Recon infantry?

[Jarmo]

I thought to bring this up, after reading "gamey tactics"

I assume all recon was not done by vechiles during WWII, rigth? Wrong?

What kind of units were used?

Is this totally out of CM's scope? I wouldn't think so, but...

If I use a squad, it responds solwly and panics easily due to lack of HQ.

Going with the whole platoon doesn't seem bright either.

Maybe sniper, but I don't think they were used like that.

[Spook]

Another option is to split a squad into half-squads (HS) and send these off on recon details in different directions. Or keep them close together, with one HS moving while another watches if the moving HS comes under fire. Likely the moving HS will get panicky or wasted, depending on what shoots at it, but the hope is that the other non-moving HS can then "see" what the defending shooter is, depending on the FOW settings.

This example is one of the "recon by death" cases, which can be unavoidable when trying to locate a dug-in enemy hiding in close cover. But it's comparatively better than using a whole platoon (grouped close and moving together) that moves forward "blindly" on a recon mission, with all platoon units suddenly coming into ambush by multiple enemy units.

[This message has been edited by Spook (edited 07-10-2000).]

[Frenchy]

Recon was performed in several ways in US Divisions during WW2. All had HQ units with recon sections attached to them. Patrols were used by frontline troops and taken from existing squads. Reg and BN Hq had A&P (Ammunition and Pioneer) platoons which sometimes peformed recon duties. Short of updating the equipment list to show rec teams, I guess one would have to split up squads for the time being. You ca go the the 100th Div (WW2, not today's training div) Site (URL escapes me) and look at their comprehensive organization charts to get the exact makeup.

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

Webmaster

http://www.trailblazersww2.org

http://www.vmfa251.org

[Los]

Also read my post in the gamey tactics section to adress the thoght process about leaving recon teams out of CM.

Los

[Mark IV]

The observation that split squads panic easily in recon roles (without an HQ) would apply equally to a 3-man scout team, wouldn't it? I mean, they're supposed to look, not get into firefights.

It's a risky role and of course they might run into trouble- in which case either the split squad OR the recon team should & would get back to the main force.

That said, I&R (intelligence and reconnaissance) platoons were pretty common at infantry regiment level, weren't they?

[Hakko Ichiu]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Los:

Also read my post in the gamey tactics section to adress the thoght process about leaving recon teams out of CM.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I see the logic of leaving out dedicated scout teams, so how about this: allow infantry squads a "detach scout" command. This would create a two-man sub-team (presumably two-rifleman, rather than BAR/LMG men) with less of a morale penalty for the other 10 guys in the squad than the "split-squad" command. This essentially simulates the "Hodges and Johnson, sneak up to the top of the ridge and tell me what you see" command that a squad-leader might give. Reformation of the whole squad would be as per normal.

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

Ethan

-----------

Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

[This message has been edited by Hakko Ichiu (edited 07-10-2000).]

[Jarmo]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Los:

Also read my post in the gamey tactics section to adress the thoght process about leaving recon teams out of CM.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That clears it up for me.

I would't think "detach scout" option would produce a mentally

less fragile unit. After all, the guys would know they are being

sent to a possible ambush.

[Frenchy]

I and R units were very common...I think perhaps a tweak to list these as a purchasable unit might be in order.

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

Webmaster

http://www.trailblazersww2.org

http://www.vmfa251.org

[Hakko Ichiu]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jarmo:

I would't think "detach scout" option would produce a mentally

less fragile unit. After all, the guys would know they are being

sent to a possible ambush.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just to clarify, I meant that the main body of troops would be less fragile. Clearly, the scouting party is going to be walking on eggs.

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

Ethan

-----------

Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

[Los]

Just to clarify: iI was normally the responsibility of the manuever element (i.e. rifle company) to detach and provide for it's own scouts during movement to contact. IR platoons and what not generally had differnt roles (depending on the whim of the BC and the S2 who they directly worked for) which normally ranged from special patrolling missions (i.e. night patrol to go capture a prisoner), to battalion quick reaction force or reserve, to even mundane tasks as the "Palace Guard" (Bn HQ). The corrolation between how modern scout platoon works and how they were utilized in WW2 is not necessarily accurate.

If you guys don't like having to detach your own squads and break them up to scout ahead of the main assault (which is minutes behind not hours behind) well that's what your real life counterparts had to do also.

Los

[Los]

BTW a quick follow up, there was little or no specialist training done in I&R platoons which would have made then any more adept to scouting than regular infantry. In fact they would often stick oddballs, "brainiacs" and other "undesirables" there, (of course your mileage may vary). And ceratainly once combat started there was even less time to train up these guys. This of course is cmpletely different from today's scouts and recon types who are usually selected from the top infantryman in the battalion (again YMMV) and who do get specialsit training either at schools or at home station.

Los

[Spook]

Now for a little history about "recon" in the old Squad Leader board game series, to which CM can trace some of its roots:

In response to players' demands for a specialty "recon" unit in the Squad Leader system (prior to Advanced Squad Leader, or ASL), a "scout" unit was provided starting with the third add-on SL module as a single-man unit similar to leaders and "heroes". The premise of the scout unit was that it would usually get nailed when it stumbled over a priorhand hidden or concealed enemy unit, but provided a chance that this enemy unit's identity would be revealed. There was also the low-probability allowance that the scout would not only survive contact, but could also attempt close-combat with the enemy unit now revealed.

On face value, this all seemed like a reasonable concept. The problem was that the concept was soon quickly abused by "gamey ploys." Examples included using "scout swarms", using scouts to pick up various weapons like MG's and AT devices, using a pair of scouts to man a MG with the MG thus operating at full effect, etc.

Thus, the ASL system in '85 deleted scouts as a unique counter type, and it was stated in the rules footnotes that players should just use half-squads if they wanted to simulate a "recon unit".

So how does this get back to CM with its own unique models? Well, for a moment, allow that gamers could indeed "detach" a two-man scout team from parent squads. What would prevent an attacking player from detaching scout teams from ALL of his squads, thus sending a "swarm" of smaller target units just forward of the main squad or EVEN in unison with the attacking squads? This could possibly overload the TacAI in deciding what to target. And even if the scout teams aren't targeted, they give the attacking player a higher chance of an "infiltration element" with scout teams that flank or get behind defending enemy units, thus providing cross-fire opportunities.

This isn't suggested as a bad concept, in fact it MIGHT be desirable to attempt in "combat theory." But in reality, getting small two-man teams to detach to move forward or even defend in a COMBAT (not scout) role required a lot of prior training, experience, and initiative for the troops in question. Thus it becomes a bugaboo for the CM model to discern which squads could provide scout teams, the probability of "detachment", any possible modifiers due to nationality or WW2 timeframe, etc.

So the "speciality" recon unit or scout team can be valid CM concepts, but it's not apparent yet as to the benefit is in reprogramming CM to provide such units, beyond a CM player just using half-squads in the scout role.

One way to provide specialized "scouts" in DYO would be to add an infantry platoon (with its HQ unit) and then delete all platoon units except for the HQ and one squad. The squad could then be split, and the HQ unit given a high concealment attribute for "infiltration" ability.

[Jarmo]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hakko Ichiu:

Just to clarify, I meant that the main body of troops would be less fragile. Clearly, the scouting party is going to be walking on eggs.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dammit, your brain is clearly more effective than mine. Thanks for clarification.

[RMC]

The problem with the scout detachment in the SL series (introduced in Crescendo of Doom) was that the game system was unable to accomodate the loss of the scout to the squad. The squad suffered no penalties for the loss of the sqaud member and each squad could produce numerous scouts. CM wouldn't have that problem since it does track the individual men.

The concern about overloading the ai due to having too many scout team running around is misplaced. Right now I can field a battalion of infantry and split every squad into half-squads. I haven't done it, in fact I've never split a squad. It could still be done and I haven't seen anything that indicates that you shoudln't do this because of CPU, VRAM or any of the usual reasons not to stress out the system.

Even if there shouldn't be purposely designed scout teams, I would like to see something smaller than a (American) 6-man group being detached. The US squad at one point had two of the men designated as scouts. IF CM can treat a two-man scout section from a squad as harder to spot than a six-man half-squad then I'd like to see that as an option. If the spotting rules don't take that into account, then half-squads will have to do... or bazooka teams or snipers.....

[KiwiJoe]

I'd like a specialised recon squad... say about 3-5 men who have +1 or so stealth but only light weapons... few pistols and maybe a sub-machine gun.

[Spook]

RMC:

I should clarify to say that the tacAI won't necessarily get "overloaded" in computing power. Rather, if a "swarm" of two-man teams is thrown forward in attack along with the regular squads, then the tacAI MIGHT be challenged in its "logical" targeting behavior.

So on that note, if a player is going to attempt such an attack tactic (and rest assured, if given the chance, some players WILL), would the defending units be allowed to "split" its firepower to handle targeting multipe units at the same time? Would the MG's get larger "beaten zones" that allow multiple attacking units to take possible casualties that are close to the targeted one?

If so, then the "scout attack team" ploy can be reasonably nullified. If not, then some CM gamers will try to woogie the game system if they see some existing limits to tacAI targeting ability.

I don't think highly of six-man scout teams either (from US squads). But here again, turn to DYO. Pull up a US airborne platoon that uses 10-man squads and try what I suggested earlier, to delete all but the HQ and one squad and then split the squad. In fact, this might be better in that the airborne squad has a higher allotment of shorter-range, high-ROF carbines and SMG's, which would be preferable as scout team weapons.