Short Visability Battle
 

I'm just curious how other people work this. I'm currently in a battle aganist the AI (Germ vs CAN,Itay, 1/44, Delay) in the snow with a visability of 6. When I first saw that I thought, "this is sure going to be interesting." I've have about a 50/50 armour/Inf force, some hills and forests, but a fair amount of open space that is invisible beyond 300m.

My thought was to quickly move up combined arms into the anticipated avenues of attack, leaving a 8-16 unit moible reserve. The plan is to have the enemy advance into my fighting retreat. If I can stop them in the first hundred yards of visablity, then I can give them a bloody nose and retreat out of visability again. By gaining an advance position, I can also set up units that will be passed by in the fog and can then ravage the Canook's rear units.

I think it's a good plan, but what do the SP venterns think?

Re: Short Visability Battle
 

Sounds like a viable plan, however, remember Plan A rarely survives contact with the enemy, having the mobile reserve may help you there.

Oh yes, it's Canuks, and they are tough and love snow, tell your boys they will hear the Pipers long before they die at those visiabilities! LOL!!

Bob out:D

Re: Short Visability Battle
 

Yeah, Canuks like the snow, but so do tigers!:evil: Panthers like the jungle, but my seem to be taking to the snow like Canuks.:D

Re: Short Visability Battle
 

that's funny because i am playing the same type of battle in afrika 1941, with a visibility of 5, a delay with the germans vs the british.

i think this is a very tough battle when you defend because the defender does not see where the attack will occur...

i managed to destroy the tanks but with casualties (the AI managed to attack me at the back, exactly your plan, but on me)

now facing huge waves of infantry supported by artillery,

cant do anything but retreat

what happened with your plan?

Re: Short Visability Battle
 

In general, low visibility favors the attacker in assaults and advances. The numerical advantage the attacker has can be reduced as they approach with artillery and long range direct fire, but not if you can't see them until they are only 300m away. At least against the AI, you can be sure it won't attack on a narrow front and just try to punch a hole in your line. Instead, it uses a broad attack meaning you won't have problems finding something to shoot at. The down side is you have to pretty much watch everywhere, even of you don't protect everywhere.

There are two exceptions to low visibility favoring the attacker. One is air support. The attacker has more points to spend so could get more air support than the defender, if it was available. The other is if the defender has weak AT guns. In low visibility situations, the attacker will encounter such guns at close range where they will be more effective. That is easily countered however by proper recon.

Re: Short Visability Battle
 

On the ATG thing I think that is still an advantage to the attacker as troops should be leading & they are very vulnerable at close range.

Re: Short Visability Battle
 

If you have a weak ATG, any chance is better than none, but you are correct. I lead my attacks with scouts and they usually can spot entrenched infantry and guns at a range of three. Infantry and engineers aren't far behind. I keep my tanks concealed until I can assess the threat.