 |
|
Split squads ? - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Combat Mission (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=10) +--- Thread: Split squads ? (/showthread.php?tid=39169) Pages:
1
2
|
Split squads ? - Jobu88 - 02-13-2007 Fellas-- Does anyone routinely split their squads before making a dash across open or otherwise dangerous territory? I recently had my Russian Airborne troops shot to pieces by a single German rifle platoon while trying to cross 100 meters of open terrain. It occurred to me afterwards that I might have had more survivors if I had split all the squads before giving them the order to charge. Twice as many targets the enemy has to shoot at. Anybody have any experience with this idea? I usually split squads to create a scout, or if I need to cover two places with one squad. But I haven't split en masse for an attack & I'm curious if it's effective. RE: Split squads ? - mTk(FGM) - 02-13-2007 RE: Split squads ? - Skeld (FGM) - 02-13-2007 Im pretty sure, if memory serves, there was a MG-42 involved as well.  In a QB I'm playing atm I tried a similar dash with 3 split squads into a patch of woods that held a small flag. Unfortunatly my opponent had some hidden troops in there...they were all cut down in no more then a 40m dash. :hissy: Didn't work for me there, seems to me, dashes like that work out much better in CMBO then CMBB. You gonna send me a set-up Chris? RE: Split squads ? - Soldier - 02-13-2007 Hi Jobu88, I split them when defending, especially if fox holes are available. Get an additional fox hole with each split.. :-) Also when either running or advancing over an open terrain. The half with the sub machine gun advances, while it's light machine gun wielding counterpart does the over watch. RE: Split squads ? - Mike Abberton - 02-13-2007 Split squads suffer increased loss of morale versus a combined squad, and I believe that causes them to suppress quicker than whole squads. So, it might not help a whole lot in an advance across open terrain. An MG might only cause casualties to one of the 1/2 squads, but there is a good chance that it could suppress both of them. If you could split the squads and keep them separate enough on the advance that one MG position could not suppress both 1/2 squads, it might work. RE: Split squads ? - Ratzki - 02-13-2007 Jobu, I need a turn from you. RE: Split squads ? - Mad Russian - 02-13-2007 See information on splitting squads here: Splitting Squads Hope this helps. Good Hunting. MR RE: Split squads ? - McIvan - 02-13-2007 Try splitting ONE squad, sending half of it out to get shot, and leaving the rest there to shoot the shooter. That's the point of splitting squads on the attack. Splitting troops to dash across open ground is negated by the fact that the enemy fire affects everything within 14 metres, so unless you keep your troops well spaced you will end up getting em all affected anyway, possibly badly affected, because split squads have lower morale. However, if you DO space out your half squads properly, the enemy gets more shots into them than they would have if you'd rushed the full squads past all at once. I suspect that at anything other than close range (where the first para of this post applies),you are better off rushing them across all at once to minimise the time they are under fire. At long range you can run or walk, at medium range you should advance. Finally, in my opinion attacking infantry should usually be kept mostly in full squads (sacrificial/scouting half squads as above aside) because they're going to be shooting at enemy in cover and need the full firepower to get a decent effect on the target. Even with SMG squads I'd prefer to keep them mostly together on the attack. RE: Split squads ? - Colonel Talvela - 02-13-2007 RE:��Split squads ? - Copper - 02-13-2007 |
){kind=link}