Jump to content

How to retreat?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

In the ANZAC spirit I concur,you stand there and die like a man.

Yes like Villers-Bretonneux , Trobruk, Milne Bay, Kapyong, Long Tan ....... oh hang on a minute we won those ones... ummm sorry when were we overrun?

And I mean properly overrun like St-Quinten, Bataan, Gloster Hill, Dien Bien Phu ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes like Villers-Bretonneux , Trobruk, Milne Bay, Kapyong, Long Tan ....... oh hang on a minute we won those ones... ummm sorry when were we overrun?

And I mean properly overrun like St-Quinten, Bataan, Gloster Hill, Dien Bien Phu ;)

Umm as an Australian, how are we overlooking Gallipoli, here?

A nice piece of retreating that... but a retreat it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greece, Crete, Singapore, ...

See what happens when we are not in charge and we have to stooge about with our backs to the sea and a noticeable absence of the Navy ?

Even then only in Singapore were we truly overrun.

Timor...

12 month guerrilla campaign before being the last Allied forces to withdraw from SE Asia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[serious]I agree with Mr. Vulture's post pretty much. Many times if you think that now is the time to leave, you're probably too late. And that when performing a delaying action, get your opponents attention, then beat feet.[/serious]

Yep, between that and the need for overwatch and smoke to cover the unit that is withdrawing, I think it pretty much covers it.

Generally speaking; a unit will NOT be able to extract itself from contact and still be useful later in the battle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL surrendering means you are not overrun.

Must remember that.

Yes of course.

Overrun is when you position has been breached and there is nothing you can do often the chance for an orderly retreat is gone, surrender is when your position itself is still viable but the surrounding situation is not.

Retreat is when you are fleeing an enemy you cannot hold, withdrawal is when you disengage for your own reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, Rabaul was

a) 'running off into the jungle', that well known and standard operation of war

mauve) an orderly retreat, still taught in Staff College as an exemplar of how it should be done

4.i) a surrender because the Phillipines had been invaded, even though Rabaul itself was still emminently defensible

iii) an overrun

sparkplug) fleeing an enemy that could not be held (also a retreat, but a different kind of retreat than mauve) above)

omega) none of the above

©) something else

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool formatting there Jon

But yeh I have no idea how one might categorise Rabaul, there wasn't really any formal resistance offered it was more along the lines that the Japanese landed and the "defenders" fled.

So I would take omega) none of the above

It has been quoted as "every man for himself", a stroke of military genius really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Mr. Vulture's post pretty much. Many times if you think that now is the time to leave, you're probably too late. And that when performing a delaying action, get your opponents attention, then beat feet.

Funny... just a few hours ago I was having a discussion about the stock market. Usually the minute the investor thinks "I should probably be out of this" is about a minute after it's too late to avoid a catastrophe. Or when working with heavy/dangerous equipment thinking "I'm really tired, so I'll do just one more" is when you lose a hand or a leg due to a fatigue related injury. Which is why yesterday, when I found myself saying that, I stopped doing what I was doing instead of trying for one more ;)

When on the attack if you find yourself thinking "my, this isn't going well" the usual worst thing to think is "I'll press a little harder and then reevaluate if it does't go right". I'm guessing that more than 90% of the time the final try is probably what dooms the attack to failure.

The defense is the same way. "I'm probably going to lose this position, so I'll start my withdrawal now" is most likely after the attacker has achieved some leverage that will make an orderly, effective withdrawal unlikely.

The Germans made this mistake many times in WW2. In CM:BN's setting the Germans should have realized that they lost France when they couldn't push the Allies into the sea in the first week or two. A modest blocking force could have kept the under supplied, under maned Allied beachhead from expanding very quickly. The Germans could have used the time to pull forces back and create a defensive line that had at least some long term hope of holding. I personally think that would have been eventually defeated too, but not nearly as badly as what happened in Normandy IMHO.

The Germans botched the Eastern Front several times, but the worst one was in the Spring of 1944 when it should have been clear that Army Groups North and South were going to be doomed if the weak Army Group Center was challenged (not to mention obliterated). Not withdrawing the flanking Army Groups after Center fell apart showed amazingly inept leadership.

On the attack the Germans blew it with Zittadel. The commanders knew the attack wasn't going well and that a counter attack was forming that would make it even worse. Did they stop, straighten the lines, and consolidate? Nope, kept right on going and eventually nearly destroyed.

So if you find yourself doing things like this, don't worry... you're in good company!

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The defense is the same way. "I'm probably going to lose this position, so I'll start my withdrawal now" is most likely after the attacker has achieved some leverage that will make an orderly, effective withdrawal unlikely.

AHA !! So the Australian decision to abandon Rabaul almost before the first bombs had landed WAS INDEED a master stroke!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First I think retreating is much easier in CMBN then it was in CM1x. If you are early enough, a squad that has a retreat path (even if it is only "straight back from a hedge) has a good chance of survival. You have to be quick though - one turn of fire, or two at most when you kill all point men of your opponent in the first turn, and you have to move. Otherwise you will be pinned, and tanks, artillery or other nasties will finish you off.

I have got the feeling that in CMBN this means that you often will get killed anyway. For even if you can fall back in good order, you wil need some space to do it. Generally the maps in a QB are to small for the number of forces. On most maps you only have the room to fall back once, or at most twice. Then your position is known, and the artillery will finish you of.....

I have played several QB's now, and in each the defender either ended up (in pretty good order) at the edge of the map, at whih point he was easy pickings for the artillery, or he stood his ground, and was killed by artillery at his initial line of defence. In fact the most QB's seem to be a duel between the two sides artillery, the infantry is just used to find the positions of the enemy (if that is needed, if the attacker takes a bit more artillery, he can just plaster the suspected positions with half his allotment, and kill most defenders). For this reason I have the feeling the artillery is a bit on the deadly side. In history there are plenty of examples of troops holding out even when battred by artillery (take the para's at Arnhem for example. In CMBN they would have been down to less then 50% strenght after 5 minutes of shelling)..

Anyway, that is ow it seems to me.... maybe others can confirm or deny?

Bertram

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... or time travel, ...

So do you go back to the point were the battle started to go bad and run away then OR do you go back to when the enemy started to get the upper hand and change your strategy so they then lose OR do you time travel forwards and see how it turned out then go back and change what you did until it turns out in your favour OR do you just time travel to another when altogether and forget the whole thing OR do you time travel the enemy to get there 3 minutes after you left ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do you go back to the point were the battle started to go bad and run away then OR do you go back to when the enemy started to get the upper hand and change your strategy so they then lose OR do you time travel forwards and see how it turned out then go back and change what you did until it turns out in your favour OR do you just time travel to another when altogether and forget the whole thing OR do you time travel the enemy to get there 3 minutes after you left ?

It doesn't matter either way, no enemy will let you get speed up to 88 miles per hour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...