Henri Posted October 28, 1999 Share Posted October 28, 1999 ..by onewho has never played yet. If you have been reading reports of CMX games (multi-player wargames like TacOps with referees), you will notice that the most frequent (almost universal) mistake admitted to by players is underestimating the importance of recon. In a fog-of-war situation, if you don't know what the hell is going on, you have to depend on luck to make the right moves, and as Napoleon might have put it, luck is a lady who likes to be courted with restraint. So although I have never seen the game beyond Fionn and Martin's AAR, my advice for you is to recon, recon, recon, before you commit your forces. Hednri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted October 28, 1999 Share Posted October 28, 1999 I would whole-heartedly agree Henri. However, sometimes you don't have this luxary. Such as when you are ordered to take pos. x by time y (see quote from the FAQ below). And time y is only z minutes from now. In such cases you don't have the time to do painstaking recon like you otherwise might, so you have to do the best you can in the time allotted, take some calculated risks, and hope for the best. And since CM will feature scenarios simulating such victory conditions based on time constraints, then folks are going to have to learn to fight w/ minimum recon as well when the scenario/situation calls for doing so. _____________________________________________ CM FAQ "What kinds of victory conditions and objectives are you going to include? We haven't created our scenarios yet. But we can assure you there will be multiple objectives and ways to win. No single victory condition will cause you to win orlose a battle. Instead you will be judged on the following (tentative) categories: Objectives - Physical areas in your possession at the end of the game. Casualties - a ratio of friendly to enemy losses that must be maintained. Prisoners - captured enemies can provide useful intelligence. Time - a time range to accomplish a certain goal. Maneuver - moving forces through a particular objective area or map edge, or preventing the enemy from doing the same. ____________________________________________ Bottom line is recon is always a good idea. But depending on the scenario victory conditions, and what type of situation the scenario designer is trying to simulate w/ these conditions, this may not be possible, or even recommended. You can't spend 30+ minutes doing recon and feeling out the enemies MLR (main line of resistance) when you only have 45 minutes to take the key objective that lies 1 km behind the MLR. You'll simply never get there in time to do so. So every situation calls for different strategies and tactics. Extensive recon may be possible and very prudent in one situation, while it is nearly totally useless/unachievable in another due to time constraints. As Charles, Steve, Moon, Fionn, and others have said over and over again, get ready to unlearn. Which is why when all is said and done I believe a flexible battle plan is one of the most important aspects of any successful operation. Even if you have the time to do proper recon, things can still surprise you, bad luck can happen, enemy can do something you didn't expect, etc. So as others have already said here on the board, flexibility in your attack/defense is equally as important as anything else. Which is a tactical tenet I have always followed and most certainly plan to continue to follow when CM comes out. Regards, Mike D aka Mikester [This message has been edited by Mike D (edited 10-28-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted October 28, 1999 Share Posted October 28, 1999 BTW the stringent time conditions set by most Scenario designers to get something done are (IMO) almost universally the main problem. Outside from extreme circumstances this is something that doesn't happen very often in real life. Don't get me wrong there is a lot of hustle built into real life actions but that's the stuff that isn't modelled in the scope of most games since it happened before the battle (i.e. you had to hump 20 klicks that night to get into positions etc) Either things have been reconned ahead of time to some degree and you have a clearer picture of what is going on, or you have enough time to scout your way ahead as you are moving out. Recon is a physical law of combat just like gravity is a physical law on this planet, failure to plan for it and do it or have it adressed invariably leads to defeat(in real life at least) which is why it's ALWAYS done. Having been doing a bunch of scenario design myself, the big problem is that as scenario designers you know where everything is when you are playing your scenario. If it comes down to the wire for you, (who knows more or elss what's out there etc) then you need to back off some time (even ten minutes or five minutes, which is a long time in CM-not advocating an extar half hour, that's too much in our wnat instant gratificati0n gamer's world.) for the player that's going through this for the first time. Another problem is that if I, as a company commander, have wrecked my company achieving the scenarios goals, then nine times out of ten, I have failed even though the scenario will chalk you up for a win since you are useless to deal with whatever comes after that last minute of the scenario. It all goes back to the fact that 99.9% of all actions are not Little Round Top, where the fate of the world rests upon the shoulders of a few men, though many scenarios seem to be designed with these extremist views. You don't often get this feeling of time crunch in a battle. (You do in prepping for one) IN a battle it's more like you main concern is getting the job done with the minimum casualties. Sure time is there as a concern, but usually you're not going to wreck yourself wihthout good reason over a time hack. Again that's once the action has started. Cheers... Los Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixman Posted October 28, 1999 Share Posted October 28, 1999 Henri and Mikester, I agree with both of you. But I go back to my basic premise in the other thread (CM tactics)-- that of the balanced scenario design. One MAJOR difference between wargaming and the real thing is that a well designed scenario is winnable from either side. So, one FOW element that does not exist for you is the chance that there are just overwhelming odds out there waiting for you behind the tree line (of course, in real warfare, there are no such assurances). If your orders say you need to get to point x in y time with z forces, then the game damn well better have been designed to give you a chance in hell of doing that. Supposing that it has, then the victory conditions are going to factor in that you have limited time for thorough recon. So, if the victory conditions look as if you need to be bold to meet the time table, then you better be bold to meet the time table. In such circumstances, it is likely that you will have sufficient forces to withstand an ambush or two and still vie for victory. Pixman ------------------ Fact is the enemy of truth. - Don Quixote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted October 28, 1999 Share Posted October 28, 1999 LOS, Some very good comments. Makes sense to me. Pixman, You are right as well. If a scenario designer is going design a scenario where the overiding victory condition is based on a time constraint, then they had better do so with the considerations that you've mentioned. Of course, as LOS pointed out, a scenario totally (perhaps even partially) based upon such time constraints probably isn't the norm. Although I would disagree that they didn't occur at all. Take for example your company has been ordered to break through an enemy encirclement that occurred earlier that day in order to relieve your fellow grunts. You better believe time might matter, especially if that surrounded force is being squeezed by a superior force and/or is holding a critical objective like a bridge, etc. Mikester [This message has been edited by Mike D (edited 10-28-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixman Posted October 28, 1999 Share Posted October 28, 1999 My only follow up to this is in reference to the scenario that we all witnessed between Fionn and Martin. The 60 minutes was clearly enough time to meet the objective while doing solid recon (still can't dilly dally and check under every bush though). This is what I would call the standard scenario type for taking a position (I am ignoring the added complexity of the opening US attack on the Falschirmjaegers and just looking at the relief force's mission). As it turned out, they called it quits at turn 41, but could have gone further. Still, 60 turns was plenty of time for Fionn. Now, if Steve had backed it down to 45 or 50 turns in the scenario design, that would be moving away from the base condition and putting added time pressure on Fionn to press ahead. In such a case, I would expect to see Steve give him additional assets -- more arty FOs, a panther, or replace the Volksgrenadiers with more Panzergrenadiers, etc. Or he could have reduced Martin's reinforcements a little. My point is that, if he just shorteneded the time schedule, without moving the balance of assets, then he would start to skew the scenario toward Martin's favor. All I do is reverse this logic and infer what the other side must have based on what I have and the given time table. Turning it around to the defense, if I have a moderate force in a strong position and the timetable says my opponent has to knock me out in 40 turns, I'm expecting 3 SS Panzer Divisions to come around every corner with the pedal to the metal. There won't be any real feeling out or balanced fire fights, just punch him in the nose and fall back, punch him in the nose and fall back, etc. Again, this is one FOW element that exists in the real world that just does not exist in the balanced gaming world. Pixman ------------------ Fact is the enemy of truth. - Don Quixote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts