Reverse movement command needed; German armor sections?

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

Prince is just being argumentative. Don't worry about it. Trolls have a hard time staying on topic. I suppose his point is that defending is easier than attacking. Wow. He is smart. Except this can also be a defensive manuver.

But my point WAS that reverse speed (which is quite slow and Mobius is correct) can be increased while reversing down a slope. That's physics and not worth arguing about.

And it IS on topic.

Above, a case in point, before he can edit it again.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Marc von Martial]

Enough of this, Erik has asked to stay civil 2 times allready.

We are simply goind to lock this thread if you guys can not stay civil, all of you.

[Yoozername]

I do not need to edit it.  Open a new thread about whatever you need to discuss Prince.  You are off-topic.

[Trigger Happy]

interesting bits here about soviet tactics :

In defense and covering a retreat, the T-34 with the turret at six o'clock is often dug in on a commanding height along a road or on the edge of woods or villages. Then after surprisingly opening fire from ambush, the T-34 can be driven out of the concealed position still under cover.

Should we do that instead of implementing a reverse command... [;)]

I'm gonna try to do that in my next game...

[Prince of Eckmühl]

If I have to pull a platoon back while playing, either to reposition the unit or because it's simply too hot where they are currently located, I use the WITHDRAW command.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Yoozername]

The rear and sides of a T34 give better protection than most AFV's similar areas. 

[Yoozername]

Interesting shoot and scoot example. Note the ricocheting AP round also.

http://www.deutschesoldaten.com/personal/knolle.htm

(4) All that gunfire created a haze. When it got thick enough, I crawled back towards the houses behind me and dug my second foxhole in a woodshed. I could now look out without being seen, and I had protection against direct hits from mortar fire. The shooting got heavier again when I noticed two Sherman tanks, (6) and (7), advancing and rapidly firing. My wood shed was turning into a sieve. Suddenly, a German tank commander tapped me on the shoulder and asked where the enemy tanks where. I shouted at him to get down, but he didn't budge. He just stood there and repeated his request. Knowing that we wouldn't survive the next 5 seconds up there, I did climb out of my foxhole and in the smoke and haze pointed the Shermans out to him. He immediately ran off and I, even faster, dropped back into my hole.

(5) A few minutes later, a big German Tiger tank roared up next to me, stopped and instantly fired a round at Sherman tank (6). However, the shell, grazing the ground, ricochet off with a spine chilling screech. Yet, it must have also glanced off the Sherman tank, because I now saw its crew emerge from the conning tower and flee. I fumbled for my dirt-covered rifle, but was too slow to get off a shot. The German tank now advanced maybe 25 m, a second round flashed across and the Sherman tank blew up. The crew may nevertheless have gotten killed nearby. Obviously aware of the danger, the other Sherman tank was by now in full retreat. But our tank commander also didn't wait around to see who might now shoot at him. He too got into reverse and barreled back down the incline, heaven help who was in his way. The tank action apparently defeated the Scottish Cmd Black Watch (Essex Scottish, 5th Brigade) attack on the 8th and 9th. (6) and (7) shows Sherman tank positions in the attack as described above. - (8) We were told not to direct fire at the house of Dutch doctor Van de Kar, J.P.M., because Canadian and German wounded in addition to civilians were there in the doctor's care.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

Interesting shoot and scoot example. Note the ricocheting AP round also.

http://www.deutschesoldaten.com/personal/knolle.htm

(4) All that gunfire created a haze. When it got thick enough, I crawled back towards the houses behind me and dug my second foxhole in a woodshed. I could now look out without being seen, and I had protection against direct hits from mortar fire. The shooting got heavier again when I noticed two Sherman tanks, (6) and (7), advancing and rapidly firing. My wood shed was turning into a sieve. Suddenly, a German tank commander tapped me on the shoulder and asked where the enemy tanks where. I shouted at him to get down, but he didn't budge. He just stood there and repeated his request. Knowing that we wouldn't survive the next 5 seconds up there, I did climb out of my foxhole and in the smoke and haze pointed the Shermans out to him. He immediately ran off and I, even faster, dropped back into my hole.

(5) A few minutes later, a big German Tiger tank roared up next to me, stopped and instantly fired a round at Sherman tank (6). However, the shell, grazing the ground, ricochet off with a spine chilling screech. Yet, it must have also glanced off the Sherman tank, because I now saw its crew emerge from the conning tower and flee. I fumbled for my dirt-covered rifle, but was too slow to get off a shot. The German tank now advanced maybe 25 m, a second round flashed across and the Sherman tank blew up. The crew may nevertheless have gotten killed nearby. Obviously aware of the danger, the other Sherman tank was by now in full retreat. But our tank commander also didn't wait around to see who might now shoot at him. He too got into reverse and barreled back down the incline, heaven help who was in his way. The tank action apparently defeated the Scottish Cmd Black Watch (Essex Scottish, 5th Brigade) attack on the 8th and 9th. (6) and (7) shows Sherman tank positions in the attack as described above. - (8) We were told not to direct fire at the house of Dutch doctor Van de Kar, J.P.M., because Canadian and German wounded in addition to civilians were there in the doctor's care.

The poster continues to contradict himself.

On page 1 of this thread he cites the following as an example of that which he insists is analogous to the episode described above:

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

The classic offensive use of reverse is to shoot and scoot. A short move forward followed by a quick reverse upon firing (driver does this automatically).

On page 3 of this thread he elaborates as follows as to his vision of this "classic" WW2 maneuver:

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

But firing in the orders phase, even after a short move, and then withdrawing in the reaction phase (a form of shoot and scoot mind you) IS a WWII occurance.

And now let me assert something. There is simply no way that the actions associated with the Tiger's advance, engagment of the enemy, and subsequent (exigent) withdrawl can be shoe-horned into the 40 second turns used in PcZ. I'd also assert that NOTHING that he's posted in the way of "documentation" suggests that WW2 AFV were advancing for 20 seconds into LOS of an enemy, firing two rounds, and then withdrawing to safety in the remaining time. There'd be no time left on the clock. In the context of the game, which is after all the APPROPRIATE topic, his concept is at once both ABSURD and IRRELEVANT. That USERNAME continues to advance these specious arguments gives pause to question his motives for posting them HERE in the first place.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Trigger Happy]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

If I have to pull a platoon back while playing, either to reposition the unit or because it's simply too hot where they are currently located, I use the WITHDRAW command.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

Well, my exemple actually showed that they didn't reverse out of a dug in position, but even prefered to dug in the tanks with their backs to the enemy so that they could get out faster if at all.

[Yoozername]

I won't address Price's trollery (He should note his assertions are besad upon faulty assumptions). I do want to point out that very few people here are even posting WWII examples. And I will reiterate what I have said:

As far as shoot n scoot within a phase, that may be a bit much and very limited to close combat in towns, etc. Also limited to experienced crews.

As far as allowing a vehicle to use engage-move and then reverse in the next phase. I am all for it.

I also think that a German platoon using bound should be able to reverse in the subsequant phase.

Buttoned vehicles may reverse shorter distances and perhaps slower.

It should certainly be impacted by experience, afv design (visibility/5 man vs 4 man crew, etc), panic level and some other things.

Now that actual examples of shoot and scoot behaviour has been posted, it is not a valid argument that they will not fit into the games parameters. That is square peg and round hole thinking.

The game should examine its parameters after examining reality. Not the other way around.

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl
And now let me assert something. There is simply no way that the actions associated with the Tiger's advance, engagment of the enemy, and subsequent (exigent) withdrawl can be shoe-horned into the 40 second turns used in PcZ. I'd also assert that NOTHING that he's posted in the way of "documentation" suggests that WW2 AFV were advancing for 20 seconds into LOS of an enemy, firing two rounds, and then withdrawing to safety in the remaining time. There'd be no time left on the clock. In the context of the game, which is after all the APPROPRIATE topic, his concept is at once both ABSURD and IRRELEVANT. That USERNAME continues to advance these specious arguments gives pause to question his motives for posting them HERE in the first place.

Poe, I believe I asked for some documentation on a RTS type 'shoot n scoot' being done. The Tiger example could be recreated by using two turns. The first to creep into position and shoot one tank, and the second to withdraw. Granted that its hard to say that the Tiger commander in that example decided before hand on moving 25m forward, shooting and reversing as fast as he could. Or sized up the situation after the combat and then decided to back away.

One thing is that it does relate to my turret down example previously stated. Instead of first spotting the enemy tanks from a turret down hide position the Tiger commander reconnoitered on foot and left his tank hidden. This is not doable in a game at this scale.
But it does show that if an unseen tank knows exactly were an enemy tank is, and the enemy doesn't know he is there, he has a chance to shoot first even though he is not stationary. Range or haze might give him a chance. (I hope the game is delaying a little for sighting to take place and not doing it instanteously like RTS.)

[Yoozername]

By the way, the faultiness of some argumentation here is comical.

Exactly WHY does the vehcile have to 'get back' in 40 seconds? Would it not be acceptable that it at least start a rearward movement of sorts after firing? Games do not drive reality.

So a vehicle could make a short rush forward, halt, aim/fire, and then START to reverse (be in motion)? In 40 seconds (if that's the magic time-clump) it CAN be done. And again, it could also start very soon in the next time-clump. Do we see reality creeping into this thread?

As a person that has worked as a motion control engineer, I am certainly snickering. No alterior motive here. I am just having a good laugh at someone's expense. Especially since that person accused me of using 'specious' arguments. Look up the word.

If anything, something like firing on the move is gamier. It was also done in reality but there is specific SOP against it (at least for the Germans trying to use precsion fire). The Soviets seemed to enjoy using it though.

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Yoozername
By the way, the faultiness of some argumentation here is comical.

Exactly WHY does the vehcile have to 'get back' in 40 seconds? Would it not be acceptable that it at least start a rearward movement of sorts after firing? Games do not drive reality.

Why does it have to be in the same turn?
You seem to be saying that unless all this can happen in one turn then its not realistic.
There are no 'turns' in reality.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

Well, this comes as quite a shock:

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

As a person that has worked as a motion control engineer, I am certainly snickering.

We were thinking that the MEMBER was an AFV crewman:

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

But I have also reversed in tracked vehicles. Its called a drill. Just like everything else.

Or did he simply read about it:

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

Well I read the book in my backyard. The grass was green and mown recently. I usually read the words from left to right.

Or is this Mr. Tittles speaking, as in this thread in which USERNAME is outed and banned, yet again, from the BFC forums:

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ulti ... 0;t=003145

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Mobius

One thing is that it does relate to my turret down example previously stated. Instead of first spotting the enemy tanks from a turret down hide position the Tiger commander reconnoitered on foot and left his tank hidden. This is not doable in a game at this scale.
But it does show that if an unseen tank knows exactly were an enemy tank is, and the enemy doesn't know he is there, he has a chance to shoot first even though he is not stationary. Range or haze might give him a chance. (I hope the game is delaying a little for sighting to take place and not doing it instanteously like RTS.)

Hi Mobius,

I completely understand what you are getting at. My point is that incorporating a mechanism into the game that'd allow all of what's been presented as S.O.P to be executed in a single order isn't realistic or desireable. It's also worth noting that the game already includes a panic reverse upon the failure of a morale check by AFV.

As I've stated before, I endorse the notion of a REVERSE menu-subitem to either the ENGAGE or DEFEND menus. That'd do it. The game doesn't need a "Hey, kick it in the ass, throw a wild-piece of lead at some shermans, kick it in the ass again, stop on a dime, fire again, and, then creep rearward" item on any of the menus.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Yoozername]

ORIGINAL: Mobius

ORIGINAL: Yoozername
By the way, the faultiness of some argumentation here is comical.

Exactly WHY does the vehcile have to 'get back' in 40 seconds? Would it not be acceptable that it at least start a rearward movement of sorts after firing? Games do not drive reality.

Why does it have to be in the same turn?
You seem to be saying that unless all this can happen in one turn then its not realistic.
There are no 'turns' in reality.

No you saying what I am saying. Prince is saying that its a big argument point that it CAN'T happen in the same 'turn' (actually phase).

This is too funny.

Yeah Prince. More specious arguments from you. And many people have served in the military, worked for military contarctors, gotten engineering degrees afterwards, worked in many engineering disciplines and are very well read also.

And please refrain from using the 'Royal -We'. Its so typical of someone that is losing an argument.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

ORIGINAL: Mobius

ORIGINAL: Yoozername
By the way, the faultiness of some argumentation here is comical.

Exactly WHY does the vehcile have to 'get back' in 40 seconds? Would it not be acceptable that it at least start a rearward movement of sorts after firing? Games do not drive reality.

Why does it have to be in the same turn?
You seem to be saying that unless all this can happen in one turn then its not realistic.
There are no 'turns' in reality.

No you saying what I am saying. Prince is saying that its a big argument point that it CAN'T happen in the same 'turn' (actually phase).

This is too funny.

Yeah Prince. More specious arguments from you. And many people have served in the military, worked for military contarctors, gotten engineering degrees afterwards, worked in many engineering disciplines and are very well read also.

And please refrain from using the 'Royal -We'. Its so typical of someone that is losing an argument.

Click!

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Yoozername]

Besides a troll and a 'camera-man'; do you have any qualifications to speak on any technical subject? 

If not, please feel free to share any data or combat reports that back up your 'feelings'. Otherwise, your 'opinion' is noted and others will use data and technical expertise to discuss this further.

[Yoozername]

Just so everyone might be on the same page here....
 
Each TURN is 80 seconds.  Each TURN consists of two phases.  Each PHASE is 40 seconds.  One gives orders during the ORDERs phase.  Those 'Orders' must model reality throughout the 80 second turn (as the game is now).
 
Its evident that nearly everyone wants 'reaction' phase options of reversing.  Hence the name 'reaction'.  This should have come out in playtesting the game in my opinion.
 
 

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Yoozername
No you saying what I am saying. Prince is saying that its a big argument point that it CAN'T happen in the same 'turn' (actually phase).
This is too funny.

Yeah Prince. More specious arguments from you. And many people have served in the military, worked for military contarctors, gotten engineering degrees afterwards, worked in many engineering disciplines and are very well read also.
And please refrain from using the 'Royal -We'. Its so typical of someone that is losing an argument.

From what I understand both of you are saying almost the same thing. You are saying that these things can happen in a short time. Within 40 seconds. Poe is just saying that indeed they can but they don't necessarily have to happen in the same turn or phase.
One turn can end and another begin. You don't need to demark the turn boundaries around the entire complex action.
Thus there doesn't need to be added another type of order that does all the things that can be handled with a single order in one turn and another order in the next turn. Or an order in the orders phase and a reaction command in the reaction phase.