Jump to content

Infantry Movement Rates


Recommended Posts

With traditional hex-based board wargames, a unit will typically be given a number of movement points usable per turn. The various terrain types will be given a number of movement points required to enter. Thus it’s relatively easy to visualise where each unit will be at the end of any given turn.

Within CM, how can movement rates be calculated/estimated? For example, assuming no enemy interference, how far can a unit travel when using Slow, Hunt, Move, Quick and Fast? And how does this change for the various terrain types? This isn’t stated anywhere in the manual and a forum search hasn’t returned anything on this topic.

I’d really like to know that, for example, a unit that is 'Ready' could travel 'Quick' through woods for around 60m in a one minute turn. Then I could decide whether to move them that full amount, or whether to have them move for just 40m and rest for the remaining 20 seconds.

Does anyone have any useful info along these lines?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question. 

No. ;)

So much depends on the terrain and what the men are carrying. Are we talking two men with 3 Javelins, or a 13-man Marine squad who have fired off every round? Rubble, road, tall grass, hedges, slope, intermediate waypoints, entering a building...etc.

Once you understand, and embrace, that CM doesn't give you answers but allows you to learn through experience, questions like yours become unimportant. Not busting on you: I certainly had those questions, too. "Will this team be able to cross that distance and gain cover in this turn?" IRL, does a platoon leader know how long it will take his scouts to cross the field? No...he has an idea, but no solid knowledge: Smith and Jenkins can cross this field (which I measure to be 204m) in 1:17. That's silly. Instead it's more, "Smith, Jenkins! Cross this field. We'll wait here and cover you until you get to the other side."

The more you play, the more you'll get a feel for what's reasonable to expect as far as movement rates. With intermediate waypoints, solo teams move faster than squads made up of multiple teams. Giving an order to SLOW for 75m will exhaust your guys and take about 3 turns. Or more.

The cool thing? If you really want to know the movement rates, the editor allow you to set up what you want.

(But, yes, it would be easier/nicer(?) if that info were out there.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is by far not a question that is easy to answer.

First, I think you need to get your head out of how board games work, its hard to get cm to work on similar concepts.

 

But my suggestion to you is this, you need to get a feel for how cm works with movement, yes, what you are requesting is good to understand. but getting a chart handed to you is not likely to happen.

 

The best thing to do is set up a test map. place your units on the map and then run a test for what they will do in the terrain you want to check them against.

you will get pretty direct results on distances a unit will make in that minute. Run the test multiple times, in each terrain type you want to check.

 

But here is where the problem begins, ok that might get you a good number if the troops are in perfect order and no one is firing in their general area.

but the truth is, the troops condition and how exhausted they are impacts how fast they move,. they might not even take your orders and follow them if they are having morale issues.

Terrain does not work like a board game, woods is not always the same, depending on how the woods are created in the map, they can portray many different levels of obstruction to movement and viewing, none of which is easy for you to tell until your troops are actually in there doing it on the game.

So in CM, its more of a feel for what you expect your units to do instead of knowing for sure what they will do. You will only get good at it after playing it alot and seeing the general tendencies of how troops react under certain conditions.

So running troops that are fresh at full speed on turn one will result in what is expected. but running troops that might be exhausted, have a few men killed and still having to haul the same equipment is going to be a whole different world in what will happen.  There just is no charts for this.

The game is like real life, you don't know how far that second group is going to get in a minute, because in truth, you wouldn't know for sure in the real situation either. you would assume a logical guess and hope for the best, the same is true in the game

 

 

 

Edited by slysniper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To add to the replies above, which are both spot on, it is also important to understand the differences between the various move commands, so ensuring the appropriate order is used where possible.

All of the five move commands for infantry units not only affect speed of movement, but also the likelihood, or not, of returning fire while moving,  use of nearby cover, whether a unit will stop when under fire, or continue to move regardless etc. 

P

 

Edited by Pete Wenman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jonPhillips said:

Does anyone have any useful info along these lines?

The game is so dynamic a chart would not be practical.  With experience playing and reading these forums you will be able to understand some general rules for what works, when it works and then adopt those rules for the specific tactical problem you're looking at. 

In March of 2017 I did a test where infantry on Hunt traveled faster than they did on Move when in open terrain but slower than Move in light woods. (One example of why a chart might not be practical.)

Something I found interesting when I discovered it: A lightly wounded troop (yellow base) will often lag behind the rest of his fire team when moving causing the entire team to wait on the yellow based troops arrival at a waypoint before continuing to the next waypoint.      

In addition, below is something @c3k posted in June 2015 that I found helpful.  I paraphrased it and saved it in my notes. 

Each waypoint creates a game-mandated Pause until all the troops are present, then the unit goes to the next waypoint. Fewer waypoints mean fewer delays. Fewer sub-units mean shorter delays. For the shortest possible delay use one team, one waypoint. This means the most heavily loaded troop may be some distance behind. (Every item is allocated to a specific troop and weight carries a penalty.) An un-split three-team squad waits for all 3 teams to arrive/congregate at each waypoint before moving again. I split my squads and use Quick as my default move order.     

Below is a chart @axxe created in March of 2017 that you might find interesting as a general point of reference. I'm to lazy to look for the link but there is an entire thread associated with the below chart. 

image.png.10536f1f3179f2ae99538cc4a5020fef.png

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎19‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 12:53 PM, c3k said:

Good question. 

No. ;)

So much depends on the terrain and what the men are carrying. Are we talking two men with 3 Javelins, or a 13-man Marine squad who have fired off every round? Rubble, road, tall grass, hedges, slope, intermediate waypoints, entering a building...etc.

Once you understand, and embrace, that CM doesn't give you answers but allows you to learn through experience, questions like yours become unimportant. Not busting on you: I certainly had those questions, too. "Will this team be able to cross that distance and gain cover in this turn?" IRL, does a platoon leader know how long it will take his scouts to cross the field? No...he has an idea, but no solid knowledge: Smith and Jenkins can cross this field (which I measure to be 204m) in 1:17. That's silly. Instead it's more, "Smith, Jenkins! Cross this field. We'll wait here and cover you until you get to the other side."

The more you play, the more you'll get a feel for what's reasonable to expect as far as movement rates. With intermediate waypoints, solo teams move faster than squads made up of multiple teams. Giving an order to SLOW for 75m will exhaust your guys and take about 3 turns. Or more.

The cool thing? If you really want to know the movement rates, the editor allow you to set up what you want.

(But, yes, it would be easier/nicer(?) if that info were out there.)

hey, new poster, owned CMBN since May

I imagine that might be complicated to carry out user interface wise, though would that not be an argument for including some sort of "Pause Until Friendly Seen" command, say something similar user interface wise to the target commands though which made your units pause indefinitely and watch an targeted action spot, and then once an allied unit was seen in that action spot resumed the units orders. I imagine would be interesting with the friendly fog of war that's present too. :)

I was also wanting to question the same thing as the OP, as was trying to do some section bounding, and having some slight trouble (even when not under fire) with ensuring the pauses I provided ensured that whilst one was moving the other was stationary and covering.

Edited by Oliver_88
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Oliver_88 said:

hey, new poster, owned CMBN since May

I imagine that might be complicated to carry out user interface wise, though would that not be an argument for including some sort of "Pause Until Friendly Seen" command, say something similar user interface wise to the target commands though which made your units pause indefinitely and watch an targeted action spot, and then once an allied unit was seen in that action spot resumed the units orders. I imagine would be interesting with the friendly fog of war that's present too. :)

I was also wanting to question the same thing as the OP, as was trying to do some section bounding, and having some slight trouble (even when not under fire) with ensuring the pauses I provided ensured that whilst one was moving the other was stationary and covering.

This is one of the most difficult concepts for new players to get used to. Other games give that sort of control. Of course, in real life, I could say, "Team Bravo, harden up. When Alpha breaches, then move up and enter behind them." I'm sure there'd be a way to program that with targeted links. But then what happens if Alpha gets totally wiped out? Or if they run in fear all the way off the map? Etc.

Pros and cons...

The timing skills get acquired with more play. I had the same issues at first. Now, even the mighty @sburke fears to join any thread in which I post. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Oliver_88 said:

I was also wanting to question the same thing as the OP, as was trying to do some section bounding, and having some slight trouble (even when not under fire) with ensuring the pauses I provided ensured that whilst one was moving the other was stationary and covering.

With experience you should be able to pretty well guess how long to make your pauses and bounds. It doesn't really matter much if it isn't all perfectly precise, it isn't perfectly precise in real life either.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, c3k said:

This is one of the most difficult concepts for new players to get used to. Other games give that sort of control. Of course, in real life, I could say, "Team Bravo, harden up. When Alpha breaches, then move up and enter behind them." I'm sure there'd be a way to program that with targeted links. But then what happens if Alpha gets totally wiped out? Or if they run in fear all the way off the map? Etc.

Pros and cons...

The timing skills get acquired with more play. I had the same issues at first. Now, even the mighty @sburke fears to join any thread in which I post. ;)

This is sburke's wife.  He ran screaming from the room with some bizarre high pitched scream I have never heard from him before and is now whimpering in the closet.  BUT were he a real male with a few drops of testosterone that I keep telling him to get from his email spam, he'd say c3k... is.....  hmm how do I say this, I think I saw something similar recently about just saying it real fast

Iagreewithc3k.  There.  Damn that was difficult.  There are two aspects to wego that are somewhat flip sides of the same coin.  One is the loss of control once you have issued commands.  For me that loss of control is the bit of realism about the limits of command.  I can tell a unit what I want it to do, but what happens after the big red button is hit is out of my hands for a minute.  I like that.  On the other hand there are certain situations that RT is more realistic in that as c3k noted, if I want team B to head out and join team A when they reach cover across the field I can do that.  In wego I have to guess and if I decide I'd rather not guess I have to wait the 60 second cycle. 

What I have learned is to be patient. Well that is what Steve has learned.  What I have learned is he is a pathetic coward afraid of action, but we can discuss that another time.  I think he is about to emerge from his hiding spot.  

Use the whole dang 60 seconds.  Slowing down the game is usually a good thing for a player.  The time compression we invoke based on our god's eye view of the battlefield frequently causes us to make really bad decisions.  Waiting allows your team to have more situational awareness.  They spot better and you may find they identify enemy units better especially if team A receives a couple rounds of incoming fire.  You now have a more informed position to make a decision on the next turn.  I have this perception from posts that players are still trying to perform this complex synchronized ballet of movement.  That isn't combat.  That is god's eye gaming.  Slow down.  Observe.  Move from cover to cover with over watch and if you have to cross terrain that you are not sure is clear of enemy, for god's sake use smoke.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

With experience you should be able to pretty well guess how long to make your pauses and bounds. It doesn't really matter much if it isn't all perfectly precise, it isn't perfectly precise in real life either.

Michael

Yeah do not worry I am not caring about the bounds being that precise either. And I am trying to learn such things on my own, though I was just going to want some judgements (again not expecting precise things) on what people find works for them, from those who have that experience already.

 

9 hours ago, c3k said:

This is one of the most difficult concepts for new players to get used to. Other games give that sort of control. Of course, in real life, I could say, "Team Bravo, harden up. When Alpha breaches, then move up and enter behind them." I'm sure there'd be a way to program that with targeted links. But then what happens if Alpha gets totally wiped out? Or if they run in fear all the way off the map? Etc.

Pros and cons...

The timing skills get acquired with more play. I had the same issues at first. Now, even the mighty @sburke fears to join any thread in which I post. ;)

Do you mean prior to A reaching the action spot that B is watching for them at? Then B would not move given that the condition for their movement is not met? And once the turns over you can just un-pause B to send them in anyway or else change their orders. Just as I imagine you might with the Pause Command. Question then using the Timed Pause Command what happens in that situation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, sburke said:

This is sburke's wife.  He ran screaming from the room with some bizarre high pitched scream I have never heard from him before and is now whimpering in the closet.  BUT were he a real male with a few drops of testosterone that I keep telling him to get from his email spam, he'd say c3k... is.....  hmm how do I say this, I think I saw something similar recently about just saying it real fast

Iagreewithc3k.  There.  Damn that was difficult.  There are two aspects to wego that are somewhat flip sides of the same coin.  One is the loss of control once you have issued commands.  For me that loss of control is the bit of realism about the limits of command.  I can tell a unit what I want it to do, but what happens after the big red button is hit is out of my hands for a minute.  I like that.  On the other hand there are certain situations that RT is more realistic in that as c3k noted, if I want team B to head out and join team A when they reach cover across the field I can do that.  In wego I have to guess and if I decide I'd rather not guess I have to wait the 60 second cycle. 

What I have learned is to be patient. Well that is what Steve has learned.  What I have learned is he is a pathetic coward afraid of action, but we can discuss that another time.  I think he is about to emerge from his hiding spot.  

Use the whole dang 60 seconds.  Slowing down the game is usually a good thing for a player.  The time compression we invoke based on our god's eye view of the battlefield frequently causes us to make really bad decisions.  Waiting allows your team to have more situational awareness.  They spot better and you may find they identify enemy units better especially if team A receives a couple rounds of incoming fire.  You now have a more informed position to make a decision on the next turn.  I have this perception from posts that players are still trying to perform this complex synchronized ballet of movement.  That isn't combat.  That is god's eye gaming.  Slow down.  Observe.  Move from cover to cover with over watch and if you have to cross terrain that you are not sure is clear of enemy, for god's sake use smoke.

 

 

 

 

Alright I see then. Though I rather do not think I am wanting to perform some "complex synchronized ballet of movement" and believe I am being patient in my actions, clock and assigned objectives seems to think so. :P Interested though on the using the whole 60 seconds, so you would not use the Timed Pause for such purposes, and just do an movement per turn even though the distance might be slight. Does that not eat up much in your time limits?

I enjoy that loss in control too that you get in WEGO, not to mention being able to replay what happened for each of my sections. :) Though some small redundancy in orders is not amiss for me where realistic, imagine some real orders can have some element of "when carrying out orders if a happens do b"?

Beauty in this game seemed to be some of the elements of realism and historical aspects, such as the need for keeping c2 links, the relative spotting, and to & e. So would have thought that if what c3k wrote about Jenkins and Smith was how the order would realistically be given, then that would have been an suitable thing to replicate. But consider me defeated then.

 

Edited by Oliver_88
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Oliver_88 said:

Alright I see then. Though I rather do not think I am wanting to perform some "complex synchronized ballet of movement" and believe I am being patient in my actions, clock and assigned objectives seems to think so. :P Interested though on the using the whole 60 seconds, so you would not use the Timed Pause for such purposes, and just do an movement per turn even though the distance might be slight. Does that not eat up much in your time limits?

I enjoy that loss in control too that you get in WEGO, not to mention being able to replay what happened for each of my sections. :) Though some small redundancy in orders is not amiss for me where realistic, imagine some real orders can have some element of "when carrying out orders if a happens do b"?

Beauty in this game seemed to be some of the elements of realism and historical aspects, such as the need for keeping c2 links, the relative spotting, and to & e. So would have thought that if what c3k wrote about Jenkins and Smith was how the order would realistically be given, then that would have been an suitable thing to replicate. But consider me defeated then.

 

That wasn't specifically meant for you, just an observation.  What you are running into is the balancing act.  Time can be critical and to be brutally honest I do find myself on the short end of the clock late game more often than I'd like.  I will use synchronized movement with pauses etc but typically only when I am pretty sure I am in no danger of significant contact.

Bounding movement and using the timed pauses definitely has a place.  If I am borderline sure about the enemy I may have the initial move after the pause be hunt just to give my unit a chance to cancel.  I have learned (well I am learning cause I still make this mistake way too often) to be aware of what positions I know are clear and what aren't, to try and provoke the enemy to break cover by a target brief on a position I am not sure is clear before I venture to move.  There is no "right" answer. The one I really struggle with is when I want to smoke a street I think is covered by the enemy. Smoke is short lived so waiting too long means you lose the cover but trying to guess when a team will actually toss grenades and how long it will take to form a screen and how long it will last (and if it will last long enough to cover my retreat f I need it)... let's just say it can be pretty tense.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Related to the "PAUSE until friendly seen" idea, is the related "PAUSE until enemy is seen and shot at, then move to next waypoint". 

This would be invaluable for AT and Sniper teams.  Also, that would be a useful "Ambush" order for other units since in WEGO you don't want your ambushers waiting around for 45 seconds while the enemy brings heavy firepower to bear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Oliver_88 said:

Yeah do not worry I am not caring about the bounds being that precise either. And I am trying to learn such things on my own, though I was just going to want some judgements (again not expecting precise things) on what people find works for them, from those who have that experience already.

Alright, fair enough and I will describe the technique I use most often. Let's say I am playing one of the WW II games as the Americans. I need to get one or more squads across an open, flat, level area that is dry and firm and the temperature is moderate. (All these conditions are variable and all the variables can and will effect the timings and distances I will use.) There are likely some unidentified enemy units on the other side of the field and I would like to get them to reveal themselves without my taking more casualties than is absolutely unavoidable.

Okay, so I have already broken my squads into teams and this is how I will move them. Team A is ordered to advance at Quick for 20-25 meters and then pause for 10 seconds. Then they are to advance at Quick for another 20-25 meters and probably stop. Team B is ordered to wait 10 seconds and then advance at Quick for 20-25, pause for 10 seconds and then advance again before stopping. Team C is ordered to pause 20 seconds, advance at Quick, pause for 10 seconds, and then advance again. If I have timed everything just right, the turn should be ending just as Team C completes its move, but it's okay if there is a little carryover.

Under this system of moving, there is always at least one and more often two teams able to spot and return fire while the third team is moving and no team is exposed to enemy fire for more than 10 seconds at a time. Due to the 7 second spotting cycle, this latter fact is important for keeping casualties down. If at the beginning of the next turn, any team with a spotted enemy unit can remain in place and maintain fire on that unit, keeping it suppressed.

Like I said, there are a lot of variables that can effect the length of bounds and their frequency. Tiring units get shorter bounds and longer pauses to catch their breath. Same for units moving through mud, snow or dense foliage or uphill.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good explanation. I do something very similar but usually use slightly longer pauses 15s and if a team is small (like a two man HQ team) they get 20s instead.

The only thing I would add is that if you do that bounding across a longer distance at the end of each turn I just check in to see how things are doing and adjust the pauses if needed. Like if one team is getting a head because they have smoother terrain they will get a bit more pause time. If any of the bounding is getting out of sync I tweak the pauses so they go back to covering each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, IanL said:

The only thing I would add is that if you do that bounding across a longer distance at the end of each turn I just check in to see how things are doing and adjust the pauses if needed. Like if one team is getting a head because they have smoother terrain they will get a bit more pause time. If any of the bounding is getting out of sync I tweak the pauses so they go back to covering each other.

That's what's called "good play".

:D

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

 

A bit more chart below. Not an exhaustive (har har) test, but still helpful.

With a combination of using Target to measure approximate distances, and rough numbers like in the chart, I can fairly well synchronize unit movement, and have an idea of when to expect fatigue, etc.

UHJjbAt.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...