Tactical Decision Games

[domfluff]

This one in particular, since it's quick and simple, yet directly relevant to Combat Mission.

http://kepler.pratt.duke.edu/NROTC/gazetteOLD/tdg97_1.html

Came across this, and thought this was pretty interesting - in particular how all three of the solutions differed - my solution was identical to A (differing on where I placed the MG - my placement was probably worse), but it was interesting to see the alternative points of view.

Some of the other TDG's on this page include the idea of a "Premortem" - "Assume that you can see into the future and can see that your plan was a complete failure. Try to anticipate what would likely have gone wrong and why." That seems like a useful tool in general - anticipating failure, so you can work to counteract it.

[Bulletpoint]

Interesting stuff. Since I have no military background, I approach this from the perspective of a civilian CM player. And if there's one thing CM told me, it's not to assault over open ground when the flank isn't secured. And that it's never secured unless it's actively proven safe.

In this scenario, we assume 2nd fire team is somewhere on the hill, but we don't actually know. Could be they ran into an observation post.

My plan would be to take the MG team and 3rd team from the left flank, then peel back behind 1st team, check out if it's actually 2nd team on that hill, and then continue through masked terrain (stream/trees) to get a visual on the big empty (?) hill on the right part of the map.

It probably has infantry on it too, and in a CM mission, the hill north of it would be the optimal place where an unspotted enemy HMG would be ready to put enfilade fire on any assault team moving across open ground.

Would not attempt to assault, but would gather intel and call for backup.

Edited October 16, 2018 by Bulletpoint

[domfluff]

There are suggested solutions with maps to the top right (A, B and C). "Solutions", really, since there's no one right answer, but the process is the thing.

Solution A http://kepler.pratt.duke.edu/NROTC/gazetteOLD/tds97_1a.html
Solution B http://kepler.pratt.duke.edu/NROTC/gazetteOLD/tds97_1b.html
Solution C http://kepler.pratt.duke.edu/NROTC/gazetteOLD/tds97_1c.html

For what it's worth, I don't like the look of Solution B. Solution A was the same as what I sketched out, and Solution C is the most similar to yours, since it's similarly defensive (but possibly from a stronger position?)

It didn't actually occur to me to not attack(!) here - I'd be more than happy to probe cautiously and cancel the movement on contact, but I've come to realise that I have a strong bias towards manoeuvre in general, which doesn't mean it's always the best fit for the job.

Incidentally, other games on this page are include the same scenario from the opposite perspective:
http://kepler.pratt.duke.edu/NROTC/gazetteOLD/tdg97_3.html

And the same scenario from the perspective of the platoon commander:
http://kepler.pratt.duke.edu/NROTC/gazetteOLD/tdg97_5.html
 

[Bulletpoint]

8 minutes ago, domfluff said:

Solution A was the same as what I sketched out, and Solution C is the most similar to yours, since it's similarly defensive (but possibly from a stronger position?)

Yes, I think my solution is more or less a combination of A+C.

Could be interesting for a tiny CM scenario.

[domfluff]

I was thinking about adapting some of this kind of thing (going back to Von Moltke's originals)

Some CM scenario's are a bit "puzzle like" in this manner - I wonder whether this kind of thing would be better with multiple plans, or actually being "solvable".

For example, any kind of flanking move to the right could run into an enemy team (or worse) hidden from view - if so, should they always be there? sometimes? If one were developing CM TDG's, I wonder what the best approach would be.

[Bulletpoint]

1 hour ago, domfluff said:

I wonder whether this kind of thing would be better with multiple plans, or actually being "solvable".

For example, any kind of flanking move to the right could run into an enemy team (or worse) hidden from view - if so, should they always be there? sometimes? If one were developing CM TDG's, I wonder what the best approach would be.

I definitely prefer to have many different possible semi-random enemy positions in a scenario. Good scenarios deserve to have a lot of replayability. This option is unfortunately not always used by scenario designers.

If your tactical approach is sound, it shouldn't hinge on being lucky that an enemy team is/isn't present at a particular location.

Edited October 16, 2018 by Bulletpoint

[MOS:96B2P]

3 hours ago, domfluff said:

This one in particular, since it's quick and simple, yet directly relevant to Combat Mission.  

Very interesting stuff.  Thanks for sharing.   Many small, short Combat Mission scenarios could be made from these TDGs.  They fit the scale of CM very well.  +1