Jump to content

scrappie

Members
  • Posts

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by scrappie

  1. Nice set of tests. One question though - how can the number of shots before the hull down tank hits its opponent be less than 1?
  2. Wouldn’t having a command that made a unit follow a road help with at least some of these issues- I.e. move from this point to that point on the road
  3. Most of these rules could be implemented within the game as an additional difficulty level above Iron, thus ensuring compliance. Can't see it being high on Battlefront's priority list though
  4. Hi Erwin I tested out the scenario you suggested and can confirm what akd is saying is correct. Under the scenario conditions the FO & HQ units will never spot the unit that the scout team spotted because they don’t have access to the thermal sights. If you go into the scenario editor and change the conditions to clear you will find that the HQ (for example) will spot the tank in question fairly quickly (even without C2 sharing). Also the sharing of spotting information is clearly working fine - many units (even those without LOS) get tentative contacts. This is all that C2 sharing does. As has been pointed out by others, the unit then still has to actually see the enemy unit to turn that into a definitive contact. Because it is beyond their visual range in that position and under those conditions this will never happen.
  5. I regularly play simultaneous mirrored attack / defence QB games because ME's usually turn into a race to occupy and hold the central objective(s). I also think the tactical problems to be solved to plan a good attack / defence are more interesting (and realistic). I have also recently started asking my opponents to agree at the outset that we will ceasefire after the allotted time expires. I rarely have the problem you mentioned about opponents mirroring your strategy - usually the combination of different force selections and different initial deployments makes it difficult to mimic the opponents strategy. Where it sometimes happens is when you find a good firing position or covered route that your opponent then copies (or vice versa). They usually can't do this immediately though, so they get less advantage anyway. I also find it interesting to compare how my opponents choose to approach the same tactical problem & which approach works out to be the most effective. You can't really use this approach for scenarios though due to the fixed force selection. When evaluating the results for ladder competitions though it would be good if points were allocated on the basis of the victory point .differential between the 2 games.
  6. Wasn't aware of that either. Although isn't that problematic for scouting using the hunt command? You would typically give your scouts a short cover arc so they don't give away their position by firing, but would like them to stop once they see the enemy.
  7. Bil Thanks for posting these rules and the accompanying AAR. I'll try them out on a few solo games to see how they operate. I have experimented myself with a few different rules that try to address the player's god-like command of the battlefield & have a few observations. Area Fire I'm not sure I agree with how AF-2 is restricted. Suppose a squad was split into 3 teams on a scouting patrol and 2 of the teams encountered a tentative contact in the same AS. This rule would prevent the squad leader ordering these 2 teams to use area fire to suppress the tentative contact while the 3rd team to flanked the position (because more than one team has a sound contact in the same AS). Instead I'd suggest folding AF-2 and AF-3 into one category of AF - Area Fire Controlled by Autonomous Unit Leader. A squad on scouting patrol would then be an Autonomous Unit and could act independently of the PL. Later in the battle, however, when the squad has rejoined the platoon, the PL would be the Autonomous Unit Leader, not the squad leader. Viewing the Map/Battlefield Several other respondents have talked about restricting being able to move the camera around the battlefield. You experimented with not allowing clicking on enemy unit icons but decided that was too much of a pain for any added realism. I've tried a few approaches and thought the following works ok: You can move the camera anywhere on the battlefield at viewing level 4 or above At viewing levels 1, 2, or 3 you can only view the battlefield from the location of one of your units. You may only zoom to a maximum magnification of 8x. (Some flexibility in moving the camera is allowed in plotting moves through tricky terrain.) You may click on enemy units for the purpose of determining which of your units can see that unit. You should not tab to the location of the enemy unit. You may use the LOS tool freely when plotting movement orders. The effect of these restrictions is to provide some FOW while not overly restricting playability. Movement orders In my opinion this is the trickiest area to try to balance playability with realism. As the god-like commander you can have a scout team identify an enemy position and then next turn order your armour to move into a position where they will be able to spot and destroy that position - even if there is no C2 link between the scout team and the tanks. Or - your scouts might spot and AT gun that would take out your armour if they continue their current mission, so you cancel their current mission and issue them with new orders - even though they are blissfully unaware of the threat! I haven't really found anything specific I'm happy with yet to counter this. However the basic philosophy could be along these lines: When issuing orders players should try to place themselves in the boots of the unit commander and only issue orders consistent with information known to that commander (including what their superior might have ordered them to achieve.) Each Autonomous Unit(usually a platoon) should have a mission. To avoid book-keeping, players should issue full orders to all teams in the Autonomous Unit to complete the mission (move to this position, move to contact, etc). Only units in C2 with the Autonomous Unit's HQ can receive these orders. Units that are not in C2 with HQ should continue to execute current orders. Players should only change or cancel orders based on information known to the unit (i.e.its contacts or tentative contacts). Let's say team A spots an enemy unit. You should not be able to alter the orders for team B based on that information until team B has a tentative contact for that unit because that represents the flow of information (and orders) from team A to team B (potentially via Platoon HQ). Unless the unit is in C2 with its Autonomous Unit commander its only choice is to continue current orders or seek the nearest cover and halt. So in the previous examples the tanks should not be able to get new orders until they too had the tentative contacts that the scout unit had spotted. Of course this is potentially problematic because often units are in different chains of command - but reading contemporaneous accounts lack of coordination between units, particularly tanks and infantry was not uncommon. In practice I fear this might require too much discipline for players to adhere to!
×
×
  • Create New...