How to defend?

[womble]

Because HQs are separately modeled from the units they command, we now have a way to depict loads of things we never thought much about before. If the troops are tired and in bad shape, then imagine what shape their "fearless leaders" must be in! Not only do tired and/or unwell, distracted leaders make lots more mistakes, but they execute more slowly than their better rested and/or healthier selves, thus missing opportunities to a) smash the enemy or at least limit the damage some ill judged action, already under way at their behest, is likely to cause. This explains how brilliant leaders can fail catastrophically when it matters most.

Unfortunately, it's usually not the HQ unit that's making the decision, but the player. HQ unit effects in-game are fairly subtle and the distinction between a Fit and a Weak or a High and a Low Motivation HQ is difficult to detect in actual battlefield effectiveness.

[John Kettler]

womble,

Then I guess the Real Commander™ is going to have to go without sleep for 24 hours, have his or her feet in cold water and eat awful food, generally cold. We'll find out in very short order who the real hard core gamers are!

Regards,

John Kettler

[womble]

womble,

Then I guess the Real Commander™ is going to have to go without sleep for 24 hours, have his or her feet in cold water and eat awful food, generally cold. We'll find out in very short order who the real hard core gamers are!

Regards,

John Kettler

Or we could just always play whilst drunk!

[Michael Emrys]

Savvy leaders have learned the art of the catnap, catching even as few as 20 winks whenever the opportunity presents itself. And whatever his other faults might have been, Montgomery was very conscientious about getting a full nights sleep every night even when a battle was going on.

I think this also points out how very important it was for leaders, going all the way to the top, to be in great physical shape and especially to have great stamina. There are many people of great intellect who theoretically might have made great tacticians, but who would simply not have been able to cut it under the physical rigors of command.

Michael

[JonS]

True, except most great leaders weren't in great physical shape. They all had tremendous stamina, but they were also usually physically broken to one degree or another, be it by age, infirmity, injury, or accumulated wounds.

[ZPB II]

Then I guess the Real Commander™ is going to have to go without sleep for 24 hours, have his or her feet in cold water and eat awful food, generally cold. We'll find out in very short order who the real hard core gamers are!

Regards,

John Kettler

I take it you have never lived in a Finnish dormitory.

(I had a flatmate who smuggled cheap gas from Russia and hustled it on. He used to store it in our dorm. There was a minor accident once. Talk about an immersive gaming experience when there's a small explosion in your apartment and streaks of burning petrol cover the floor. The smell was quite something.)

[Erwin]

"This explains how brilliant leaders can fail catastrophically when it matters most." Uh, thanks John for explaining my situation so eloquently.

[Aragorn2002]

Another question. What is the best way to feed reserves/reinforcements into the (defensive) battle? I understand it largely depends on the situation of the battle, but are there general rules? I sometimes make the mistake of rushing them into battle and make them suffer (perhaps) unnecessary losses.

[womble]

Another question. What is the best way to feed reserves/reinforcements into the (defensive) battle? I understand it largely depends on the situation of the battle, but are there general rules? I sometimes make the mistake of rushing them into battle and make them suffer (perhaps) unnecessary losses.

Via covered routes... Or by falling back onto them (which is the essence of defense in depth, really). Your advantages as the defender mostly depend on being the one sitting still shooting at the poor schmos who have to cover ground to take your position. Retreating through a cascade of ambush positions (and therefore obliging your opponent to advance through those ambushes) is where it's at.

If you've got a really solid fighting position you can approach in cover, then it's worth sticking about and reinforcing, but trying to cross fire lanes to get to a beleaguered position isn't worth it; better to take the casualties on the withdrawing troops (or fight to the death without reinforcements) than on the relieving force that's supposed to be forming the next layer of your defense.

[slysniper]

Via covered routes... Or by falling back onto them (which is the essence of defense in depth, really). Your advantages as the defender mostly depend on being the one sitting still shooting at the poor schmos who have to cover ground to take your position. Retreating through a cascade of ambush positions (and therefore obliging your opponent to advance through those ambushes) is where it's at.

If you've got a really solid fighting position you can approach in cover, then it's worth sticking about and reinforcing, but trying to cross fire lanes to get to a beleaguered position isn't worth it; better to take the casualties on the withdrawing troops (or fight to the death without reinforcements) than on the relieving force that's supposed to be forming the next layer of your defense.

Perfect answer

I enjoy it the best when I can set them up in a 2nd defensive line of some type and then try and draw the enemy towards them.

The best way to do that is to show fleeing troops that are past their point to the rear. It gives the impression you are falling back to a deeper location. Thus it can get your opponant to rush forward thinking the ground in front of them is being evacuated.

[womble]

Perfect answer

[preen]

The best way to do that is to show fleeing troops that are past their point to the rear. It gives the impression you are falling back to a deeper location.

Which, of course, you are. It's just not the next location that the attacker is going to have to engage.

...it can get your opponant to rush forward thinking the ground in front of them is being evacuated.

Don't you love it when a plan comes together?

Of course, usually they'll massacre the retreating troops and speculative HE will carry through the obvious cover into the subtle ambush position you've created, eliminating the chance of doing any damage...

[slysniper]

[preen]

Which, of course, you are. It's just not the next location that the attacker is going to have to engage.

Don't you love it when a plan comes together?

Of course, usually they'll massacre the retreating troops and speculative HE will carry through the obvious cover into the subtle ambush position you've created, eliminating the chance of doing any damage...

Now that is part of the art of pulling back, if you wait too long or do not have covered exit routes, then you deserve to see your men die. Plus run them too close to your hidden next line and watch stray rounds do some damage.

It never is easy to have perfect plans.

The only reason I mentioned it is if you do have a safe way to pull back, sometimes you have to expose some guys and put them at risk. (They are the rabbit to get the Fox to chase)