How long would you wait as a defender?

[Palantir]

This thread expands the A/D tactical discussion going on in the, "I'm impressed thread."

How long in # of turns should a game be to allow the attacker to "properly" setup his attack & if required re-coordinate and execute a second attack?

One problem with playing an attack/defend CM game over RL is: how many turns does the defender want to sit around doing nothing while waiting for the attacking player to "properly" set up his attack? "Properly" in this case = scouting the enemies defenses, setting up firing lanes, coordinating pre-attack bombardments (even if just mortars), planning a diversionary attack... etc.

In RL 2-3 hours of this is not "long" in terms of doing it properly etc & not wasting soldiers lives needlessly.

But in CM 2-3 hours is 120-180 TURNS! What CM player on defense wants to sit thru @150 turns waiting for the attacker to properly set up his attack? Now, a designer should have all of that "sitting around time" done before hand based on the setups positions etc. but if the attacker still wants to do his own scouting etc how long (turns) should he get/take or the game be?

Should the game be @30 turns to "force" the action or @60 to give the attacker pleanty of time to do it "his" way?

[mangus2000]

Me and Niel were talking about his a while back. My idea was to play a kind of short pre-match scouting game with a small recon force. Ofcourse you would have to keep them alive to learn as much as possible about the defense.
Maybe a gentlemans agreement on not moving guns, Pillboxes and Trenches etc but the defender can move his armour and troops around as much as he likes.
The attacker can do a screen print or something and work out his route and Trps etc from this.
I feel this might go some way to overcoming the difficulties of A/D.

If anyone played the Sie Kommen scenarios they gave some brilliant briefings with maps and possible enemy positions for you to plan from. I still got slaughtered by the AI but it was great fun trying!

[Iron Mike USMC]

If you are playing a QB, with default starting lines, you better pad the time.

I have been experimenting with custom maps, where I can set up the start lines. Rarely do I have the lines too far apart. As the defender, I certainly do not want to sit around too long. As an attacker, though, there is a certain amount of anticipation inherent in probing the enemies defenses. You never know.

Actually, you can have a pretty good idea. Obviously with a QB you won't have too much time with the map to plan, as well as, not knowing the terrain before force selection.

I have been sending a copy of my maps with the first turn, so my opponent can see the terrain before force selection. This gives them the opportunity to study the terrain, and determine the best forces for their assault or defense. There is the drawback of reviewing the map, where each side can see the lines where the opposition starts. You don't get that with a QB, but you can guess.

After all, it is only a game. It would be cool if the game engine really could generate FOW. Perhaps if the map was 'clouded'. Unless you had good LOS, only a hint at the type of terrain would be shown. Possibly incorrectly. OK, time to wake up.

One approach to attacks, is to do them as campaigns. Start wth probes, and escalate each game until you get the full blown assault.

[Nemesis Lead]

The following diatribe assumes we are talking about CMAK QBs with medium or large maps. FYI, CMBB maps are smaller and shallower than CMAK maps. CMBB games would require about 2-3 turns less time on average.

I would love to play 48 turn (or more) variable ending games for A/Ds. However, most people balk at 38 turns and so I just leave it there.

At 30 turns, you attack spearheads MUST succeed in taking flags with their initial thrust. You also usually cannot take multiple flags with one thrust (unless they are really close together). If a spearhead flounders it is very hard to "pull back, reconcentrate, and launch another attack" even once.

At 38 turns, you do have enough time for maybe one iteration of "pull back, reconcentrate, and launch another attack." If you are really successful, you can even get behind your enemy, surround him, and/or take multiple flags with one spearhead. Most of the time, however, you are pressed for time at the end of the game unless you artifically speed things up by exposing your men more than you would IRL.

48 turns or more would be great. A force that wins a battle on one side of a map has the time to move across the map and help comrades who may have had a hard time on the other side of the map.

I don't think the defender would get bored. He will make contact maybe only slightly more slowly in a 38 point game than in a 30 point game. The difference is that the defender would face reckless attackers less often. Ammunition expediture also becomes really important. There is such a thing as a "low ammo ceasfire" in CM. My only ladder/club loss was due to one of these.

I would not make maps shallower to force contact more quickly. Better to make them deep so the defender can chose a forward defense, a mobile defense, etc. It is sometimes cool to put scouts out, see what the attacker is doing, and then manuever into place to stop him.

One additional great thing about long games--far less gamey flag rushing! The game resolves itself naturally!

[FM WarB]

If the defender has scouts out And a mobile reserve, his interest should be maintained by planning his killer counterattack, even in longer games.

[Robus]

"I would love to play 48 turn (or more) variable ending games for A/Ds. However, most people balk at 38 turns and so I just leave it there."

I wouldn't balk. I like the idea of a BIG map and a LONG scenario, with enough time for scouting and maneuver on both sides. The dull intervals would be a small price to pay for the opportunity to fight these battles as they were really fought. In the single player game, I prefer the operations because they give the battles a context and time for both sides to develop plans. My favorite operations in CMAK are Benghazi and Bir Hakeim.

[Robus]

Nemesis, you and I may be two of a kind. Hmm. I really wish it were possible to play operations games single-player against a patient, relentless, and above all human adversary. If we were allowed to do that, the one-off 25-turn single battle scenario games would become obsolete overnight.