Gannon Pitre

Hello all, I know that the USMC has a TACOPS license that allows active-duty personnel to download a copy of TACOPS for their personal use free of charge... Has the US army got anything similar going? How about for reserve personnel? All this because... I recently got back in touch with an old friend from High School who did several years active duty in Germany in M1s (started as a driver). Now he's in the reserves (as an M1 TC). He'd never heard of TACOPS, but it was quite easy to talk him into downloading the demo. We grew up playing paper and micro armor wargames, so it seemed like a natural--neither of us have yet "outgrown" our games! Well, sure enough: one look at the TACOPS demo, and he's ready to buy the full version. Now, I'm all for a few more dollars flowing MajorH's way, and the price is a better value than just about any other game out there, but I still thought I'd ask: is there an already-licensed version for him as a USAR member? Either way, I eagerly (and patiently) await MY opportunity to purchase v4.0. Gannon Pitre aka Gennady Gollandovich Petrov OC, 321st MRR (BTR) "Big Red" OFFICIAL MOTTO: "Go West, Young Man!"

Just in case anyone hasn't seen this, every TACOPS player should check out the strategypage.com "gallery" section. Tons of great stuff, but absolute TOPS is the video of a live fire test of the Javelin ATGM against a target T-72. It's a big download (4.4 megs) but it is worth it! P.S. Careful if you're at work/trying to fool the significant other--the video has sound and it it LOUD! Gannon Pitre aka Gennady Gollandovich Petrov, OC 321st MRR (BTR) OFFICIAL MOTTO: "On the Dustheap of History, but Digging In Deep--and with Overhead Cover!"

Ooh, ooh, thought of something else! (Don't worry, soon I will go to bed and leave everyone alone!) MajorH, Question: >In v4 the explosion animation will be sized to show the actual ground being covered. In version 3.x, the beaten zone shrinks as the number of tubes firing the mission shrinks, although the animation does not. Does that hold true for smoke missions as well, or just for HE/ICM fires? --GP

Jingo: As regards smoke, I think I remember reading (way in the depths of the TACOPS board) that additional smoke missions on the same spot don't result in any additional obscuration--that is, smoke is smoke, and smoke x 2 gets you, well, smoke. The only added benefit you get is that missions arriving later extend the duration of the obscuration. (And as we know, the wise commander notes the start time of every smoke screen he lays...I have learned the hard(est) way...) Again, I THINK I read this somewhere. It seems to me to be in line with the way the sim operates, too. RICH: Interesting note on the Bison's "spontaneous fire." I've observed the OPFOR Mortar units conduct what seems to me to be self-directed mortar fire. That is, indirect fire that takes place during the DF portion of the turn. Relating to your comment, Rich, this would be "spontaneous fire." At first glance, it seems to me that it WOULD be more accurate; Imagine: YOU see the target, YOU drop the round, YOU see the splash, YOU adjust... Anybody know about this? Is it what it seems to be, i.e., a mtr platoon SEES a target and FIRES at it? Or are we seeing something else? If it is "self-adjusted" (or "spontaneous", is this practice a good idea--I mean, is it in line with OPFOR doctrine (not that this would make it a good idea, but I know that OPFOR sets store by DF Sau-122 missions, etc.) I'm also interested in learning how these "self-adjusted" (if that's what they are) fire missions rate in terms of accuracy, as compared to "standard" indirect mortar fire. Gannon Pitre aka Gennady Gollandovich Petrov, OC 321st MRR (BTR), "Big Red" OFFICIAL MOTTO: "Category B, and Proud of It!"

Thanks all, esp. MajorH. After watching you dissect 1000+ criticisms of TACOPS mechanics, I knew there was sound reasoning behind the arty rules. Sounds good to me. While I'm on the subject, though...(you knew it was coming ), what's the TACOPS chapter and verse on recon by fire? Just curious, since the "game" seems to be driven mostly by the concerns/wants/needs of its military customers, how is it that what seems to me to be a key point of doctrine is not modelled? Would it result in "gamey" play (i.e. "fakery"), or is below the scale of what's being modelled, or, well...just askin'. As before, wonderful product, sorry to disturb you, keep working hard on 4.0, I am not worthy, etc. P.S. Has anyone ever pinned you down on "I.L. Holdridge?" Are you related to the famed British Boer War LT Backsight Forethought? Or perhaps the less well-known (but equally great) US LTC A. Tack Always? Once again, just askin'. Much respect, Gannon Pitre aka Gennady Gollandovich Petrov, OC 321st MRR (BTR)"Big Red" OFFICIAL MOTTO: "We Were Trackless When Trackless Wasn't Cool!"

I'm hoping some of you arty types out there might be interested in conducting a little workshop on the use of indirect fire in TACOPS. I've been running my own little tests, but I've found that 2 minutes talking to someone who KNOWS is usually far more valuable than hours of self-(mis?)directed study... Some questions to get the ball rolling... 1) How are on-map arty/mtrs best deployed/used? That is, assuming they're safe from DF and Counterbattery, is it better to fight bttys whole, or split into smaller units? What I'm after here is: are fewer guns on more targets better, or crushing strength on one? I know the short answer is "well, depends..." But we can do better than that, can't we? In the simplest terms, how much is enough? Can two 3-tube mortar units put enough rounds on target to be useful, or do I need to keep all six together on one? 2) Has anyone worked out a chart/list/rule of thumb for equating on-map arty ammo into turns of fire? That is, how many ToF do I have for a given # rounds? 3) Any guidelines or advice on how much fire (on average) is needed to suppress a given unit (I know, "depends...") But say: INF team (in open, in rough, in woods, in town) ATGM team, dismount (ditto ditto ditto) IFV MBT You get the idea. Ballpark... 4) From a realism standpoint, what sort of rules do people use to govern arty adjustment? I.E. it seems a little too good to be true that I can dial an MLRS strike right onto a moving stream of vehicles with only 5 seconds till impact...or does it? Perhaps this is a question for MajorH--is this a compromise to make up for a deficit in some other area? Thanks all--feel free to weigh in with any opionions, tactics, etc, or to push the questions into more interesting or fertile directions. P.S. MajorH, thanks again for a great game. My girlfriend thinks you are an evil man--she complains from time to time about being a TACOPS widow... -GP