Guidelines to winning CM battles

[Mike Abberton]

In regards to game length versus real-life, I think part of the problem is that we tend to simulate a whole attack at one time that would really happen in phases, particularly in a QB.

Consider that most QBs, particularly attacks/assaults, represent a completely un-reconned situation. You have some basic intelligence, i.e. you know it is defended (or you wouldn't be playing the game in the first place) and roughly the total amount of forces (by the point totals). But you don't know the enemy force mix, positions, etc. All you really have are the objective locations.

Presented with that situation, I suspect that most real-life commanders would send in a small detachment to scout things out, but with orders not to get to heavily engaged until they report back what they find. There would be a pause in action, maybe long or maybe not, while a plan was put together. Then, the main attack would go in. I don't think the real-life commander would routinely say "well let's just send everyone in from the beginning, because the Colonel wants this wrapped up in a 1/2-hour".

But in the game, who wants to play a 90 to 120-turn QB where, the first 30 turns is a recon phase with sporadic low-level engagements. Then 30 turns of no fighting while the attacker positioned his men for the attack. And finally 30 to 60 turns of actual fighting.

An interesting way to go would be for the defender to set up first. He saves the file once before hitting "Go", and e-mails that file to a third person. Then he hits Go and e-mails the file to his opponent. After getting a recon plan (direction and units involved) from the attacker, the third person takes a look at the defender's setup and gives a generalized "recon report" to the attacker before he sets up. Nothing too specific just very generalized observations (e.g. infantry near the cluster of buildings in the center, a possible tank spotted on the crest of the hill in the background, etc.), with an eye towards the attacker's recon plan. Everybody assumes the recon was of a non-contact nature and that casualties/ammo expediture were essentially nil or that they were from forces not to be commited in the attack. The defender is also notified of the recon (direction of advance, general idea of types of units involved) The attacker then sets up and the QB represents the actual attack phase.

Obviously such a system requires a willing third person and is open to complaint/abuse depending on too much or too little detail in the recon reports, but it could be an interesting change of pace. In fact, if someone wants to try it, I would be willing to serve as the third-party neutral observer.

Mike