dugfromthearth Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 1) flanking with infantry isn't important as such. Concentration of infantry is important, whether that involves flanking or not. Given the slow movement rate and vulnerability of moving infantry, splitting infantry into center and flanks tends to create easily isolated units that get chopped up. 2) tanks are only really useful when they are forward and engaged. But then they are vulnerable. The goal for tanks is to spot theirs with yours hidden, pop-out and destroy their tanks, then use your tanks overtly to engage their infantry. Note that tank quality imbalance may render this unnecessary, but if players choose their own forces this imbalance is unlikely. 3) mortars should not be assigned to infantry platoons. They are support weapons whose major benefit is their long range, which is negated or turned into a liability if they try to advance with infantry. They are maneuver units, but they should be positioned to shoot at enemy moving to the point of contact, not enemy at the point of contact. 4) armored vehicles function as cavalry once the enemy tanks are eliminated. A scout car with a couple of machine guns can quickly move to wherever needed, making it far superior to infantry machine guns - if the enemy tanks are eliminated. Stuarts and other light tanks are fantastic against infantry. Wasps can move forward and instantly break infantry units with their flamethrower, making them ideal for "cleaning up" isolated enemy infantry units - if the enemy tanks are eliminated. 5) with combined arms your goal should not be to engage with your infantry. It should be to spot and fix the enemy. Then artillery should be brought down on their infantry and your armor should be used against their armor. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fredrock1957 Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 Welcome to the world of CMBO Dug Now play CMBB and try the same tactics... I would be interested in what you feel is the difference in tactics... IMO most of the time in PBEM's that for each CM game one should have seperate tactics... not based upon scenario (cause I believe scenario tactics to be tendencies of your opponent) but tactics for the two games are completely different.. just look at the HMG42 ... Hory Cow...Am I describing the Human TacAI vs Human AI... jeeezzz its been a long night.. Regards FR 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beta1 Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 Well thats your way to play. I have similar thoughts except point one. concentrations of infantry, especially in attack is just asking for artillery. You try clumping a large number of men together agasint a good player and you'll find you get hit by light artillery within a turn which will stop you getting out of the way of the 200 blast stuff (or worse VT) thats incoming shortly... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 Exception to 3) British 2" mortar hasn't the range to hang back. Moving up with the squads enables it to slap ATGs about from defilade. Outflanking a position can be useful, as you end up killing mortars and guns without having to wade through squad infantry. CMBB and CMAK are a whole different ball game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 Outflanking can be useful in another way. It concentrates a large portion of your force against a small part of his. The rest of his line can be masked off by terrain, smoke, or just be out of range. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dugfromthearth Posted November 26, 2003 Author Share Posted November 26, 2003 correct Michael. Outflanking is useful if it serves the function of concentratig your firepower. That is a very small outflank though. Sort of a micro-tactic. As opposed to trying to do a napoleonic outflank. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howard R Posted November 27, 2003 Share Posted November 27, 2003 Getting behind the other guy's infantry is very important. it is a platoon tactic, performed within company operations. Not the classic breakthrough and pursuit to "roll up the line" of larger scale battles. The light mortar (2", 50mm and 60mm) is very handy for laying smoke on the the other guy, as well as keeping heads down on his machine gun units while I move closer, around or to better cover. also great for popping his guns. my general theory is this: Tanks against his infantry, AT against his tanks, infantry against his AT. not to be followed to the letter, or adhered to strictly-just a general guideline. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dugfromthearth Posted November 27, 2003 Author Share Posted November 27, 2003 I have never actually used smoke. I am sure it is a major element I am missing. I will have to try that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 27, 2003 Share Posted November 27, 2003 Originally posted by Howard R: ...infantry against his AT.Even better is artillery, especially on-map mortars. A few rounds accurately dropped will either knock it out or break the crew. In general I agree with your post: use the right tool for the job. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howard R Posted November 28, 2003 Share Posted November 28, 2003 In general I agree with your post: use the right tool for the job. Thanks! That is high praise from one with so low a number! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.