How do you evaluate terrain and movement?

[Yskonyn]

I am having trouble with my planning in pretty much any CM games as I find it very hard to evaluate terrain (and therefore movement) and come up with a plan.

As much I'd like some rule of thumbs I also realise that this problem is very dynamic and dependent on a lot of factors. Afterall, if it all was cookie cutter stuff Battles were probably fought differently.

Still, there must be something to hold on to that you guys are willing to share?

For example; let's say you have a big map with open fields broken by a few patches of trees and a forrested road on the left which leads up to a crossroad you need to capture (so the objectieve is on the left side of the map).

You have mostly armored vehicles.

I understand the road is dangerous because of possible ambush locations, but it does conceal movement towards the objective for a long time.

Open fields, on the other side, allow for maneuvering and wide field of view.

How would you proceed?

[Combatintman]

I'd take a look at any of Bill Hardenberger's AARs as a starter for ten because he really steps through this process.

While it is possible to conduct analysis of the ground in isolation, to do the thing properly you need to analyse every aspect of the problem. So understanding your own capabilities and those of the enemy is important. For instance if you have an infantry company supported by a T-34 platoon in this scenario and you are facing only German dismounts then your planning options are way different to a scenario where the German dismount force has an assault gun platoon or an anti-tank gun platoon in support.

In the former I would stand off 400-500m away in the open ground with my T-34s and whack the woods and the crossroads with HE and coax. The reason being that the dismounts are only going to have Panzerschrecks and Panzerfausts. Neither weapon is overly accurate beyond about 300m and my T-34s, by sitting in the open, can sit there almost invulnerable.

While all this is going on, I can pretty much do what I like with my infantry because the opposition is suppressed so assaulting across the open ground allows me to bring all of my firepower to bear at the risk of getting picked off by isolated groups of Germans. Or I can sneak up along the road using the forest as cover. This allows me to attack in echelon and effectively steamroller the crossroads objective. The risk is that my lead elements could get a very bloody nose from any Germans in the woods that are out of LOS of my T-34s.

Now the other problem with the Stugs/anti-tank guns ... difficult to answer generically, I'd need to see the map and the problem in full.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

Consider the kind of force you have against what the enemy have. In your example you describe good tank country. However, it is also could anti tank country. So be wary of anti tank guns. Figure out where these might be. The patches of trees might well conceal AT Guns so treat these areas with caution.

I would avoid the road since it is too obvious a line of advance and is very likely going to be covered by enemy positions. Send in dismounted infantry first while the tanks overwatch. Use bounding overwatches. For instance a platoon of three tanks might overwatch with one tank while two advance to the next position/ At the next level you use a tank platoon on overwartch to cover the platoon you are advancing.

[Combatintman]

Further to my last about Bill - check out his blog, there is some really good stuff there:

http://battledrill.blogspot.co.uk/

[MikeyD]

I've said for years that terrain is the 'third player' in the battle. There's you, the opponent, and there's the terrain. I marvel at those players on YouTube who always play the battle from 30 feet up and 30 feet back. Me, I have to get down on the ground with the troops - eyeball every fold of terrain and hedge. Whats' that acronym? WYSIWYG - what you see is what you get. A good rule of thumb is to forget its a 'game' and instead think "Would I do that in real life?" Be sneaky, be crafty, fight dirty. In real life you wouldn't travel down a straight raised stretch of road if you knew the enemy held the far end and was watching your every move.

[costard]

Yskonin, Hi.

With regard to your question:

I do a quick scan, get the features - hills, valleys, water/mud swamp, forests. Buildings and built up areas if any. I do a quick rough sightline analysis (after all, this is what 3D representation is) with different camera angles and heights, trying to remember good positions for covered fire (sides of hills, edges of forests, folds and saddles in the ground), good positions for observation and movement (i.e. places my guys can move without getting killed.) Find the places I can't move, or have to move (vegetation and water blocks, rocky ground for fast moving tracks, bridges and fords). I'll spend some time on this, the whole process might take forty-five minutes. Finding these positions becomes much quicker as you learn to recognise advantages of particular shapes of ground, but you are looking at moving to some of those positions with covering fire from another, different position, or through dead ground: the whole exercise becomes a little more intellectually demanding. So this is where I usually turn the map around and look at things from your opponent's perspective. Try to find the traps that can be set against you - kill sacks and suchlike. His covered movement paths might give you the start of a plan, an idea of his probable positioning.

You have a highly mobile force in an open environment. Use the early game to find out as much as you can about your enemy - his forces and their disposition. If your enemy allows, take your time, be patient, take your time - communications is more than just language and footpaths, it's eyeballs on targets and shell paths too. The less information you give away to your opponent the more events will seem to him to happen as a surprise. The more information you can get out of your opponent, the better your ability to shape the battle as you want it to happen. Take your time, be patient.

Practically, this means vehicles in full defilade and small binocular equipped teams moving in cover to observation points. Spare leaders are a boon here - those with radios and artillery privileges are precious. Remember that a probe can be a distraction, it is possible to mask a major movement, somewhat, by drawing his forces to a smaller part of your force in order to skew the main match up: threaten one avenue before taking another, but the highly mobile nature of your force means that your coup de main ought to be a fist of tanks and halftracks smashing their way through a weak point and snotting him mightily - setting that up, you'll just have to be creative. (Be aware that he'll probably have much the same plan, but might execute it blind).

[Cymru]

I start by looking at it from the other player's seat. If I were defending, where would I place my units? Obviously this doesn't always work, but it usually stops me from making really dumb mistakes.

[Macisle]

... I marvel at those players on YouTube who always play the battle from 30 feet up and 30 feet back. Me, I have to get down on the ground with the troops - eyeball every fold of terrain and hedge...

Same here.

[Michael Emrys]

I marvel at those players on YouTube who always play the battle from 30 feet up and 30 feet back. Me, I have to get down on the ground with the troops - eyeball every fold of terrain and hedge.

I do both. Most of the time when I am actually plotting moves I am in the view 3. But in uncertain situations I get right down on the ground, looking for minor undulations of terrain and other useful information. I will generally move the camera along a prospective path, stopping now and then to look around to see what can be seen from that point and, more importantly, where that point can be observed and fired on from.

Michael

[Blazing 88's]

I've said for years that terrain is the 'third player' in the battle. There's you, the opponent, and there's the terrain. I marvel at those players on YouTube who always play the battle from 30 feet up and 30 feet back. Me, I have to get down on the ground with the troops - eyeball every fold of terrain and hedge. Whats' that acronym? WYSIWYG - what you see is what you get. A good rule of thumb is to forget its a 'game' and instead think "Would I do that in real life?" Be sneaky, be crafty, fight dirty. In real life you wouldn't travel down a straight raised stretch of road if you knew the enemy held the far end and was watching your every move.

I do both. Most of the time when I am actually plotting moves I am in the view 3. But in uncertain situations I get right down on the ground, looking for minor undulations of terrain and other useful information. I will generally move the camera along a prospective path, stopping now and then to look around to see what can be seen from that point and, more importantly, where that point can be observed and fired on from.

Michael

Exactly I remember in my early days of table top miniature wargaming, I would use a homemade reverse periscope to get a view of the battlefield from the troops perspective on the table. With CM it is a matter of pressing #1 or scrolling the mouse down to get the same effect. Love it.

[MikeyD]

Of course you can play 30 feet up and 30 feet back. You can also fast forward through turns without paying attention to the action. But both of those are doable only for the initial deployment phase. Once you've met the enemy every wall, ditch, hill and depression becomes a thing of importance.

[c3k]

These ideas are all...indicative of moral degeneracy and show why so many players lose.

Evaluate terrain and movement? Simple. Order several squads to advance at the double. The ones that get shot show you BAD areas. The ones that make it show you GOOD areas.

It is simple and foolproof.

If you want to know how BAD a BAD area is, send a lot of men there. I use a quantitative analysis comparison methodology. For example, a "27 dead men" area is BETTER than a "34 dead men" area.

An added benefit of this method is that it clears your OOB of the men who were doomed to die. Now you can focus on the survivors. Win, win, win.

[c3k]

In a serious vein, (really, I'll try), an eye for terrain takes a bit of experience and some time.

Bil (among others) is a master at examining a map and finding its nooks and crannies.

You need to find KEY terrain. The KEY terrain will UNLOCK the GATE on the path to victory. Really.

Work backwards: what terrain do I need to control/capture? Great. What location will enable me to leverage the enemy out of it? (All this assumes attack: do it from the reverse perspective for defense.) Okay, if that copse of trees allows me to put fire on the rear of the defender, how do I get there? Okay, I need this piece first.

That kind of analysis should guide you. However, you also need to think about escape routes, how easy it is for the enemy to trap you/put you in a kill-sack, or the ability to switch your attack to a different axis. Also, is that how the enemy expects you to come?

Getting down low with the camera helps. Nooks and crannies are important. Cover is very important.

Time limits play into it. Do you have TIME to use that route?

If all else fails, send in scouts.

Ken

[DaddyO]

Nooks and crannies are important.

Ken

Combat Mission, the Thomas's English Muffin of wargames.

[Macisle]

Combat Mission, the Thomas's English Muffin of wargames.

Sig-worthy!

[John Kettler]

MikeyD,

I, too, marvel at that. The English bloke who does CM reviews is a prime example of the practice. Couldn't believe how fast he could move his forces about.

Combatintman,

Totally agree with your Hardenburger AAR recommendation. I would not want to face him in real combat.

Blazing 88's,

With you on the mirror. We ruined a beautiful first surface mirror when using it as a periscope on the sand table.

DaddyO,

I love those English muffins, but they're so expensive. This, though, is free.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Vinnart]

My best advise to reading the terrain is to use a grid mod. It really helps to see the subtitles in the terrain which can really make a difference to placement, and routes. If a more covered route will take longer, better to take it if possible over saving time in movement through terrain that will be more dangerous. Also, always consider what movement order is best for the situation according to the terrain. I try to think how i would move if i was that grunt on the ground. Would I sprint? low crawl? ect..

[DaddyO]

DaddyO,

I love those English muffins, but they're so expensive. This, though, is free.

Regards,

John Kettler

Not sure where you live, John, but here you USED to be able to get them at Costco, something like four 6-packs for $5. Not any more, though. Miss those nooks and crannies.

Thanks for the commercial link, it just goes to show their ad campaign worked on me when I was a kid.

[Yskonyn]

All great advise.

It basically comes down to methodically analyze the map for good and bad spots.

I must confess that I might be one of the those 30 feet / 30 feet players at times. I need to slow down and force myself to be more engaged with the terrain.

Is there a way to measure a point on the map? Say, there is an edge of a forrest where I find it likely the enemy might have a HMG. It's effective range is a known fact. Can I then measure from that patch of woods the range outward in some way?

The Target command is the only 'measurement' order I can think of, but logically, this only originates from a given friendly unit, not out of enemy units or spot on the map.

But is there something you guys use? Or do you just develop a feel for range and scale after a while?

[Jock Tamson]

All great advise.

It basically comes down to methodically analyze the map for good and bad spots.

I must confess that I might be one of the those 30 feet / 30 feet players at times. I need to slow down and force myself to be more engaged with the terrain.

Is there a way to measure a point on the map? Say, there is an edge of a forrest where I find it likely the enemy might have a HMG. It's effective range is a known fact. Can I then measure from that patch of woods the range outward in some way?

The Target command is the only 'measurement' order I can think of, but logically, this only originates from a given friendly unit, not out of enemy units or spot on the map.

But is there something you guys use? Or do you just develop a feel for range and scale after a while?

A lot of players would put a waypoint from one of their units on that spot, then stretch a targeting line from it to see what the line of sight is like.

If you didn't know you can stretch target lines from waypoints, this may be the key you are looking for. When you do it, it will look like the target line still emanates from the unit however the information it is giving you is from the waypoint you originated it from. This is how you find hull down positions, for example.

[Yskonyn]

Thank you. I do know about this functionality, though. Nonetheless it's appreciated.

[Badger73]

<snipped>

Is there a way to measure a point on the map? Say, there is an edge of a forrest where I find it likely the enemy might have a HMG. It's effective range is a known fact. Can I then measure from that patch of woods the range outward in some way?

<snipped>

But is there something you guys use? Or do you just develop a feel for range and scale after a while?

Vinart mentioned using a GridLine terrain mod.

Bil Hardenberger's "Gridded Terrain Mod" can be found in the CMBN repository at URL = http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=1148http://

Where weapons ranges matter, it is fair for a player to have some way of measuring distances in the game.

Good luck and good gaming!

[Combatintman]

I don't really bother with the fine tuning - in the setup I'll 'target' points from the setup zone to get a feel of the dimensions and just roll from there. Those reference points serve as my 'range card' and I can just judge distance from it ... bit like how it is in real life.

[LongLeftFlank]

Ah yes, good old Thomas's. Of course, for 'nooks and crannies' read 'air'. Getting consumers to pay more for air instead of actual product is the Philosophers' Stone of confection.... This hides behind many 'low calorie' or 'crunchy' (puffed rice in your chocolate) formulations.

[Michael Emrys]

Ah yes, good old Thomas's. Of course, for 'nooks and crannies' read 'air'. Getting consumers to pay more for air instead of actual product is the Philosophers' Stone of confection.... This hides behind many 'low calorie' or 'crunchy' (puffed rice in your chocolate) formulations.

Indeed. Cheetos™, being about 99% air is a classic example. Nevertheless I rate them highly among junk foods and willingly pay through the nose to get "Cheeted".

Michael