Austrian Strategist
-
Posts
148 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Austrian Strategist
-
-
True, true. But he seems to be playing a vily opponent. And with 2.000pts you can afford a coupla 88 Flaks. I never leave home without them.Originally posted by Silvio Manuel:He shouldn't have problems with non-Pak43/long 88mm AT guns if he's rolling the thick Churchills, they bounce short 75mm fire (prolly not Panther fire).
-
My mistake; I assumed you made the scenarios for the previous Newbie Tournament(s) as well.Originally posted by Panzerman:We have not worked on any other tournaments, but the other battles we have done are all at the scenario zone or the CM Scenario Depot.
I have downloaded rhe Lorraine Pack, and it looks highly interesting!
Can you tell us anything not confidential about the Tourny Scenarios?
[ June 11, 2002, 06:05 PM: Message edited by: Austrian Strategist ]
-
There´s a problem with this: If he buys something like, say, 4xRifle44, 3xM10, 1x105mmArtillery, then, I believe, you are in deep trouble.Originally posted by Priest:And I heavily agree with the Hetzer arguement. Use the guns to protect the Hetzer and two 76mm Sherms do not stand a chance in Hades.
(Explanation: Rifles will kill your men, relying on numbers, M10s will kill your Hetzer, Artillery will kill your guns.)
[ June 11, 2002, 03:27 PM: Message edited by: Austrian Strategist ]
-
You are too infatuated with vehicles; they aren´t cost-effective. If he uses lots of AT Guns, you are dead. Try Infantry. (If you don´t, I think you will rue it.)Originally posted by Scheer:But now, after I send my setup to my archenemy , I´´m thinking that I had better be of, with only fourteen Churchill VII and VIII and only seven wasps. For the saved points I could have bought three 81mm mortar FO´s.
And then try that smokescreen thing ...
-
Too complicated, and too risky.Originally posted by xerxes:no, no, no.
Here's the shingle.
Go british. They talk cool.
Buy a glider batallion, heck make it two. Make them green.
Buy 10 wasps. (green)
Buy 10 mmg. (conscript, what the heck, they're bait anyways)
Buy enough universal carriers to carry your piats.
Flood one flank with 30+ universal carrier look alikes, lead with the mmgs. Send a batallion of infantry with the horde of locusts. Run over and kill everything.
He'll never know what hit him.
Here´s what you buy, if you know what is good for you:
3x Rifle44 Company (Regular)
2x Bazooka (Regular)
7x M18 Hellcat (Veteran)
2x Artillery 105mm (Regular)
Advance everything except Hellcats cautiously towards Victory Flags. Spread them somewhat, so his Artillery can´t hit everybody at once. Where you find enemies, overwhelm them with numbers, or drop Artillery on them.
When his Hetzers appear, rush out your Cats with 'Hunt', and kill them.
-
Buy a ton of Infantry, and flood him.
Infantry is most cost-effective, and Hetzers are not that great against it.
1500pts Infantry, 1000pts Tank Destroyers -keep in reserve until enemy armour shows up- and 500 pts of whatever you like best should do the job. :cool:
-
Question for Panzerman: Do you have a link to scenarios your team has made for earlier Newbie Tournaments, so we can get an idea what to expect?
No problem with the delay, but any bones to satisfy my curiosity would be appreciated.
-
Thanks. What does 'Riders of Rohan' mean?Originally posted by Cpl Carrot:OK here are the teams and whos playing who.
-
Fionn, you got me totally wrong. I wasn´t arguing for no Recon. I was arguing for no Counter-recon. If I am Defender, I let you do your Recon to your heart´s content and watch the clock. I am arguing about best Defense here, not best Attack. And my Defensive Doctrine is: Do as little as possible, and watch the clock!Originally posted by Fionn:I think the idea you seem to be peddling that recon is worthless vs a defence in depth and that you'd be better just charging towards it ( even though you don't know where the MLR actually is) is incredibly dangerous and naive. Maybe that's not what u are saying though since it really does seem quite far off base. Perhaps you could clarify your position?
I do not (very much) disagree with your ideas about Attack. I do (very much) disagree with you about Defence, which should be an entirely different thing. The main advantage of the Defender is: He has the VLs already, so nothing happening is to his advantage. Therefore, his priority should be for nothing to happen. As a Defender, I am not interested in destroying the Attacker (which you seem to assume). I am interested in keeping the VLs, and watching the clock. This is what I would do in real life!
Edit: Reading your post once more, I should add 2 more things for clarification:
-I 'specialize' in battles of 2.000pts or less. All of my experience is with small-to-medium scale, and I consider 1500pts 'medium'. So the question is: Are you of the same opinion for a 1500pts battle?
-Regardless of this, I am convinced your Recon -necessary as it is!- won´t give you very much against what I consider 'Defence-in-depth'. It is very usual for me to put 50% or more of my forces into reserve. So my MLR will be weak everywhere; but that´s the point of Defence-in-Depth!
Finally: In a Tactics game, I do usually view 'value' in 3 dimensions: Material, Space, Time. Defence-in-depth, imo, is about trading material and space for time.
[ June 10, 2002, 05:13 PM: Message edited by: Austrian Strategist ]
-
It´s June 10. (In fact, it´s nearly June 11, over here!)
-
What if he doesn´t (actively) commit to the Recon battle at all? Then you will have a large reserve, but so will he. You will have used some time (and lost a few men) just to identify the forward-most part of his defence-in-depth, so what now?Originally posted by Fionn:I haven't played all or nothing but for movement to contact the answer is always the same:
Find the enemy using as little force as necessary to win the recon fight and get to his MLR and provoke a response. Get him to overcommit ( less experienced players often need a LOT of forces to achieve a certain objective within a given time frame. This means that they often, to more experienced eyes, overcommit) and then when he is extended and off balance either counter-attack his attack ( preferably at its base) or smash through his lines somewhere else ( at a previously identified weak spot) with that large reserve you've saved by winning the recon battle with far fewer forces than your opponent used.
(This is assuming you are the Attacker, turn limit is short enough to be a serious consideration, and the Defender´s strategy is 'Delay-Delay-Delay'.) :cool:
[ June 10, 2002, 02:02 PM: Message edited by: Austrian Strategist ]
-
Tools:
Your 75+50 AT approach I find well worth trying out. Note you have some points left-over in your first example, so you could afford another HMG. I don´t like the Rifles44 so much, and I prefer 2 Cracks with Crack Support to a Company of Vets anyway, that´s the reason behind my choice of infantry, but it´s sure debatable. Your 2nd example would seem a tad risky to me; what if your opponent buys 5+ Platoons of Regulars? He might overrun you, or attrit you to death, I think.
-
I know most general advice already.Originally posted by redwolf:In small defenses without Fionn limits it is hard to be prepared against all kinds of attack. If you are prepared for two routes of advance by thick Churchills or Jumbos you don't have points left to defend against a pure infantry and artillery attack. A mass of M8 HMC and Greyhounds will also pass AT defenses that are built for few slow tanks.
That´s why I made the problem very specific. Note that 'Americans' disallows Churchills, 'July44' disallows Super-Heavys, 'Combined Arms' makes all-out Infantry, all-out Armour, all-out Greyhounds impossible. I was really more interested in discussing precise (point-wise) solutions to a specific situation, because I believe there are no general rules that apply to every set-up.
-
Simply to get another discussion rolling:
You defend with the German Army in a 700pts QB against an American Attack.
Both sides use Combined Arms limits.
Americans have Regulars and/or Veterans, you may choose Veterans and/or Cracks.
Small map, July44, 20 turns, clear day, agricultural terrain, moderate amount of trees, small hills.
----------------
This is what I would buy:
1x Security Pl (Crack)
1x Mot Inf Pl (Crack)
1x Mg42 light (Veteran)
2x Mg42 heavy (Crack)
1x Panzerschreck (Crack)
1x Flak 88mm (Crack)
1x Artillery 75mm (Veteran)
5x AP Mines
Mines channel enemy soldiers into kill zones; Infantry, MGs and Artillery kill them. Flak stays hidden until I am confident it will kill all enemy tanks in the same turn. Panzerschreck is insurance in case a tank escapes Flak.
What would you use? Why?
-
The Germans`, too. This was called an Igelstellung, (Hedgehog Position); MLR was called HKL (Hauptkampflinie).Originally posted by Fionn:MLRs don't have to be relatively linear, contiguous defensive positions. A series of positions fortified for all-round defence ( such as you seem to describe) are actually, doctrinally speaking, the Soviet's preferred way of developing an MLR in the post-1943 time period.
[ June 08, 2002, 08:20 PM: Message edited by: Austrian Strategist ]
-
I understand; but then it won´t apply to most real-world situations -which are not full-scale wars between super powers.Originally posted by MajorH:TacOps does model "good" morale and good training.
TacOps does not model "poor" morale.
Armed struggles in the past -and probably future- few decades were/are more likely between 3rd world countries, between a 3rd world country and a primary power, between a 3rd world country and a secondary power, between two secondary powers, between paramilitary groups in a civil war...
In all those cases, mediocre and/or poor morale, training, equipment and experience are to be expected on one or both sides. So I still think not modeling bad morale/insufficient training etc is limiting realism most drastically.
-
Agreed; in one of my current pbems I killed 3 Shermans and an M10 with a single Nashorn.The point I'm trying to make is that a single T.D. can still survive and be quite effective even against potential multiple opposing AFV's if terrain is used to its advantage.
-
In this case at least, it was.Originally posted by Paul Harrington:Should I just switch to choosing my own troops or is this sort of force mix reasonable?
Imo, what you should have done:
Keep your Tank Destroyer hidden (best behind hill), until enemy PzIV is spotted and within a few 100 metres. Then jump out of your cover with 'Hunt', and you should get the first shot and (probably) kill the enemy tank.
-
Hmmmm. I´m not really sold on this feature. I´d find it really fun -and realistic- to simulate combat between two third-rate forces, where the major problem is that absolutely no one wants to put up a fight.Originally posted by redwolf:It is really a different game. Don't think of it as CM without morale. The morale is more hidden by the different game scale than by programmer choice. And the SOP entries are way better than the move/sneak/withdraw/delay/scared-chicken control mechanism in CMBO, IMHO.
-
No experience/morale? Then it will be hard to simulate a fight between factions of vastly different motivation level.Originally posted by redwolf:In CMBO terms, TacOps units always perform as advertisted, no morale, no different training quality.
How do you simulate Elites vs. Militias? :confused:
-
Thanks; great!Originally posted by redwolf:I know you are into CM, so I answer with references to CMBO.
Can you 'mix' to simulate some neutrals or 3rd world countries who have both Blue and Red equipment?Pink^H^H^Hred force actually has a wider range of weapons and vehicles, both in general and as a mix in typical scenarios.
My concern here was not so much about technology but hard-coded 'doctrinal' disadvantages for Opfor. [such as less flexibility/slower reaction time/fewer orders options] So there are none of those?Some of red force's limitations and shortcomings are usually switched off for challenging and balanced gameplay. You give Red-equipped forces better warheads, comparable to blue warheads, and you give them thermal sights.
Looking forward to it!I'm preparing a TacOps tactical primer for CM players.
-
-
-
Is Tacops Pbem fun, too? Can you Pbem at all? Is the game real-time or turn-based?
What about playing Opfor? Interesting, or are their options more limited, which would make them stereotypical and boring to play?
Is there something like a QB in Tacops? Can you make your own scenarios/maps? (I had never heard about this series -is it possible to shortly explain where it differs from CM? -Thanks.)
[ June 05, 2002, 02:03 PM: Message edited by: Austrian Strategist ]
That´s why I made the problem very specific. Note that 'Americans' disallows Churchills, 'July44' disallows Super-Heavys, 'Combined Arms' makes all-out Infantry, all-out Armour, all-out Greyhounds impossible. I was really more interested in discussing precise (point-wise) solutions to a specific situation, because I believe there are no general rules that apply to every set-up.
The All New Newbie Tournament: Fellowship of the Newbie
in Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord
Posted