tactics and tactics in CM(?)

[kunstler]

I have finished playing both sides of both battles in the combat mission demo. Lots of fun, and really involving. Good to hear there will (or may) be a patch that lets you save movies of the battles. I was wondering what tactics people find work in combat mission, and if these tactics are ones that would really have been used/worked. How are people approaching their attacks? It certainly seems like a realistic simulation. Any feedback from military circles yet?

So far, this is what I have found/learned in playing the demo:

1. Never send tanks close to forests or buildings that haven't yet been swept by infantry. Keep infantry abreast or ahead of armour. Shell from a distance. Only move armour into a town when surroundings all held by your troops. That damn panzerchreck thing has a much longer range than I woulda thought. How far can a panzerfaust fire?

2. Shift the weight of the attack to one side. Attack on a narrow front, and overwhelm the defenders. Computer tends to set up guys on a broad front. I have found concentrating troops and defending less area more effective, at least vs. the computer. Not sure if this would be really smart vs. humans who might be better at maneuver.

3. Put defenders on hide until the enemy rolls up real close then hammer them.

4. Avoid roads, go cross country.

5. Kill artillery spotters right away, with prejudice.

6. How do you go about finding the best spot for spotting/machine guns? Spots I think might be good often turn out not to be.

7. Pull back forward troops before they get too weak, have them set up with other defenders to form strong line in rear to bleed enemy dry.

8. Use transports to shuttle troops between forests, over open ground. Keep guys in cover whenever possible.

9. Drop smoke in front of enemy spotters, tanks, guns, troops to block their LOS.

Has anyone repelled the american attack and prevented them from getting any objectives?

I have found the german ss guys easier to beat than the american attack.

Look forward to the game. Kudos to the design team, it looks/plays fantastically. And thnx for supporting a Mac version!

kunstler

[argie]

Try the Chance Encounter scenario. This is the more hard in the first time you play. I think you could d/l it in Battlefront and CMHQ.

Try to play against humans by PBEM, there is the real challenge.

Ariel

[Mike Zeares]

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

So far, this is what I have found/learned in playing the demo:

1. Never send tanks close to forests or buildings that haven't yet been swept by infantry. Keep infantry abreast or ahead of armour. Shell from a distance. Only move armour into a town when surroundings all held by your troops. That damn panzerchreck thing has a much longer range than I woulda thought. How far can a panzerfaust fire?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They come in several versions, 30, 60, and 100 meters, I think. The lessons you list above are probably among the most important in keeping your tanks alive. Smart lad.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

2. Shift the weight of the attack to one side. Attack on a narrow front, and overwhelm the defenders. Computer tends to set up guys on a broad front. I have found concentrating troops and defending less area more effective, at least vs. the computer. Not sure if this would be really smart vs. humans who might be better at maneuver.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It can be very effective, but a lot does depend on your opponent's skill at repositioning his forces. See the Riesburg AAR at CMHQ for a good example of this.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>3. Put defenders on hide until the enemy rolls up real close then hammer them.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is especially important for your mg's, unless you want them to get shelled from long range.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>4. Avoid roads, go cross country.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

One of Murphy's Rules of War, "the roads are all mined." Of course, if the fields are muddy, or you're travelling from Nijmegen to Arnhem, you may not have a choice.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>6. How do you go about finding the best spot for spotting/machine guns? Spots I think might be good often turn out not to be.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

When I figure it out, I'll let you know.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>8. Use transports to shuttle troops between forests, over open ground. Keep guys in cover whenever possible.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, the trick to open ground is smoke. Smoke is pretty wacky in the beta demo, but it's been fixed since then.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>9. Drop smoke in front of enemy spotters, tanks, guns, troops to block their LOS.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then take the opportunity to move so your guys aren't back in LOS when the smoke clears.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Has anyone repelled the american attack and prevented them from getting any objectives?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, several times, but only against the AI. The AI in the beta demo is not very good on the attack. This has also been fixed, according to the beta testers, may they rot in Hell.

-- Mike Zeares

[Black Sabot]

I have played all 3 scenarios numerous times against the computer. One tactic that i find that works for me is, as the attacker, i deploy a strong force along the side of the map close to an edge. They then advance along that edge until they are well behind the main line of defence. I can then launch an attack in Patton style ("hold 'em by the nose, then kick 'em in the ass!") This seems to work in all 3 scenarios. Give it a try.

[Fionn]

Incredibly "gamey" way to win though isn;t it?

Such an attack would earn my special ire if I was playing against you in PBEM and ensure I wouldn't accept a surrender but would prosecute your forces till they were pulped.

I don't like edge-hugging.

[Jarmo]

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

Incredibly "gamey" way to win though isn;t it?

I don't like edge-hugging.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Encirclement is gamey?

[Guest Germanboy]

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

Encirclement is gamey? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Err, no. But using the edge of the map to screen your troops from flanking attacks is, I would say.

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

Andreas

[Bil Hardenberger]

I don't know if I agree with Fionn about edge hugging. It really is no different than using a boundary with your neighboring friendly Battalion to protect your flank. Although in reality that boundary is not always what it seems, and many units have gotten in serious trouble by depending on it. Something CM cannot duplicate.

[Peter Western]

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

Err, no. But using the edge of the map to screen your troops from flanking attacks is, I would say.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Any advance benefits from the fact the game has a limited map size, a unit which is closer to the edge than range of deadly fire (for example; 1 km or more for tanks) receives flanking protection. Limiting attacks to areas at a distance of 1 km from either map edge would be necessary to get around this "GAMEY" tactic.

[Black Sabot]

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

Incredibly "gamey" way to win though isn;t it?

Such an attack would earn my special ire if I was playing against you in PBEM and ensure I wouldn't accept a surrender but would prosecute your forces till they were pulped.

I don't like edge-hugging.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm sorry but i don't understand what "gamey" means. PLease explain.

Anyways, what i was trying to offer was a different approach to the game. With only 3 scenarios to play you have to spice it up the best way you can, Much like sex...

Also,Fionn, its hard to accept a surrender when you have no forces left on the field

[Guest Big Time Software]

Good observations Kunstler.

We covered the Edge Hugging problem a few tims in great detail in the past. If anybody missed it they make for a great read.

Edge Hugging is a problem that dogs all wargames. However, we feel that in CM this tends to work less well than in others. It doesnt' take much to stall out a column formation, or even a narrow wedge, in CM. So if you are concentrating on a map edge and get hit by even light artillery or concentrated small arms fire... oh-oh

In Steel Panthers I could always get through those types of situations, but in CM one unit can hold up MANY. I had two 3 inch mortars stall out an entire SS Company that attacked too narrowly, oddly enough towards the edge of the map (the AI isn't designed to use the map edge, so this was influenced by other factors).

Even so, as Bil said there is some realism to such Edge Hugging moves. The problem is that in real life more often than not there was some sort of flank support fire. However, attackers very often whacked a defensive location on the side fairly unfazed by neighboring enemy units.

Just more food for thought.

Steve

[Gen. Sosaboski]

Good posts Steve and others. Also what I do (In CE alot) is to send the Sherms screaming down the road and then dismounting my infantry. This works real well if you've got a "Super Sherman" on your hands .

Also, if you see an enemy arty spotter, crush him with everything you can! It's only a two man team,but sometimes it can cause more damage than all 4 Shermans combined in Riesberg (that was fun ).

Other than that, nothing to add other than what's been covered.

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

Sosabowski, 1st Pol. Abn.

Yes, I know my name is spelled wrong as a member!

[Los]

"How are people approaching their attacks? It certainly seems like a realistic simulation. Any feedback from military circles yet?"

I find that I just apply real world principles (i.e. out of FM 7-8, or my own experience) and my attacks and defense work just fine. Nothing else needed really. I don't even need to know by how many factors a rifle squad prone in the trees degrades incoming fire etc etc. I just do what I would order my guys to do for real and the porgram returns the same expected results (good, bad, or indifferent depending on all the factors involved). Based on that alone, CM is the most accurate wargame I've played. Having been beta testing the thing since day one I still don't know the numbers behind the engine and I don't care. But then again I don't know the "numbers" behind the defensive benefits of a fighting position in real life too. I only know it's effects on degrading incoming fire. Same priniciple.

Hope that answers your question.

Los

[Black Sabot]

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

Err, no. But using the edge of the map to screen your troops from flanking attacks is, I would say.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not sure i understand your position here. Are you saying that the map edges should be off limits? Keep in mind that the edge works against the attacker as well by limiting his freedom of movement. I also do not see how it screens your troops from flanking fire. A good defender would know what avenues of approach to defend and position his forces accordingly.

Take a look at LD as the German commander. You assume that the town is defended so you look for a way to enter it with the least amount of casulties. For your armor it boils down to only 2 routes, and you can assume (being a veteran commander) that the amis have those routes covered. So why not try something they don't expect? Why not try the indirect approach?

[Major Tom]

It is hard to say. In LD and reisenburg, to attack effectively you almost have to hug the sides. Frontal attacks are virtual suicide. I have NEVER had troops running right beside the side of the board, but, in order to utilize some good cover and dead ground you have to get pretty near the side. I have never really thought of it as a gamey tactic, as, I have used it vs PBEM players, and they have used it against me, without too much uproar on either side.

[Black Sabot]

Can someone please explain to me what the term "gamey" means. I can think of several interpretations but i am only guessing.

[All American]

I'm not exactly sure what the defination is but I think it is when you take advantage of a game's limitations and do something that someone in your position in real life wouldn't do.

All American

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

perviously known as Kid

[Darstand]

Off topic, after a three month break, I would like to play CM again. Looking for a foe with moderate experiance. I would like to play Chance Encounter as US.

Darstand@home.com

[William Thiel]

The term "gamey" is derived, I beleive, from the comparing of some tactics to the rotten stink that rolls off of cooking meat from wild game that has been eating the wrong things.

Gamey tactics are those that come from using some particlar aspect of a simulation that do not represent real life, and that the simulation is not able to account for. They can also come from people having played scenarios before in a simulation and using their knowledge to do things in the game that they would not do in real life.

Here's where the arguments usually come in. For instance, in LD as the german commander, would you really dump smoke on the hill opposite you or shell positions there without knowing that mortars were there in the first place? Would you sit back and level all the buildings in the center of town before entering?

Frankly, I don't usually give a ****. Berli has whipped my ass a couple of times doing the things described above, but Major Tom is currently getting butchered by me in RB since I defended the avenues of approach near the edge he decided to use. It's all learning to me, and since I can't play around with moving infantry guns by hand, or all the toys the beta tester are getting good at using, i am just contenting myself to setting up the best ambushes I can with what I've got.

To address the original question of this thread, I was in the army but never in combat, so I can't say for sure. Most of your points seem to coincide with my training, however.

Goannas at work.

[Black Sabot]

To All American:

Thank you for clearing that up for me. I thought it was either that or something to do with venison.

To Fionn and Germanboy:

I respectfully disagree with your opinion as to "edge hugging". The way i see it one should utilize the entire map to one's advantage. If running a force down an edge to flank a defence is considered taking advantage of the game's limitation then how far off that edge do i have to be before i'm no longer "gamey"? 10 meters? 20?

Also, in all 3 scenarios the attacker's initial deployment is at or near the center of their set-up area. Doesn't this arrangement seem a bit too orthodox to you? Haven't you ever repositioned your forces to a flank to throw off the opponent? How close to the edge did you deploy? Do you see what i mean?

Now don't get me wrong, I respect your opinions on this subject. It's my belief that you want the gameplay to be as"real life" as possible. All i'm saying is the tactics i described are "real life". After all, the map has to end somewhere and the defenses Can't always be streched to cover it. I would very much like to hear your opinions on this.

[Guest JonS]

I think the main point is that it means you can effectively ignore the units which in real life would be flanking the map you're playing on, and would be able to interfere with you move along the chosen (map edge)route.

Since these forces don't exist in the game world, you get a 'free ride' down the map edge.

From a scenario design point of view it is probably possible to overcome this by such tricks as placing the objectives near the midlle of a wide map, or making the terrain along the edges so slow to move through that it will take too long to use that route.

Regards

Jon

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

Ubique

[Simon Fox]

A good thread. Personally I think Fionn's just sooking about board edge creep because he ascribes the school of "active" defense and likes to run his defenders forward to place nasty ambushes and feels pretty silly when he has to run them back again when outflanked

On the pretty small maps found in the beta demo scenarios I don't think there's anything wrong with it and on larger maps it would probably be largely self defeating.

[This message has been edited by Simon Fox (edited 03-15-2000).]

[Fionn]

Well it just comes down to various opinions really.

I find that "edge-hugging" is gamey and akin to exploiting a game limitation to gain an edge. As such I NEVER PBEM play an edge-hugger a second time.

I don't berate them by email but I don't play them again either and if asked to recommend an opponent to a friend or beaten PBEM opponent I will NEVER recommend an edge hugger.

In short, you are free to edge-hug but you will find a large number of player will take great exception to it and will refuse to play you if you edge-hug. Also, edge-hugging is the most predictable and base of tactics and so it will only result in defeat.

For the record I think that a player who keeps about 100 metres between himself and the map edge at most times is being very fair and this is what I do myself.

If, upon reviewing a PBEM movie of a finished game, I found that my opponent had outflanked me by racing a substantial amount of his forces directly along one edge or the other I simply would refuse to ever play him again as this behaviour is antithetical to my personal definition of "fair play".

I don't have a rulebook which I can enforce on PBEM play but I DO have a choice as to who I play and whom I respect and one thing I know is that I don't respect edge-huggers and refuse to play them a second time.

[Guest JonS]

A long time ago, in a version of CM far, far away, there was a battle where someone used the map edge to get across a frozen river...

(just teasing )

[This message has been edited by JonS (edited 03-15-2000).]

[Simon Fox]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>(just teasing )<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good to see you went out of your way to make that abundantly clear Jon. After all Fionn's not one for giving you a serious answer to a tongue in cheek post...