Splitting Squads

[whizbang]

Reading the Strategy Guide I was encouraged to split my squad and send one half in one direction and the other elsewhere. However it's not possible to split the HQ whicch means one half goes off without the quintessential guidance from el jefe. Could someone please explain to me when it is desirable to split a squad and why. Is it just to disperse your forces or is there some more aggressive reason?

Thanks

[Tigrii]

Not really for combat reasons. Teams only good for scouting (attacker) and outposts (defender). They panic more easily when split and have a lot less FP. The idea is you sacrifice a unit to gain info on the enemy, and you make the victim as small as possible, so at least the other team survives.

[Dook]

Split squads also have two other uses (although one might be limited to CMBO).

First, you can split your squads in an attempt to deceive your enemy. When your split squads are first identified, they will usually be labeled as "Infantry?," just like full squads. You can therefore fool a gullible opponent into thinking you have a force twice as large as what you really have.

Second, in CMBO, you can split your squads on defense to create fallback foxholes. Each half squad gets its own foxhole on turn 1 and you simply move the rearward half squads up to join their buddies.

[Slappy]

What may be misleading is the 'different directions' bit. I split my squad often, but tend to keep them fairly close to their mates and the HQ.

Scouts and outposts are the primary uses, but that can be done within 50m of the rest of the platoon. I don't like the idea that I'm sacrificing units. I want to have a plan to get that team back to its unit (and ultimately its collective families).

That said, it still limits exposure for scouting. Try using each half of a split 40m out in front of a platoon as you move through deep woods. They'll run into trouble first, trip most ambushes, and the rest of the boys can follow up within a turn. Worst case, you lose both halves to a well lain ambush. It's far better than losing two squads and the HQ.

Someone else will likely be along to explain why some consider sending split squads 300m from their HQ is gamey.

[Aaron]

One thing I've learned is that if you split your squads, your opponent will go through his ammo faster. Its very gamey though.

Same is true for 50% casualties.

Aaron

[whizbang]

I asked because Mark Walker in his Strategy Guide suggests in the Hill 312 tutorial that when you meet opposition you should split the squad and send one to make a surprise attack on the flank of the enemy while you keep them engaged with the other half. As a result the enemy will then panic. I thought I was missing something. Sending a small scouting force makes sense especially if they are likely to be eliminated. I hate doing that but I guess commanders in real life have to do so. Ah well its only a game.

[Tigrii]

Originally posted by Aaron:

Its very gamey though.

Same is true for 50% casualties.

Not really. A RL commander would minimize his losses and wouldn't send a whole squad on a suicidal mission. What is more gamey is the fact that anyone's on a suicide mission. No on e would do that except possibly the Japanese.

[CombinedArms]

Originally posted by whizbang:

I asked because Mark Walker in his Strategy Guide suggests in the Hill 312 tutorial that when you meet opposition you should split the squad and send one to make a surprise attack on the flank of the enemy while you keep them engaged with the other half. As a result the enemy will then panic. I thought I was missing something. Sending a small scouting force makes sense especially if they are likely to be eliminated. I hate doing that but I guess commanders in real life have to do so. Ah well its only a game.

I don't agree with Walker that this is a wise or necessary strategy--I remember reading that advice in the guide and it seemed to me frivolous and wrongheaded. If your platoon's squads are within HQ command, as they ought to be, you should have 3-4 whole squads with which to manuever. A surprise attack by a split squad on dug in infantry is not going to panic ANYONE. A unsupported split squad in an assault role is essentially useless, because of low firepower, lowered ability to sustain losses, and proneness to panic. But a whole squad assaulting from a slightly different angle while the rest of the rest of the platoon is pinning the enemy with suppressive fire might be very effective in the right circumstances.

[Aaron]

Originally posted by Tigrii:

Not really. A RL commander would minimize his losses and wouldn't send a whole squad on a suicidal mission. What is more gamey is the fact that anyone's on a suicide mission. No on e would do that except possibly the Japanese.

I think you misunderstand me. If you have a platoon in woods engaged in a firefight, you opponent will use more ammo if you split them into 6 1/2 squads instead of three full squads. This is esp. true of MGs. I think its a function of the game engines treating gunfire as one group shooting at one other group. The TacAI shifts fire around quite a bit, thus using more "shots" from the ammo pile.

Whether this is realistic or not I'm not sure.

Aaron

[Silvio Manuel]

Originally posted by Dook:

First, you can split your squads in an attempt to deceive your enemy. When your split squads are first identified, they will usually be labeled as "Infantry?," just like full squads.

It's interesting to me how one can (sort of) exploit FOW to actually divine real info. If you see 4 inf. units advancing, and 3 say "Infantry squad?" and one says "Infantry?" usually that 4th one is the HQ... they seem to be FOW-represented as only "infantry" and maybe never as "infantry squad?". Of course, he might be a spotter (though would that be "crew?") or some other unit (half squad maybe).

[Zebulon Pleasure Beast]

I use them mainly for scouting, I consider them to be a bunch of men selected by the platoon leader to go and check out the terrain or enemy positions ahead.

If there's room to manouver and I'm going against a static opponent, I'll split some squads up and disperse them so I can get bullets raining on those foxholes from every possible direction in an effort to route them. If the enemy is also manouvering, I try to avoid splitting my forces and get them chopped to piecemeal as they get outmanouvered.

I try to avoid gamey suicidal missions though, since I get more "kicks" out from the game if it's more immersive, not just sending out some C&C minigunners fresh out from the Hand Of Nod to keep that GDI Medium Tank nuking my powerplants occupied.

Indeed, if the situation is dire, say a huge enemy horde is overrunning my positions and I have no hope of holding and the only consideration now is to get my men back alive to their families, I might leave a split squad or few to hold back the enemy as the rest of the force falls back. They die a brave death for their comrades, country and beliefs.

And then I have to smack a medal of honor or two on their coffins and write letters to their families

[Dook]

Originally posted by Silvio Manuel:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Dook:

First, you can split your squads in an attempt to deceive your enemy. When your split squads are first identified, they will usually be labeled as "Infantry?," just like full squads.

It's interesting to me how one can (sort of) exploit FOW to actually divine real info. If you see 4 inf. units advancing, and 3 say "Infantry squad?" and one says "Infantry?" usually that 4th one is the HQ... they seem to be FOW-represented as only "infantry" and maybe never as "infantry squad?". Of course, he might be a spotter (though would that be "crew?") or some other unit (half squad maybe). </font>

[Apache]

In one or two scenarios I have used a lot of split squads together, led by a coy HQ, with their buddies with the LMGs providing suppression commanded by platoon HQs. I did a few tests and found I actually lost less on some occassions than by assaulting with full squads.

Of course, a tank does it better

[whizbang]

Since I first posted this topic I have discovered, quite by chance, another use for splitting squads. If you need to RUN from cover to another cover if you run a split squad you are much less likely to be spotted than if you run the the entire squad. Of course it will take you twice as long.

I have found this particularly useful when setting up a right flank attack in Hill 312 where there is precious little cover rather than the conventional but probably not the best left flank route.

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by whizbang:

Since I first posted this topic I have discovered, quite by chance, another use for splitting squads. If you need to RUN from cover to another cover if you run a split squad you are much less likely to be spotted than if you run the the entire squad. Of course it will take you twice as long.

No it doesn't If you run both at the same time, but split, then you still get the split benefit of being more difficult to spot.

[whizbang]

Fantastic! Can anyone explain why? Or is it "simply our's not to reason why, our's just to do or die"?

[Redwolf]

I don't understand the question and have to qualify somewhat.

Split squads are harder to spot. Two split squads side-by-side are still exactly as hard to spot, except of cause for a probablity multiplication by two. The game does not take an "area saturation" or something like that into account, which would be what the human eye would use, the game just does a unit-by-unit spotting.

[YankeeDog]

Here's another use for split squads: Ammo conservation when engaging in long-range fire.

This technique is most useful for squads with 2 LMGs, which have a lot of long-range firepower, but usually relatively low ammo counts.

As I am sure most are aware, in CMBB when you split a squad, all of the LMGs go into one team, and all of the SMGs go into the other (unless it's an SMG-heavy squad, in which case there will also be some SMGs in the LMG half).

Since the half-squad with the LMG(s) represents most of your long-range firepower, IF you feel the need to open fire on enemy infantry at longer range (over 250m or so), you will use your ammo points more efficiently if you open fire with just the LMG half of the squad. When you rejoin the squad, the ammo counts of the two halves will be averaged.

This technique is especially important for SMG/LMG-tye squads where there is a big difference between the long-range and short range firepower of the two split teams. The most extreme examples, such as the Volksgrenadier Heavy SMG squad (6 MP40s & 2 LMG42s, with a whopping 15 ammo points!), have ALL their firepower over 250m in the 2 LMGs. This means that if you need to open fire on a target more than 250m away, splitting the squad and opening fire with just the LMG teams will result in *no* net reduction in firepower, but will effectively cut your ammo usage in half.

Admittedly, I try to avoid using my infantry squads for long-range fire, preferring HMGs for this role, but occasionally the tactical situation demands that you use an infantry squad for longer-range fire. When doing so, splitting the squad will result in much more efficient ammo usage.

Cheers,

YD

[Bruceov]

Use them to get fall back foxholes in CMBO

[Caesar]

I believe the thing that Mark Walker was trying to encourage in the strategy guide is that if you get the unit in a cross fire it is more effective than your whole unit from one angle. When the second unit suddenly appears firing it will also be more likely to cause a panic. As far as I can tell from my own experience, it appears that when you first come into contact with a previously unspotted unit there is an increased chance of it causing panic (which seems quite realistic BTW)

[Monty's Double]

I'm with CombinedArms that split squads assaulting are very brittle, so the advantage you'd get from flanking is outweighed by the reduction in firepower and morale. When attacking I sometimes split a team from each platoon and put them under the Co. HQ to create a reserve platoon, usually the B suads as they are less useful in assault and better for holding locations against counterattacks. I use split squads in defence for forward spotting, and occasionally as sacrificial "roadblocks". In a PBEM at the moment a single half squad has held up two PzIII's and a reinforced platoon for over 4 turns. They are in a foxhole, so he's having a tough time winkling them out with 50mm guns, and he is nervous about rushing them because he doesn't know where the rest of the platoon is.