Is there ever any reason not use teams?

[markshot]

So, I am most familiar with CMBB/CMAK and now on the learning curve the CMx2v3 WWII engine.

All the stuff I watch seems to give me tons of reasons to use teams.

Then, is there ever any reason not to use teams?

Aside:  granted they are useful, but doesn't kind of up the micro-management factor by 2-3X?

Thanks.

[GerryCMBB]

Hope you don't mind me coming in here Mark but I am interested in the answer also and I have a similar concern.

I was watching a video series by Chris M. explaining squad differences by nationality and their flexibility in terms of creating different kinds of teams from the squads. Great stuff and shows what an incredible series this is. But I am afraid if I break most of my squads up I will be totally lost - looking for that AT-team, where is assault team, how to keep it all organized somewhat, etc. So looking forward to some feedback.

Gerry

[Michael Emrys]

1 hour ago, markshot said:

 

1 hour ago, markshot said:

Then, is there ever any reason not to use teams? Not that I can think of off hand. It does simplify movement where they are not expected to come under fire, but that's about it. Tactically I find little or no advantage to using teams. But note this is for the US Army, the Italians are rather a different story, but I never play them.

1 hour ago, markshot said:

Aside:  granted they are useful, but doesn't kind of up the micro-management factor by 2-3X?.

Yes, but it is something you get used to. Allot yourself enough time to play and then patiently perform all the tasks required of you. The payoff is that you then get to watch the replay of the move where you annihilate your enemy.

Michael

 

[Michael Emrys]

41 minutes ago, GerryCMBB said:

But I am afraid if I break most of my squads up I will be totally lost - looking for that AT-team, where is assault team, how to keep it all organized somewhat, etc.

I usually just keep all the components of a squad in fairly close proximity to each other. You are going to need to keep all the components of your platoons fairly close anyway due to command and control limitations. Letting a team or squad wander out of command range is not good for their health.

Michael

[General Jack Ripper]

1 hour ago, markshot said:

Aside:  granted they are useful, but doesn't kind of up the micro-management factor by 2-3X?

Absolutely. However, if you break down your orders phase by Platoon, it helps to keep track of everything.

I usually split a squad into teams, accomplish a specific objective, then merge the squad back together for any non-combat movement.

[MOS:96B2P]

1 hour ago, GerryCMBB said:

<Snip> I am afraid if I break most of my squads up I will be totally lost - looking for that AT-team, where is assault team, how to keep it all organized somewhat, etc. So looking forward to some feedback.

Gerry

I find the following helps.  I use a 50 meter 360^o Target Arc on my maneuver platoon HQ teams.  Then I try to keep my teams within this area.  It also gives a visual general representation of the HQs voice C2 radius.  Some teams, like the reserve squad, light mortar etc may drop a little ways out the back of the 360^o command circle but the ones up front in contact I make sure are in command.  It also keeps the HQ from firing at far off targets and giving away it's position.  50 meters should be enough for self defense.  Below are some screenshots of the concept in battle.  

 

 

 

Also, like @SLIM said I assign and follow up on orders by platoon.  1st Platoon is securing the crossroads: I run through all the teams in 1st Platoon.  Then move on to 2nd Platoon.  In battles against the AI the group command is also useful.   

[Bulletpoint]

2 hours ago, markshot said:

Then, is there ever any reason not to use teams?

As long as the squad is together, they all benefit from the squad leader's binoculars, I believe.

Also, I think they benefit from the squad leader's leadership rating. Once you split the squad, the individual teams tend to have the same leadership scores as the parent squad, but I'm not sure this leadership bonus actually counts unless there's a designated "leader" or "assistant leader" in the team... drifting into speculation here.

Edited December 11, 2016 by Bulletpoint

[GerryCMBB]

Thanks everyone. And Mos that is a really neat idea. I am a very visual person so I will try that.

[Michael Emrys]

MOS alluded to a feature that is worth emphasizing. And that is using the + and - keys to run through your order of battle is a good way to keep track of where everybody is and what they are doing. From that you can give them orders.

Michael

[GerryCMBB]

2 minutes ago, Michael Emrys said:

MOS alluded to a feature that is worth emphasizing. And that is using the + and - keys to run through your order of battle is a good way to keep track of where everybody is and what they are doing. From that you can give them orders.

Michael

Does it follow along in sequence by teams - squads - platoons related to the unit you start with? Or is it a more random thing? Thanks.

And sorry Mark if I derailed your thread.

[Michael Emrys]

It takes the units in order. You can select a unit and go forward or backward from there. Of, if you don't have a unit selected, it will start with the ranking officer and go on from there.

Michael

[GerryCMBB]

4 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said:

I find the following helps.  I use a 50 meter 360^o Target Arc on my maneuver platoon HQ teams.  Then I try to keep my teams within this area.  It also gives a visual general representation of the HQs voice C2 radius.  Some teams, like the reserve squad, light mortar etc may drop a little ways out the back of the 360^o command circle but the ones up front in contact I make sure are in command.  It also keeps the HQ from firing at far off targets and giving away it's position.  50 meters should be enough for self defense.  Below are some screenshots of the concept in battle.  

 

 

 

Also, like @SLIM said I assign and follow up on orders by platoon.  1st Platoon is securing the crossroads: I run through all the teams in 1st Platoon.  Then move on to 2nd Platoon.  In battles against the AI the group command is also useful.   

Thanks again for the graphics. You mention a group command. Is that the camera groups you are referring to? I use it but is only active for a session. You have to reset them every time you load the scenario. But better than not having it at all.

[MOS:96B2P]

4 minutes ago, GerryCMBB said:

Thanks again for the graphics. You mention a group command. Is that the camera groups you are referring to? I use it but is only active for a session. You have to reset them every time you load the scenario. But better than not having it at all.

Yes the camera group.  Depending on the size of the battle I give 1st Platoon Group #1, 2nd Platoon group #2, the Company HQ #6 etc.  The draw back, as you said, is that you have to reset them every session which makes them useless for PBEM.  So I just use them against the AI when I think I will get to play more than 5 turns or so.  But no worries I heard @IanL is going to buy Steve some alcoholic beverages and get the camera group feature made permanent so it does not have to be reset all the time.  

Direct all future questions about the timeline and status for implementation of this improved feature to Ian   .    

[GerryCMBB]

8 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:

Yes the camera group.  Depending on the size of the battle I give 1st Platoon Group #1, 2nd Platoon group #2, the Company HQ #6 etc.  The draw back, as you said, is that you have to reset them every session which makes them useless for PBEM.  So I just use them against the AI when I think I will get to play more than 5 turns or so.  But no worries I heard @IanL is going to buy Steve some alcoholic beverages and get the camera group feature made permanent so it does not have to be reset all the time.  

Direct all future questions about the timeline and status for implementation of this improved feature to Ian   .    

I don't know about the beer offer but he was interested in the feature for sure in the thread I started on the FB forum. So maybe he was more interested than I thought!

[Vanir Ausf B]

9 hours ago, markshot said:

Then, is there ever any reason not to use teams?

In Red Thunder split Soviet squads suffer an extra moral penalty. Despite that I usually spit them anyways.

[markshot]

Thank you for the thoughts and interesting visualization.  Also, I think the idea is useful that a squad has a task whether split or not is a good organizing principle.

One problem I have is that to keep recon teams in command often requires having the command unit trailing them closer than I would like.  It seems to make them vulnerable to getting sucked into an ambush?

[Michael Emrys]

1 hour ago, markshot said:

One problem I have is that to keep recon teams in command often requires having the command unit trailing them closer than I would like.

I sometimes have to let them go out of command range. I usually have some part of their parent squad following them closely enough to see and respond to any location the scouts might receive fire from. Some times the scouts just get waxed anyway, but that's war.

Michael

[gnarly]

On 12/12/2016 at 3:24 AM, MOS:96B2P said:

I find the following helps.  I use a 50 meter 360^o Target Arc on my maneuver platoon HQ teams.  Then I try to keep my teams within this area.  It also gives a visual general representation of the HQs voice C2 radius.  Some teams, like the reserve squad, light mortar etc may drop a little ways out the back of the 360^o command circle but the ones up front in contact I make sure are in command.  It also keeps the HQ from firing at far off targets and giving away it's position.  50 meters should be enough for self defense.  Below are some screenshots of the concept in battle.  

 

 

 

That is a very useful tip MOS, much appreciated! I have been struggling with C2 in WW2 cf. Black Sea, so I'll give that a try.

[Migo441]

On 12/11/2016 at 10:24 AM, MOS:96B2P said:

I find the following helps.  I use a 50 meter 360^o Target Arc on my maneuver platoon HQ teams.  Then I try to keep my teams within this area.  It also gives a visual general representation of the HQs voice C2 radius.  

As a clarification, does the 50m voice radius apply at all difficulty levels?  I was thinking this wasn't true on Iron but I'm not 100% sure.

[MOS:96B2P]

39 minutes ago, Migo441 said:

As a clarification, does the 50m voice radius apply at all difficulty levels?  I was thinking this wasn't true on Iron but I'm not 100% sure.

Yes, it applies to skill level Iron.  Terrain can effect the 50m radius and if a unit is on Hide (either HQ or fire team) the C2 voice radius will decrease.  Otherwise it is generally automatic at 50 meters. 

[Migo441]

16 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said:

Yes, it applies to skill level Iron.  Terrain can effect the 50m radius and if a unit is on Hide (either HQ or fire team) the C2 voice radius will decrease.  Otherwise it is generally automatic at 50 meters. 

Thanks for the clarification!  I've seen the auto 50m not work but that makes sense that it would be due to other factors (terrain and stance) and not the difficulty level.

The HQ with 50m circular arc is a nice SOP for all the reasons you laid out: it's a quick and easy voice command "footprint" reference and visual queue and you don't want your HQs drawing attention to themselves by engaging the enemy at long ranges in any case.

Thinking about this from the other side's perspective, if you believe you've identified a Platoon HQ, it provides a nice center-point for a like sized area indirect fire mission!  Noted: easier conceived than executed.