General Question: Time Spent on Battles?

O

Old Velcro

Guest
Thanks to all the great vids and AARs the community puts out, I'm learning to slow it down, working on coordinating forces, checking lines of sight -- mostly by way of painful and costly losses to my pixelated units :p.

I can't seem to get away from micro-managing all the aspects of even medium-sized engagements. Do you guys ever "chuck it" and run and gun? Do you just learn how to process all this info more efficiently?

I'm looking at the list of battles and campaigns in CMFI alone, and wondering how the hell I'll ever get through this title, never mind the all the other goodness that awaits.

The real life timeline for Op Husky has easily overtaken me at this point! ;)
 
LOL I am new to all this too and my experience is if Battlefront went bankrupt today I would still have a lifetime of stuff to play. I'm a NOOB so take my advice with a grain of salt. I play the game very much intuitively. I move a tank here or move my men there, take a quick look from ground level just to see if it is a good spot. In other words I don't think too much about micro managing except for putting LOF arcs.

And Kudos to all who make those AAR's and videos. Best marketing for the game for sure.
 
Micromanaging has its perks but it's no replacement for solid tactics. I've seen other people like Krause on youtube do little to no micromanagement and still achieve good results, while I myself have sometimes micromanaged heavily and taken huge losses. Take a look at some of Bil Hardenbergers AARs and his Tactical Problems blog, here. It's not a magic solution to every situation but it's a solid philosophy to build on.
 
When attacking send scout team ahead so you won't suffer heavy losses on contact.
When defending keep to the reverse slope of a hill or the blind side of a building or the blind side of a patch of woods so the attacker won't bring down fire from heavy weapons on your position, be aware if these positions can be flanked. Place ATG's in 'key holed' positions.
Alway remember to keep short fire arcs on units that are scanning the battlefield, they will gather intel.
Thats all I know :D
 
Thanks for posting this Old Velco,

good to know I was the only one wondering about this
 
For myself the answer would be "way too much" ... I double check many things before pressing the "next turn" button !
I also keep pics in "8" aerial view of the battlefield at each turn of the game with sometimes comments to remember for instance the spotting of units.
 
Corsaire31 said:
For myself the answer would be "way too much" ... I double check many things before pressing the "next turn" button !
I also keep pics in "8" aerial view of the battlefield at each turn of the game with sometimes comments to remember for instance the spotting of units.
Click to expand...
That is a really good idea to keep high altitude screenshots of each turn. This could prove very usefull in games when there is a longer break. I tend to forget some critical infos in these cases.

Back to the thread question. There is no general answer to that for me. It is highly dependent on different circumstances. I tend to spend more time on smaller scale engagements. If I just got one company and a few tanks I spent more time on grunt level. The smaller the size the less forgiving the game is. A lost tank there may be already the loss of the game.

In bigger engagements Battallion plus I play quite large portions nearly on auto pilot and going down to grunt level is way more seldom. Most of the game is played from higher altitudes. It's not that important when the ordinary GI Joe or Hans Müller dies or is wounded. The bigger picture counts. But of course I also spent time down low in critical areas where close attention is important. To counter my hasty movements and not watching out for details too much I tend to get everything back in shape (in command, better positions etc.) every 10-15 minutes. Then a turn in the bigger games can last 2 hours +. Doing this every turn would drive me crazy.
 
You're right, and this is why I don't play big games, don't want to go nuts ! :)
 
I think this is a great question on many levels; for me, I spend time setting out my master plan for the battle. Identifying fire bases, avenues of attack or areas of defense. Trying to second guess what my opponent will do. Once I'm set and I have my plan I execute at a fairly broad level turn by turn. Considering the tactics Nathan mentions, reverse slope, kill zones etc. I do general LOS checks but don't rely on the command line being blue, often my troops see enemy and engage even though the command line advises no LOS. I don't micro manage, often taking only a few minutes a turn just to review against my master battle plan unless any major events have happened.

I then tend to cycle a more detailed appraisal every 10 minutes or so to see what I need to adjust at a more strategic level. Is my fire base still relevant, enemy avenues of attack etc. Halfway through I do a complete evaluation against my plan, rethinking against all my assumptions. I try to capture that in my AAR videos.

For me personnaly the question is, do I trust my plan? If I'm micro managing I found I was making orders which were actually contrary to my master battle plan. I sometimes ended up with troops far away from where I needed them to be 10 turns on because I'd micro managed them elsewhere.

I'm really interested in how others ensure the individual turns stay in-line with their master plan?
 
If your plan lasts until halfway through, you are a lucky man ! Plans are generally the first casualties in the battle... :)
Although I try on setup to guess what my opponent could do by looking at the map from his side, I found out that he generally does something totally different from what I would have done...
 
My plan usually starts with a recon pull, i.e. send small recon forces down several possible avenues of approach to get an idea of enemy emplacements. Keep most of your force in reserve and when you find the least defended position launch an attack there. I usually also feign an attack at another position- I put units in cover and trade shots, in the hopes that the defender will be too worried about it to reposition his units in front of my real attack, allowing me to flank around them.

The only time I set a plan in stone from the beginning (the command push) is when I know it will be suicide to go anywhere but a single path.



*SPOILERS*
A great example is the first mission of The Scottish Corridor. Reviewing the map you can see the entire left and center approach is a plowed field. You are told in the briefing that a MG bunker is at the crossroads overlooking this field, and there is a hedgerow running perpendicular to the entire thing, as well as buildings behind it. Everything about it just screams KILL ZONE. If I tried to push across it my troops would slog slowly through the mud, tiring quickly, and my tanks would become bogged.

However, on the far right flank there is a narrow wheat field leading up to a hedgerow. Obviously there would be defenders there, but I would be safe from my left because of the orchard and small hedges. The wheat field itself provides concealment, and I could use my tanks effectively from the safety of the road. It should be noted I still put eyes on no man's land, just in case.
*END SPOILERS*



The only real micromanagement I had to do was bounding overwatch. This is time consuming to plot out, but it can mean the difference between a frontal assault being stopped and chopped to bits and making it with light casualties. Someone explained why this was on BF's forums, on the Road to Monteburg thread. The term he used was "fire ascendancy". Basically, the closer you get to the enemy, the more fire you can accurately bring to bear, and as this happens fire superiority shifts from the defender to the attacker. Bounding overwatch is necessary to achieve this especially if you have no hard cover, but even if you do. By only exposing your teams for a few seconds at a time, the defender is essentially playing duckhunt, and suppression and morale penalties are spread amongst your entire force. So no one gets their feelings hurt! :p The commander only picks me to get shot at :(

So basically when I look at a map I think recon pull or command push? When moving my forces I ask, am I completely concealed or not? If I am I don't micro at all, besides plotting a series of waypoints that keep my men in cover. If not, I recon to find out how well defended the unconcealed route is, then create concealment with smoke and/or suppress with overwatch. If I walk into a kill zone I do my best to find cover, suppress the enemy, and assault them. If I can't suppress them I fall back and find another way to go. Like Sun Tzu said, be like water. And stuff. Or don't.

Hope this is relevant :D
 
Strachwitz said:
That is a really good idea to keep high altitude screenshots of each turn. This could prove very usefull in games when there is a longer break. I tend to forget some critical infos in these cases
Click to expand...

Great point, Strachwitz. And great idea, Corsaire!

DoubleD said:
I then tend to cycle a more detailed appraisal every 10 minutes or so to see what I need to adjust at a more strategic level. Is my fire base still relevant, enemy avenues of attack etc. Halfway through I do a complete evaluation against my plan, rethinking against all my assumptions. I try to capture that in my AAR videos.
Click to expand...

I just realized that I recently found your channel and subscribed to you. I really appreciate that aspect (evaluation) of your AARs, especially my being a newer player. Keep up the great work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom