Mr. Clark Posted January 26, 2001 Share Posted January 26, 2001 Okay, here is an opposite example of what I said earlier, from a different book. COMPANY COMMANDER spoiler ahead... I'm currently reading COMPANY COMMANDER, and in the last parts of the BULGE that he sees, he is warned that he MUST NOT lead from the front. He tosses aside the advice, in an attempt to hurry his company to a location. He is ambushed and wounded... losing command of I company in the recovery time. (And, obviously, becoming useless in the current situation!) As for Band Of Brothers, the two examples I cited of Winters leading from the front were in fact company sized or larger attacks. (I don't own the book, so I cannot look it up... sorry) However, I'm certainly not saying this is what HQ's SHOULD do! Winters standing under fire in the middle of the road and inspiring his men to advance from the ditches was an extreme example of leadership and courage. One of his men even states that he will NEVER forget the brave image of Winters yelling to the men to get out of the ditches, while tracers zipped past him. [This message has been edited by Mr. Clark (edited 01-25-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorak Posted January 26, 2001 Share Posted January 26, 2001 Mr Clark, Company commander is a great book. But I don't think he got wounded in the buldge by trying to hurry his men forward from the front.... More the case of him standing still, while everyone else was moving backwards. Lorak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Clark Posted January 26, 2001 Share Posted January 26, 2001 MORE COMPANY COMMANDER SPOILERS AHEAD! The company was advancing through a forest... not sure which... to a road. He moved up to the front with the scouts, taking 3 of his HQ unit along (because the company had already gotten "lost" once.) One of the HQ men yelled at him to get back, and he dismissed it, wanting to lead and hurry to the road location. They came upon a German party and fell to the ground. They get caught in some type of crossfire then and he tries to pull back, but he and another man get hit in the process. Right before he's hit, he realizes that it was very stupid of him to be in the front, where he cannot do his job properly and where he is at risk. GREAT book so far! [This message has been edited by Mr. Clark (edited 01-25-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDesertFox Posted January 26, 2001 Share Posted January 26, 2001 Michael, so in the end, maybe we are all arguing over the angels on the head of a pin. Yep, seems to be the case here. Basically the question is: Is it a frequent occurence in the game that the AI leads with HQ units in front ? I have seen enough examples in the game both with the AI in defense or counterattack situation where HQ units were not the first in line [full FOW on]. So I don´t see this being a problem with the game. As for The Black Watch incidence and the numbers of 15 making it back to the start line...From what I´ve read about it, they were doomed this way or the other, irrespective where their CO has been it wouldn´t have changed their fate. They ran into a perfect trap comparable with the trap the North Novas ran into in Tilly la Campagne. If someone might be to blame for the problems of the incidents in particular and "SPRING" in general it definitively weren´t the battalion COs. In the case of the Black Watch canadian reconnaissance sucked bigtime not taking into account the all present mining tunnels in the area which were used by the defenders to hide and pop up in the back and flanks of the attacker. Helge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisl Posted January 26, 2001 Share Posted January 26, 2001 I'm getting into the discussion a little late, but my experience in playing against the AI (and it's been a while) seemed to be that with worse troops it tended to throw away the leaders (by leading from the front) and with better troops it's not as bad. It was particularly noticable in Chance Encounter, as the Germans, since the troops are green and conscript they tend to sit on their asses while the leaders go die. Even playing the as a human with low quality troops you tend to lead more from the front (because of the "I'd rather sit here and have a smoke than get shot at" effect). It's worth an experiment (which I may try this weekend). ------------------ "If you can taste the difference between caviar on a cracker and ketchup on a Kit-Kat while blindfolded, you have not had enough aquavit to be ready for lutefisk." (stolen from some web page about lutefisk) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von Lucke Posted January 26, 2001 Share Posted January 26, 2001 It's much simpler than ya'll are making out. You can even try this experiment at home (given proper adult supervision). If you set up a platoon and give all squads and HQ orders to move, the HQ itself is invariably the element that moves first (no command delay). It's also the unit less susceptable to morale effects. Ergo, it's the HQ units that end up in front of everybody else... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasoncawley@ameritech.net Posted January 26, 2001 Share Posted January 26, 2001 Yes, the HQs move out sooner. But that is why my HQs always use a 1-pause delay when the platoon moves out, so they trail slightly instead of leading slightly. If the quality is lower, a second pause might be in order. The AI would act smarter if it did the same. Rather than thinking the fastest movement is best, the HQ should pause when necessary, to keep "on station" with the men being commanded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts