Planning

[Cuirassier]

Out of curiosity, i was wondering if most players thoroughly plan their movement of troops down to the smallest of detail before the action begins. (Creating a battle plan for every unit during the set up phase) Also, for a battalion sized game, how long does it take one to complete the set up phase? The normal turns of average?

Just wondering where I should be. Thanks!

[tar]

Well, I don't. I plan the general course of the action. On the attach I identify what I expect my major axes of attack to be and set up the order of march. I generally keep some reserve and then adjust based on what I discover. On defense, I put out observation and harassment units and determine where I want to make my main stand. Again, this gets adjusted as I see what is coming towards me.

On no account, do I do detailed planning of all movement before the game begins. It would be a waste, since a lot would need to be redone in light of the information that reconnaissance brings in. I do, generally, plan all of my movement up to where I expect the first contact to be.

[dieseltaylor]

Ditto

[stoat]

I do more planning once in contact than at the start. I will move troops out of their default positions to be closer towards the axis of advance, but I don't think out the entire thing every time. Once in contact, though, I do a little more thinking as to what I need each unit to do.

[JasonC]

I will spend hours setting up and planning, including contingencies. Then run through the moves before contact pretty rapidly, with a minimum of adaptation. After contact, I will occasionally spend a long time on a turn, but often only a small number of units are changing what they are about in any serious way. I will step through the others and "tweak" them, which takes some time in a larger fight. By the end I am sometimes just hitting "go" to give moves and shots time to accumulate.

[imported_no_one]

When attacking,I really only place emphasis on overwatch units,making sure that all lines of sight are worked out,so that when something is spotted it is dispatched as quickly as possible.Of course I also find the avenues of advance and setup so as to use them.

When defending I spend a lot more time on the setup since you won't get much of a chance to reposition after the battle starts.

[imported_no_one]

Also, for a battalion sized game, how long does it take one to complete the set up phase? The normal turns of average?

It depends on the situation.How difficult is the setup?If you have tons of trenches and plenty of possible reverse slope positions it should be pretty easy.Just remember that the defender should always take longer on the setup as you really don't get a chance to change much unless the map/situation allows it.

Also,are you playing versus the AI or a person?If it's a person,take around a day or so,but not much more.As to "normal turns of average" I am not sure what you mean.If it's number of PBEM turns per day,try and always send atleast one turn per day,maybe more if you have free time.As you get more experienced you will be alot faster and probably get 2-4 turns out per day.Again,depends on your situation.

[ November 14, 2005, 04:08 PM: Message edited by: no_one ]

[RockinHarry]

Since I´ve started to collect those german tactical handbooks and field regulations early this year, I´m now more and more employing those various combat principles for the various combat styles (attack, defend, reccon, terrain evaluation ect.) in my games. This now goes the way like, making a command map first (CM map screenshot + contour map), then doing the whole terrain evaluation process with great care, deciding for the "Schwerpunkt" (point of main effort), distributing troops according to the Schwerpunkt, assigning support weapons, trying to plan ahead with regard to when to reach objectives (including intermediate objectives) for the various combat groups and deciding for particular reccon measures (if game/scenario is long enough) as well as reserves. All that stuff is entered on my command map on various layers and then I try to let the battle unfold as far as the enemy lets me do.

On dense maps I take great care on recconing those map spots ideally suited for support weapons. That could mostly be those battles where I have yet to fight for the final jump off point (Bereitstellung) and where possible fields of fire are yet to be found. That would be the task for the support weapon HQ units.

All in all the set up phase could take me 30 to 60 minutes (incl. making the command map) and I rarely take the unit set up as given by the scenario maker. I usually redeploy units in company sized patterned groups. Same goes for support weapons, before I reattach them to any possible battle group. Once all plans and evaluations are finished (see above), I put all units to their final starting positions and hit "Go".

I would say the more time and care is invested in the setup phase, the quicker you can play the rest of the game! Winning the game is not guaranteed though.

[Renaud]

As far as setup, I usually run through all the units, placing them in an orderly 'parade-ground' formation so I can visually review exactly what I have. Then reassign them to battlegroups to fit the game strategy I have decided upon and move everything to final start positions.

I like to use free company/battalion CO's as reserve force commanders since they can take charge of anything. I hijack units from other formations, particularly those with so-so leaders, to form the reserves. Really vanilla or excess platoon/section leaders get assigned to overwatch/spotting duty, or used in the recon screen.

In timed tcp/ip, my favorite way to play, initial setup is critical for the attacker in larger scenarioes as this will reflect and determine your major axes of advance. Everything should be laid out with the correct attack formation, facing and spacing so you can easily use group select to move entire platoons, recce screens, and even companies at once. No time for micromanagement.

[juan_gigante]

One thing I do before I setup any of my guys is I sort them. I never really handled the long string of troops along the edge well, so what I do is I take all of company A, put them in that field and sort them by platoon. I put all my mortars in that field. All my tanks over there. Then, when I actually want to set up, instead of having to search down the line for them, I just go over to the appropriate spot and grab what I need. This is also good for evaluating your force's OOB. "Okay, I have 10 HMG-42s... 3 regular, 4 veteran, 2 green, and a crack... 5 of them have one casualty, one has two... 7 have full ammo, three are down to 2/3rds..." With this, I feel I better understand my force, can better allocate it, and setup easier. Of course, it takes about twice as long to setup, but it helps me a lot.

On the downside, the long setup times really frustarate me. I just get bored before the game even starts. I would say that of the games against the game that I start, I don't even finish the first turn of 1/3rd of them. Just get bored setting up and plotting the first turn's moves.

[RockinHarry]

Scenario designers should take that into consideration (some do) and IMO should at least offer am alternative scenario version that has the starting forces well sorted, instead of having them put into place where the scenario designer intended! (BFC should consider that option for next game versions too and avoid the long string at map edge, providing a more useful initial setup)

This way you get a much faster overview about your available forces and have them out of the way for your own terrain evaluations and plans. If the scenario maker intends or demands a particular starting setup, then it would help to provide a command map that shows you the force setup in better overview (Terrain+Contours+Forces as military Icons+boundary lines+other clues you can think of).

A well made briefing oftentimes does the same purpose if you logically structure it and avoid putting too much (unecessary) info into it. IE I find it of little use if a scenario maker tells you in detail, what a particular infantry Cpy. all includes! It would be sufficient to tell the infantry Cpy. is available (maybe with a (+) or ( - ), telling you that it´s either reinforced or lacking a detached component) and what its attack/defend/move sector would be.

Example (german designation, assuming higher echelon formation would be infantry regiment 12):

1./ JR12 in Village X (1st company of 12th infantry regiment)

2./ JR12 in woods X

3. (-)/ JR12 in reserve at location X. (3rd company of ... less one Plt.)

ect.

instead of:

1 Infantry company:

3x Infantry Plt.

1XHMG squad

1 FO

ect.

and not telling where it is currently located on the map.

That is the most frequently encountered situation when starting a scenario and this in fact differs little from starting a QB. At last you still have to sort out all available forces on the map and waste lots of time while doing so. I imagine this to be a situation similar to where a commander is freshly sent from the "Etappe" (base?), without that he has any chance to contact his staff members where he usually would be informed about the most important things concerning the unit he has just taken over.

So a halfway "useful" briefing should mention in the "Own forces:" section only about the maneuvre forces (companies in a Btl. sized game usually) and their general locations on the map (see example further above). In "historical" scenarios this shouldn´t be much of a problem since there are usually many known landmarks/terrain features that can be used for the purpose. In a "Wilderness" like scenario one can make use of "christening" particular map/terrain parts. Example: "Horse shoe wood" for an abviously horse shoe like shaped wood. Or use code names if terrain features lack distinct shapes (irregularly shaped woods that remind you of nothing). Examples: "Alpha-, Beta-, Paul, ..." or more fanciful stuff. Unit positions now can be designated relative to these known land marks like...

1./ JR12 in sector northwards of "Heinrich-Woods".

2./ JR12 in sector between 1./IR12 and Hill 65 (or point 65).

3. (-)/ JR12 on backslope of Hill 65.

ect.

If you know a standard full strength infantry Cpy. in defense would be assumed to hold a sector about 200-400m wide at average (depends upon mission and defense sector of superior force command), you could already roughly imagine from the briefing how your forces are positioned on the map. If you leave the units at these locations is another questions, but at least you´ll find them a lil more quickly.

Off course newbies would probably have a harder time at first (but maybe not) if they don´t know about compositions of standard units and designations yet. Not to forget...matter of preference. Hollywood style or something more educational is both in order. One can go to the extremes in both ways.

Map text (designating unit positions or sectors) could be used as well for play vs. the AI, but obviously makes little sense for any play vs a human opponent (spoiler!). That would be another suggestion for CM2x: Store map text for each player side in the file seperately! (...+ possibility to add map text during game play and not just in the editor!)