#1 Tip for Newbies????

[Capt_War]

Anyone have a #1 basic but good tip for newbies??

[ January 15, 2003, 10:47 PM: Message edited by: Capt_War ]

[Krazy Canuck]

Originally posted by Capt_War:

Anyone have a #1 basic but good tip for newbees??

Read this and practice, practice, practice etc.

KC

[xerxes]

Concentrate your firepower. (and the corollary, try to stay out of the way of your opponents concentrated firepower.) Easy to say, hard to do.

[ January 13, 2003, 12:41 AM: Message edited by: xerxes ]

[JasonC]

Look for the lopsided match-ups, the ones you win completely for free, not the even match-ups, the "fair fights". Save your men for the stuff they can do that well, and string together such "clean wins". Mindless mashing of like on like, without looking for the "angles" that let you hurt the enemy without being hurt, is the number one newbie mistake.

Examples - tanks machinegunning infantry caught in the open. Light mortars shelling a gun from out of sight, by using an HQ to spot for them. Indirect artillery fire smashing concentrated, good order enemy infantry. Guns firing from ambush at single targets they can reliably kill. Tanks killing other tanks they outmatch in armor terms, or at the right ranges. Hitting guns or tanks while they are facing the wrong direction or shooting at something else, before they can turn to reply. Your own infantry mopping up broken enemy infantry before they rally.

Examples of the stuff to avoid - he sent 2 platoons of infantry into those woods, I'll send two platoons of infantry into those woods. Only marginally better - sending 3. His tank can kill mine and mine can kill his; let's see who wins. I'll just stay another minute and see if I can take out that gun before it kills my tank. These are "mindless mashing of like on like".

[ January 13, 2003, 01:40 AM: Message edited by: JasonC ]

[SgtMuhammed]

Have a plan, but don't fall in love with it.

Learn to analyze the map and identify key terrain and then either plan on how to take it or at least keep the enemy from doing so.

Take your time to set up your attacks and then be decisive. IOW build up your attack like water behind a dam and then hit the enemy all at once. Dribs and drabs in an attack will only get you killed.

Don't worry too much about things you can't control (bogging, weird AI moves) just deal with things as they come up and make the most of them. Remember even a clock that is stopped is right twice a day. Don't just give up on something because it seems usless.

#1 Have fun.

[Ex Bellator]

1) Take your time.

That's it really. Especially if you play PBEm or TCP. Build up the action gradually, keep high value units hidden until the mid or end game when threats have been identified.

[Fionn]

Read AARs. (preferrably with movie files attached). It is the best way to see what works for others and why. Gains you lots of experience very quickly if you do it BUT you have to be willing to improve/change ( which few are).

[ciphrix]

hey fionn can u put some links up to these AARs with movie files, and if ur not to busy, make something like a nwebie guide to CM but instead of text only or text and pic (like many of them), have a example movie of a battle on subjects of tank tactics, infantry defence etc, that way we can learn by watching how others do things, and thats a much faster way of learning

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by Fionn:

Read AARs. (preferrably with movie files attached). It is the best way to see what works for others and why. Gains you lots of experience very quickly if you do it BUT you have to be willing to improve/change ( which few are).

I heartily second this. Reading experienced players'(like Fionn) AARs is VERY eductional and has certainly helped me become a better player.

To take this one further, write your own AARs. Or at least, take notes of what you're doing while you give orders and why you're doing it so when the battle is done, you can go back and analyze what you did right and wrong, where you were lucky, where you relied on a 'gamey' trick that works against the AI but probably not against a competent human player, and what you should have done differently.

Cheers,

YD

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Rex_Bellator:

1) Take your time.

That can also backfire when done during the battle, for actual movement.

Thinking too much before the battle can mean coming up with overly complex plans which are doomed to fall apart and/or getting hoocked into assumptions about the enemy forces and positions which are purely a result of fantasy. During the battle, second-guessing and overdone "optimization" make your overall force fall apart. At the end of the battle, brillant new ideas will usually make you lose even what you gained.

Time is invested right at these places:

1) terrain study. During the battle you never want to re-analyze the terrain, you instantly have to know where cover, approch paths etc. are.

2) force analysis. But only of your own force. Enemy force info will usually be too incomplete and/or deceptive. Enemy force analysis must be done, of course, but not with much thinking, do not enhance facts and obvious conclusions with assumptions.

3) After-battle analysis. What of what you did worked and what didn't? Both on a small scale and for the overall battle.

Movement during the battle should be dictated by a plan, formations and be simple. It must be paired with deceptive moves unless you are very safe from observation before you strike, otherwise you become too predictable.

[OGF Keller]

Not 1, but a few:

--Maintain Unit Cohesion -- CMBB, as in the real world, gives you props for keeping command structure intact. It's not always possible, and things happen, but the more you can keep your guys together and organized, the more powerful you can be.

--Find good cover and defilade positions -- that means hull down/reverse slope positions/behind buildings for your armor. Woods, scattered trees, heavy buildings, reverse slopes for your infantry. Sneak through wheatfields.

--Achieve local fire superiority on the attack. More on them than they have on you.

--Find good fields of fire, enfilade positions -- you want hit the other guy from multiple angles.

[ January 13, 2003, 10:55 AM: Message edited by: OGF Keller ]

[SgtMuhammed]

Good advice redwolf

Remember, you don't have to think alot you just have to think well.

Be decisive. Even if you mess up at least your guys didn't get killed waiting for something to happen. Just find what you did wrong and fix it next time.

[Redwolf]

This is a lesson I had to learn the hard way:

When concentrating your forces on one point, that means the one point is not where your units hang out, but where your units can shoot at. Platoon coordination is done by operating toward the same point to shoot at.

While it is obvious that you shouldn't bunch up, what I did for some time was moving with wide space and then concentrating only for a decisive blow, too fast for enemy artillery to react.

However, even though I successfully avoided getting artillery onto my head it still turned out to be very unhealty. I had occurances of bunches of tanks being shot up by a single enemy tank or gun with very slow turn rate (Panzer IV/70, M10, PaK43/41) that I wouldn't have with more space. In CMBB the direct fire that people can deliver instantly to attacking infantry is so effective for a wide area around the impact that it also puts a halt on infantry concentrations even if you are swift enough not to get hit by artillery.

Jeep rushes are out, too

[Hat Trick]

Maybe not number 1 tip, but some common newbie mistakes (ok, mistakes I made):

1) Let my tanks lead my infantry. Tanks have armor, so they should be out in front, right? Unfortunately, no. Unless there are very wide open spaces on the map, tanks and other vehicles are vunerable to hidden anti-tank guns and infantry anti-tank weapons (not to mention other vehicles). You need to use your infantry to screen/probe all woods and buildings before bringing a tank within 100-200 meters of such areas. In fact, its often a good idea to keep your vehicles completely hidden (behind woods or a ridge) until well into the game, when you have a better sense of where your opponent's positions are. Even then, you usually want to keep your tanks well back from the front line; a tanks advantage over infantry is its range, so use this advantage.

Caveat: In wide open maps, one can lead with tanks over open terrain where infantry might get cut down by enemy machineguns or other fire. Also, against heavily armored tanks, a more lightly armored but faster tank can be raced ahead to get in side or rear shots at the heavy tank.

2)Put my anti-tank gun or machine gun on top of a hill with a wide line of sight. After all, this way the gun can cover a wide field of fire, hitting multiple targets. Unfortunately, being able to hit multiple targets means that one can also be hit by multiple targets. What happens to your anti-tank gun when 3,4,5 or more tanks come into view at the same time? Better to place the anti-tank gun so that it oversees a narrow field of fire, over key terrain, where you expect the enemy to bring his vehicles singly. The same holds true, to a lesser extent, for machineguns, especially in CMBO, where their supressive effect is less, well, effective. For machineguns, you want a fairly wide field of view, but not one so long that enemy tanks can blast away at them. Its often useful to set up machineguns to fire across the width of the battlefield, rather than its length, so to speak.

I've made many other mistakes as well, but these two stand out as the ones that I think other new players may make.

[Silvio Manuel]

Read the CMBO strategy guide , which is very relevant even for pure-CMBB use (great basics).

[Fionn]

Ciphrix,

I actually had planned that (an interactive, downloadable tactics and strategy guide with associated movie files and scenarios for teaching/learning purposes hyperlinked into the text at salient points) as well as a weapons database programme which would have included tactical tips on how to use the weapons ( as well as their important tactical-technical characteristics and pictures). I actually had a fair bit of both of the above type out and a coder and artist involved.

THEN I got told to burn in hell/ calls for banning etc for asking people to give a bit of consideration to non-American civies who died in the aftermath of the 11-9-2001 anniversary and my enthusiasm to "give something freely" to the community dried up. ALL innocent civies who die are equal. Sure maybe I should have started a new thread ( and I apologised for not doing so) but the reaction was egregious and the failure of most to do anything about it was almost Chamberlinian in its error.

So, short answer. I fully intend to never, ever produce anything of help to people in this community in the future. The only caveats to that are my friends and, of course, newbies. You stated you were a newbie so I sent you files to help... I never received acknowledgement of receipt BTW did you receive it/find it helpful? Sorry but it seems that people are still not clear on my position so I thought it worthwhile to clarify it one more time.

P.s. YankeeDog, cool sig. I LOVE it

[ciphrix]

Well, no cos my email is on exclusive and it probably sent it to the junk mail, however I did thank all the feedback and the help I got, and YOU were the main dude giving me helpful tips and even took to the time to sent me files regardless if I got them or not. So if I didn't make my gratitude clear in that post, I apologise and yes, THANK YOU for taking the time to help a noob.

[General Bolt]

Play early, play often. Ignore the wife, kids, and job. Don't ignore the dog it could get real messy.

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by Fionn:

[snip]

P.s. YankeeDog, cool sig. I LOVE it

Thanks. It's a little snip of wisdom I picked up in Sociology class back in college, and ever since I've found it applicable to life on a number of levels. I've also found it quite applicable to my CM strategizing.

If I've got the meaning of yours figured correctly (i.e., the Latin), it's rather ironic considering what you allude to above. I must have been offline when the fracas developed as I don't remember the thread in question (and I'm sure I would remember it if I'd seen it).

I'm sorry to hear that the ugly actions of a few have damaged the community as a whole, but I can't blame you for not feeling much like participating after an experience like that.

Regards,

YD

[Redwolf]

Another thing new people do wrong:

If you slug it out with an enemy you often gain a wrong impression how strong he is or still is. You directly see the damage done to your guys, but you only have spotty info on his damage. He will look scarily strong, but do not bail out. His damage will usually be much heavier than it seems. Do not back out too early, slugging through may be the more successful strategy.

On the contrary, if you face an enemy you didnt slug it out with, which is only partially spotted then you better assume he is stronger than he looks.

Related to that is the rule of thumb to let artillery rain down one turn more than you think is right. You cannot se the damage you can clearly enough, and usually a turn more is very much worth it when you are targetted and through the spotting rounds anyway.

[CombinedArms]

To add a few specifics regarding redwolf's good point--damaged units don't always show their damage, but they may be significantly weakened by your fire. For example:

1. HT's may have lost a crew member and thus be unable to fire their MGs. If so, they're totally harmless.

2. Tanks may be shocked and thus unable to unbutton--or in CMBB, they have have lost their HQ tanks and be prone to panic and command delays.

3. Infantry squads may be sorely depleted, esp. if under tank or arty fire. Three squads down to one or two men each can look like a full strength platoon from a distance. (Another illusion can come from split squads. A platoon of split squads can look like two platoons.)

4. Even intact squads can be depleted of ammo.

5. Other squads that seem to be holding ground may be panicked or broken.

Study the map when the game is over to begin to pick up on this info--then remember the action on your part that caused this effect. Gradually, you'll be able to "read" the likely damage your actions have had on enemy units with fair accuracy. This can encourage you:

a) not to give up or lose heart

to push the attack or counter-attack at the right moment: i.e. when the enemy is likely to be depleted, broken or down on ammo.

It can be tricky, though. A unit that pulls back from the firing line might be panicked, but it also might have been deliberately withdrawn, etc., etc. It takes experience to learn to read all of this, and one still doesn't always get it right.

[Fionn]

Ciphrix,

Want a resend?

YD,

Very good points. Another couple I've come to appreciate through interaction on the forum is that "People see things not as they are but as THEY are" ( alternate but less snappy version "People see things not as those things are but as those people are") and "Some people are more interested in being RIGHT than in being CORRECT" ( that one comes up time and again in "factual" debates here on the forum).

As re: the Latin. Well, you are of course correct. Believe it or not you're the first person to ever comment on it. I take that as a sad reflection on the utter unimportance of such sentiments to the world at large. The world is a bunch of Chamberlains nowadays unfortunately.

Free snippet for your CM strategising "People never believe so completely as when presented with something they want to believe". IOW most people are so blinkered that when they see things beginning to go their way they'll suspend all their critical faculties and be led around by the nose for a considerable amount of time. Show him an attack where he expects you to attack and the odds of him keeping his reserve to meet your real main effort are absolutely minimal.

[ciphrix]

Fionn:

Yeah that would be real helpful if u can buddy, but not rush, so send it whenever you feel like it, and thanks dude.

Also, I haven't got teh chance to test this out, so this is going on basically nothing. If say you have a ATR dude shooting at a turret tank from the flank (tank that has a turret that can turn without the body turning), and assuming this tanks sees nothing else on teh map, would he turn his whold body (front facing ATR dude) therefore putting his thickest armour to bare?

If so, wouldn't that make a good ambush tactic? Have the tank turn to the ATR dude and maybe the 45mm can take it out from the rear. Like a distraction and then kill.

Thanks

[Fionn]

Theoretically yes but, in practice, you'd be foolish to rely on it.

No, what you want to do is create a firesack. Any half-competent site dealing with Soviet army tactics can explain the thinking behind this for you... Firesacks pretty much guarantee either lots of flanking fire OR lots of "dead frontal" enemy assaults. Either one is in your favour when you are defending.

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by Fionn:

Free snippet for your CM strategising "People never believe so completely as when presented with something they want to believe". IOW most people are so blinkered that when they see things beginning to go their way they'll suspend all their critical faculties and be led around by the nose for a considerable amount of time. Show him an attack where he expects you to attack and the odds of him keeping his reserve to meet your real main effort are absolutely minimal.

Boy, have I ever fallen into that trap before! There's a fine line between exploiting the opportunities your opponent (and luck) present to you, and allowing yourself to be led by deception into disaster.

As I'm sure you'd agree, this concept is equally applicable on the defense; if you show an attacker defense where he thinks you will be defending, or an opening where he wants there to be one, you can control his plan of attack.

It seems to me that this whole idea is related to the RIGHT vs. CORRECT idea you bought up. It is remarkably easy fall into the trap of clinging to the belief that you are RIGHT about your opponent's intentions rather than continually analyzing whether or not you have sufficient evidence to be reasonably sure you are CORRECT about what's going on. . .

None of us come even close to attaining complete objectivity in any sphere. I have a lot more respect for (and am much more likely to listen to) people who at least try to examine their own assumptions with an objective eye occasionally. I suspect not coincidentally, such people seem to also make considerably more challenging PBEM opponents. . .

I must say I'm proud of myself for figuring out the Latin correctly as my knowledge of the language is pretty much limited to learning the origin of Latin roots in primary school grammar class.

Well, I've probably sidetracked this thread for long enough. If you ever feel like dispensing any more tactical wisdom, I'm all ears.

Cheers,

YD