estimate of Churchill Mk VII tanks made available for Epsom, to 5 tanks instead of the 6 I reported before.

The following is a picture of the War Diary Entries during Operation Epsom, for Squadron A of the 141st RAC. Note the initial transfer, and the action on the 26th/27th.

141 RAC War Diaries

Last edited by Stwa on Fri Jun 13, 2014 6:20 am; edited 3 times in total

#85: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 10:53 am
—

Quote:

I fiinally got access to the 141st RAC War Diaries, and as might be expected, Dima has been withholding some important information about the Crocodiles during Epsom. What a creep!

Great you finally made some search Exclamation

Quote:

So, I am going to revise my estimate of Churchill Mk VII tanks made available for Epsom, to 5 tanks instead of the 6 I reported before.

false estimation.
try again ;)

Quote:

But also notice the crew casualties that Dima failed to tell us about before.

we've never talked about casualties, havn't we?

#86: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 11:52 am
—
false estimation. try again -Dima

Then provide an Orbat for regiment, you spammer, otherwise I use the one I already retrieved, where the troops had less than 3 tanks. Some troops only had 1 tank. Laughing

Last edited by Stwa on Thu Jun 12, 2014 11:58 am; edited 1 time in total

#87: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 11:55 am
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

false estimation. try again -Dima
Then provide an Orbat for regiment, you spammer, otherwise I use the one I already retrieved, where the troops had less than 3 tanks. Some troops only had 1 tank. Laughing

ok a tip for you Smile

try to find a difference between Tank Troop and Tank Squadron Wink

#88: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 12:06 pm
—
OK, a tip for you, find the Orbat otherwise I use the one I have already retrieved. How many tanks in each troop? (1,2, or 3) Laughing

For all I know, for purposes of driving down a road, troops are 1 tank each. Laughing

#89: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 12:14 pm
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

OK, a tip for you, find the Orbat otherwise I use the one I have already retrieved. How many tanks in each troop? (1,2, or 3) Laughing

For all I know, for purposes of driving down a road, troops are 1 tank each. Laughing

ok, I can see it's very complicated for you, but I like you Smile

so let's try to have it step by step:

1) How many squadrons from 141RAC were supporting 8th Corps for Epsom?
2) How many troops were there in each squadron of 141RAC?
2) How many tanks were in each troop of 141RAC?

:)

#90: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 12:56 pm
—
Ok, you mindless spamming dilbert, goto page 4 look at the Orbat there for the 141st and you can you can fill in the answers for your own questions. Me thinks you are gonna be dissapointed with Squad A. Rolling Eyes

If you have a better Orbat, upload it! Laughing

#91: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 1:34 pm
—
Oh Dima, Deeeeeema, where did you go.

Don't you get the sense that this unit (the 141st) is having a hardware isssue. What happened to Squad C at Juno, or was it Gold, I have already forgotton. Laughing

Everytime they bring the regiment close to the Germans, bad stuff starts happening. Laughing

Maybe you can tell us how many tanks landed, and were they Squad A tanks, B tanks, or C tanks. Does a tank count as landed even if it is underwater? You have all the literature, so you are just lazy! But really, I am more interested in the fuel trailers. So, how many of those went into the channel. Laughing

a) 1 fuel trailer
b) 2 fuel trailers
c) 3 fuel trailers
d) none of the above Laughing

#92: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 3:52 pm
—

Quote:

Don't you get the sense that this unit (the 141st) is having a hardware isssue.

never seen any mentioning of missing flamethrowing equipment in 141RAC.

Quote:

What happened to Squad C at Juno, or was it Gold, I have already forgotton

Only 2 Troops of C were landing on Gold and lost 4 of 6 tanks drowned.
But that's wasn't something extra ordinary during landing - alot of tanks including ShermanDD got drowned on all the beaches.

Quote:

read above. A,B and most of C landed on prepared beach 2 weeks after first 2 troops. All squadrons were up to full strength in preparation for Epsom and other supporting ops like Ottawa. Each British Corps received a Croc Squadron for support.
Yes, they lost 3 fuel trailers drowned on June 6th as irretrivable losses. But those were compensated when the rest of 141RAC landed.

#93: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 7:27 pm
—
If you scroll the list down to 31st Tk Bde [EPSOM OOB] you would see some more Crocs there - so how many troops in a total for support of 8th Corps? -Dima

Here are links to each chart.

Operation EPSOM Order of Battle
30th Armoured Brigade
31st Tank Brigade

Last edited by Stwa on Sat Jun 14, 2014 12:27 am; edited 1 time in total

#94: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2014 2:22 am
—
...never seen any mentioning of missing flamethrowing equipment in 141RAC. -Dima

Yes, they [141RAC] lost 3 fuel trailers drowned on June 6th as irretrivable losses. -Dima

...they [141RAC] actually lost 2 trailers to mortar fire with some casualties while having them pressurized and ready for combat. -Dima

Confused

#95: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2014 3:34 am
—
141 RAC War Diaries

141 RAC War Diary June 22-30

Here are entries for June 26-30

June 26, 1944

(a) In the adv to CHEUX by 7th RTR crocodiles not employed but engaged a few enemy Panthers. One tk holed by an 88 mm three times in the engine and put out of action. Tk Co d (Sgt. Wheatcroft) ordered crew to vacate the tk in case of fire and himself remained on board.

(b) 4 and 5 Tps under Capt. CH. Strachan were employed in sp' of the RSF to clear up ST MAUVIEU. This op very successful except for one strongpoint where inf casualties made it impossible until the next morning when Capt. Strachan staged a fresh attack with a coy of the Wiltshires. Lieut. NH.Harvey's Crocodile which shed a track in the middle of the strongpoint was then found to be empty and the crew was presumed captured. During the operation another Crocodile shed a track and the driver (L/c.D.Rogers) killed by a sniper. One tk overturned. Total Casualties :-3 Crocodiles (later recovered), one killed, on officer and four missing presumed captured.

June 27-30, 1944

'A' Sqn provided tps to 7th and 9th RTRs to be used if required in the adv on the R. Odon.The Crocodiles were not actually engaged but a great strain was placed on the crews as they were continually out. Also in counter attack role against the German thrusts on the CHEUX and FONTENOY LE PESNEL.

My comments.

June 26, 1944 (a): NO Crocodiles were engaged or provided, but Churchill Mk VIIs were provided as gun tanks ONLY.

June 26, 1944 (b): Crocodiles and Mk VIIs (gun tank ONLY) are provided. This attack is the ONLY time 141 RAC provides Crocodiles (Mk VII + flame kit) to 15 Scottish Division. How many tanks? I say no more than 3-5 Crocodiles.

June 27-30, 1944: 141 RAC provides NO Crocodiles to 15th Scottish Division or 8th Corps. They provide some (amount not mentioned) Mk VIIs as gun tanks ONLY.

#96: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 6:56 am
—
141RAC landed 1 troop with 3 Crocs on June 6 on Gold. -Dima

Only 2 Troops of C were landing on Gold and lost 4 of 6 tanks drowned. -Dima

Yes, they [141 RAC]lost 3 fuel trailers drowned on June 6th as irretrivable losses. -Dima

Confused

So, how many Churchill Mk VII tanks were landed on D-DAY?

How many Mk VII flamethrower kits with trailer were landed on D-DAY?

And, how many Crocodiles (Mk VII + Flamethrower Field Kits attached) were operated (on land) during D-DAY?

#97: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 8:53 am
—
141 RAC War Diaries - Report of Crocodiles (page 2)
141 RAC War Diary - Report of Crocodiles (page 3)

This Report seems to have been created at the end of EPSOM or perhaps during EPSOM. I am saving Page 1 for later since it deals with D-DAY. Please note the concerns of flame tank leakage, having to be on standby for 48 hours, the inneficiency of the 75mm gun, and always being used as a gun tank, not a flame tank.

4. MECHANICAL

Tanks:

No trouble.

Trailers:

Develops a number of gas leeks resulting in a drop of pressure. Lieut Shearman suggests that all unions and valves be reinforced. Additional leakage has been found from the inspection plates at the fuel tanks. The sealing of these plates need improving. It has sometimes proved necessary to keep the trailers pressuered up for 48 hrs.

5. EXPENDITURE OF NITROGEN (excluding tanks lost on beach)

58 bottles
1. ed:- approximately 5 bottles a shot. This is due to leakage in keeping trailers standing by presured up with no specific target. The percentage of bottles to fuel must be increased.

6. EMPLOYMENT

Offrs stress that it must be used in a correct flame throwing role and not in an anti-tk role. Up to now in the majority of their actions they were used as gun tanks and not flame throwers. They were kept in a forward position to deal with tanks and were not on call as flame throwers.

7. GENERAL

(a) "Tigers" and "Panthers" nearly always lie in ambush to a flank. They like sitting on the edges of woods etc.

(b) There is a strong feeling amongst tank crews that greater provision of the 17 pounder gun is necessary to deal with Tigers and Panthers against which the 75mm is not very effective.

At CREULEY the advance was held up for several hours by two Tigers which had concealed themselves in a wood. Three Shermans were knocked out one after the other attempting to get forward and this advance was not continued until a Sherman with a 17 pounder was brought up.

#98: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Bungarra, Location: Murchison region, West Australia

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 9:08 am
—
At CREULEY the advance was held up for several hours by two Tigers which had concealed themselves in a wood. Three Shermans were knocked out one after the other attempting to get forward and this advance was not continued until a Sherman with a 17 pounder was brought up.

And....

#99: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 9:24 am
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

141RAC landed 1 troop with 3 Crocs on June 6 on Gold. -Dima

Only 2 Troops of C were landing on Gold and lost 4 of 6 tanks drowned. -Dima

Yes, they [141 RAC]lost 3 fuel trailers drowned on June 6th as irretrivable losses. -Dima
Confused

So, how many Churchill Mk VII tanks were landed on D-DAY?
How many Mk VII flamethrower kits with trailer were landed on D-DAY?
And, how many Crocodiles (Mk VII + Flamethrower Field Kits attached) were operated (on land) during D-DAY?

How one can be so inadequate? Wink

2 troops of 3 tanks each (6 in total) were landing on June 6,
of them 3 tanks got drowned in deep water so only 3 got ashore = 1 troop.
of them 1 got drowned in a shell hole so 2 remained (check TLD:BfC Wink

).
on June 7 a Croc that was drowned in a shell hole joined the remaining 2 tanks.

#100: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 9:29 am
—

Bungarra wrote (View Post):

At CREULEY the advance was held up for several hours by two Tigers which had concealed themselves in a wood. Three Shermans were knocked out one after the other attempting to get forward and this advance was not continued until a Sherman with a 17 pounder was brought up.
And....

of course there were no Tigers or Panthers at Creuley Smile

#101: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 10:13 am
—

Bungarra wrote (View Post):

The Report ends there. And can someone check the report. I mean the digital picture. This part is on page 3. I keyed in CREULEY, and the objective on the report may be different. It was hard for me to read the letters.

I have checked it again myself, and it now looks like CREULXX, but it should be CHEUX? Use the page 3 link I have provided.

@Dima:

Bad Dima! Go back to your cage.

#102: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 11:57 am
—
Here are two sources that may indicate the potential strenth of the 141 RAC at the time of the D-DAY Landings.

Authorized Organization 141 RAC
141 RAC War Diary - Return of Officers

From the Authorized Organiztion, the 141 RAC would need 17 officers per battalion but NOT assigned to the battalion's 3 squardons.

Each squadron requires 3 officers + 1 officer per troop of 3 tanks.

The Return of Officers dated June 3, 1944 lists 49 officers at or above the rank of 2nd Lieutenant.

#103: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 3:09 pm
—
141 RAC War Diary - Report on Crocodiles (page 1)
141 RAC War Diary - Report on Crocodiles (page 2)

This portion of the report (page 1) details the action from June 6-14, 1944. By this time, while suffering few personnel casualties, 5 of 6 Mk VII tanks had been lost and only one fuel trailer was listed as serviceable, but with a broken trailer link.

The following information was obtained from Capt. Barbor and Lieut Shearman, both of "C" Sqn 141 RAC :-

1. The CROCODILES landed at H plus 45 mins on D Day. Three were lost in landing in too deep water and one went into a water filled shell hole. The first objective Pt 44 (9185) was attacked by the remaining two CROCODILES AND ACHIEVED BY USING 2 RDS 75 MM AND BESA. They then supported the inf (7 Green Howards) down the axis of adv for the remainder of that day. No flame was used at all. Having left the inf they closed lagered 1 kilometre south of CREPON. Next morning they were fired on by a cleverly concealed battery behind our lines. THE CROCODILES went into action with 75 mm and flame. Approximately 150 Germans surrendered immediately on sight of flame.

Harbored for 2 days with the Westminster Dragoons at BRECY 8778. From there they sere sent to join 231 Bde of 50 Div. They supported the Hampshires in clearing a thickly wooded area (7570) down to Main rd 7569. The Inf wanted them to stay in the wood for the night. They objected and were eventually allowed to go back. The reached X rds (7772) when they receive an urgent order to drop trailers and go to X rds (7669) where the Devons were being attacked by enemy armour. This they did and attacked the village LA BELLE EPINE at 2210 hrs on 11 Jun using 75 mm and BESA on the houses. This was successful and the inf reentered and took possession. Action closed at 0030 hrs and crews returned North to refuel. In the middle of refueling they were recalled to the X rds (7669) owing to the possibility of a dawn attack by enemy armour.

They remained on patrol in that area all day, the trailers were put on again that afternoon but action was not joined. That night 12 Jun the CROCODILE crews were relieved by Lt Davies and crews who were from the CROCODILES lost on the beaches. They patrolled the same area during the 13 Jun.

On the 14 they took part in an attack on the village of BEENIERES BOCAGE (7970) to which the enemy had infiltrated. (There were now three CROCODILES one having being salvaged). The action was successful and they advanced down the main road to X rds (7868) using a small quantity of flame. They were then fired on by German armour. One CROCODILE was completely wrecked having its turret blown off and caught fire. This was due to a penetration on the thickest armour on the fromt to the right of the driver. The other two lost their trailers and sustanied some damage to trucks and turret. On Panzer KWV was knocked out by 75mm fire.

2. CASUALATIES - personnel:-

1 missing on beach
1 killed )
2 wounded) from burnt out tank.
2 missing)

tanks

3 in sea (under salvage)
1 burnt out
1 hit on turret - extent of damage not yeat ascertained.

Trailer serviceable

1 serviceable but trailer link broken.

#104: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 11:47 pm
—
141 RAC War Diary - Use of Crocodiles
Churchill Crocodile

It is clear that the trailors must be kept well back when not in action or committed to action. It is also clear that no pressuring up should be done until we are committed to action. (This takes 30 mins.) -H.Waddell, Lt-Col. Commanding, 141 RAC (The Buffs)

The pressure required had to be primed on the trailer by the crew as close to use as feasible, because pressure could not be maintained for very long. The fuel was used at 4 gallons per second; refuelling took at least 90 minutes and pressurization around 15 minutes. -Wiki

My comments:

1. The trailers must be kept back lest they get picked off when they are being refueled and pressurized.

2. The whole presurrized [flamthrower] fuel system is riddled with leaks, and was expected to take 15 minutes, but now takes 30 minutes, and it is affecting the operational range of Crocodile attacks in a most negative way.

3. Lieut. (now Capt.) Shearman's idea to keep the Crocodiles pressured up for 48 hours with NO specific target is just NOT possible, because of the wasted nitrogen required to do this, and now the old man doesn't like that idea anymore.

Last edited by Stwa on Wed Jun 18, 2014 1:25 am; edited 1 time in total

#105: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2014 10:09 pm
—
Use of Crocodiles (page 2)

4. Emphasys.

(a) Crocodiles must get to 80 yds without fighting our way if possible.

(b) Range of flame 60 to 80 yds.

(c) Trailer very vulnerable to all enemy weapons.

(d) Manouvre very difficult, particularly when backing.

(e) Arc of flame only 11 to 2 o'clock from front of tk. Cannot flame to side. Target must be in front.

(f) One Crocodile Sqn can only be divided once effectively. (a) Sqn Ocmd and RO (or LO) and 3 Tps. (b) Sqn 2IC and LO (or RO) and 2 Tps. It will operate to best advantage as one unit of a whole sqn.

(g) Crocodiles should not be launched against enemy armour.

(h) They are not anti-tk guns.

(i) They are not defensive weapons.

(j) On consolidation should be reasonably clear of enemy mortars and arty fire (can give sp, until releasaed, from behind our Inf positions.)

My comments:

1. From the same report "Use of Crocodiles" (see previous post), Lt. Col. Wadelell reports July 15, 1944.

2. Note the range of flame given as 60 to 80 yards. I do not believe the 60 yard estimate to be due to a complete drop in pressure of the fuel trailers.

3. Several battle reports which I may cite in a later post, describe what happens when there is little or no pressure left in the system, and the range is much less than 60 yards.

#106: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:31 pm
—
141 RAC War Diary - Use of Crocodile (page 1)

Going forward, I do intend to identify what tanks the 141 RAC had at its disposal during Operation Epsom. As with all TOEs the task is made difficult since any TOE represents a single moment in time.

But for now, I would like to spend two more posts regarding the "Use of Crocodile" report. These reports were generally TOP SECRET, as they normally tend to describe the problems (and suggestions to those problems), that the weapon system has encountering in the field.

(2) Recently we have done much better as our insistence on certain points have been granted, o.g.

(a) NOT one tp only but a half Sqn at least for any action.
(b) Inf must follow up closely and go through flame, which will not hurt them.
(c) Better results can be expected when we can get rehearsales with Inf and when we can operate as a whole Sqn.
(d) The plan should be based on flame and be made by ourselves and the Inf with Arty and RAC in sp.

(3) With three Sqns up in the line [each assigned to a different Corps] virtually all the time we are having a steady drain of casualties which recently average about 5-7 daily or over a hundred a month, and we are continually in demand and always allocated.

(4) It is strongly urged that we get some more rfts to train, including some good young Cpls and L/cpls.

It is clear that our role involves assualt to 10X of the objective and that unfortunately all enemy A Tk wpns including the 37mm and Bazookas penetrate virtually all parts of the tk at those ranges. Each hit appears to carry a very high and instantaneous fire risk and with the F.T.F chances of escape are proving abnormally slight. It is almost one hit - one crew.

My comments:

1. There are two dates on this report; July 15, 1944, but more likely July 20, 1944, which is also indicated.

2. The author of this document seems to suggests that the 141 RAC, up to now, cannot make Squadron sized attacks. Either this is a tank or trailer issue, or an issue with planning, or a manpower issue. There may be plenty of officers (see "Return of Officers") from a previous post. He also suggests that 141 RAC plan the attacks, which seems reasonable.

3. Fuel trailer leakage is not mentioned in this report, but has already been indicated to Command in last month's report. In any event, immagine the difficulty a leaking fuel trailer would impose on all of the enumerated actions required to launch and coordinate a Crocodile assault.

#107: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 12:49 am
—
141 RAC War Diary - Use of Crocodile (page 1)
Churchill Crocodile

It is clear that our role involves assualt to 10X of the objective and that unfortunately all enemy A Tk wpns including the 37mm and Bazookas penetrate virtually all parts of the tk at those ranges. Each hit appears to carry a very high and instantaneous fire risk and with the F.T.F chances of escape are proving abnormally slight. It is almost one hit - one crew. -H.Waddell, Lt-Col. Commanding, 141 RAC (The Buffs)

...The Crocodile was a specialised weapon limited by the short range of its flamethrower. -wiki

My comments:

1. It was this last statment, posted way back on page 2 of this thread, that brought the game makers and spammers (they know who they are) out of the woodwork. Everyone entered the posting fray to defend the "long" range of the Churchill Crocodile flame device.

2. Lt. Col. Waddell understands that all flame devices are short range, including the Crocodile. The Uppers that will receive the "Use of Crocodiles" report understand that as well. The report is just reminding all that read the report, that to maintain a weapon of Horror (read as Terror if you like) in the field, it may prove to be costly to Great Britain in tanks and men.

3. In WW2, ANY weapon system could be described as "limited" if it was forced to advance to a range so near the enemy, that the death of the system (Churchill Crocodile) and it's crew could be regarded as a certainty.

#108: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: papa_whisky,

Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:53 am
—
Stwa and Dima I think you should take your debate to another thread you killed this one.

#109: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:06 am
—

papa_whisky wrote (View Post):

Stwa and Dima I think you should take your debate to another thread you killed this one.

NO WAIT

Someone has already started a new GWTC First Impressions Thread here.

Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS

#110: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Sapa,

Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2014 8:27 am
—
meanwhile..the old dinosaur makes his first impression...

*the mortars still hits all the time (even with new fantastic Graphics)*

*tank pathing works better (why shoulnd it after the the disaster in Roads to Arnhem!?)*

*the AI feels better (probably because of the the smaller maps, what a surprise!)*

i am old and learnd from my mother not to raise my voice..but...*

[size=18]AFTER Roads to Arnhem and Panthers in the fog...DIDNT YOU SEE THE RUNNING GIRLS AND STILL THEY ARE IN GAME AFTER GAME AFTER GAME.....[/size]

Whats the use of beta testing, beacuse i thought someone would have an opinion! and this time there was even modmakers of the CC Community MAKING the game!!

It is really sad Crying or Very sad

Mats

#111: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: jacquesboot,

Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2014 12:33 pm
—
Returned to CC after years away; stopped playing at Battle of the Bulge edition because of the terrible bugs (mostly line of sight and pathfinding).

Coming back after a long break first impressions after a campaign as the Germans

Explosions effects great. Love the idea of mortars being able to reuse "zeroed in" target areas; nice touch. Infantry combat is as good as it ever was.

The not so hot:
Mortars still too accurate when they fire blind, (nor friendly troops to spot for them... that would be at least one good reason to be accurate).
6 Pdr AT seems to stay invisible after firing a lot of shots off, sat in a field with German troops less than 100 metres away, only supressing area fire and a costly infantry charge to less than 40 metres revealled it.
Some line of sight bugs; Can't recall the map but I had PZIV being shot at by a Cromwell with only a small hedgerow between them, no smoke or anything else in the way but the PZIV couldn't "see" to shoot back. Similar happened to some infantry who couldn't see the Sherman shooting at them from other side of a hedgerow. Yes I know there are often tiny gaps where line of sight is possible but Ive played these games a lot and it isn't those.

Path finding is worse than CCIII . Several times vehicles ordered to drive along a lane next to a hedge row managed to veer off into the hedge and get tracked for no apparent reason, (it wasnt under fire or anything like that).
(Is it just coincidence but I've never noticed AI vehicles getting tracked when crossing hedges etc... I hardly dare drive a Tiger through anything more than grass or roads).
Path finding seems to be worse for halftracks or that's been my experience so far. In one instance a 251/1 was ordered across an open field but instead it headed for the nearest hedgerow which was no where near it or the destination. Micro managing their path finding is too distracting ...
Infantry are doing similar things now and then but not so badly. EG retreating them out of a hedge row because they're under fire; instead of withdrawing they insist on a random crawl along the line of the hedge row until they're wiped out. I know it's programmed so infantry seek out cover but there is a limit... or should be.

The strategy feature that I can't get my head around; why the AI is able to secure a victory even when its morale breaks and I still have a force left that can wipe it out or at least force it into retreat. It's a big get out of jail free card for the AI which makes no logical sense. On one battle I was attacking, had taken one victory location, then the AI threw in an early counter attack, which was fought out until their morale caved in. It had a few battered infantry units left and one Sherman. I still had 3 PZIVs and most of my infantry. If the AI had not thrown in the towel I would (like to think) that the Germans could at least have taken the major objectives on the map in good time. If a force has its morale broken, even it is sitting on most of the objectives then surely it isn't in condition to resist the enemy and would have to give up ground?

Ref: the Super Crocodile. For some reason it has massively thicker armour in the Vehicles.txt file compared to the other Churchill models; I haven't read anywhere that it isn't just a converted Mk VII, nothing about thicker armour.
They have one parked outside the D-Day museum in Portsmouth (UK) and another at the Tank Museum in Bovington Smile

Vehicles.txt file also reveals that the Cromwell is too slow compared to other tanks speed figures; the Tiger has some part of the frontal armour which is very weak (but only one area, anyone figure why that is?).

Good point made about why no MP44?

Oh one final whinge (for now) ... Panzerfausts, the scourge of Allied armour in the Bocage, are proving pretty much as useful as water pistols; maybe they can be used to rust the Royal Tank Regiment to oblivion. They packed a punch in CCIII. Apart from when they're in solid cover in L2 or higher buildings, German infantry seem happy to get shot to bits rather than think about using them.

The AI seems to be having even less luck with the PIAT against German tanks, but I've not played the British yet. I'm not expecting to fare any better.

Apologies if these items are mentioned/explained ad infinitum elsewhere but I don't have the time to search everything on here.
none of the above is a show stopper, just niggles which I thought may have been corrected.

#112: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: leviath,

Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2014 12:53 pm
—
You might want to post about those armors bugs and stuff on the steam forum of the game or the official forum. It looks like the devs need to look into it because it is quite strange.

#113: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2014 5:08 pm
—

Quote:

Ref: the Super Crocodile. For some reason it has massively thicker armour in the Vehicles.txt file compared to the other Churchill models; I haven't read anywhere that it isn't just a converted Mk VII, nothing about thicker armour.
They have one parked outside the D-Day museum in Portsmouth (UK) and another at the Tank Museum in Bovington Smile

Mk VII had a thicker armor than the other marks before Wink

#114: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:11 am
—
Hey Mats,

We should ask them if they can't put a switch in the ini file for Girls On/Girls OFF. Idea

et All,

Yes the Mk VII Church had more armor, which also contributed to its low speed. Since, they never upgraded its engine throughout the series. It also did its part to make the Crocodiles a certain death trap for it's crews. See posts above.

The Brits were not into the mobility thing.

#115: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: jacquesboot,

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 10:44 am
—

Dima wrote (View Post):

Mk VII had a thicker armor than the other marks before Wink

Yes that's right. In the vehicles.txt file the MKVII has thicker armour, but also in that file the Crocodile has even thicker armour than the MKVII.

Stwa wrote (View Post):

The Brits were not into the mobility thing

The Cromwell and Crusader marks were big on mobility at the expense of armour, and certainly in the latter case, reliability. For some reason a decent all round medium tank seemed to elude British tank designers until the very end of the war; the Comet, but that's about it. They seemed fixated on either well armoured but slow infantry tanks or fast and fragile "cruisers".

#116: Re: Gateway to Caen - FIRST IMPRESSIONS by TIK Author: Dima,

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:28 pm
—

jacquesboot wrote (View Post):

Dima wrote (View Post):

Mk VII had a thicker armor than the other marks before Wink

Yes that's right. In the vehicles.txt file the MKVII has thicker armour, but also in that file the Crocodile has even thicker armour than the MKVII.

oh I see, another mistake then or an interpretation of facts Smile

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat Gateway to Caen

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Page 1 of 1