Sacrificing Troops

[bogey]

While playing defense, I found my positions overwhelmed. Tanks were pounding anything that moved. I decided to fall back deeper into the village.

I left a 50 cal to cover my retreat. I knew the enemy would make mincemeat of the crew, but they'd buy time.

That made me think for a moment. If I were a company commander, if I knew these troops, could I sacrifice them?

I don't think I could.

I withdrew the 50 cal with the rest and I lost. I'm no Stonewall.

[Guest wwb_99]

What you are refering to is called a command decision. There are times that the few will have to be sacrificed for the many, and in those times someone must decide who. In CM that person is you.

But also note that if properly sited, an infantry defense can be designed to roll backwards. Also note that one should be retreating onto their HMGs, not leaving them out in front.

WWB

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

Ave, Caesar! Morituri te salatamus.

[dNorwood]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by wwb_99:

But also note that if properly sited, an infantry defense can be designed to roll backwards. Also note that one should be retreating onto their HMGs, not leaving them out in front.

WWB

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This reminds of back when I used to play pool - an mediocre player would comment to a highly skilled player "Of course you beat me - all your shots were easy!!"

(The reasoning is torturous - Playing well means never having to make a sacrificial command decision...)

[Hamstersss]

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

(The reasoning is torturous - Playing well means never having to make a sacrificial command decision...)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Though I agree with your pool analogy, I take issue with your relation of it to combat. Soldiers, vehicles and equipment in combat are nothing like balls in pool. Pool follows a non-random structure and is reliant entirely upon the skill of the player. In combat, your men will break at inopportune times, your tanks will miss at the worst possible moments (Ask JDMorse and Elvis) and your arty will fall in all the wrong places, regardless of how good a player you are. Dealing with these disasters is 50% of combat, proper tactics is 25% and proper preparation is 25%. In pool, on the other hand, your ball will never stop rolling because it got scared, go off course due to a gunner with a hangover or get bombed by unexpected enemy air support.

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

Meeks is correct.

-Steve, of Big Time Software, creator of Combat Mission, Vicar of Peng on Earth.

[Guest wwb_99]

Planning well means decreasing the liklihood of having to make a tortorous command decision. But a good plan will not excuse you from having to make such a decision. In every assault there always is the 'first unit over the top' so to speak.

WWB

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

Ave, Caesar! Morituri te salatamus.

[dNorwood]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Elijah Meeks:

Though I agree with your pool analogy, I take issue with your relation of it to combat.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're right - I should never have compared the game of pool to the game of Combat Mission.....

[Jarmo]

Interesting point actually.

First thing that comes to mind is "expendable".

While it was not the norm for good commanders, it certainly was not unusual

to give out "suicide" orders. Leaving a detachment to cover the retreat being

a typical example.

But in real life, the troops would probably figure out they've been

left to die, and would suffer a serious morale hit.

Or the fanaticism might kick in.

But then again, don't troops alone out there already suffer a morale

hit in CM? So I guess it's modeled after all. Kind of.

[Guest tero]

Remember the Falaise Cap ?

The Germans held the corridor open long enough for most (some ?) of the troops in peril to escape. That meant that somebody propably gave the order for the troops to die if necessary saving the rest.

If your men know they are the last line of defence they will either run or stand fast. Or if they are intelligent they will hold off the attacker long enough for the rest to widraw and regroup AND pull out in time without being routed.

[coralsaw]

Why are we assuming that they will necessarily die if fighting a delaying action?

Unless the defenders expect to be executed or at least suffer in the hands of a hard OPFOR (e.g. battle of Berlin), or unless they are fanatics, the most probable course of action is to fight until overwhelmed and then surrender, or at least try to.

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

My squads are regular, must be the fibre in the musli...

[Guest tero]

>Why are we assuming that they will necessarily die if fighting a delaying action?

Indeed ! It is just that in CM once you are out of CC you are SOL. Your reactions slow down and executing orders becomes more difficult. That is why dying is (almost) the only possible solution, if you do not surrender.

>the most probable course of action is to fight until overwhelmed and then surrender, or at least try to.

I'd say the most professional course of action would be to delay the enemy and then, when the mission in complete, slip away to fight another day. Alas there is no "disperse and randevous at location *click spot* on the map" command available.

[This message has been edited by tero (edited 11-16-2000).]

[coralsaw]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Your reactions slow down and executing orders becomes more difficult. That is why dying is (almost) the only possible solution, if you do not surrender.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good point, but check out the withdraw command. I never used it, but a few good people said that if the troops are high quality and if not used at the last minute, the command can save the troops, as it has zero delay.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I'd say the most professional course of action would be to delay the enemy and then, when the mission in complete, slip away to fight another day. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are right my friend.

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

My squads are regular, must be the fibre in the musli...

[David Aitken]

tero wrote:

> The Germans held the corridor open long enough for most (some ?) of the troops in peril to escape.

> That meant that somebody propably gave the order for the troops to die if necessary saving the rest.

From Stalingrad onwards, the German war effort was basically a bunch of 'fight to the last man' orders from Hitler. Sacrifice was the Nazis' order of the day for the whole latter part of the war. More unusual is to hear of the Western Allies sacrificing troops – Allied soldiers were certainly willing to fight to the death (at Arnhem, for example), but would not normally be under orders. I quote a notable exception, also from the Arnhem battle, from Cornelius Ryan's book:

"Shortly after 6.00 p.m. Brigadier Ben Walton sent for Tilly. At Walton's headquarters in a house south of Driel, Tilly expected the brigade commander to review once more the details of the night's operation. Instead, Walton told him there had been a change in plan. Word had been received, Walton said, that 'the whole operation – the large-scale crossing – was off.' Tilly's battalion would still cross but for a different purpose. Tilly listened with increasing dismay. His men were to hold the base of the perimeter while Urquhart's First Airborne Division was withdrawn! He was to take as few men as possible – 'only enough to do the job': approximately 400 infantry and 20 officers. Tilly did not need to go: he could detail his second-in-command, Major James Grafton, to take his place. Although Tilly replied he would 'think about it,' he had already decided to lead his men over. As he left Walton's headquarters, Tilly felt that his men were being sacrificed. Walton had said nothing about getting them back. Yet he knew that Walton, too, was helpless to alter the situation."

It says more here than I remembered – in short, in the face of heavy German opposition, only 239 made it across the river, and very few linked up with Urquhart's forces.

Of course, we're talking theoretically here – in practice, many people are killed in war for no reason. There are numerous examples from any major conflict, of men being sent on a mission and ending up being wiped out for little gain (Arnhem again). In that respect, if you knowingly give a sacrificial order for a good reason, it's not a foolish thing to do. Not something you want to make a habit of, but war is about killing people – you give orders which will help to end the war, not orders which will save your men, because your men will only stop dying when the war is over.

David

[Jeff Heidman]

The mission and the men -- in that order.

War is a ****ty business.

Jeff Heidman

[Doug Beman]

Elijah, imagine if those things DID happen in pool! It'd make the 4 hour snooker tournaments that ESPN2 shows Saturdays at 2am exciting!!

DjB