|
RE: Why Tactical?
I have never been very good a playing operational scaled wargames. The only exception is the CS, which imo sort of bridges that gap between tactical and operational fairly well.
Tactical level is so much less vague to me. A much more intimate affair. For example, I have just started a new SBVN scenario where I am in charge of a battalion. I LOVE that size game. Controlling 3 companies of infantry on a search and destroy against the VC (although I DO wish I had at least a heavy weaps platoon attached which in this scenario I don't...ack!).
These troopers were dropped smack in the middle of "Indian Country" with nothing but their wits, their leaders, and their weapons. Terrain and tactics will make or break the day. What happens to individual squads actually MATTERS. In fact, on my first turn, one of my squads of 10 lost one man....of course it was the M-60 gunner. Now I have the choice....drop grenade launchers or LAW rockets to pick up the machine gun or leave it? That ONE man matters to his squad, which in turn matters to their platoon.
Lose that LtCol in charge of the battalion or one of your 3 company commanders and see how the complexion of the game changes. Leaders, even down to the platoon level, make a true difference. Lay back or move forward with your men? What quality is the leader? A? B? C? In the tactical world it MATTERS. Do you move up to that pinned squad to rally them (chancing the leader getting shot), or let them retreat, take the big "D" and lower morale, and try to rally them in a safer spot?
Tactical is more personal. Less worry about supply chain as the time length makes that not so much of an issue. The pace in tactical level is quicker as well which I like. I like my fights to develop fairly quickly with very defined objectives. Operational just covers too much ground for my limited grey matter.
|
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
){kind=link}
