Numerous battle

[jbmtintin]

I need help, there, for the 8th mission of The Outlaws (D+1), as there is too many troups there (20 tanks,...). What are your strategy in such mission?

- Do you let for example half of the force behind, as reserve, and attack with the other half?

- Do you send everybody to combat? But how are you managing all these troops (in CMx1 I was used to check and order my troops one by one, but it is pretty long...).

- ...

Thanks for your help! (and just tell me if another thread deals with that... I did not find one...).

[Erwin]

I played this a while ago but don't remember it. In general you want to use the min necessary force to accomplish the job. And a reserve is always good.

I find it can work to set aside part of ones force and pretend you don't have em and try to fight better and more cleverly with a smaller force. When you have a lot of stuff there is temptation to throw em all in and this simply provides more targets for the enemy. Hope that helps...

[Sakai007]

When I am fighting large battles, with a Batt+ involved, I always end up breaking everything down into a series of smaller engagements. For example, it is tempting to use an entire platoon of troops to recce an area when you have three full infantry companies. I give each Company an area of responsibility, be it on the attack or in the defense, and then break that down into setting up each Companies battle area by giving each platoon an area of responsibility. I then fight nine platoon size fights instead on one huge Battalion sized melee. I also don't waste anything in this way. More often then not, the problem I had before this technique was not using enough force to do the job, sending reinforcements in piece meal until they were slaughtered and having a ton of support elements laying around at the end. With the new way, I have my support groups engaged in supporting their charges, and all the firepower at my disposal is used.

[jbmtintin]

I played this a while ago but don't remember it. In general you want to use the min necessary force to accomplish the job. And a reserve is always good.

I find it can work to set aside part of ones force and pretend you don't have em and try to fight better and more cleverly with a smaller force. When you have a lot of stuff there is temptation to throw em all in and this simply provides more targets for the enemy. Hope that helps...

Ok, thanks. It is a good thing to know that it is possible to win with forces in reserves, and not with everybody in fight.

[jbmtintin]

When I am fighting large battles, with a Batt+ involved, I always end up breaking everything down into a series of smaller engagements. For example, it is tempting to use an entire platoon of troops to recce an area when you have three full infantry companies. I give each Company an area of responsibility, be it on the attack or in the defense, and then break that down into setting up each Companies battle area by giving each platoon an area of responsibility. I then fight nine platoon size fights instead on one huge Battalion sized melee. I also don't waste anything in this way. More often then not, the problem I had before this technique was not using enough force to do the job, sending reinforcements in piece meal until they were slaughtered and having a ton of support elements laying around at the end. With the new way, I have my support groups engaged in supporting their charges, and all the firepower at my disposal is used.

Doing that, we need to have order to each team? So there is still a long time to give orders... But it is managed more easily than in a "real" battalion fight, as we have micro-fights, that is the idea?

[Erwin]

I agree with Sakai's tactical idea except that I like to do "2 up": two platoons (or companies) ahead to recon and engage the enemy with one in reserve to provide reinforcement. Also, remember to only reinforce success, not failure. Ideally, you want to find the enemy's weak area and attack in force there, and avoid his strong points wherever possible (use arty for those if you can).

Re Recon, best to split off 2-man teams and do it with the minimum of men. It's harder to spot 2 men than a squad or even an assault team.

[Sakai007]

Yes Erwin, 2 up - 1 back is to correct way to do things. I didn't elaborate, but that is the way I do things as well. When scouting, I tend to use a slightly larger force then the two man scout unit. I use the A section, with the SMG, to do the actual scouting. I like to have the BAR troop follow fairly close behind to facilitate an escape with suppression fire if the scout unit gets into to much trouble. Then I figure the best way to cope with the situation at hand.

The comment about only reinforcing success can't be over stated. Yes, there may be a time or two when an extra platoon could have made the difference, but more often then not you are just feeding the grinder. Using your strongest forces to attack their weakest point is also pure gold. On the defense, I use a tactic as old as organized warfare. I will withdraw a force in an attempt to lure the attacking forces into pursuit so I can attack their flanks with a squad or two I keep in reserve.

[Erwin]

I only disagree about using more than a two man scout team. Yes, you can back em up with a lot more. But, the idea is to give the enemy ambushers very little to see or shoot at. 4 guys are easier seen than 2. And if the ambush is good, 4 will die as easy as 2.

However, due to spotting bonus of binoculars I have used XO and HQ Support teams for recon as well. They are usually 3-man teams.