Suicidal Obedience

[Obergefreiter Porta]

I am not a happy man.

I'm playing a PBEM game and in two seperate instances I have lost an entire platoon of infantry who have been running into higher than expected resistance in treelines.

The first occasion, I had a Veteran German Sturmgruppe platoon 'chasing' a Regular US Rifle 44 platoon out of a small clump of woods. The moment they broke cover into the open ground between the clumps of woods it was clear that the US infantry were dug in and ready to hold ground. Fire came in killing a good few of my men. They carried on 'bravely' into the woods and were butchered. Out of 39 men there was one survivor in the space of just over one minute. American casualties were negligable.

On this occasion I accept that it was rash to run into those particular trees, but I was kind of hoping (as I watched) that my Platoon commander would make some kind of 'in the moment' judgement and pull back to the treeline they'd just run from. But no, he ran his men into certain death.

The second occasion. I held the crest of a hill with a platoon of German 44 Rifles (regulars) and on the opposite side was a wooded area. I'd scouted near the trees and come up with nothing (until about the first second of the following turn...) and so moved the Rifle platoon in to give support to a creeping advance I had going on elsewhere. My opponent had managed to sneak a US Rifle 44 into the trees. In the 20 or so metres of open ground my men had to cross, I lost every man bar 2. US casualties 1. Again, my commander blindly followed orders and charged to his own and his men's death.

Obviously the moral of this story is NEVER run into trees. I can accept that, and I can accept (certainly in the first case but not so much the second, you have to see the map to see what I mean) that I made mistakes. BUT I cannot accept the slaughter of entire platoons who manage to inflict less than a car full of casualties. Moreover I can't accept that any platoon of men, especially veterans, would willingly follow an order long after it had become obvious that it was going to kill them all. I've seen this happen too many times in other games of CM to let it go as '**** happens'.

There is a point when bravery becomes foolhardiness. I don't think that CM models that very well.

I admire CM a lot, it has taken wargaming into a whole new dimension. I just think that if it's designed to take away micro-management, there has to be a certain amount of INTELLIGENT autonomy in the Platoon leaders in order for them to respond to things that their commander (ie the Player) couldn't or didn't foresee when they gave their orders. The response shouldn't come only when their platoon has taken 75% casualties are running round like headless chickens in a blind panic. In reality only an utter tosser of a platoon leader would let things get that bad in the first place.

Just so this isn't dismissed as bad-losership (game's not lost, I've still got plenty left for a pretty strong defensive game) I'd like to say that out of all the PBEM games of CM I've played, I have only won one. Out of all of those defeats (some extremely crushing and others very humiliating) none have given me cause to raise a point about the design of CMs internal workings on this forum.

[JoePrivate]

You are right, it is rash to rush into an unknown situation. Try using Move instead of Run and have some support assets give covering fire if needed. Better yet suppress the area first if there's even a remote chance of having enemy troops. In CM you are the Platoon Leader, your troops were just following your orders. Probably not what you are looking for but the tools are there in CM already to avoid that.

[109 Gustav]

Even better than move is sneak. It works like a hunt command for inf. As soon as they start shooting, they will stop to fire back.

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

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

[Obergefreiter Porta]

If I had been the platoon leader I'd've told my men to get back to cover (my treeline or back over the ridge) the moment I saw the number of men/amount of fire that was heading my way, but of course that happened in the minute when I was merely a bystander.

Good point about Sneaking, Gustav, but if I'm firing at guys in a treeline I don't want to be out in the open when they have the benefit of 16%-type exposure. I may kill more enemy men but it doesn't help the survivability of mine. In cases like this I'd rather be back in the cover I rushed from.

Both these incidences could've been avoided with a bit of foresight (hindsight's a great thing eh?). My point is that it would be a good feature if your men and their leaders could react to the conditions they find in the replay minute with a bit more dynamism (no criticism, just observation).

Taking a quick cue from a game in a different genre, Half-Life's marines use a very simple series of rules to achieve realistic and extremely effective behaviour. You shoot at them in the open and they usually take cover before returning fire.

Anyway, this is turning into another essay so I'm off before it does. Thanks for the answers guys and I'll be using those tips in the future.

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

In addition to the others comments (whose moral is to use "run" with care, especially with larger formations, as the anatomy-to-the-wall rush it is meant to be), I have two other comments on these incidents.

The first is that firefights resulting from such rushes can be knife-edged affairs, in the sense that one squad intact and with morale high enough to fire, that makes it into cover and the end of its "run" order, can turn the fight. If it surpresses the defenders or break them, the other attackers wind up reaching cover and add their fire, and the whole snowballs to overpowering. If the defender is lower in unit quality than the attackers, this is easier, as the defenders will shoot well before the attackers stop and open up, but break easily under intense short-range fire once that happens.

If your platoon-across-the-hill "charge" had worked, and wiped out the defending squad for modest losses, you might be heralding your own tactical brilliance in sending enough men at once. But the doctrinal practice would be one squad runs into the woods while two cover it, then the others run to catch up. Also, if your men had been less brave, they might indeed have broken in the open and run away again - without necessarily being much more use to you after the experience, than your dead veterans are.

The second is a different sort of point, about historical realities. At one point the initial poster said he could not accept whole platoons obeying attack orders when they did so little to the defenders. Well, I can point him to numerous unit history incidents in WW II, in which attackers came straight across open fields into heavy fire, in which a couple of squads shot down almost a battalion of infantry that repeated this over and over for hours, and in which front line soldiers were incredulous about the stupidity of enemy "tactics" that were none the less faithfully obeyed.

American interrogater to young German POW taken during the Battle of the Bulge - "why did you just come across the open field yelling and shooting?" POW's answer - "that is what we've been doing since the offensive began, and up until now everyone else ran away or surrendered."

Look at what men from the same nations did in WW I, obeying orders to attack. Losses went as high as 40,000 in a single day from men running over open ground into machinegun and artillery fire, when an offensive began. And it was not only then - the Chinese and NVA and Russians all did similar things, sometimes on a battalion scale and often with horrible results to show for it. So, beg pardon, but one platoon being shot down in the open, because they were caught there by enough infantry firepower, strikes me as anything but "unrealistic".