Cease Fire

[Guest John Maragoudakis]

Can the players agree to a cease fire for a number of turns? No fire orders allowed if both sides agree to a cease fire for the duration of the cease fire. Movement orders not approaching known enemy positions allowed only. Your units are allowed defensive fire if an enemy unit approaches... by mistake. hehehe (that unfortunate event would not break the cease fire).

The player asking for the ceasefire would have to plan no attacks for the next turn. His only action for the next turn would be to request a cease fire. The opposing player would not be obligated to return an answer. The opposing player could choose to fire on the requesting player as an answer. The opposing player is in no way hindered by a request for a cease fire.

I don't want to add something so late in the game developement. Perhaps something to toy with for CM2. Of course there is the possibility that cease fires are outside the scope of squad level games.

[This message has been edited by John Maragoudakis (edited 04-23-99).]

[Guest Rhet Schmidt]

I was just wondering what this will add to the game John? Maybe you could elaborate a little more on the reasoning for possible inclusion. This would help in evaluating your proposal better.

As far as historical use of "cease fires" the only real interesting one that I know of was during the North African campaign. The Tommies and the Gerries had a standing cease fire agreement during this campaign. The first cease fire of the day took place during tea time and the second cease fire was from dusk to sunrise. There are documented cases where the two combatents used this time to share medical personnel. All in all a damned civilized way to fight a war.

As far as the Eastern front the only cease fires I know of were when the other side was dead or surrendered. I don't really recall hearing of any on the Western front after the African Campaign either.

------------------

Rhet

[Guest John Maragoudakis]

A cease fire would let you reposition, redeploy to better positions.

Asking for a cease fire *might* give the other player a false sense of security. He might just attempt a risky attack if he thinks I am breaking. So in that sense it would be mental bate.

It would be fun to shoot at a player asking for a cease fire. Remember, the asking player would not plan any attacks when asking for a cease fire so any refusal would be time lost and a slap in the face.

Of course this is war so any cease fire attempt so be treated with *extreme* caution, there better be something in it for you.

The suggestion might add extra fun to the game.

If it's not historical, by all means forget it.For instance it can be argued that the action of asking for a cease fire takes more than sixty seconds, something that is outside of the scope of the game.

The suggestion is not a demand. I'm just throwing the idea up in the air.

[This message has been edited by John Maragoudakis (edited 04-23-99).]

[Mike D]

I guess I would say that I would disagree with implementing a cease fire option for a certain number of turns during a given a scenario. Sounds totally unrealistic to me. "Hey, GI Joe, this is Hauptman Hoffmeier, stop shooting at me and my men for 5 or 10 minutes (5-10 turns) so I can reposition my unit up there that is in no mans land being ripped apart by your 50 cal machinegun and bring up some support units from the rear to blast you." No way this would happen in real life in the heat of battle and if it did it would be an exceptionally rare occurence. On the other hand, I think a cease fire option should be available in the sense that if both players have been bloodied and no longer want to continue to fight then one or the other side can send the cease fire request and his opponenet or the computer can accept if they agree. But then the current game ends. If it is a single scenario it is over and the victory tally is displayed to both sides. Where an option like this would be of more use is during a campaign game where both sides would then have the time to like their wounds, bring up reinforcements, and reposition their units prior to starting the next battle/scenario segment of the campaign. Which in this case would mean resuming the fight on the map where you left off when the cease fire was agreed to. Close Combat has always had this feature and it does add a lot to the game. I think it would also be a great feature to have in CM, but only if it is implemented correctly.

Mike D.

aka Mikester

[Guest Big Time Software]

Rhet,

There are documented cases of cease fires on all fronts, even the Eastern Front. Generally they were arranged at very low levels for the removal of wounded or the recovery of the dead. Often there would be a cease fire to facilitate a decent sized force surrendering to the other (or at least hearing the proposal).

I just read one Western Front cease fire that was granted to allow a German ambulance HT to pick up 7 wounded soldiers from a partially knocked out bunker. This sort of thing happened OFTEN on the Western Front. But these are outside of CM's scope.

Combat Mission will have some way of calling a battle in a Campaign quits (NOTE: just the battle, not the Campaign). Basically, both sides agree that they have had enough fighting under the current circumstances and therefore would rather not engage in any real combat for a bit of time. This simulates both sides withdrawing their forces from imediate contact and offensive/counter offensive action. During such a period, historically, cease fires might be called in order to get dead/wounded, but this will not be simulated (outside of CM's scope).

Upon entering a new battle each side will be allowed *some* ability to redeploy forces. This simulates the motion that happens in the minutes/hours/days after a battle. The longer the simulated non-combat time, and the further away units are from the enemy, the greater the chance that they will be able to move. Obviously reinforcements entering inbetween battles will have at least some freedom (this depends on the campaign designer's wishes).

Steve