CMx2 Gamey Jeep Recon vs. Real Life Actual Military style Recon and/or Scouting?

[aka_tom_w]

I don't know very much about how real Military Recon is supposed to work, ( I have an idea but not like some Grogs around here)

BUT what I do know is that in CMxx the whole idea around recon was to use cheap expendable units that might die to find out what the other side had coming at you.

Hence the "Gamey Jeep Recon"

So the idea is then to send something FAST and Cheap deep into the enemy held territory. In CMBO a jeep would do the trick. THe crew would bail out and watch and tell the player ALL about what he could see. Now the lack of realism inflamed some grogs and some players would get down right HOSTILE and yell gamey obscenities at the offending "Gamey Jeep Recon" Evil Doer.

So in the game the (being that it is a game and you play to win) the gamey player wants to exploit the game and the opportunity for cheap recon intel by finding the fastest Cheapest unit and sending it on a suicide run into the other guys back field.

Without Fail some form of this tactic will attempt to be employed in CMx2.

This is where the Company HQ with Radios have been used in a gamey fashion in the past. In the New Game if the Company HQ does not have Some VERY meaningfull roll to play they will be the first unit sent forward on a fast vehicle to be used in a gamey way for recon purposes.

In short gamey recon in the game is ALL about using the fastest cheapest unit you have to send on a suicide mission to get as much recon intel as possible for as little cost or risk as possible.

I am hopeing BFC is considering this because the minute the game is released ALL the gamey players will be looking for ways to exploit the game for cheap gamey recon purposes. ( i.e. What is Cheap fast and expendable and can give me recon intel for low cost and low risk????)

Can someone tell me how in the New game "Real Life" recon should be conducted, (and how the game engine should allow it to be realisitic) without being labled gamey and just an excersice in exploiting gamey loopholes in the game code (i.e. the "Gamey Jeep Recon bailed crew sees all trick!").

Your comments?

Thanks

-tom w

[ February 01, 2005, 09:45 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Sgian Dubh]

Aside from this being the winner for the most usage of the word "gamey" in a single post....

I would hope that there will be dedicated recon forces in the next game, with the necessary equipment, etc. It would be great to see Rangers, Pathfinders, etc.

Of course, games would be longer this way as realistic recon could (and should) take quite a bit of time.

Perhaps you could have the ability to place recon units in special setup positions (having the game check to make certain that there is no LOS on turn 1) which might allow you to reduce the amount of time a bit.

Other wise I could see what was a 30 turn games becoming a 60 or 80 turn game as the first 30 turns are spent moving Recon forces around.

Or perhaps the game could allow you to select certain areas and have enhanced information on those areas during setup (perhaps sound-contacts, etc.) to mimic the information from returned recon patrols.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

I don't know very much about how real Military Recon is supposed to work, ( I have an idea but not like some Grogs around here)

BUT what I do know is that in CMxx the whole idea around recon was to use cheap expendable units that might die to find out what the other side had coming at you.

Kinda worked that way in real life, too, come to think of it.

Infantry battalions had scout and sniper platoons (in the CW I mean). Think of them as using snipers in CM for "gamey recon." This was actually their role in real life!

The problem in CM is again with spotting. And I think it is a scenario design problem more than anything (and is highlighted by Quick Battles in which there is no premade briefing). CM represents - in the majority of cases - the situation in which a battalion or company commander has done his reconnaissance already.

There were many instances IRL where a recon (can we agree to say recce? Grrr, I thought not) was not possible. Some recce ... err, recon ... missions are interesting enough of themselves to simulate in CM. But not with the current set of victory conditions open to the player/designer. Andreas had a neat recon scenario for the training for CMMC2 as I recall - where the player's objective was simply to scout a position. JasonC had a mini campaign with a similar scenario.

This is not something you'll find in a Quick Battle.

I'd love to see Quick Battles gain in sophistication - date, place, pre-arranged scenario briefing based on the terrain and mission. Don't know how possible it is to do that from a randomly generated map (and would HATE to go back to simply picking from a list of scenarios as in most other games) but would perhaps address the problem of "gamey" recon simply by providing scenarios with the recon already done (ie the briefing would contain a map and overly showing likely enemy positions, strengths, etc., where known - make it a QB option "Friendly Intelligence.")

More pie in the sky for the discussion mill, but it is an interesting topic.

I mentioned infantry battalion recce assets. The infantry division (in the CW) had an armoured car battalion (officially "recce regiment") for that purpose, and armoured divisions had recce squadrons in each armoured regiment, and an additional armoured regiment with Shermans (or Cromwells) devoted entirely to recce.

Corps headquarters had an armoured car battalion also as an additional recce element. Again, their missions would likely make a standalone scenario, as any missions undertaken using the information they gleaned would likely not be done "on the spot" but with a few hours or even days of prior planning.

And of course, this doesn't include aerial recon, resistance/spies reports (not usually taken as canon), prisoner interrogations, civilian interviews, etc.

[Ace Pilot]

I think it would help this discussion if we were to define some terms and relate them to what we as players experience in CM. Unfortunately, my lack of army service ensures that I haven’t a clue as to what is involved in recon. Grog Dorosh provided some good details on how recon units operate and who they report to.

His point that the briefing can substitute for recon has merit, but as players, we are looking for recon that tells us there’s a HMG in the upper story of THAT house and a platoon is dug in amongst that tree line.

So, my question is, what do we call recon that tells us that a German mechanized infantry company with ATG support is holding the objective, as compared to recon that tells us where the platoons and guns are specifically located?

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Ace Pilot:

So, my question is, what do we call recon that tells us that a German mechanized infantry company with ATG support is holding the objective, as compared to recon that tells us where the platoons and guns are specifically located?

Remember Crescendo of Doom?

"A good scout is a dead scout."

[aka_tom_w]

Good thinking

Dorosh is right.....

Gamey spotting is really ALL about the lack of realism with regard to Absolute (Borg) Spotting, so for sure if they find a way to deal with that aspect of the game then the gamey recon loophole will be largely reduced as well.

Good Point

-tom w

[junk2drive]

I think there is a terminology issue.

Recon Recce is RL and out of the scope of games.

In CM the problem with gamey tacics is with LOS or spotting.

I used to take a glider or 2 in SPWAW to overfly the map and uncover enemy units. That was gamey.

[Michael Dorosh]

We may want to differentiate between true reconnaissance and scouting. I don't know if there is an "official" distinction, but for our purposes, we might say (tell me what you think)

Scouting is done in-game and refers to precise locations of individual weapons and teams (as Ace Pilot discusses) done for the purpose of dealing tactically with those problems immediately (bypassing, eliminating, etc.)

Recon/Recce refers to the deliberate act of reconnoitering done for the purpose of reporting back but not taking action (for the purpose of planning further operations by other units).

Does this work?

[junk2drive]

Scouting is a good term.

Does it include poor tactics and being shot up to find the enemy location? lol

[aka_tom_w]

Yes

that works for me

I like the use of the term Scouting

it is FAR more applicable to what actually happens in the average scenario.

AND if that scouting involves a JEEP it becomes "Gamey JEEP Scouting"! (Just to be clear)

Thanks

Scouting it is...

Thats what happens in scenarios when we use jeeps and snipers to advance in front of the main body.

-tom w

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

We may want to differentiate between true reconnaissance and scouting. I don't know if there is an "official" distinction, but for our purposes, we might say (tell me what you think)

Scouting is done in-game and refers to precise locations of individual weapons and teams (as Ace Pilot discusses) done for the purpose of dealing tactically with those problems immediately (bypassing, eliminating, etc.)

Recon/Recce refers to the deliberate act of reconnoitering done for the purpose of reporting back but not taking action (for the purpose of planning further operations by other units).

Does this work?

[David I]

Tom is right about M. Dorosh being right.

Tighten up the borg spotting ability and the banzai suicide jeep recon won't work so well.

I use armored cars to draw enemy fire. Then they blow up.

Word has gotten around so now I have to herd my AC crews into their vehicles at gun point, chain them in their seats and train a big gun on the rear of their vehicle. Then they move out to draw enemy fire. Then they blow up.

DavidI

[MikeyD]

I believe the jury may still be out on how 'gamey' jeep scouting really is. Of course it all depends on the circumstances. On those days that an armored Brigade covers 40 miles a day I can see someone being handed keys to a jeep and a walkie-talkie and being told to see what's going on in that hamlet on the ridgeline. If you're toe-to-toe with the enemy in the depths of the Hurtgen forest NOBODY's going to be going for any jeep rides!

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

I can see someone being handed keys to a jeep

heehee....I'll be charitable and not say it. But yes, your overall point is apt.

Lieutenant Farley Mowat, after landing in Italy in Sep 1943, talked in his biography about riding on the hood of a jeep pushing inland ahead of his battalion, scouting for mines and looking for the Italians (whose country had just surrendered).

[gibsonm]

Michael,

Firstly, very happy to go with “recce”.

Secondly as someone who has been a crew commander, Tp Ldr, Sqn OC and Regt 2IC (and hopefully CO one day) of such a Armoured Reconnaissance Regiment, I’m not such a big fan of “cheap expendable units that might die to find out what the other side had coming at you“ - its bad for morale you know.

The Regt is a Div asset and can provide Sqns to spt Bde’s so our tasking is “big picture stuff” find the enemy MLR etc. So in an advance a Recce Tp might locate a major position (say Coy +) and picquet it. Once the main body arrives they would take over and release the Tp to continue forward to find the next enemy position. The Recce Tp could tell them that they took MG fire from grid blah.

The main body then conducts its own recce / scouting and that’s where you tend to find out which house at grid blah has a MG in it (through probes, etc.).

Recce by burning callsign (e.g. I haven’t heard from two troop for two hours but there is smoke in their location, therefore the enemy is probably there) is not the preferred method but can be a Darwinian way of removing officers not suited for higher positions (usually the SNCO’s and NCO’s stop this from happening though).

I suspect the only true way to use recce is to have a two battle operation with the first battle simulating the recon battle and identifying enemy positions. The 2nd battle (or perhaps on turn X of a single battle) the main force would arrive on the map and be directed to the positions as identified by the recce elements.

A suitable recce quote to finish off with:

“Only the Enemy in Front - (every other bugger behind)” adapted (the part in brackets added) from the motto of the UK Recce Corps.

[General Bolt]

IRL doesn't the jeep, AC etc drive up to some protected spot and park. Then a true scout or two gets out, slithers on his belly up to the edge of town, pulls out the walkie-talkie, and says, "Check Mate King Two this is White Rook Over" (Insert static here)...

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by General Colt:

IRL doesn't the jeep, AC etc drive up to some protected spot and park. Then a true scout or two gets out, slithers on his belly up to the edge of town, pulls out the walkie-talkie, and says, "Check Mate King Two this is White Rook Over" (Insert static here)...

Yeah

That is what I was thinking....

"Ugly Duckling to Mother Goose... Over"

(sorry I can't remember, which half famous warmovie featured the call sign Mother Goose, and who were they talking to? Was that Kelly's Heroes?)

-tom w

[gibsonm]

Originally posted by General Colt:

IRL doesn't the jeep, AC etc drive up to some protected spot and park. Then a true scout or two gets out, slithers on his belly up to the edge of town, pulls out the walkie-talkie, and says, "Check Mate King Two this is White Rook Over" (Insert static here)...

Yes usually and most recce units have / had a dismounted element (Assault Section / Assault Tp) for such a task (and other things like checking a bridge for mines BEFORE you drive over it, or whether the bridge can take the vehicle’s weight, etc.). I normally use a HT with a squad on board (or a couple of universal carriers).

The “problem” with this though is that it:

a. slows things down so much that many players I suspect get bored (since things aren’t exploding every 10 secs), and

b. you currently can’t dismount a crew off an AC to conduct dismounted recce and then get back on to proceed (hence the need for dedicated dismounts).

The other option could be to allow recce units to move to “turret down” which is similar to “hull down” except the turret is masked too. However, the commander can still stand in the turret (or on it) and observe the far side. This has the vehicle protected by the feature and the enemy only sees the commander’s binoculars (if anything).

[aka_tom_w]

Hi Mark

I hope you don't mind if I posted your thoughts about this

to the 1:1 thread in the hopes that Steve would read it!

"The other option could be to allow recce units to move to “turret down” which is similar to “hull down” except the turret is masked too. However, the commander can still stand in the turret (or on it) and observe the far side. This has the vehicle protected by the feature and the enemy only sees the commander’s binoculars (if anything)."

GREAT POST!

-tom w

[gibsonm]

Sure.

You mean Steve doesn’t scan every post to every topic !?

But I suppose if he did he would spend all his time scanning these multiple CMX2 threads rather than just getting on with it.

[Michael Dorosh]

Rooks and ducks? Ugh.

"One, this is One One Alpha, Contact, Wait, Out."

Not sure what they did back then - but by Hollywood, they all said "over and out".

[gibsonm]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Rooks and ducks? Ugh.

"One, this is One One Alpha, Contact, Wait, Out."

Not sure what they did back then - but by Hollywood, they all said "over and out".

Perhaps 11, 11A, 11B, 11C, etc is too hard for our American cousins?

[Ace Pilot]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

Yes

that works for me

I like the use of the term Scouting

it is FAR more applicable to what actually happens in the average scenario.

AND if that scouting involves a JEEP it becomes "Gamey JEEP Scouting"! (Just to be clear)

Thanks

Scouting it is...

Thats what happens in scenarios when we use jeeps and snipers to advance in front of the main body.

-tom w

I don’t think we will ever get away from gamey jeep scouting, no matter how good the relative spotting model is in CMx2. Gamey jeep scouting works because of the player’s god’s eye view, not because of absolute spotting.

However, how unrealistic is jeep scouting? It seems jeep recon (as opposed to scouting) did have a limited basis in reality. But what about jeep scouting? I assume jeep scouting was not done in reality because of the lack of instantaneous communications that occur in CM. BFC has hinted at modeling a radio network, so maybe they have some clever ideas on how to address this and diminish the advantages of jeep scouting.

[Jasper 2x]

snipers suck so much in CM. walking meat

[gibsonm]

Originally posted by Ace Pilot:

However, how unrealistic is jeep scouting? It seems jeep recon (as opposed to scouting) did have a limited basis in reality. But what about jeep scouting? I assume jeep scouting was not done in reality because of the lack of instantaneous communications that occur in CM. BFC has hinted at modeling a radio network, so maybe they have some clever ideas on how to address this and diminish the advantages of jeep scouting.

Well if you go with the definition above that scouting is close recce (i.e. you know the enemy is roughly there but you need the detail) why would you DRIVE! Especially why would you drive a vehicle that was noiser than some AC’s and had no protection or weapon. Seems to me is that you are setting out to “draw the crabs”.

Dismounted scouting was the way to go (unless you had a death wish). Even tank formation commanders got off and walked.

Perhaps an option is that unless your jeep has radio it will report nothing (i.e. nothing shows up on the map) until it returns to being within the command radius of a HQ or other unit with a radio.

Then when the jeep submits its “recce report” the sightings appear. Perhaps as vehicle noises or infantry noises, etc. to reflect the fact that these sightings / contacts may have moved on since the jeep encountered them.

[junk2drive]

Doesn't Warcraft/Starcraft have a come and go FOW system? Been a while since I played it but I thought it did FOW well.