Question about operations in the game

[mr_clark]

I had one thing I thought about the past days.
How is it decided what forces actually take part in a battle?

Sounds a little stupid on the first hand but let me explain what I mean.

If I decide to let my tank battallion advance as frontcover/reconscreen for my regiment, will I be able to decide wether I might only want my tanks engage in battle, in a kind of meeting engagement/reconnaissance battle?
That would make for many interesting possibilities and more depth in the operational level, plus it would also support reallifef WP doctrine.
If units from both sidres advance in to a hex, and both comanders had specified a forward recon element then one might decide on the overalltactical situation, or by random event, which force 'spots' the other first and then the commander of that force can decide whether he wishes to prepare an ambush with the recon element/main force, advance further for the possibility of gathering more info on the enemy's OOB in that sector, engage in a battle of the recon elements or retreat to the main force without any effects. The winner of that recon battle then might be allowed to take better positions in the actual tactical battle of the main elements or something like that.

I hope I made myself clear, and after all it was just an idea I thought worth to be discussed :)

[Vesku]

You can try to get that effect with a well placed order, telling what you want to do when contact is established.

Vesku

[Pannonicus]

You can try to get that effect with a well placed order, telling what you want to do when contact is established.

Vesku

Moreover, if you have a large enough map, you can move your forces accordingly - if you dont want the bulk to be engaged, you can simply retreat off the map.

BTW, would it be possible to eliminate the end results displayed? There your opponent can see everything you had on the map, even if he did not spot them during the battle. For intel purposes, this means a lot!

[Double Deuce]

If I decide to let my tank battallion advance as frontcover/reconscreen for my regiment, will I be able to decide wether I might only want my tanks engage in battle, in a kind of meeting engagement/reconnaissance battle?
That would make for many interesting possibilities and more depth in the operational level, plus it would also support reallifef WP doctrine.
If units from both sidres advance in to a hex, and both comanders had specified a forward recon element then one might decide on the overalltactical situation, or by random event, which force 'spots' the other first and then the commander of that force can decide whether he wishes to prepare an ambush with the recon element/main force, advance further for the possibility of gathering more info on the enemy's OOB in that sector, engage in a battle of the recon elements or retreat to the main force without any effects. The winner of that recon battle then might be allowed to take better positions in the actual tactical battle of the main elements or something like that.This would require additional battles in the turn. What woud probably be most realistic is the Map Area be expanded to include surrounding hexes allowing for actual maneuver and thus allowing the recon battle to develop within the turn/overall battle. If you want to withdraw you'll need to move your units off the map.

NOTE: Battles are not restricted to a single hex and what units are moving into or stationed in it. The restriction to a hex/zone was how it was done in the Island Civil War but not in Red Snow. This format, the multiple map areas is closer to what was done in Red Snow.

[desh44]

I saw DD posted the latest roster yesterday....On the roster there are 6 people listed under soviet and 2 under general WP. do we need to start working out where our command assignments are or is this to early for that.

Also, for my fellow commanders ,should we try to do some email battles together just to see how each persons command style is.

Tom D :)

[mr_clark]

To all, especially DD, thanks for the clarifications.

You are right, on a map of that size one can include it all into the actual battle.
It might give my agressive reconaissance tactics an even better use by just striking and then retreating if the enemy is too strong... :devil:

I am interested in what you guys think about that kind of operation. I would like to let my recon batallion advance in front of the main body, and have it supported by my T-72 company and maybe even some ATGM or infantry.
Then I would use the recon elements to find targets and then move in with the support elements to kill enemies for one or two turns before disengaging the whole force.
If the unit would be able to get artillery or air support it would be an even better opportunity to kill many enemies with few losses.
I thought that up because we agreed that the BMP-1s should maiunly be used for defense and such 'stinging' by a strong recon force might lure NATO in a trap or make them believe we would strike at this sector with more forces later, letting them reinforce unnneccessarily...

[Vesku]

I was planning to use that tactic myself, having mostly BMPs to fight with. I have limited scouting power so I would appreciate your bait to lure them to the trap.

Vesku

[Pannonicus]

As for my forces, they are a mix. If I receive one more BMP-1 battalion (insted of the air assault company) then it will be a defensive force, just weaker a little bit than a soviet equivalent. I think defense missions would suit us, using the BMPs as the base of defence, while counterattacking with tanks where needed.

I would certainly take on canadians, my BMPs would be like a fox in the hen house vs. their M113s. :D

[mr_clark]

Right, so agressive reconaissance becomes even more imporant as we are limited in what to use our units for.
Against the Canadians the all BMPs are strong, as long as we have enough artillery to suppress the canadian infantry hordes.

[Pannonicus]

I also have good 120mm mortars, and some D-30 towed howitzers. They will be good against infantry, even without getting stuff from the reserve. But if BMP kill M113s on long range, I dont even need artillery, machinegun will keep them at bay.

[mr_clark]

Hmm, yes you might be right, what me worries a little bit is that I only have 6 SP guns so support from our 'Arty division' would be good in the offense...

[Artur]

This approach may prove effective in many situations. Faking we are more than getting out quick is very good. So is delaying a superior force without suffering heavy losses. This tactic can help both.

Of course we have to be careful if there are enemy helos near by!!! Also SPATGMs in overwatch can be a pain as well.

Situation will tell which tactic to use...

Artur.

[Pannonicus]

Against helos, our radar-equipped Silkas will work well, they see throgh anything. I wish aircraft were equipped with IR missiles, so they could hunt helicopters!

[mr_clark]

If the patch finally comes out and they can look through smoke :P ;)

[Double Deuce]

Against helos, our radar-equipped Silkas will work well, they see throgh anything. I wish aircraft were equipped with IR missiles, so they could hunt helicopters!I could always add "substitue" equipment to the Aircraft loadout packages. Perhaps and Air-to-Air package, just in case?

[Artur]

I could always add "substitue" equipment to the Aircraft loadout packages. Perhaps and Air-to-Air package, just in case?

YES.

This way we can protect our ground units from the NATO helos.

Artur.

[Pannonicus]

I could always add "substitue" equipment to the Aircraft loadout packages. Perhaps and Air-to-Air package, just in case?

This would be a good idea. How would it be implemented in practical terms? "Dogfight" is possible between airplanes?

[Double Deuce]

This would be a good idea. How would it be implemented in practical terms? "Dogfight" is possible between airplanes?Dogfights between planes are not possible because both forces aircraft are never on the SP Map at the same time. However, helicopters stay on the map from turn to turn like any other unit. When fixed wing aircraft make their normal "target run", if they have air to air weapons they will fire on any "seen" helicopter's if they ID them in time. This is just like when they go out of their way to target AA weapon systems, even if you directed them against another ground target. In addition, helicopters armed with air to air weapons will target (opportunity fire) incoming enemy fixed wing aircraft during their attack runs if they ID them in time. These air to air armed helicopters can also be used to fire at other helicopters. I haven't tried it with the patch yet (since its not yet out) so I'm not sure if anything has changed that would prevent it from working.

[Pannonicus]

This sounds reasonable. What I was thinking of was something like SAM firing at transiting aircrafts. You said there would be a formula. I thought that maybe we do the same for aircraft - then someone will have air superiorty in that zone.