Sytass Posted October 5, 2002 Share Posted October 5, 2002 Just yesterday I was playing a random quick battle. Since I had the encounter randomized, I ended up with Soviets defending a position in the woods. I had but one 76 mm gun in a bunker which, after taking out some halftracks was knocked out by a Pz-IV. I had bought another AT gun, but it was cut out, because of my setting losses for both sides to 10 % (after all how many units go into battle at full strength). The Germans closed in on my position, and maybe 50 meters from the woods, across a street they positioned their Pz-IV, alongside a halftrack. Since I had no AT gun left I decided to send out a tank hunter (1 of 1 alive). He would have to move across the street to a patch of woods, then would be able to flank the armored vehicles. Since there were quite a number of Panzergrenadiere in the woods, I decided that the smart thing would have him using the "advance" command - after all, they're supposed to use cover on the way as best they can. I was shot in the middle of the road. I gave it another chance with my remaining AT guy (started with 1 of 1 alive, too), the others had fallen prey to artillery barrages. I had him run the way that the other was supposed to advance. He was shot at by four or five squads in total, but made it to the patch of woods, hurled his RPG at the halftrack, knocking it out for good. He then returned to the woods where he remained in cover under heavy fire, not faltering for the remaining few turns. What I want to point out is: Does it make more sense to use the "fast" command when close to the enemy and you have clear relatively short distances, especially over partly open terrain? And use the "advance" command only for longer approaches or movement that affords cover (as opposed to road, or open fields)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 5, 2002 Share Posted October 5, 2002 Originally posted by Sytass: And use the "advance" command only for longer approaches or movement that affords cover (as opposed to road, or open fields)?I would think that's the key. There is no cover in a road. BTS says that there is some degree of cover in open terrain. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hensworth Posted October 5, 2002 Share Posted October 5, 2002 Advancing with a single guy is pointless. The whole idea behind the advance command is that a squad can move forward while still returning some fire. Men will make short dashes from cover to cover and provide cover for their buddies in between. In your situation the fast move was definitely the way to go. Making him 'advance' only slows him up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted October 5, 2002 Share Posted October 5, 2002 I would also use the "fast" command for this situation. If I had multiple units, I might give one a "hunt" command just to provide return fire on a target likely distracted by all the movement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lassner.1 Posted October 5, 2002 Share Posted October 5, 2002 Advance vs. Fast makes a difference in the face when receiving fire - but advance does not *prevent* casualties. With one man in the unit its a pretty chancy affair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sytass Posted October 5, 2002 Author Share Posted October 5, 2002 Thanks for the input. Yes, now the advance command makes a lot more sense to be used for (groups of) units with several men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts