[RERomine]

Originally Posted by Charles22

P3 - You would rather air go for a loaded HT than a tank? DO you mean a tank with riders, or just a tank? I presume you mean just a tank. I presume I would too, but of AA defense is what got us to that point, so recall you were the one who dedicates the majority of your SPAA to infantry. I was the one who wa telling you that air is not too interested in the infantry, therefore you see the need but not executing it, unless, that is, you wish to start more protecting that armor now.

This is incorrect. Four SPAA units typically cover one tank platoon and four SPAAs cover two SS infantry companies, so the armor receives proportionally more protection. But as you said, they don't have riders. What would you protect more, infantry in tracks or Tigers and Panthers with somewhere close to 1,000 kills? I know the answer to that. Even with out the kills, the tanks are just more valuable assets. I have to provide the infantry and tracks with some protection, however so each company gets two SPAAs.

Would it be accuarate to say, that you would flank with your advancing infantry the sides of the board, then protect them with SPAA, thinking you were better protecting not only tanks but infantry better that way? Could be, but do recall that an SPAA, or AA any on the map, that is onan edge is having it's arc of fire severely limited. It is my opinion that not only is it less gamey, but it is also more protective, but by your earlier description of them on the defense, persuming no air, you certainly weren't flank happy in that case, but probably mis-read this idea of protecting the whole map by cramming the advancing flanks.

I don't do anything radical with air defense. If my core moves in mass, SPAAs take up position on the main body flanks and rear. If they have to break up differently to accomplish the mission, I adjust the coverage based on what is available. One infantry company with only two SPAAs obviously can't have them on both flanks and the rear since there just aren't enough.

Tell me, for all you have seen of the SP series, wouldn't you say that the AI does far better with his aerial support than does the human, that he manages to destroy more frequently the AFV's for example?

Yes!!! One of the reasons I don't use air strikes much is I find them to be as much a risk to my forces as the AIs forces. It's bad enough to lose a tank, but it's worse to lose one to your own plane. The AI, on the other hand, seems to rarely have blue on blue attacks. It is very deadly with it's air strikes. They are worse than artillery.

From my experience, enemy air is none too concerned about the front line unles sit be a hill loaded with AFV's. He is more interested in the units just behind the front. You seem to think that an HT for what little they may be attacked, getting attacked with loaded infantry isn't worth the infantry being sfaer on foot and infantry and HT both surviving. I say both surviving because I do not expect the AI will target the unladen HT, but as we know, it's somewhat academic anyway, consdiering how the Ai air just loves the AFV's. There probably isn't a strike that goes by where if he hasn't spotted an AFV beforehand, he spots it in flight.

I see AI aircraft about 20% of the time, but it has infantry and machine guns all of the time. The infantry is safer in the tracks. Of the 20% of the times I see them, probably half are on defend missions and the infantry is in entrenchments or fire pits anyhow. When they are in tracks, it's only to get to into attack position so they really are dismounted most of the time. They can't do their main job unless they dismount.

Just for clarity, the infantry stays dismounted until they actually need to move out. I've lost too many infantry units sitting in tracks to artillery while waiting at the LD.

So having said all of that, I am curious as to what all this speed gains you. Are you on some sort of reduce the turns kick to increase difficulty? If we got rewards for exiting units, I would be more interested in a more mobile force, or at least using what I have in a more mobile way. Do you think armies load up onto HT's because speed is so important (WWII armies I mean) that under imminent threat of air strikes they just keep driving along? I don't see my score increasing by speed, more likely lessening for the more risks, nor do I see it influencing the experience generated. Oh, now I recall, your fear of AI arti. Yes, I fear your huge force has brought part of that on, and since I imagine your map is smaller than mine (I don't think you have ever stated the size precisely) the AI has more chance to hit you, so you think you can move away from it a lot, but I think ratio-wise, unless I do some miracles with my counter-batterying and movement, that you suffer from it much more than I do. Or to be more precise, you used to. It seems a simple conclusion to reach, as arti nugs me so little, however I'm adjusting to it, that when I'm attacking anyway, even my foot infantry is often staying ahead of it, or if it doesn't the damage is none too great. If I left my infantry in anything open-topped (not saying you do this specifically) when it was raining down, if I were thinking defeat was slowing down for it, and got hit by it, then yes, I would fear it all the more, but it seems your adjustment period to more mobility came because you are enjoying less harassment from arti for that increased mobility.

Whether on foot or with transport, as long as the units keep moving, AI artillery isn't a great risk. It does a great job of firing where we've been and not where we are. Added speed allows me more operational variations. Speed helps greatly on assault missions. From the point you start clearing mines, you have about 3-4 turns before the AI start hitting the area with artillery. On your large map, the AI mines should be more scattered, but on the 100x100 map with the value of my core there is always a minefield from top to bottom. There is no going around it. It has to be breached. Now, I could just move back and wait until the AI finishes the barrage, but I usually just try to get through.

I think after you made the adjustment, not before, but after you got the sense of the AI arti pulse; the same as I got without changing much of anything. So knowing the pulse, and using mobility more, who's to say just which is more important. I would guess knowing the pulse myself. You see, if bombardment falls at your heels all the time (hitting behind your advance to very little or no effect), does it matter if it's a couple more hexes from your heels? OTOH, our forces are very different in size and map. I tell you that arti is not much of a problem over here by knowing when to move and how much (and a few more minor factors), and in what terrain of course, but your AI is probably so limited and your map so small, with a much higher density of units, that you have to almost run around to avoid it. I realize I can't possibly be entirely accurate there, but we are talking about two very different beasts here, and I think it's time we realized that we aren't facing the same things, even allowing how we're playing in different years.

Quite correct. The bottom line is does it work. Sounds like your way works for you and mine works for me. My tactics may change based on who I'm fighting and the terrain. I've done lots of different things, dismounted attacks, air assaults, mobile defenses, flanking maneuvers, etc. I've also got PBEM games against people going. No tanks or tracks. Just infantry, guns and mortars. Truck transport for the guns and mortars because you have to move them. People will counter battery fire much more frequently than the AI will.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe you're just bored with marching any foot units to any degre, and we know you think it's just way too easy using tank riders. So let me put you slightly on the spot here, using your own concern for 'realism' shall we call it, in the form of not using riders because they don't suffer enough whenn hit, to say, have you ever known a WWII formation that was ever as mobile as yours? I realize it's not particularly a good idea to always base our force as some national representative, like we can't have more PZIVH's than Panthers (even though after the Panthers got more fully produced the last two years plus, they were actually out-pacing PZIV production), but I'm not so sure any force was as mobile as yours. If you still want to be that way that's fine, but it may be denying you of some of the experiences any real Gerry formation had to worry about, but I'm appealing to your sense of realism here, and other than seemingly being able to dodge more arti, something to consider certainly, I see no benefit. I suppose it's your PBEM that has done this and you adapt one technique to fit all. All I can tell you, is you can become a lot less mobile on my map, with the size of my force, and still have it not rip you to shreds, providing you're playing the AI. You get a whole lot more arti for your huge amount of units on a smaller map, and you can get some wacky arti idea from PBEM'ers, or at least much more effective use therein. That must be it. Take my last battle for instance meeting with poland, though it was one of my mroe exceptional decisives, and that is that I lost only 65 men and three AFV's, and 1 Storch. Does that sound like arti problems to you? Other than the sniper, he didn't wipe out even one squad of my infantry. Well you can probably nevermind this, I'm probably only aggravating you, but I don't mean to. I just want to see what's making you tick. I already got the idea of the airborne scouts, that might prove useful should I think it doesn't give me too much of an advantage (note how the AI will never make air drops). If I can do that as what I deem as too successfully, with too much impact, then I will have to cut back on it or eliminate it, but of course I haven't tried it yet.

Charles, you are grasping at straws a bit here now. Do you think that the German army which fielded millions of men didn't have enough half-tracks to mount two infantry companies? Rationally, you would similarly equip companies in the same battalion with similar equipment so they can continue to function as a unit. It's only as fast as it's slowest unit. But if you want a name, I would suspect Kampfgruppe Peiper during the Battle of the Bulge would qualify. This brigade had 4,800 men and 600 vehicles. That one vehicle for every 8 men. On December 24th, when Kampfgruppe Peiper was finally destroyed, allies captured their remaining equipment in La Gleize: 28 tanks, 70 half-tracks, and 25 artillery pieces. I don't think it's a big leap of faith to conclude there were more half-tracks than just 70 in the brigade, so squeezing out 28 to mount two companies wouldn't be difficult.

Artillery has it's moments. Sometimes it's a real killer and sometimes it just makes tooth picks out of trees no where close to me. While I don't remember the exact details, that battle I keep referring to where I had AP ammo problems, I lost only 20 men and had a couple of damaged tanks. Destroying 179 tanks and armored cars and inflicting over 600 casualties was a nice return for my efforts. Since my casualties were so low and my force was relatively static being the battle was a delay, I can only conclude artillery wasn't a factor in that battle. There was a note that I only lost 29 men and no tanks in the battle before, so artillery probably wasn't a factor in that one as well. Either that or I just handled it well.

P4 - Arti observers are not only 4X weaker than scouts in the GE sense, but they're usually armed worse, if that's possible. Why would I front line them? Unlike scouts are primarily for spotting a front, the FOO is for directing bombardment at a quicker rate, uusally my arti is accuraye enough through them, that not only are they not seeing the targeted area, but they are also moving in some cases. Spotting through anything else just takes way too long fo rme, and I think the accuarcy is good enough, especially since their most primary task is to direct against any onboard arti I may find in the rear. Yes, I do use him in core.

In the same manner that the FOO doesn't fight, but has a useful role, the same applies to scouts. They can serve as additional eyes for your unit. A set of eyes that can get closer to AI units without getting shot at most of the time. Once you have spotted the AI units, you can deal with them as you see fit: artillery, tanks, infantry, airstrikes. The other option is you spot them with some other unit only after the AI unit shoots at you. Think of them as a life insurance policy for your more expensive core units.

P5 - no, I wasn't talking about some puny pnzrfst team, I was referring to an entire "full" squad of infantry when I made that comment of bettering scouts on a flank.

I missed that, but I didn't have any infantry in the area. It really wasn't critical, however because I hand MkIVs and Tigers outside of the woods. I just wasn't going to run my tanks in looking for other tank. It was just a bonus that the scouts got the kills, but if they hadn't, my tanks would have.

P6 - You said you stop the scout after hitting that 2 hexes away, okay. And you also said you "peel back". That's what I was talking about, not you moving forward with the scout anymore. You still haven't necessarily answered the question. You seem to have the practice of stopping for the turn at that point, and then the next turn even moving within one possibly. But while saying you stop within two may not be comclusive, ebcause if indeed you ever do peel back in that situation, there is no statement as to if that was mistaken words on your part, thereby you never peel back (unlikely) or that you might be able to move again, but only backwards on the same turn without being spotted. But of course our scouts are probably extermely different as I'm just starting out with them; too clumsy with them or not, so I can't expect anything like what you say you're doing just yet.

Well yeah I realize they would be spotted with full movement, but I was talking about the 2 hexes away, being the 1st movement, the peel back of one hex being the 2nd of the same turn (or maybe the next turn). I guess it's somewhat immaterial when I realize now you're on an entirely diffent plane of experience. the only hope was that yours went that far and weren't any better than the early ones I have.

I guess I should clarify this a touch more. My scout backs up because I typically hit infantry encountered this way with artillery. My objective is to save the scout. There are many other options available, however. You could just keep the scout in place and engage the spotted infantry with direct fire from tanks. The scout will be safe from that. Another option could be to start working the scout around the spotted infantry unit. He's been spotted, so there's no benefit to keeping the scout there watching it and you may not have the ability to engage it immediately with artillery or direct fire. With scouts, once you an AI unit close, always move one less than the maximum and the scout will more than likely remain hidden. It's pretty easy to do. Just be patient with it. Since you are use to working with dismounted units, I don't suspect this will be a problem.

P last - Yes, I know all that basic stuff. Virtuallt all functions get better with experience. Hmmm, speaking of which, I don't recall, I might had just forh=got, anybody telling me my conclusion that ammo trucks don't dish out ammo more quickly with more experience.

No, they don't resupply any faster with more experience. Experience only helps reduce suppression from attack and aids in rallying suppression.

Hmm, bring up another point. Needless to say everything isn't improved by experience, as probalt infantry doesn' take less losses to bombardmnet through exp, though it's possible IRL. What about road speed? How many times do you tell the AFV to go on to the full amount the movement arc specifies om a road, and it ends up with some funky bonus hex or two beyond that limit once it gets there? I'm curious if more exp could possibly make that much more likely.

Experience doesn't increase road speed. As mentioned, it will help reduce suppression, aid in rallying, increase shots per turn, increase accuracy and increase spotting ability. There may be some others. Resupply is much more critical if you have highly experienced units, because their number of shots increases, but the ammo payload does not. My Tigers, firing 8 shots per turn can go through their ammo fairly quickly. There's nothing worse than a highly experienced unit with an empty gun.