Extreme assault?

[Kool Kat]

If you want to make the assualt easier lets get rid of the big red " D " that makes it easy to see who to assault. How did commanders SEE into what the enemy was thinking or how he was acting 250 meters away.

IMO, being able to "see" the status of an enemy unit (Dispersed) makes sense. Combat units routinely sent out either point or area reconnaissance groups to scout enemy positions in addition to having multiple observation and listening posts. Also, many commanders traveled to the front lines to observe first hand the disposition of their troops and the enemy. Rommel is one famous example that comes to mind.

A combat unit that did not make it its business to learn and observe nearby enemy units... was in for an "extreme" assault?

[Chuck10mtn]

Hawk,
We cannot assume that the units are 1 meter away from each other. A assult from 1 meter would be different than one from a full 250 meters. so do we have to break down the assaults to figure in distance that the attacker would have to travel.

Are we forgetting that a turn is 6 min long and you would be getting alot of information in a very short period of time.

I'm not against assaulting and do so when it has to be done, I like you don't think the process is broken and think maybe a higher price for the attacker should be in order. If the attacker in a assault could face some serous losses maybe he would think harder before just assaulting every turn.

I'm not sure what the differance is between a POW and a surrender. 1st they surrender then they become a POW so they are the same guys just seen in different phases of being processed.

At least the topic is going forward and is starting to yield some good ideas on what direction the game should go.

Chuck

[umbro]

It occurs to me that if you cannot even count the enemy in a hex it should be even harder to discern their mental state.

Note: D = disrupted (i.e. suffering a morale effect; not dispersed, a tactical formation)

umbro

P.S. Just like counting the enemy, Disrupted in the open should probably be discernable

[Herr Straße Laufer]

It occurs to me that if you cannot even count the enemy in a hex it should be even harder to discern their mental state.

Note: D = disrupted (i.e. suffering a morale effect; not dispersed, a tactical formation)

umbro

P.S. Just like counting the enemy, Disrupted in the open should probably be discernable

I'm in agreement with Hawk. Routine patrols and observation are a bit more keen than the "extreme fog of information" that you seem to hint at.
Plus, most troops had a relative idea of who they faced and how many to expect. Though, not with perfect accuracy.

If your thinking of a further "option" that does not allow the morale status of a unit to be viewed, I am for that.

And, on a side note. For those who think that assault an "area" (ie. hex) was not common. I'd like to say it was a lot more common than they think. Especially in towns and forests. I'd like to see assault stay as part of the game. I find the "shoot 'em until they go away" type battles, that extreme assault has brought to the game, has changed the game in a fundamental way. And, in my opinion, not for the better either.

I thought extreme assault promised to be successful even against undisrupted units, if you had the right number of troops, mix, and die roll?
What difference would seeing the "D" mean anyway? :chin:

RR

[Kool Kat]

We cannot assume that the units are 1 meter away from each other. A assult from 1 meter would be different than one from a full 250 meters. so do we have to break down the assaults to figure in distance that the attacker would have to travel.

Assaults are an abstraction of combat events taking place within a 250 meter area. It makes no difference to the game engine if troops are assaulting from 1 meter, 250 meters, or some meter in between.

Are we forgetting that a turn is 6 min long and you would be getting alot of information in a very short period of time.

I believe combat troops; especially under fire, can make a whole lot of decisions within 6 minutes... because they have to!

I'm not sure what the differance is between a POW and a surrender. 1st they surrender then they become a POW so they are the same guys just seen in different phases of being processed.

I believe Hawk was making the point that more troops were captured then surrendered in WW2.

[Chuck10mtn]

Assaults are an abstraction of combat events taking place within a 250 meter area. It makes no difference to the game engine if troops are assaulting from 1 meter, 250 meters, or some meter in between.



[quote=mwest]

I believe combat troops; especially under fire, can make a whole lot of decisions within 6 minutes... because they have to!
[quote=mwest]

I believe Hawk was making the point that more troops were captured then surrendered in WW2.

To the game engine no, but I believe that an assualt from 1 meter you will have a better idea of the units morale and weather its disrupt than if your assualt starts from 250 or as much as 499 meters if you believe that 2 units in ajoining hexes can be next to each other 1 meter, then they could be as far as 499 meters away from each other.



I know they do but your talking about sending out patrols and gathering info that would take much longer than 6 minutes.



I know I was being a little cynical about it. Sorry if somebody took it too mean that they were really different.

I know that a lot of information was gathered on what was going on and when. The Allies took a long time to plan the D-Day landings and somehow somebody missed a crack division 352nd I believe, was waiting on the coast. I would like to see the big red D show that some or all of the units in the hex maybe disrupt, or at least one but maybe all could be disrupt.

[Dan Caviness]

Chuck10mtn....
NEVER apologize....you just keep being beautiful...(:O)

The Hawk does not play well with others...which is why we like him...lol...

I like cheese...

Is that lint in my bellybutton?

[Hawk Kriegsman]

The Hawk does not play well with others...which is why we like him...lol...

Really? How would you know exactly?

What I cannot give my opinion like everyone else?

Thanx!

Hawk

[Dan Caviness]

Hawk:

1. Well, you have a point! Start a game and we see how you play with others! Your pick.

2. Yes, you certainly can, and do I may add, give your opinion like everyone else.

3. I suspect you may have misinterpreted my tone. All in fun.

4. Turns out that WAS lint in my bellybutton.

Your Welcome!

Dan

[Hawk Kriegsman]

Hawk:

1. Well, you have a point! Start a game and we see how you play with others! Your pick.

Thanks for the offer but I am full up at this point. Maybe at some point in the future.

Thanx!

Hawk