Puff the Magic Dragon Posted January 17, 2002 Share Posted January 17, 2002 I could swear this was on the board only a few weeks ago, why the heck I can't find it??? However... I wonder if it really makes sense when crews get under the players command during the battle, especially bailed vehicel crews? We know, the typical human being on the battlefield does not automatically tend to act like a hero. If possible, he trys to bring his ass out of the fire. So, when a crew has the luck to survive the death of the tank, will their first clear thought will be 'Let's try again to die for our country on a kamikaze mission!'? Well, this is of course speculative. The only case I know for sure that someone did so was Wittmann - and he also moved behind the front lines to get a new tank before he engage again, and he got a knights cross for his heroism. A more practical point of view is this. A crew jumps out of the tank, they are possibly lightly wounded, and they must save heavy wounded soldiers. They are out of command range. Even if they want to engage, they must first get orders, and they must find something better then their pistols. They must find a higher HQ unit. Both will need some time, already 15 minutes would be much within the CM battle's timeframe. The leader of a HQ must be willing to use this for him unknown man. (speculations again) We also shouldn't forget that even CM vehicel crews are part of a bigger formation - would the commander of a tank platoon want his crew men to act as infantry, or does he want them to move from the battlefield to jump into another tank later (more speculations). To come to an end, would it be more sensefull (or historic) when a crew without it's vehicel simply try to survive: run for the next cover and hide, and the player will not be able to give them any orders, or if any, then only to move away from the enemy to friendly map edges. I don't ask because of the victory points. Even if you get more points for killed crews, it doesn't have a big influence. But I often notice that a) crews are used on scoutmissions (how do the transmit their information?). Information is VERY important in a battle. To loose a crew is a cheap risk for an uncovered AT gun, for example. IMO it is not historic - it's not even logic I guess the simpliest solution would be to increase the time the crews stays 'panic'. Thoughts? [ 01-17-2002: Message edited by: Puff the Magic Dragon ]</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted January 17, 2002 Share Posted January 17, 2002 I disagree. The victory point price of crews is high enough that I can punish other player who use them as scouts badly enough that they don't do it again if they understand what happens or loose if they don't. Especially since crews cannot see or fight very well. And since they are costly, they need to be under player control. It is part of the game challenge to evacuate or even rescue them. As for killing a bazooka with a crew - that sounds right and matches historical accounts. Isolated units live dangerous, even the teethy bazookas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmead Posted January 17, 2002 Share Posted January 17, 2002 Using crews for reconn or search and destroy units is a poor, gamey tactic. I don't play people that utilize such tactics a second time unless they agree not to do so. IMHO I agree the game should only allow you to extricate the units from their difficulties and not allow them to be used in such a way. I don't think the game sufficiently penalizes such behavior or we wouldn't see so much of it occuring over and over. Nor would we keep discussing it over and over. We can debate the gameyness of it, but at this point I for one cannot be persuaded that it is anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 17, 2002 Share Posted January 17, 2002 Also there are isolated cases of crews from knocked out tanks taking the offensive, as is the case of the 761st Tank Battalion which charged a line of Pak 43 AT guns after loosing a half dozen tanks, capturing the guns on foot using crews from the dead tanks. You may run into a situation where a crew or two, martialed in the right place, grabs victory from the jaws of defeat. More likely, if you use them boldly, they will get blown away, but those are the breaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puff the Magic Dragon Posted January 17, 2002 Author Share Posted January 17, 2002 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf: I disagree. The victory point price of crews is high enough that I can punish other player who use them as scouts badly enough that they don't do it again if they understand what happens or loose if they don't. Especially since crews cannot see or fight very well. And since they are costly, they need to be under player control. It is part of the game challenge to evacuate or even rescue them. As for killing a bazooka with a crew - that sounds right and matches historical accounts. Isolated units live dangerous, even the teethy bazookas.<hr></blockquote> How costly? I haven't managed to figure it out. But I still think that you have to loose a lot of them to influence the result. To evacuate is what I meant when I said 'only move to friendly map edges'. So we are not really contrary on this point. About the Bazooka - if they stumpled over it on the retreat, okay. But did they hunted it? I would like to see the historic account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puff the Magic Dragon Posted January 17, 2002 Author Share Posted January 17, 2002 Slapdragon This may be right, but it was, as you has said, an isolated case. And how long did they need to reorganize before they attacked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted January 17, 2002 Share Posted January 17, 2002 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Puff the Magic Dragon: How costly? I haven't managed to figure it out. But I still think that you have to loose a lot of them to influence the result. <hr></blockquote> 6 points a regular crewmen, 8 for veteran. Captured is twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puff the Magic Dragon Posted January 17, 2002 Author Share Posted January 17, 2002 Well, that's more then I expected. But let's calculate. A crew with three veteran survivers - you risk 24 points. You use them as scouts, and they stumbled into a wood with a hidden AT. At the end they were killed by an MG. But now you don't loose one or two tanks, each worth 150 points or more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted January 17, 2002 Share Posted January 17, 2002 Uh, I hate to shift the discussion to a different level, but what you are observing here is that defense with dug-in units (in CMBO) only works if your opponent somewhat plays like you intend him to do. In such a defense you would have to have enough infantry to guard the gun against infantry (both spotting infantry and assaulting platoons), but you don't have enough points to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puff the Magic Dragon Posted January 18, 2002 Author Share Posted January 18, 2002 Redwolf, this was only an example. Just want to show that a sucessfull scouting crew can save you much more points then you risk. Even if you only let them move over no-mans land, a MG may pop up and shoot them, and you answer with a barrage on the dicovered position. Anyway, that doesn't answer the question of realism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Robert Posted January 18, 2002 Share Posted January 18, 2002 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by kmead: Using crews for reconn or search and destroy units is a poor, gamey tactic. I don't play people that utilize such tactics a second time unless they agree not to do so. IMHO I agree the game should only allow you to extricate the units from their difficulties and not allow them to be used in such a way. I don't think the game sufficiently penalizes such behavior or we wouldn't see so much of it occuring over and over. Nor would we keep discussing it over and over. We can debate the gameyness of it, but at this point I for one cannot be persuaded that it is anything else.<hr></blockquote> I agree with this point, that it is primarily gamey. Trained crews were too valuable to be thrown away when functioning vehicles were waiting for them in the rear motor pool. That's why tankers have praised the mechanics; their efforts allowed the tankers to keep fighting effectively as long as they had vehicles to fight with. They did not receive full infantry training - although the american arty were given basic small arms and some inf. training - but they knew how to operate, and equally importantly, how to maintain the vehicle so it could continue to run: Attrition occured for reasons other than AT guns; although not considered in the scope of CM. If the vehicle wouldn't start, threw a track, etc. it was of little value. That is what makes Wittman's story so important. He retreated to the rear where he could get another tank which allowed him to be so succesful. Scouting with crews? Who orders them to do so? What overall intell. on the battle do they possess to know where to scout and, as been stated, how do they communicate this info. to HQ? In the scope of this game, once their vehicle is gone they are largely out of the battle, so why not use them as inf? Because it is GAMEY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priest Posted January 18, 2002 Share Posted January 18, 2002 Then do not play the players who use crews to do that. When I have a bailed crew (AFV Crew) I pretty much just move or run them backwards to my map edge. Now if they happen to come across an enemy unit and the TacAI engages (not me manually doing it) then so be it. That is what I do, I may also adjust the path for the quickest way off map, or maybe on large maps not take them off map but to the very edge (as it effects global morale). This is the solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeo Posted January 18, 2002 Share Posted January 18, 2002 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by kmead: Using crews for reconn or search and destroy units is a poor, gamey tactic. <hr></blockquote> However, it is great fun when playing the right people. I use crews only for fun and entertainment. Seriously, I used to always run them off of the gameboard, but believe me, by the time you've resorted to using crews as infantry, the gig is pretty much up. With the survival rate of my tanks, I'd be an idiot (point taken) not to contemplate using the cowering, low ammo former-track-riders for combat, and a complete wanker if I didn't occaisionally resort to their use in dire circumstances. Though the calculations should be based on reality, remember that it is a <big>game</big>, and is therefore played for fun. Yeah BTS, for making the best wargame in existence! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Uber General Posted January 18, 2002 Share Posted January 18, 2002 Would you consider this gamey? When defending I will often send crews from destroyed assets (ATGs, AFVs, mortars, etc) back to my local "command post" which is usually a building near or behind a flag in the rear of my main line of resistance. Here, they are placed under the command of whoever is available (company commander for example) and used for last ditch desperate local defence or to reinforce a hot spot that is in danger of being overrun? Cheers SUG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Radley Posted January 18, 2002 Share Posted January 18, 2002 Basically, that's what I've begun doing too. Any kind of crew, be it mortar, tank or even bazooka, when they are out of ammo or have lost their tank, I send them back to wherever my main command post is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Robert Posted January 18, 2002 Share Posted January 18, 2002 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Sir Uber General: Would you consider this gamey? When defending I will often send crews from destroyed assets (ATGs, AFVs, mortars, etc) back to my local "command post" which is usually a building near or behind a flag in the rear of my main line of resistance. Here, they are placed under the command of whoever is available (company commander for example) and used for last ditch desperate local defence or to reinforce a hot spot that is in danger of being overrun? Cheers SUG<hr></blockquote> Good point, and it sounds reasonable. Also, if the AI sends the unit somewhere that it could effectively watch a flank, for example (even though the AI didn't send it there for that reason) would you consider that dinkum? By that I mean leaving the unit there to observe if it was reasonably protected. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 18, 2002 Share Posted January 18, 2002 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Puff the Magic Dragon: Slapdragon This may be right, but it was, as you has said, an isolated case. And how long did they need to reorganize before they attacked?<hr></blockquote> In the case of the 761st ambush, according to the unit AAR (which was published when the unit was awarded a Presidential award in 1976 for the actions on this day and others) 6 tanks where knocked out in quick succession, then a sergeant began to rally downed crews and led a charge to take the guns before they could shoot into the upcoming unit, By the z time, the action lasted about 17 minutes. Two of those guys where considered for the CMH from that action though, so it was no ordinary fight. (neither recieved it because the tankers were black and the military did not, at that time at least, want any more Dory Balls. They would change their mind later though, but the CMH was gone by then). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted January 18, 2002 Share Posted January 18, 2002 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Slapdragon: Also there are isolated cases of crews from knocked out tanks taking the offensive, as is the case of the 761st Tank Battalion which charged a line of Pak 43 AT guns after loosing a half dozen tanks, capturing the guns on foot using crews from the dead tanks. You may run into a situation where a crew or two, martialed in the right place, grabs victory from the jaws of defeat. More likely, if you use them boldly, they will get blown away, but those are the breaks.<hr></blockquote> German tankers too did this; a group of Grossdeutschland tankers fought a British armoured column in 1945 with panzerfausts and won some nice Knight's Crosses for themselves; one officer (Anding, I believe) had 24 AFV destruction badges to his credit at war's end. Now, how common that was, is open to question. A prime consideration is that tank crews were highly trained specialists and usually under orders to save themselves, remove themselves to the rear, or wait with their vehicle for recovery - rather than act as infantry or tank hunters or scouts or whatever other duties we sometimes use them for (what is the German word for "flag-rusher"?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puff the Magic Dragon Posted January 18, 2002 Author Share Posted January 18, 2002 Slapdragon I'm not sure if I understood this right. 17 minutes from the first tank was shot till the last gun was taken out? 17 minutes from the beginning of the counter attack til the last gun was down? Do have this details available? Michael I also assume that they first need some time to organize - as we know, tankers have no Panzerfausts when they jumped out of the tank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted January 18, 2002 Share Posted January 18, 2002 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Sir Uber General: Would you consider this gamey? When defending I will often send crews from destroyed assets (ATGs, AFVs, mortars, etc) back to my local "command post" which is usually a building near or behind a flag in the rear of my main line of resistance. Here, they are placed under the command of whoever is available (company commander for example) and used for last ditch desperate local defence or to reinforce a hot spot that is in danger of being overrun? Cheers SUG<hr></blockquote> Perfectly reasonable IMO apart from "or to reinforce a hot spot that is in danger of being overrun?" Granted, Crews alone are mere cannon fodder and the player is punished appropriately for using them that way, though the intel gathered through 'scouting' can outweigh that at times I think. However, an unscrupulous player can take advantage of the TacAI behaviour re targetting by mixing crews/AT teams in with an attacking/defending platoon. They are high priority targets and will soak off fire, while the accompanying infantry, the main threat, goes by unscathed in those precious seconds/minutes. It can make the difference between losing or holding a position and never fails to pull my chain. Some see it only as a game and a mechanic allowed by the game so what's the beef? Others are more interested in a historical simulation and cringe. Even accounting for real-life cases of crews doing the exceptional, and I can recall plenty CM examples of 'heroism' using them in an 'historical' manner, there is little precedent to do so on a regular basis, as SOP. To each their own I guess.... Ron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xerxes Posted January 18, 2002 Share Posted January 18, 2002 If my opponent wants to use crews in such a manner so be it. They seem to have a high tendancy to get captured. I assume every CM battle is "heroic" and not a day to day engagement. If an enemy crew charges my mg and takes it out, they deserve a medal. Crews are expensive, fragile, and 1/2 blind. I try to hunt down enemy crews, if he wants to save me that trouble, so be it. -marc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeauCoupDinkyDau Posted January 18, 2002 Share Posted January 18, 2002 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf: Isolated units live dangerous, even the teethy bazookas.<hr></blockquote> Tell me about it. I just finished 'Para Recon in Force' against another player. He moves a platoon of Brit AB away from a victory flag he just captured from my defenders, but runs over and dosen't see a shrek team of mine that he didn't hit. I'm thinking I have a chance to score an easy flag grab with my AT team. Only, when I scoot them closer to the flag, I find that he has left a Piat team behind. The two AT teams duke it out alone (the whole fight lasts like 24 seconds), and he is left with one man to hold the flag. Normally AT teams don't seem to inflict much damage on infantry, but when you have two of them facing off at 10m (and isolated), it gets bloody real quick. [ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: Vader's Jester ]</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walker Posted January 18, 2002 Share Posted January 18, 2002 I can't stand it any more. You don't loose crews. You lose them. Chris Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puff the Magic Dragon Posted January 18, 2002 Author Share Posted January 18, 2002 Xerxes I see it vice versa - a typical CM battle is a typical 'each day' fighting. Walker Indeed it is a secondary question. Men fight and die in war, doesn't matter if they were crews or infantry or whatever. But we should give them a historical realistic electronic death , and if crews influence the general tactic in an inhistoric manner, then a change of their abilities should be considered. And if you refer to incorect sbellling...I have an excuse, I'm German . I don't know about the others [ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: Puff the Magic Dragon ]</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts