DAR: Alam Halfa Ridge

[Brummbar]

Andy make's some good point's but, that doesn't take away anything from your excllent reporting!

Ahistorical can be alot of fun too!

Keep 'em comin RERomine!

[RERomine]

Originally Posted by Brummbar

Andy make's some good point's but, that doesn't take away anything from your excllent reporting!

Ahistorical can be alot of fun too!

Keep 'em comin RERomine!

It does get a little difficult keeping things too historical, unless I want to turn the game into a research project. I know what the Germans had, but not when, where or how many they had.

Technically speaking, all war games are designed with an ahistorical angle to them. The losing side of a battle has a chance to win, different equipment is present than in reality, numerical odds are different, etc. During WWII, it was figured it took five Sherman tanks to destroy one Tiger, but in the game you can't get three Shermans, must less five for the price of a Tiger.

I figure the AI tends to go ahistorical in generated campaigns most of the time, anyhow. Otherwise, it wouldn't be using 34 artillery batteries, including twelve 7.2in, to support an assault against my reinforced battalion. Dealing with 48 7.2in howitzers wasn't fun, but it wasn't unexpected. For the first time in a defend, I bought bunkers and hid all my infantry in them until they were actually needed in the fight.

Part of the ahistorical aspect is my fault. My preferences are for "AI Tank Heavy". Since I have mine set that way, I have to go ahistorical to deal with the numbers of tanks the AI throws at me. That's all fine. The objective is to have fun and not recreate history, right?

[gila]

Whether it was historical makes no difference.
You have a good concept on this game that makes it fun to read
I think i learned something from your strategy.
I enjoyed reading your play-by-play report.
Feel free to share more

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by RERomine

It does get a little difficult keeping things too historical, unless I want to turn the game into a research project. I know what the Germans had, but not when, where or how many they had.

Technically speaking, all war games are designed with an ahistorical angle to them. The losing side of a battle has a chance to win, different equipment is present than in reality, numerical odds are different, etc. During WWII, it was figured it took five Sherman tanks to destroy one Tiger, but in the game you can't get three Shermans, must less five for the price of a Tiger.

I figure the AI tends to go ahistorical in generated campaigns most of the time, anyhow. Otherwise, it wouldn't be using 34 artillery batteries, including twelve 7.2in, to support an assault against my reinforced battalion. Dealing with 48 7.2in howitzers wasn't fun, but it wasn't unexpected. For the first time in a defend, I bought bunkers and hid all my infantry in them until they were actually needed in the fight.

Part of the ahistorical aspect is my fault. My preferences are for "AI Tank Heavy". Since I have mine set that way, I have to go ahistorical to deal with the numbers of tanks the AI throws at me. That's all fine. The objective is to have fun and not recreate history, right?

48 7.2 inch are but 6 batteries. The British use 8 gun batteries for mediums and field arty. Some gamers seem to get confused with the 2 by 3 or 4 gun platoons/troops which make up a battery, especially those whose armies only use little 4 gun batteries. So if you PBEM a UK player and agree a max of 2 batteries - expect 16 tubes from your opponent to your 8 tubes, that is historical and not cheating on his part.

Artillery is unlimited in the assault, which is historical since the attacker has all the time he needs to bring up equipment, like at the Somme say.

What we don't have in SP is the British and Commonwealth multiple battery fires onto impromptu targets (this is available in the old Wargames Research Group WW2 tabletop rules with reinforcing batteries, and "fire blows"). So no ability to call for an "Uncle target" unless you have bought all the divisional artillery, which would be rather expensive. It would need some way to create a "Fire blow" unit containing all the divisions/Corps/Army guns but only 5 rounds gunfire (hence much cheaper than buying all the div's guns with all the ammo assigned to your front for the entire battle which is the SP way, as all arty is "under command") to drop into a 250 by 250 metre square all in one turn.

http://members.tripod.com/~nigelef/m...tery%20Targets

From 1943 onwards, this really is the preferred .uk anti-Tiger response though, rather than trying to duel them with Shermans.
"Uncle Target, Uncle Target, Uncle target. Tigers at grid ABC123"... And if anyone still was present after that, then "Hello One this is Two, repeat .. "

NB although the Americans could produce concentrations like the British, it was not a routine tasking for impromptu targets. The BCE system pulled all guns off their current tasking to shoot the concentration which was something the US were reluctant to do. Also BCE arty observes were implicitly authorised to order such fires, so no joining a request queue at the "Fire Direction Centre" to try to wheedle some idle batteries as in the USA system, the hammer was dropped on the FOOs say-so with every tube in range from the Regiment (bn)(Mike target), Division (Uncle), Corps (Victor), Army (William) or Army Group (Yoke).

But the AI pick lists do reflect the arty of the participants, so expect the BCE, USA and USSR AI pick lists to be strong in that arm.

Cheers
Andy

[RERomine]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

48 7.2 inch are but 6 batteries. The British use 8 gun batteries for mediums and field arty. Some gamers seem to get confused with the 2 by 3 or 4 gun platoons/troops which make up a battery, especially those whose armies only use little 4 gun batteries. So if you PBEM a UK player and agree a max of 2 batteries - expect 16 tubes from your opponent to your 8 tubes, that is historical and not cheating on his part.

Artillery is unlimited in the assault, which is historical since the attacker has all the time he needs to bring up equipment, like at the Somme say.

One learns something new every day, but in one of these thread somewhere, you mentioned you use to be FA in the Canadian Army. I figure their organization is somewhat similar to what British used. For clarity sake, it was 136 tubes of artillery which seems to be a lot to throw at one battalion, but on the receiving end, one tube is going to seem like a lot. I like "Fast Artillery Off", so when the AI started to fire, I could go eat dinner. Anyhow, my men were happy to be hunkered down in their bunkers.

The way we get around the PBEM problem is to specify a percent limit of total allocated points. Leaves little room for misunderstandings.

What we don't have in SP is the British and Commonwealth multiple battery fires onto impromptu targets (this is available in the old Wargames Research Group WW2 tabletop rules with reinforcing batteries, and "fire blows"). So no ability to call for an "Uncle target" unless you have bought all the divisional artillery, which would be rather expensive. It would need some way to create a "Fire blow" unit containing all the divisions/Corps/Army guns but only 5 rounds gunfire (hence much cheaper than buying all the div's guns with all the ammo assigned to your front for the entire battle which is the SP way, as all arty is "under command") to drop into a 250 by 250 metre square all in one turn.

The AI and players generally sling artillery everywhere, on targets of opportunity or what have you. All of this with one FOO to boot. It was something discussed on one of the ladders as being unrealistic and artillery guidelines were created for P2P play.

From 1943 onwards, this really is the preferred .uk anti-Tiger response though, rather than trying to duel them with Shermans.
"Uncle Target, Uncle Target, Uncle target. Tigers at grid ABC123"... And if anyone still was present after that, then "Hello One this is Two, repeat .. "

It makes more sense to do it that way, because I wouldn't have wanted to be in the first four Shermans of the five Sherman approach. One TV show actually had a computer graphics recreation of this tactic. Basically, the first four tanks sacrificed themselves to allow the fifth to get in position for a killing shot. I wonder who thought that one up?

NB although the Americans could produce concentrations like the British, it was not a routine tasking for impromptu targets. The BCE system pulled all guns off their current tasking to shoot the concentration which was something the US were reluctant to do. Also BCE arty observes were implicitly authorised to order such fires, so no joining a request queue at the "Fire Direction Centre" to try to wheedle some idle batteries as in the USA system, the hammer was dropped on the FOOs say-so with every tube in range from the Regiment (bn)(Mike target), Division (Uncle), Corps (Victor), Army (William) or Army Group (Yoke).

But the AI pick lists do reflect the arty of the participants, so expect the BCE, USA and USSR AI pick lists to be strong in that arm.

Cheers
Andy

Trust me, I expect it. As a player, you adopt certain "procedures" when playing against the AI. One of those is not to stay put where you can be seen for any length of time. When I stop and engage with one of my units, a mental timer starts. By the time it gets to the third turn, I'm starting to think about relocation. The trick is to remember where you've already been. It wouldn't make any sense to move one unit where another just left. All you get there is artillery hitting a target it wasn't actually after, but hitting one none the less. In the defense, this really isn't much of an option. I'm going with fire trenches and bunkers now. Basically, since I can't avoid the incoming mail, I try to survive it.

[Mobhack]

you mentioned you use to be FA in the Canadian Army

Nope - I did a cadets course at the School of Artillery, Larkhill with the School CCF when about 16 (1973?). And then a weekend at Otterburn with the Edinburgh University OTC battery a year or so later while stil ACF. Training units were still pushing 25pdrs about back then.

Then instead of OTC at Uni, I joined the local Black Watch TA unit (it paid more ), and did some time on the Mortar platoon. But mainly in the rifle platoons.

Cheers
Andy

[RERomine]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

Then instead of OTC at Uni, I joined the local Black Watch TA unit (it paid more ), and did some time on the Mortar platoon. But mainly in the rifle platoons.

Cheers
Andy

Ugh!! Too much walking around with too much equipment. That's why I went armor. Our gear went into the tank bussel rack and got a seat with view