Split squads

[Triumvir]

I've brought this up once on the CMHQ Chat.

Does anyone here have any reasons not to use split squads apart from the two outlined in the manual?

1) They break [in morale] more easily

2) They break [physically] more easily

While I agree that for regulars or worse splitting squads may lead to rather shaky troops, I've found that for anything experience level above that, the ability to more finely-tune your movement outweighs the disadvantages.

For example, splitting a platoon lets me cover quite a bit more space than a regular platoon; and when I make contact, it almost invariably is with one squad at a time. After this squad goes to ground, I can then use a portion of my other units to continue scouting the ground ahead, while I bring the others across to take the contacted enemy in the flank.

I can also recycle the units, allowing one split squad to run down its ammo, while the other remains fairly fresh. When the first has used up maybe a quarter, I can swap the two around; this keeps my ammo usage down quite a bit when in holding a position either for an attack or for defence. If one squad gets annihilated, I still have another that's reasonably well equipped.

This works especially well for close-range German units like FJ, Volksgrenadiers etc because not only is their close range firepower roughly the same as a full Allied squad, but their firepower estab is roughly symmetrical.

By the way, I recognize that I could do much the same thing with full squads.

Does anyone else find that the advantages outweighs the slightly higher chances of breaking?

[Guest Pillar]

I find the splitting of squads is excellent for representing a "spread out" order when doing recon.

Then you can have them reconverge on the enemy fairly efficiently as you described.

[Guest MantaRay]

I agree. I dont do it much, especially in large battles, but from time to time I find that it helps against MG positions to make them pick and choose which squad to fire at, while the other can advance.

Ray

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

When asked, "How many moves do you see ahead?", CAPABLANCA replied: "One move - the best one."

New CM Site. In process of switching. Brought to you by Hardcore Gamers Daily

The Red Army of the Rugged Defense Group Ladder

[Olle Petersson]

I guess it's also a matter of battle size.

If you only have one or two platoons, splitting the squads might be a good option to increase flexibility. If you have a battalion it's probably less beneficial to split a couple of squads.

Cheers

Olle

[Triumvir]

Olle; you have a point. I usually try to play company-level actions at most, simply because my organisational abilities break down when faced with anything bigger.

[Pak40]

Splitting squads in the setup will double your foxholes. This will enable you to make an initial defensive line and a secondary defensive line that your squads can fallback to when the enemy seems overwhelming in the primary defensive line.

[Joeri]

Pak40,

That's a tactic I also use quite often in defensive battles (splitting squads to double number of foxholes). Something to consider when using this tactic is to make sure that the attacker does not benefit from your forward foxholes when you abandon them. They often make excellent firing positions for the support weapons of the attacking side.

Joeri

[muzzlehead]

Splitting squads offers two major benefits. It is an excellent way to confuse your opponent as to the size of your force when advancing in the open forward at a distance.

It also allows you to bunny hop into position after moving through open ground.

Later,

Muzzlehead

[109 Gustav]

I don't think splitting squads to appear stronger has ever fooled me. I mean, when I see a bunch of units labeled Infantry squad? and they all have two men, it's pretty obvious that the squads are split.

Sometimes, when I'm facing an attack on a broad front by split squads, I'll concentrate my fire on every other unit. That way if they break and run for the rear, my opponent must either continue the attack with half his forces, or go back and regroup into full squads, costing him a few minutes.

I always do the double foxhole trick on defense, though, and use split squads as observers, putting one on a hilltop or tall building with good LOS so I have an idea of my opponent's routes of advance.

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

Well my skiff's a twenty dollar boat, And I hope to God she stays afloat.

But if somehow my skiff goes down, I'll freeze to death before I drown.

And pray my body will be found, Alaska salmon fishing, boys, Alaska salmon fishing.

-Commercial fishing in Kodiak, Alaska

[Guest Scott Clinton]

Other reasons not to split squads:

Lower firepower (even when you add them together IIRCC)

*

Two teams from a split squad take up more room and are harder to conceal than a single squad.

*

It is harder to coordinate two units as opposed to one

*

They have lower h-t-h abilities (close assualt a team with a full squad and watch the slaughter)

*

Splitting squads lowers your entire forces overal morale (as indicated on the main screen)

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

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

[PeterNZer]

... however. Get a split yanky squad infront of a german squad, and another from the side and watch the germans take casualties.

There seems to be some kind of extra-bonus for firring in from the side. I routed a german platoon using this tactic by accident once.

Anyone else experienced similar?

PeterNZ

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

"I can be quite pleasant, you know" - Andreas

"WHERE'S THE MOAT?!" - Jon

[Terence]

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

... however. Get a split yanky squad infront of a german squad, and another from the side and watch the germans take casualties.

There seems to be some kind of extra-bonus for firring in from the side. I routed a german platoon using this tactic by accident once.

Anyone else experienced similar?

PeterNZ

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yeah. It was something I got good at when I played Gettysburg. I didn't expect it to work so well in CM, but it does. it surely does.

btw, that double foxholes/split squad thing is damn clever. But is it gamey, in the sense that can you fit a whole squad into a split squad foxhole?

One other thing I do that helps create a layered defense is to park my troops at the back edge of a woods during setup. They they appear in foxholes on the first turn. Then move them forward about half way through the woods and then stop and hide.

When I need to, I engage the enemy, he comes out of sneaking along mode and deploys to engage. I trade fire for a little and then fall back to the foxholes. Its a good delaying tactic, and sometimes it looks as if you are running away, which is a little deception I like.

Once I played both sides in a hotseat game to see what I looked like when I was playing, and for a turn or two, it appeared that there were more of me than there actually were, cause after I broke contact and displaced back to the foxholes, there were lots of spotter markers scattered about.

Although in that case cause I knew that I wasn't really running away, the running away deception that I mentioned earlier didn't really work on me.

Oh, the hilarity,

Terence

[Alexander]

btw, that double foxholes/split squad thing is damn clever. But is it gamey, in the sense that can you fit a whole squad into a split squad foxhole?

Yes, I think so. The 2 reasons why I'm playing canned scenarios PBEM instead of attack/defend QBS are the 1)TRP bug and 2)the split squads/extra foxholes phenomenon. Firsst of all, it's extra work; the right tactic on defense is splitting up all, or virtually all, your squads to gain the extra foxholes.

Is there a way of programming in, say, a 50% chance of NOT getting a foxhole with a team? This would avoid the complication of having small and regular sized 'holes, as well as sparing the player a lot of busy work.

[ropey]

On the other hand, if you are defending a position for real, surely you could prepare a fallback defensive position? The only way to do this in CM is the split squad way.

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

Never leave your mind so open your brains fall out.

[The Commissar]

Well, Fionn Kelly shows a great proficiency with split squads in almost every one of his games in the roles of scouts.

He plays on Elite experience levels, however, which is something I have yet to try out.

The only time I use half squads is when I am using scouts myself (usually lower-quality troops, since they almost always get ambushed and badly mauled), or when I am trying to cover as much VL's as possible in a given area without wasting too much men.

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

"...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..."

- Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back"

[This message has been edited by The Commissar (edited 12-12-2000).]

[Pak40]

"btw, that double foxholes/split squad thing is damn clever. But is it gamey, in the sense that can you fit a whole squad into a split squad foxhole?"

It's not gamey at all. These are prepared positions before the battle takes place, they can be dug as big as needed. Plus, I think the foxhole graphic represents several foxholes. You never put an entire squad in one foxhole unless you want one mortar round to take them all out.

Also, defensive positions often incorporated a dug in fallback position.

[Pak40]

"One other thing I do that helps create a layered defense is to park my troops at the back edge of a woods during setup. They they appear in foxholes on the first turn. Then move them forward about half way through the woods and then stop and hide. "

Ah, but your initial defense is not in foxholes, only your fallback position.

Try my method instead: Split your squads and put half of them forward and half of them back. On the first turn sneak your back teams up to the front teams so that they will merge back into their original squads. Hide and wait for ambush. When the heat is too thick run back to your fallback foxholes.

Some other tips when executing this defense:

1) make sure that the enemy can't use the first set of foxholes against you. Place them far enough ahead in the woods so that they can't see the second set of foxholes.

2) place the HQ unit behind the secondary foxholes, but sneak the HQ unit up on the 1st turn so that the initial ambush gets the benefit of the HQ's bonus. When the fallback occurs your HQ unit will have a foxhole to make the final stand.

3) HQ units with stealth and command bonus will help you during the pullback.

4) If possible use smoke to aid in the fallback.

5) know when to pullback before it's too late.

[Terence]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pak40:

Try my method instead: Split your squads and put half of them forward and half of them back. On the first turn sneak your back teams up to the front teams so that they will merge back into their original squads. Hide and wait for ambush. When the heat is too thick run back to your fallback foxholes.

B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is so much better than my plan. Please delete it at once so noone else can see it. And I see how the foxhole thing is not gamey since it does reflect the normal creation of fallback positions.

[This message has been edited by Terence (edited 12-13-2000).]

[109 Gustav]

Even if the terrain is unsuitable for a fallback position, like if there's only a narrow strip of cover, I'll still split squads to make more foxholes. That way, if I need to reinforce a position, my reinforcements will also have holes for cover.

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

Well my skiff's a twenty dollar boat, And I hope to God she stays afloat.

But if somehow my skiff goes down, I'll freeze to death before I drown.

And pray my body will be found, Alaska salmon fishing, boys, Alaska salmon fishing.

-Commercial fishing in Kodiak, Alaska