Jump to content

Thinking About Reinforcements


Recommended Posts

How fast could reinforcements be brought up to an area in need? If I attack with a company, and promptly run into more resistance than expected, how quickly could the battalion CO get another company to help out? How long would it take them to get on the scene?

I'm thinking that reinforcements coming in within, say 10 minutes, is too soon unless they have a long way to travel to get to the fight. If they are that available, why not just start them on the map? It would seem to me that any help arriving that quickly is really just a part of the original attacking force, rather than reinforcements. Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I attack with a company, and promptly run into more resistance than expected, how quickly could the battalion CO get another company to help out? How long would it take them to get on the scene?

Depends on if your company action is an isolated skirmish, or part of a much larger attack. If the latter, the Bn CO would most likely have a reserve on hand ready to shift to hotspots, or to exploit a breakthrough.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question. Having reinforcements come in on turn 10 is not impossible, as it could have been sent already before the engagement started. Reinforcements on foot would be slower to react than motorized reinforcements, but of course it's not unthinkable that a reserve company or platoon came on trucks, disembarked just outside the map and then continued on foot. A lot would depend on how well the command system is functioning, if you have to respond impromptu to a sudden threat or if phone connections are cut by artillery, it will take longer to decide what is needed and where. Should the reserve be within the map, then? Not necessarily if that would only mean expanding the map with no gain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a game point of view: Reinforcements are a convenient way to decrease map size.

From history: A meeting engagement is likely to have reinforcements, as a column will have advance guard, main body and rear-guard. The same goes for an attack from the march (eg in the Frühlingswind-scenario).

Another likely scenario is an attack with probing forces first. Reserves are released after the enemy strength is known. As most scenarios are balanced, you can bet that the actual strength of the enemy allows for a breakthru. Thus you get your reinforcements (even without actually probing...but not obeying the plan is your problem.).

Gruß

Joachim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Joachim:

From a game point of view: Reinforcements are a convenient way to decrease map size.

In cases where this is the primary reason for the reinforcements, I'd like to see them trickle in over a few turns, rather than an entire company being plopped on the map. This cuts down on some tedium.

From history: A meeting engagement is likely to have reinforcements, as a column will have advance guard, main body and rear-guard. The same goes for an attack from the march (eg in the Frühlingswind-scenario).

Designers should be careful here with two player non-blind. With an attack from the march, the defender must be prevented from counter-attacking the advance units in order to catch the "reinforcements" on their arrival.

Another likely scenario is an attack with probing forces first. Reserves are released after the enemy strength is known. As most scenarios are balanced, you can bet that the actual strength of the enemy allows for a breakthru. Thus you get your reinforcements (even without actually probing...but not obeying the plan is your problem.).

Gruß

Joachim

Aaah yes, this is where I'm a gamey bastiche. If I know the size of my force will be increased significantly in a fraction of an hour, I will tend to hold back most everything until all units are on the map. Why? Like you said, I don't need to probe in order to convince battalion HQ to send reinforcements. They are coming, and I WILL need them. It's better to have some good overwatch established for the "probing" force.

I never do gamey things like suicide recon with zooks or jeeps, hug the map edge, put TRPs on known restrictive setup zones or reinforcement points, etc.; but I do try to game the scenario as a whole. Playing blind prevents this; but I've found I need to screen the scenarios I choose for two-player due to too many duds.

Briefings could alleviate the non-blind gaming of scenarios a bit by informing the players that they will be in direct violation of orders if they do not conform to certain general guidelines. For example, no immediate counterattack in Fruhlingswind by the Allies, no holding back starting units intended to probe aggressively, etc.. The player could still do these things of course; but he'd know he was a gamey bastiche. :D

I think designing scenarios specifically for blind or non-blind play is just as important as the 'AI or human' design considerations. In fact, I think every scenario should be specifically designed for just ONE of the following:

1) Axis vs AI, blind

2) Axis vs AI, non-blind

3) Allies vs AI, blind

4) Allies vs AI, non-blind

5) Human vs Human, blind

6) Human vs Human, non-blind

This would separate the vast number of scenarios into six categories. Players could choose exactly the category they wanted, and feel fairly confident the scenarios will play well.

This would make scenario design easier too, because only ONE format must be kept in mind during the design process and testing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, time limits...my pet peeve. In most cases, the quicker the attacker moves, the higher his casualties will be. It's practically exponential. As few as 5 more minutes can make a BIG difference in a CM battle. In reality, that five minutes would not be worth the increase in casualties. Forcing the attacker's hand with time pressure fixes one unrealistic possibility (the non-probing probe, for example) by imposing a much bigger realism issue IMO.

I'd rather see a briefing that tells me to probe aggressively or face court martial for direct disobedience of orders and gamey tendencies. :D

Alternatively, the scenario could be designated as a "blind play only" scenario with no promise of reinforcements in the briefing.

I really feel like going on a time limit rant; but I'm controlling the urge. :D I've noticed that CMAK scenarios tend to be longer than BO/BB scenarios. This pleases me greatly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some, probably most, dont follow briefing orders. So you need a stronger stick. Then there is the whole general public aversion to anything much over 30 turns.

In any case, with proper playtesting, a happy medium of berivity and good enough time limit can be arrived at.

As for the CMAK scenarios being longer, that is as much a function of the larger, more open maps requiring more careful moves combined with a bit more designer experience. CMAK is alot more like CMBB than CMBB was like CMBO, so there were a number of learning pains as people realized things would take longer.

As for a time limit rant, lets save it. That horse has been beaten to a pulp.

WWB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people tend to like 30 turn battles because such battles usually have much less buildup to the real fireworks. The defender isn't hitting "Go" for 10-15 turns. I can see their point; but I think they're missing out on attacking options with short scenarios, and counting on time to save them when on defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Treeburst155:

I think people tend to like 30 turn battles because such battles usually have much less buildup to the real fireworks. The defender isn't hitting "Go" for 10-15 turns. I can see their point; but I think they're missing out on attacking options with short scenarios, and counting on time to save them when on defense.

I like the buildup.

I like huge maps.

I like big forces.

I can conserve ammo.

I like clear missions.

I was p***ed by the Frühlingswind map where you have no chance to really flank the Grants. Plus that you have to wait for the announced marders to kill the Grants. So except for some shoot&scoot on the GMCs nothing happened a few turns.

Most scenarios had small maps or maneuver only for one side. So I dcided to create my own scen. For me. For fun. Vs the AI. Balance is not important. The goal is to have fun while maneuvring my forces to achieve the best result. Blind is not important as the vast space and 60+ turns allow for some flexibility on both sides. The briefing should tell you most of what you know about the enemy after seeing the setup anyway.

General idea: Axis exploit of Breakthru in 12/42. Attack and Counterattack style.

A plot around which I set the scen. Even if it is just for me.

Big map (3.5*3.5). A prominent hill (level 18 at smooth terrain setting (1.25 per level)) with a magnificient view, a village/crossroads in front of it jst ahead of the center of the map. Small rises for turret down positions or for guns behind crests. Small gullies. Large wadis. Though generally flat, there is cover and several reverse slope positions. the wide space allows for maneuver and flank security is an issue.

Though fictitious, I chose the allied forces as you would expect in a rear area. Infantry, some Grants, Stuarts, M3 GMCs and the arty park. Plus some FlaK on the hill (which is damn effective). Liitle FOs, as the arty is on board smile.gif

Axis forces: 2/3rds of a PzBtn (PzIIIj/l/n, PzIVg, Marders) and 2/3rds of an inf btn, half of it as reinforcements. Recce assets on board, but already advanced (larger setup area).

They come from one corner, hidden from view. All GE reinforcements come from the same road - but on random turns, to prevent shelling.

In another corner an Italian armor Co shows up, plus an inf plt - all reinforcements except for a single plt and an heavy FO that should immediately target the "FlaK?" landmark.

Plus various odds and ends... IGs, a battery of 105mm howitzers on board, 88s, 50mmATGs. Toys for fun.

The US has the same toys. It is more a fun scen to get to know the various wpns.

Now to make sure the Axis attacks ASAP, I put a US mech patrol in their direction. If it drops its load in the right area, they will see the road from where the reinforcements come much earlier (the AI won't do that :( ) Stones, rocks brush and th ewirde spaces allow for some hiding.

The initial setup will allow for the Germans to overrun the Allies with what they have, but with significant losses. The reinforcements must be shuttled towards the likely line of departure (covered by a small hill) by truck or on tanks or they will come late. Choose from getting your tanks which you need in the 2nd half getting whacked between houses or wait for the infantry and the CS tanks. Maybe the village has to change into a town to enforce infantry attacking it.

The infantry itself will have little use in defending the hill vs the US reinforcements.

If the Italians do not move out immediately, they will be late for the party. Infantry won't be that crucial in the endgame.

The Axis has to clear the village and hill to deploy their guns and have covered lines of communications once the Allied reserves come into play. 2km from the party, the dust cloud will be visible several turns as a threat once they arrive - putting pressure on the attacker. Once the reserves arrive, it is an even match (in points).

So now I am playtesting...

Just like Treeburst, I usually wait for my main force.

But here I moved out immediately as I have the necessary forces. Not all, but the right stuff. Plus the recce is ahead - I know the enemy is a mile away. And the pressure.

The defender has to shuffle his forces around, too. GMCs can severly cripple the advance if used properly. An FO can target the moving troops, though they should be covered by dustclouds. (The Ai doesn't). So it should even be playable as PBEM.

Even the planes did not target the wrong guys. 3 appearances, 1 shot down (mine), 1 bomb dropped by my other one), 1 damaged (Allies). Open country and distant forces including vehicles help...

There is only one drawback... It's likely the CMAK version of "To the Wolga". Processign turns takes an hour while moving lots of forces thru enemy LOS... Now that most are hidden or in position it is 20minutes.

And another one: It is possible for the defender to head towards the US reinforcement points.... but random reinforcement turns and several reinforcemnt markers ensure the Axis gets a beaating there. Mission statement is to take the hill.

Opinions about the use of reinforcements or other points we covered in this threat?

Any idea on improvements? I want this to turn into a theoretical discussion on ideas how to avoid certain errors in design. How to improve things.

Cause I think a good scen is based on a good plot. And a map fitting it.

The rest is craftsmanship - which is stil important.

Gruß

Joachim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, clearly there are different audiences for these scenarios.

Last night, my son played, with me helping, the Combat scenario from CMBO which is 8 turns long. We started after dinner and piano practice, and he finished just before bed-time. Perfect. And he/we had a great time.

This is a long, long way from what is wanted by others who play the game. I drool when I see a long campaign for the Crimean penninsula--but the chances that I would actually be able to play/finish something like that are, regrettably, small.

So variety, variety. I know there is the QB generator, but don't forget to make interesting tiny battles. Maybe I will show my son the Bruneval scenario next--or the one about a German paradrop in Italy at night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joachim,

WE are on the same wavelength. I would love to do a non-blind PBEM of your scenario. In fact, I'd like to apply for a job as your personal PBEM beta test opponent. I don't do the AI though, and I'm only good for about 7 files per week due to current PBEM load.

You want to talk about design errors. The biggest single design error is trying to design something that works well when played in more than ONE of the six formats I listed earlier in this thread. The compromises necessary will often make the scenario less than memorable.

Rankorian,

There will always be tiny battles because they are popular. They fit better with busy lives, and can be created in less time. There is a CMBO scenario where Brit paratroopers have to go to a German radar station, take the radar components, and get away on boats during the night. It's small, it's great fun. I can't remember the name of it though. You might want to try to hunt that one down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Treeburst155:

Joachim,

WE are on the same wavelength. I would love to do a non-blind PBEM of your scenario. In fact, I'd like to apply for a job as your personal PBEM beta test opponent. I don't do the AI though, and I'm only good for about 7 files per week due to current PBEM load.

You want to talk about design errors. The biggest single design error is trying to design something that works well when played in more than ONE of the six formats I listed earlier in this thread. The compromises necessary will often make the scenario less than memorable.

TB,

sorry for the late answer. Other duties on the long weekend...

Well, I am currently playing the scen vs the AI and I found out that I have to make some changes. Guestimated time to compute last move was 2 hours (during the night). So turn rate vs AI is about 7 per week :mad:

Seems moving to contact or hunting on wide open space takes time - and I guess the AI moved some forces, too.

7 turns per week is a high rate for me smile.gif Battling Andreas, the 120 turn South of Kharkov scen is in turn 14 now - since December IIRC.

So if you find another volunteer - I'd be glad to get it tested before summer.

I hope to get some changes ready till next weekend, test it until turn 15 to check computational time and - if it works - will accept your offer. I guess blocking LOS will reduce processing time. Playing 3000pts in the open desert takes a long time, too (15 min), 3000 pts on a hilly map are quick.

Or my PC has slowed down considerably from the 20minutes for turn 10 (most Axis forces on reverse slope, little firing).

The battle won't play as Allies vs AI - the Axis uses towed guns.

The current setup will have problems with Allied mech reinforcements, too.

If it will be playable in two formats (Axis vs AI, 2 player), I will have to make some changes for the reinforcement structure (ie no Allied inf as mech reinforcement but as a 3rd foot infantry company on patrol somewhere...

A thing I did not consider yet. This thread helps.

Gruß

Joachim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing I'd like to see is reinforcements released not on a specified game turn, but some amount of time after the attacker had advanced a certain distance, captured a certain objective, inflicted a certain level of damage, etc. Among other benefits, this would address Treeburst's "lagging probe" problem. If he isn't aggressive with his on-map forces, he doesn't get reinforcements.

Another item to go on the CMx2 wish list.

smile.gif

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a great idea, Michael! We need some kind of an event to trigger reinforcement arrival. It will be great when that gamey Treeburst has to start playing right. tongue.gif

Joachim,

I'm currently playing Kingfish's "All Is Fair". It takes a very long time to crunch the movies. I think this is because the defender has LOS to practically every move the attacker makes during his approach. Anyhow, if you need a tester, let me know.

Treeburst155 out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Treeburst155:

I'm currently playing Kingfish's "All Is Fair". It takes a very long time to crunch the movies. I think this is because the defender has LOS to practically every move the attacker makes during his approach. Anyhow, if you need a tester, let me know.

Treeburst155 out.

Glad to hear that it ain't just my problem. If the weather gets as bad as they say, I might find some time to make (and alpha-test) some changes. Better than driving to the Netherlands anyway.

Gruß

Joachim

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...