gezeder

I've noticed that in an operation, immobolized tanks near the front lines have a chance of being abandoned, or gone (for repairs, or already fixed? i don't know...) Matt

I think that would be great - while I feel confident enough in Company level battles, I'm at a complete loss for larger battles. One question though, would you be playing the AI in this tutorial? Would it mabye be better to have a human play the defence? After all, the AI doesn't really play the same way most humans do.... (I think) If you were fighting a co-operative human opponent, you could even agree on the sort of defence you'd be fighting, (ie. static defence) - that way the battle would be more of a controlled situation, where we can concentrate just on the tactics involved. (Don't mind me, just kicking around a few ideas....) Matt

Well, certainly I would use it - as the game stands it's a bit of a pain if you want to see the last few turns of a battle before making your next move.... If you were already doing a load next program, would a load previous be difficult to add as well? That would make the whole thing even better, your could scroll back and fourth through the battle....

yes Juju, but it sounds like what is happening is Panzer Man's email oppenent is giving his orders again, then processing the turn and sending it off - sounds like Panzer Man's opponent is just confused to me - or he's trying a really really poorly thought out way of cheating! so Panzer Man is getting more than one "turn 4" (or whatever) to choose from, then he can simply reply to whichever one he wants too.... Hope this clears it up for you. (Hope I got it right!)

What a crazy thing to do! all that does is give you better odds of the battle looking good for you - now you get a choice of movie files - which one would you like today? I doubt he'd do something like that on purpose - probably an honest mistake - like Gustav said, mabye you should suggest an email numbering system to cut down on confusion for him..... Personally, I use BobVsFred1a, BobVsFred1b, BobVsFred1c, BobVsFred2a...... etc. Works pretty well.....

ah - thanks! I thought it might be where I knew there were definatly NO enemy, so I could ignore those areas as threats - good thing I know to treat them with respect now!

Hi, I did a search but came up with nothing useful.... In an operation I've just finished the first battle and am re-deploying my troops for another assault (hopefully one that actually takes ground this time!) I noticed several 'black' deployment zones, though I have no troops with black bases, and there are no troops in them at the moment, so I don't understand why they are there? (They are ahead of my green deployment zones, towards the enemy....) A few other people have asked about this, but don't seem to have gotten an answer.... I couldn't find anything in the book about it either. Anyone out there know why, or even have an idea?

ScoutPL, So, you think Pillar handled the AI well in that battle? Perhaps this conversation is primarly confusion, both semantic and good old fashion misintrepting what we've all said... (As pointed out by MarkIV, Brian Rock, and Germanboy way back on page 3!) As for whether Pillar's AAR fits in with what his first post said, I believe it fits in fine - (forgive me but i'm not sure how to quote properly ) **Your scouts will tell you one very important thing: Where your enemy IS NOT.** Yep - he did this - even outlined it for us all in green! **As the defender, you want to know where the enemy is approaching in order to commit your reserves there.** Yep - after finding the route of attack he set up a nice warm ambush for the AI. **Just as crucial in defence is the role of a forward security element to defeat the enemy reconnaisance.** - Well, recon isn't really the AI's strong point, this I guess applies more to PBEM These quotes were from Pillars first post - unless you were referring to his more detailed post on scouting from page 2? (Which I think may have been talking more about scouting on the attack, not when playing an agressive defence.... though I could be wrong!)

Andrew, In response to what I would do in that scenario, I loaded Fear in the Fog as Americans, and your plan sounds pretty good to me, assuming there are no major gaps through which your opponent could move through without your noticing & reacting to(including your deployment zone!) As for how I would have scouted the scenario: (Mind you, I never claimed to be Good at scouting, or even commanding! I just happen to believe scouting with half squads etc to be beneficial to your success... ) I think this battle Seems to be an odd meeting engagement, where your job is to seize good defensive positions, then hold back the German forces. If I were playing this scenario, I would probably use scouts less than, say, an attack scenario against a prepared defensive position. I would use a couple of half squads to make sure the enemy is Not where he's Not supposed to be (for example, Behind the defensive lines you seek to establish!) and would definitely be cautious, sending in scouts to the town furthest from your deployment zone. (As it may well be full of enemy troops by the time you get there!) Though in such dense terrain, you could keep the rest of your platoon a mere 50-55 seconds behind and still be safe IMHO. Once (if) your defensive positions are set up and awaiting the German attack, I don't feel that any more scouts would be needed, if you can get into that position without worries it seems to me that you now have to simply ambush the Germans in the woods as they move to the exit zone, then re-enforce any position in danger of being overrun.... But during the initial stages I would definitely scout any position which I felt May contain enemy. But hey, that's just what I'd do - maybe I'll challenge my regular opponent and we'll see how it goes!

Hi Andrew, Were you expecting to find troops there? If you weren't, I'd argue that you do have a better knowledge of enemy forces now, as you are now aware of a threat you previously didn't even know was there.... If you already expected troops to be there, why on earth were your troops running? If you expected troops there, you might have been better off only crawling fowards, or moving very short distances, and hiding in the interim between movements.... Again, I don't think anyone is suggesting only recon by death, your scouts don't need to be running ahead to be scouting, and I tend to only run my recon when i'm sure they're in a safe place (or running across a small, dangerous gap in the hopes of moving too fast to attract fire), slowing to move in mildly risky places, and slowing to crawling or even periods of hiding where i feel the enemy MAY be......

Well, referring to the operation I'm playing at the moment, I wish I had scouted more before committing the majority of my forces, despite the battle only being 15 turns. I picked a point of attack, and, unfortunately, a bad one. I am now resorting to scouting out other areas on the map, and finding, much to my dismay, little resistance. This suggests to me that a little added recon before deciding my path of attack COULD have led to a more successful battle. I recognize the easy response, "you should have picked a better attack position, it was your bad call that led to this" - and I agree, however, if I had of scouted more, and Not made decisions about what to do before scouting, perhaps I could have been more flexible, and thus, changed my attack. I'm not sure Pillar is suggesting that these screening half squads SHOULD die, only that you have to accept they are likely to die. (If I'm wrong about this Pillar, I apologize ) In this case, it seems to me mission briefing was a little misleading (or simply misinterpreted by me) and more comprehensive scouting Could have helped my position. Of course, there's more to the battle than this one thing, nevertheless - I can't see what's so bad about an advance screening force of half squads, detecting and uncovering enemy strong/weak points......

Hmmm, haven't had time to look at your tactics page yet Scout (but i will) I suppose mabye i should re-think my strategies... though often my scouts don't range that far ahead anyway, mabye they could be called point squads instead of scouts? For example, at the moment i'm playing an operation (i just Love realistic force mixes! ) and my 'scout squads' are crawling forward about 30-70 metres ahead of thier supporting platoons, and about 200 metres ahead of my light vehicles. (this is in dense terrain) Would that be gamey? (or should i say, ahistorical) I am concerned about playing realistically as well as winning. Or is this all explained on your page? (boy is my face red then!)

I agree that minefields are best placed where you Don't want the enemy to come through, so if they do, they pay the price for doing so.... They're a nice thing to put on the sides of maps if you believe your oppenet may try to move along the edge of the battlefield in an attempt to flank you - a few MG's to provide encouragement while they move through the minefield, and those troops flee the whole map!

Scout, but.... if you believe (ie. guess) the enemy has set up here, at point A, but is actually at point B 250 m infront of point A, wouldn't that make advancing to point A with your entire infantry company (let's say, 60-70% of your assets) a little risky? I can understand your position of Recon by death - but what's wrong with having a few half-squads out say 50-400 metres out in front (depending on terrain, likelyhood of contact, etc etc) to spot threats, take cover, & pull back if neccessary? or even recon in force, say, a few recon vehicles, or mabye a platoon out say half a kilometre ahead (for big maps) i agree, spending a day or two figuring out where the enemy is would be ideal, but... if you don't know his plan, where he is, or even what he has, and you Have to advance within the next ten minutes.... wouldn't it make sense to check out the position a little, carefully, with some small groups of hard to spot men? instead of approaching in large groups (admiteddly, in strength, but more vulnerable too) and possibly walking straight into an enemy ambush?

ScoutPL, you stated i believe three main lines of reasoning as to why scouting (i assume you mean in regard to snipers & half squads) is a bad idea: i hope you don't mind me paraphrasing you a little here for clarity in my counter-arguments It's Gamey - well... you didn't raise any specific points in regard to this in your post, so i don't feel the need to rebutt the comment - perhaps you could tell me the link to the other posts you refered to in your above post so i can reas them and see your thinking? It's a Waste of Assets - well, this is definatly a matter of opinion - while you may lose troops doing it... information is vital. knowing what the enemy has and possibly where it is (even just an idea) is a Fantastic advantage! just think how annoyed you'd be if you were playing a double blind scenario, and your oppenent loaded it up himself to see what you had!... it would definatly give him an edge. As does scouting. you spend troops to get the info. It gives away your intentions - nah! i scout all over the place, regardless of whether i'm attacking there or not - always pays to spot possible counter attacks in advance too! i suppose if you considered it gamey and we were PBEM oppenents this would cause friction, but like always, if your oppenent doesn't mind it's no big deal, yes? as to the other 2 main points, if it's such a bad idea to scout i guess that just gives you a huge advantage over all us fools eh? IMO - scouting is good.... when used in moderation