Wanting opponents please!

[Cupressus]

My answers to your answers. So, re-answers:

(0). It is very good answer, you explain to me everything what I wanted to know. Thank you very much. Check how I understand this topic now (something like rules for myself):

A. If I satisfied about how battle is going, I should not care about how many troops I have and how many time is left (did not know about -5 min, thank you), I should care about how to use my advantage to get a higher final score.

B. If risk to fare in worse situation - than I have on a current turn - is too high, I should toggle on the Ceasefire. I should understand that my opponent/s is capable to use the Ceasefire and discussions as a trick, to get higher final score for himself.

C. If I already understood that I have no more chances to win or hold positions in battle, I should use the Surrender to not waste my time.

D. I should care only about what acts, moves, decisions will bring me a higher final score. And I should not care about what opponent is thinking - about my decisions - and about what opponent is wants, after battle is started.

This rules are simple and logical, it is very good. Because I love simple and logical rules. I see only one drawback in logic of this rules. Rational player should to use the Surrender never at all. Because opponent will get max score, and player get only VP's for enemy losses. So rational player should fight to last soldier, to gain max possible VP's for enemy losses. To fix this drawback game engine should have some reasons to rational player. Something like following: If player press the Surrender, some of a troops of player (let's say 50%) will left a battlefield, other will be surrendered; opponent will get score that not the max.

> - ...For instance, I considered pressing Ceasefire in our B vs R match as I did some cost analysis of pressing/defending...

Do not even hope that I will toggle on the CS in this one (B V R), muahahaha, at least for now.


> - ...One of the reasons they did so much damage, is because you didn't know they were coming...

(1). I did not expect at all. (in next sentence 'support' as "Art/Air support") My mind - during purchase of forces - was thinking following: "The map is a town, support is not so important in town, so I do not need that support; forces are tiny, support is quite expensive, so I have very small amount of money to buying that support; battle is short, calling a support need a time, so I do not want that support; my opponent is probably thinking same way, he probably will did not have that support, so I do not need AA-troops."


> - ...One suggestion I'd make- unless you plan to use your M113's as battle taxi's to get your troops into a far and/or exposed position, don't purchase them...

(3). My mind (lol, right now I found that write like that (flow of my thoughts) it is much more easier then make a complex sentences, I will to write like that quite often from now, sorry if it looks strange or stupid, lol) - during purchase of forces - was thinking following: "The map is a town, so I should have a lot of infantry. It is CW-era, so all infantry are already mechanized. I have not a lot of money, so I want to buy a company of mechanized infantry. My opponent with high probability will did have a some armor, so I need something for AT purposes. Tanks are multipurpose and good as AT, so I want to force a company of mechanized infantry by platoon of tanks." Of course I understand that all this M113's and BTR's it is (often and almost) thrown away money, and platoon (3 or 4) of tanks it is may be not a best choice (maybe 2 tanks or 5 tanks is much better), but I love realism ('realism' here it is my vision of how it works in real life, my knowledges about how it actually works in real life is pretty small). So I do not know what to choose: 'realism' vs 'effectiveness'.* Therefore my question: "Do in RL combats, forces organized in their default formations (TO&E), or they can be organized in as how conditions of combat required (infantry without APC's,  infantry of different types, mix of not full formations, etc.l)"?


(5). No, I meant other situation. I meant situation that was in "R V B" match. My mind - during that error - was thinking following: "We (I your beautiful mind with you stupid Cupressus) already lost many M113s, also we lost almost all infantry, so now we should to do following. As our enemy already lost one tank and as he have a lot of Shilkas, and a lot of Hinds, and we did not saw other tanks, so he with high probability do not have more tanks, only some amount of infantry and a couple low-ammo Shilkas. And as all our Pattons (aces in sleeve) are fine (not destroyed) and as we still have a reserved full platoon of infantry, so let we make next move. On a crossing of paved roads there are a couple of not a bad buildings. This buildings are in the Zone. And our troops already feel themself good in this part of map. Our enemy are weak here, he probably want to advance at different flank. If we will place our reserves there (those buildings), so with help of our high-HE-ammo Pattons we will be able to finish that match at some kind of a draw." So I maked smoke screen (through WP shells of Pattons) on paved road and rush my APCs with reserves to those buildings. Everything was great: APCs have come to the buildings, riflemen dismount and place in the buildings; smoke screen was good. But then your T-62 arrived from a corner and annihilated almost all my reserve platoon, shooting at the buildings. Then I lost my Pattons in very stupid way. My mind - during this losses - was thinking following: "OMG! Cupressus you are **, **, ** and **! How you ** ** are did lose all you tanks against this damned Shilkas and **ing RPG!". So it is was my big errors. I do not have more chances now. I already press the Surrender.


> - Unfortunately, no in-game, no tank MGs can be used for AA...

(9). No, I constructed this sentences poorly, I meant other things. My mind - during "B V R" battle - was thinking following: "Small-turrets on Pattons is such a good thing. Sadly top machinegun (not coaxial) on soviets tanks it is WW2-era AA-weapon. And if I want to use this MG (against infantry) I need to 'open up' a commander.*** So that MG is not a useful at all, cause live commander is more important than additional fire power. (But then during battle I have saw how this MG is working) Great! That MGs are works like Patton's small-turrets (without 'open up'). I do not know how (what technology) it works (some kind of CW-era RWS or what), but it is working great. I need to read something about that technology later." Of course I understand that this MGs it is trash in AA purposes (12.7mm vs modern aviation it is lol). And of course I know they do not work as AA-guns in CMx2.


> - ...When bogging starts to happen, cancel its move orders, then use the Slow command to get it out of the bad ground...

(10). Sure, of course I know all this stuff. My knowledge of mechanics part of the game is pretty good. My only big drawbacks is mechanics of Air/Air-Defence, do not have much experience in this topics. I will fix this drawbacks later, through hotseat QB, on my own.


> - I assume you mean Combat Engineers, not like say, a software engineer.

Of course, of course, I meant Combat Engineers. I will write about it right now. I always thought (I do not have knowledge, just some my thoughts) that CEs it is support troops and they do not act in a hot phase of a combat. I thought they act only before or after combat (neutralization of mines and IEDs, construction of bridges and trenches, etc.). But in many wargames CEs (sappers, pioneers) it is some kind of a shockforces, they are stronger than regular infantry especially at assaults. So a few years in my mind sit question: "WTF?"** I was try to find answer (a couple years ago), but do not found usefull info. So I want to ask this question to you. How it works in RL, how I thought initially or like in wargames?


(*). Reminder for myself: write a more thoughts and questions about 'realism' vs 'effectiveness'.

(**). ICS.

(***). Reminder: write your question about tanks.