Jump to content

Has anyone tried 'move only' rules?


Recommended Posts

WOW! I can't imagine not telling my troops when and where to fire. I would go nuts just sitting there not being in complete and total command. Having said that I might just try it tonight but I bet I don't get to turn 4 without taking over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye, I rarely select targets either.

About the only times I select targets are when I want my ATGs or tanks to hit specific enemy vehicles... Sometimes sharpshooters too. The infantry etc I leave to the AI. It does a better job most of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same here, i found that a rarely give orders for a unit to fire. Unless i situation came up, like in my last game, when i had a squad that was getting shot at by an infantry gun, but was shooting at an enemy squad, i ordered my squad to fire at the inf gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Fionn:

Aye, I rarely select targets either.

About the only times I select targets are when I want my ATGs or tanks to hit specific enemy vehicles... Sometimes sharpshooters too. The infantry etc I leave to the AI. It does a better job most of the time.

Unfortunately, this is not terribly representative of how British fire discipline worked, Fionn. The TacAI does not co-ordinate a platoon's fire, as would have occurred in real life, instead it has each section firing off in all directions. In real life, the platoon commander directs his platoon's fire as much as possible, using it as a co-ordinated instrument to suppress the enemy.

I also dislike the way the TacAI will set priorities - shooting at say, an AT Team its observed over 500 metres away rather than the infantry section 100 metres away or the tank 1,000 metres away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Fionn:

Aye, I rarely select targets either.

About the only times I select targets are when I want my ATGs or tanks to hit specific enemy vehicles... Sometimes sharpshooters too. The infantry etc I leave to the AI. It does a better job most of the time.

Exactly. The AI is almost always better at selecting targets... oh, and I never interfere with my sharpshooters (they never listen anyway smile.gif )
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Berlichtingen:

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

Aye, I rarely select targets either.

About the only times I select targets are when I want my ATGs or tanks to hit specific enemy vehicles... Sometimes sharpshooters too. The infantry etc I leave to the AI. It does a better job most of the time.

Exactly. The AI is almost always better at selecting targets... oh, and I never interfere with my sharpshooters (they never listen anyway smile.gif )</font>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I played "Its All Too Serious" vs. the AI, a turn ended right as I (as defender) was about to spring a nice L-shaped ambush on 1.5 Platoons. I experimented a bit and found that I got much better kill results on the ambush by targeting the enemy myself (by concentrating fire on fewer targets), than by letting the AI choose targets. In retrospect, I wonder if I might have routed more squads (but killed fewer men) by letting the TacAI do it. I think I would rather get the kills immediately, than risk facing many rallied troops later on.

I've played a scenario where the designer asks that the intial 1 Platoon (defending a bridge) not move from their positions, but you CAN direct their fire.

I like to micromanage, so I wind up controlling my troops fire nearly all the time anyway.

[ June 13, 2002, 09:28 AM: Message edited by: Silvio Manuel ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Lindan:

Second best is to do the setup and plot moves to last the entire battle during the first order phase.

Then you can sit back and watch your plan fall apart... ;)

I've actually played a game that was based pretty much on this concept.

It was a miniatures wargame called Apocalypse.

Each player had a force of small platoon size, divided into a couple of squads plus one commander.

The referees had set up the gaming table with lots of terrain and such, as well as picked forces for both sides.

Before the start of the actual battle we (the players) were given some time to

a) hand draw a map of the battlefield.

B) specify starting locations of each squad and the commander.

c) plot movement paths, halt locations and durations plus fire orders to last the entire battle for all squads.

d) make a plan B for each squad, with a pre-defined trigger to activate it.

e) give the map to the refs.

Then the refs executed the orders according to their interpretation of the players maps. ...

As a player I could (for some strange reason) decide on the fly what movement speed each squad was to use for each leg of the plotted movement, but that was it.

The only unit I actually controlled was the commander. If I moved the commander very close to a squad I could give that squad a new set of orders, but it took time and lots of effort.

Suffice to say that the plan did NOT survive contact with the enemy... :D

Cheers

Olle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Brian:

That aside, I find your previous comment, interesting to say the least, "is almost always better at selecting targets"? IMO its usually selecting the target which is shooting at it, rather than necessarily the one which has IMO the highest priority.

If you set the targetting, and something unexpected happens, the AI is less likely to change targets than if you let the AI handle it yourself. There are instances when targetting is important (the ambush example above for instance). With sharpshooters, my experience is that giving them tagetting orders is one of the best ways of getting them to not fire at all. Leave them alone (and unhidden) and they do what they are supposed to do... pick off officers and heavy weapons
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...