Infantry and Armour Tactics Info?

[holoween]

1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

In contrast, imagine you're in the desert with full view for miles around. There's one building about 100m away. As a human being, you know if there's an enemy nearby, he absolutely has to be in that house, because there's no other place to hide. So you send forward your maneuver element while the overwatch element obviously watches the house. The moment an enemy pops up in a window, it takes a fraction of a second to fire accurately on him.

IRL that target fixation works both ways though. if your opponent has a trench 10m next to the building your men might not even notice the fire is coming from the trench and not the house.

 

Also this focus on certain places can be done with target arcs ingame.

 

Edited November 28, 2018 by holoween

[Bulletpoint]

1 hour ago, holoween said:

Also this focus on certain places can be done with target arcs ingame.

I believe the target arcs do not affect spotting/unit focus, but only restrict what they will fire upon...

[domfluff]

It doesn't give you a bonus, but will still help with spotting - they keep their eyes towards the centre of the arc, so you'll see things in that direction.

[General Liederkranz]

3 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Spotting cycles: Depending on distance, it can take up to seven seconds for the overwatch element to even get a chance to 'roll the dice' to get a chance to spot the enemy. If they fail their check, they can wait for up to another seven seconds.

I don't think this is correct. My understanding is that in addition to the ordinary spotting cycles, when units take certain actions like firing, or move into view of each other, there's an automatic spotting check outside the 7-second cycle. I know I've often seen units spotted the moment they open fire, rather than a few seconds afterward.

[SimpleSimon]

Delete triple post

Edited November 29, 2018 by SimpleSimon

[SimpleSimon]

Delete triple post 

Edited November 29, 2018 by SimpleSimon

[SimpleSimon]

8 hours ago, slysniper said:

Maneuver unit taking fire and being pinned, then it was not time to maneuver was it. 

Pretty much. It seems to me like a lot of the time people just expect way too much of their Assault elements. It takes a lot of preparation, thorough preparation, for an infantry close assault to be successful which is often why it was not a preferred method of attack. It was more like something you did to mop up remains, not win battles. 

[Erwin]

2 hours ago, domfluff said:

It doesn't give you a bonus, but will still help with spotting - they keep their eyes towards the centre of the arc, so you'll see things in that direction.

This was definitely true in CM1.  I vaguely recall that the spotting in the arc direction was toned down for CM2.  I still try and give directional arcs to units.  But, it's not as easy to make 180 degree arcs in CM2 as it was (one click) in CM1.  However, my understanding from posts over the years is that many CM2 players seem to generally just use 360 arcs and don't seem to have problems with spotting.  So, not sure if giving directional arcs is worth it any more.  

 

[Erwin]

2 hours ago, General Liederkranz said:

My understanding is that in addition to the ordinary spotting cycles, when units take certain actions like firing, or move into view of each other, there's an automatic spotting check outside the 7-second cycle. I know I've often seen units spotted the moment they open fire, rather than a few seconds afterward.

This is interesting.  Have found that a QUICK move by a unit into the LOS of an enemy that you know is there via sound contact with an AREA FIRE order at the enemy can be more effective that using HUNT to close with the enemy.  Often one can kill or suppress the enemy even when it is in a foxhole etc.  Maybe the enemy is caught in the middle of its spotting cycle?

[Michael Emrys]

1 hour ago, Erwin said:

So, not sure if giving directional arcs is worth it any more.

I've had pretty good luck with them. On several occasions I've had vehicles moving from behind buildings into what should have been an ambush, but because I had given them covered arcs pointing their attention on the required sector, they spotted first, fired first, and got the kill.

Michael

[Bulletpoint]

12 hours ago, domfluff said:

It doesn't give you a bonus, but will still help with spotting - they keep their eyes towards the centre of the arc, so you'll see things in that direction.

More so than when using the regular facing command?

[Bulletpoint]

12 hours ago, General Liederkranz said:

16 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Spotting cycles: Depending on distance, it can take up to seven seconds for the overwatch element to even get a chance to 'roll the dice' to get a chance to spot the enemy. If they fail their check, they can wait for up to another seven seconds.

I don't think this is correct. My understanding is that in addition to the ordinary spotting cycles, when units take certain actions like firing, or move into view of each other, there's an automatic spotting check outside the 7-second cycle. I know I've often seen units spotted the moment they open fire, rather than a few seconds afterward.

I don't know for sure how it works, but in my experience, it seems quite variable how long it takes to spot. The 7 seconds is the maximum "worst case", so on average a spotting chance comes around after 3.5 seconds. Cycles are faster at closer distances, and there's definitely a spotting bonus when units are moving or firing. Especially when moving. But I doubt there's an extra spotting cycle inserted.

[StieliAlpha]

On 11/26/2018 at 12:26 PM, slippy said:

So with all the info you have provided above i should be able to make more informed historical decisions. Cheers all.

P.s, Osprey has a number of Tactics books covering various areas, anyone read them or recommend any?

 

Despite all lessons, don’t forget: „Who plays with text book in hand, dies with text book in hand.“

 

Re Osprey: I don‘t know their „tactics“ books, but mostly Osprey books are too „general“ for my taste. Though I do have some, I used them mostly as „picture books“ and as templates for 54mm modelling, resp. painting.

 

[domfluff]

Yeah, the Osprey books tend to be fantastic on pictures, and variable on actual details. You're usually better off with actual manuals (period or otherwise).

[Bil Hardenberger]

10 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

I've had pretty good luck with them. On several occasions I've had vehicles moving from behind buildings into what should have been an ambush, but because I had given them covered arcs pointing their attention on the required sector, they spotted first, fired first, and got the kill.

Michael

So have I.. especially for armor; hull and/or turret orientation make a big difference in reaction time.

[peter thomas]

Question for those who know better than I - does the enemy AI - if you're playing against the AI -  do any of these things? Not in such detail, right? Carefully organised fire and suppression or bounding overwatch? Does the AI do that? Does it even split squads? It will use the 'assault' command, I assume, but that's very ineffective compared to organising it yourself. Just wondering how much of an advantage you get if you play according to Bill's excellent suggestions? Play against the AI, I mean. 

Edited November 29, 2018 by peter thomas

[Combatintman]

2 hours ago, peter thomas said:

Question for those who know better than I - does the enemy AI - if you're playing against the AI -  do any of these things? Not in such detail, right? Carefully organised fire and suppression or bounding overwatch? Does the AI do that? Does it even split squads? It will use the 'assault' command, I assume, but that's very ineffective compared to organising it yourself. Just wondering how much of an advantage you get if you play according to Bill's excellent suggestions? Play against the AI, I mean. 

In short, it doesn't in the majority of cases. Some of the better scenario designers can produce great results with the AI which will result in coordinated assaults but they will never approach the same level of finesse that a human player can achieve. A couple of the AI movement settings are 'Assault' and 'Max Assault' so when those are linked to a unit that can split, the AI will assault. The latest version of the engine allows scenario designers to designate targets and to issue facing commands to AI groups which add to the art of the possible for a scenario designer. Ultimately though, an AI opponent is mostly going to be moving around in accordance with its movement orders and relying on the Tac AI to sort out behaviour when it sights or is contacted by the enemy.

[SimpleSimon]

2 hours ago, peter thomas said:

Question for those who know better than I - does the enemy AI - if you're playing against the AI -  do any of these things? Not in such detail, right? Carefully organised fire and suppression or bounding overwatch? Does the AI do that? Does it even split squads? It will use the 'assault' command, I assume, but that's very ineffective compared to organising it yourself. Just wondering how much of an advantage you get if you play according to Bill's excellent suggestions? Play against the AI, I mean. 

More or less. Try out some of the maps with AI attack plans and you'll see that, no, they do not explicitly conduct fire and maneuver the way the players do. Since the AI just follows a pre-planned time table and does not react to unexpected or unplanned moves you make. On the other hand, this is probably a bit more realistic than many give it credit for. I think we tend to downplay the player's omniscient super powers and extensive micro-management capabilities. Real troops didn't have me passing down my instant and perfect reception of battlefield details instantaneously like a hive mind. Of course many will also say with justification that the AI is unrealistically passive and stubborn. I think in the end the AI does conduct "attacks", but in a rather heavy-handed and predictable manner. 

[Bulletpoint]

3 hours ago, peter thomas said:

Question for those who know better than I - does the enemy AI - if you're playing against the AI -  do any of these things? Not in such detail, right? Carefully organised fire and suppression or bounding overwatch? Does the AI do that? Does it even split squads? It will use the 'assault' command, I assume, but that's very ineffective compared to organising it yourself. Just wondering how much of an advantage you get if you play according to Bill's excellent suggestions? Play against the AI, I mean. 

There is no enemy AI. In singleplayer, everything the enemy does is scripted by the human designer of the scenario.

[IICptMillerII]

@slippy ignore the fluff. The fact is, Combat mission simulates tactical level warfare exceptionally well. 

Bil’s Battle Drill blog linked earlier is an excellent resource. I highly recommend reading through or at least skimming it. 

If you want to see a former infantry officer, using real life tactics in Combat Mission to great effect, watch the Jeffrey Paulding Armchair General videos:

There are 6 episodes in total, covering everything from the basics, attack and defense, with the last two episodes combining everything. Further, Paulding tends to play from the disadvantaged side to show how dramatically beneficial using real world tactics are. As a quick spoiler, his final videos depict him attacking a US defense as the Italians, and then defending against a US counter attack. 

There are plenty of other good YouTube videos out there as well, many put together by active forum members. 

Edited November 29, 2018 by IICptMillerII

[MOS:96B2P]

4 hours ago, SimpleSimon said:

the AI just follows a pre-planned time table and does not react to unexpected or unplanned moves you make. 

This can be true in older scenarios but is not always true in newer scenarios.  The addition of two trigger types (Terrain Objective Triggers and Orders Triggers) has helped the AI to react to the player's actions.  Also, if I understand what has been posted in the forum, the old CMSF1 scenarios are getting upgraded to a certain extent.  So many of the original CMSF1 scenarios may have triggers added if appropriate.  This is a very cool development.         

[Erwin]

20 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

On several occasions I've had vehicles moving from behind buildings into what should have been an ambush, but because I had given them covered arcs pointing their attention on the required sector, they spotted first, fired first, and got the kill.

It definitely helps when using turreted vehicles to have the turrets facing towards the enemy (at all times).  But, is it spotting that occurs faster or the fact that the crew don't have to rotate the turret and spend more time aiming?   As mentioned I was always a big fan of directional arcs in CM1.  One could definitely could tell the improved spotting effect.  But, am not so sure when it comes to inf in CM2.

[Michael Emrys]

5 hours ago, Erwin said:

But, is it spotting that occurs faster or the fact that the crew don't have to rotate the turret and spend more time aiming?

That's a possibility. Either way, it seems to produce the same outcome, and that's good enough for me.

Michael

[Erwin]

18 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

that's good enough for me

Of course.  But wondered whether using directional arc spotting is actually improved by any significant amount for inf.  I recall when CMSF first came out it was noted that using directional arcs wasn't nearly as important as it had been in CM1 and the advantage in CM2 (unless it's been changed by newer versions) may be minimal.

[Michael Emrys]

Just now, Erwin said:

But wondered whether using directional arc spotting is actually improved by any significant amount for inf.  I recall when CMSF first came out it was noted that using directional arcs wasn't nearly as important as it had been in CM1 and the advantage in CM2 (unless it's been changed by newer versions) may be minimal.

R-r-r-right. I don't know; never tried that. The only time I give infantry a covered arc is to keep them from shooting at something irrelevant. As far as spotting is concerned, I usually prefer them to have a 360° awareness. I want them to spot and open fire on anybody trying to sneak up on them.

Michael