Snipers shouldn't be able to take Victory hexes!

Fredde · Post by **Fredde** » Fri Sep 15, 2000 7:45 pm

I think letting small units take victory hexes add to the psychology of the game too.
Owww.. the victory hex i was stupid enough to leave unguarded just changed color, the enemy is there! But how many? And how many should i send to deal with it. Gives you some interesting decisions to take and even more so with limited intel.

Historically, very small forces have triggered big reactions just by showing up in the right time on the right places.

Graf Speer · Post by **Graf Speer** » Fri Sep 15, 2000 8:09 pm

To all,

Having played Wild Bill's treacherous small unit Ramelle scenario, I think here is a possibly prime example of how preventing a sniper unit from capturing and/or holding onto a victory hex may be in error.

IOW's, in really small custom scenarios where even a single man can possibly turn the tide of war, the lone sniper (like "Jackson" in the Ramelle scen.) should still be accorded all the importance and weight of a "platoon" sized squad, yes?

Or another way to see a problem with limiting snipers and "crews" is where a platoon might conceivably be reduced to a "last man standing" unit and yet he would be able to capture such a hex whereas a surviving sniper would not? (not that I have witnessed nor can I recall a platoon surviving with only one man left in its original unit).

But bottom line, anything that can move (other than airplanes) should be able to capture 'victory' hexes . . . whether they can hold onto them is likely another story.

Albert

Wild Bill · Post by **Wild Bill** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 12:31 am

This is a great discussion, guys. I am really enjoying the input and nobody is pissed. That is great

Non-life threatening discussion is my cup of tea. You guys are showing maturity and respect while strongly arguing for your point of view.

Now THAT is how you debate, instead of that old "well if you hadn't crawled out from under a rock" type of argument.

Thanks fellas, for showing dignity in this discussion.

Yes Bonzo, you are right! Old sneaky me

. Ah, but what is life without surprises

?

------------------
In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Coordinator, Scenario Design
Matrix Games

Tom Proudfoot · Post by **Tom Proudfoot** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 12:51 am

I think the main issue with snipers is that they are very difficult to spot and have large movement allowances compared to other infantry. Also, since I think they are all recon units, you can pretty much move them wherever you want, even with C&C on. So it is pretty easy to grab a cheap win against a human player, especially if you buy a bunch of snipers with that strategy in mind.

Tom

3rd Recon · Post by **3rd Recon** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 2:07 am

Hot topic

As a former marine sniper(I graduated in 1988 from Marine Corps Sniper school in Camp Pendleton) I would have to agree with the posts saying we need to limit all units then. can a truck driver with a 45. hold a victory hex, if a sniper cant? I like it the way it is. When I went out it was with a two to four man team and like in an above post, there are no victory hexes in real life..its just for the game. But when I was told to hold a cross road or building, we did and quite well I might add. In a way, it was my victory hex or objective. It should be the players job to guard his rear. No Bn. Commander wouold advance his forces without protection.
In the game, I've been carried away only to seea hex I took turns before change. Like stated above I had to make a decision as to what to send over to retake it. I sent a squad to find a stugIII and lost the squad. Never made that mistake again. Learn to protect your rear.

What about Wild Bills excelent scenario(the name escapes me) with the commandos. the buildings represent targets that are guarded or destroyed. In theory 1 man(resistance, sas, RM commando, oss, ect) could and did in the second world war take out such targets. So if you eliminate the ability of snipers to take an objective you take away from the game. There are many accounts of snipers holding ground in lots of conflicts.(not a victory hex, but just as important to the man holding it.)
Now I know the fixes in V4.1 thread says this argument is too late, but what about a button in the pref. screen that lets you turn off all units that are small from takeing a hex(at teams, sniper, trucks, jeeps, crews...ect...). This would make verone happy and I would rather wait for that than get V4.1 and lose my ability to play the way it is now. I'll be the first to say I hate it when a destroyed tank sends its crew into one of my hexes. tankers I've talked to said if the tank goes, there going to get the hell out of the area.

Just for laughs then, why don't the crews of shot down A/C bail out and then we could use them to capyure hexes. Why arn't snipers in the oobs of the rifle companies they come with? what of airborne snipers? They could just as easily jump into Arnhem as they did and hold objectives.

Just food for thought. I love the game. I think a button option would be better.
3rd Recon
Semper Fi

U235 · Post by **U235** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 2:27 am

Recon,

I'm with you, I think (especially in spec ops scenarios) it would take away from the essence of the game. Could this mean another radio button in the preferance screen?

If not, I vote that this feature remains as is.

Really, really enjoying the game. Seems like a new product with each battle. Impossible to get bored with, thanks for the superior work Team Matrix.

troopie · Post by **troopie** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 3:12 am

Again and Again, snipers should be able to take and hold victory hexes. If you leave your rear unguarded, you deserve whatever trouble you get. In my formations, snipers never work alone. They are attached to specforce units or infantry platoons. They function as part of the platoon.

Limiting who can take what limits the ability to do reconnaissance in force. I will often use recce units to seize unoccupied objectives if they can do so safely. Snipers are often attached to recce units. I do not wish to lose that flexibility.

troopie

------------------
Pamwe Chete

Reg · Post by **Reg** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:04 am

Originally posted by troopie:
Again and Again, snipers should be able to take and hold victory hexes. If you leave your rear unguarded, you deserve whatever trouble you get. In my formations, snipers never work alone. They are attached to specforce units or infantry platoons. They function as part of the platoon.

Limiting who can take what limits the ability to do reconnaissance in force. I will often use recce units to seize unoccupied objectives if they can do so safely. Snipers are often attached to recce units. I do not wish to lose that flexibility.

troopie

I think everyone in this discussion is heading in the same general direction but by slightly differing paths. I totally agree with the above posting with the single exception of the sniper's ability to take v-hexes.

As I have said before, the whole point of the game is to encourage historical behaviour (hopefully without coding the system so inflexibly that it rules out reasonable what ifs).

I applaud troopie's use of the spec force/recon units as that is what they were historically raised for and they quite validly pose a rear area threat to which the enemy must react. The presence of the snipers will certainly add some punch to the force. However, snipers on their own are do not pose such a threat and will not solict a similar response from the enemy brigade commander.

The whole issue here is the impact of historical doctrine. Single snipers were not used to take and hold ground and they were percieved as such by the enemy.

By allowing snipers to take hexes we are encoraging the use of snipers in a non-historical manner due to their special abilities. Thes abilities were assigned to make snipers effective in their primary role (area denial), not make them super infiltrators. There are other units for this role (such as the very formation troopie describes).

3rd Recon: I'm sure sure sniper can and actually do a fantastic job of defending a location, it's just that I think we are dealing with a different issue here. That of whether the presence of a sniper will cause the enemy to modify his battle plans via the mechanism of the victory hex.

Great discussion guys,
Reg.

Bonzo · Post by **Bonzo** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:44 am

The thing is that passing a tank over a hex, and continuing merrily on your way is not taking and holding ground, it's a reconnaissance. You are holding nothing. To really hold ground, you have to have people on it or observing it and able to intervene.

Now I can live with snipers not taking V-hexs, but let's deal with the whole issue at one sitting. If we take the viewpoint that snipers cannot take v-hexes due to limited combat power, we need to treat all other similar units the same. Unarmed units (meaning all units CURRENTLY without offensive weapons) and units armed solely with self defence weapons CANNOT take V-hexs if snipers cannot. An unarmed tank can no more hold ground than a taxi. It would be silly to say that a sniper has less ability to hold ground or indicates a "greater interest in the ground by the enemy" than a jeep or a bren carrier with a jammed MG.

I think that depleted squads should be able to take & hold ground (ala Porkchop Hill).

But really, is this that big of a problem? Does the code need to be rewritten or do we just have to mind our security & set a sqad or 2 of 2nd line troops & an AT team in the gemeral area? Hey, it's just a game

Bonzo

------------------
Robert (Bonzo) Lindsay, Coordinator
28th (North-west) Battalion Headquarters
http://dreadnaught.home.icq.com
nwbattalion@icqmail.com

Graf Speer · Post by **Graf Speer** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 5:16 am

Question to those 'absolutists' seeking non-snipe intervention into their plans to rule the hexes:

If a sniper is the last man standing in a cornfield valued with a preset of 100 pts, are you guys saying this guy cannot succeed to seize the hex?

A sniper is no less a man and just because he's devious and sneaky and skulkin' and hard to 'see' doesn't mean he cannot hold Ramelle all by himself if fates be with him!

Let snipers capture hexes if they can and dammit if only weenies fight on the other side and cannot oust a sniper from those hexes then the sniper deserves those hexes and all the babes in the surrounding hostiles and brothels nearby

Snipers are army men, too, dammit!

Albert

------------------
The Good Nazi

Charles22 · Post by **Charles22** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 6:19 am

I think only the most expensive tank for each country should be able to take victory hexes

. I guess that leaves the Norwegians out.

Reg · Post by **Reg** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 7:47 am

Originally posted by Bonzo:
The thing is that passing a tank over a hex, and continuing merrily on your way is not taking and holding ground, it's a reconnaissance. You are holding nothing. To really hold ground, you have to have people on it or observing it and able to intervene.

Now I can live with snipers not taking V-hexs, but let's deal with the whole issue at one sitting. If we take the viewpoint that snipers cannot take v-hexes due to limited combat power, we need to treat all other similar units the same. Unarmed units (meaning all units CURRENTLY without offensive weapons) and units armed solely with self defence weapons CANNOT take V-hexs if snipers cannot. An unarmed tank can no more hold ground than a taxi. It would be silly to say that a sniper has less ability to hold ground or indicates a "greater interest in the ground by the enemy" than a jeep or a bren carrier with a jammed MG.

I think that depleted squads should be able to take & hold ground (ala Porkchop Hill).

But really, is this that big of a problem? Does the code need to be rewritten or do we just have to mind our security & set a sqad or 2 of 2nd line troops & an AT team in the gemeral area? Hey, it's just a game

Bonzo

I'm a very agreeable chap. I agree with Matrix's change to prevent snipers from grabbing v-hexes. (I was just trying to help back up the decision as there seemed to be some lack of understanding why it was made). I agree that depleted units should be able claim objectives. I agree that unarmed units should be able claim objectives. I agree that 2 man recon/FO units should be able claim objectives. (To change this would seriously affect the game and not for the better).

However, I cannot agree with the statement

..... If we take the viewpoint that snipers cannot take v-hexes due to limited combat power, ....

as that is not what I said at all. As someone so delightfully put it earlier, their grandmother could take a v-hex if it were undefended (which I agree with).

The issue is what will the enemy think of grandma claiming that bit of dirt and what are they going to do about it!!

If the enemy sees (or is informed) that there are soldiers in the wrong uniform sitting on that hill he was sworn to protect, he will be obligated to do something about it (in game terms by the loss of victory points).

There may only be a recon unit/beatup tank/depleted squad/unarmed jeep BUT it indicates that there are hostile troops in the vicinity. Just how many hostile troops, a real commander could never be sure and the size of his reaction would depend on his judgement but react he will.

A sniper on the other hand is a loner and can reasonably be EXPECTED to be operating on their own. A single man, no matter how good a shot, would not be permitted to interfere with an operation (unless he was in the way).

This whole issue revolves around perceptions and how they affect decisions, not about firepower. V-hexes are just a mechanism to encourage you to make those decisions in a historical manner.

Walk in someone else's shoes (preferably from 50 years ago) and enjoy the view,
Reg

[This message has been edited by Reg (edited September 15, 2000).]

Bonzo · Post by **Bonzo** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 9:11 am

Again, my opinions only & comments are not intended to insult.

Sniper units are not hostile troops? Villagers spot every member of a unit & can tell a sniper from a regular grunt? Snipers always work alone? The presence of a sniper in uniform does not indicate that there are ememy troops around?

Ignore following off topic, rambling story.

Snipers are highly trained, highly motivated marksmen. I know. My former boss was one (once upon a time) in the Princess Pats. He spoke about some of the "Loner Stuff" he'd done. Then went on to tell about a company level training execise he was involved in down in Florida. They had to take some small island out in a swamp away from some local US unit. His unit came in though the swamp, never saw the OP Force, Blew up their objective they slipped back out through the swamp. When asked how they had gotten past the security detail, they said "through the swamp." "WHAT! There's big 'gators & poisonous snakes, quicksand. What got into your head? You could have gotten killed!" They'd never thought of it, don't have alligators back home. Ignorance is bliss.

Welcome Back

Snipers seldom truly work alone. They are often part of a combat team, thus their observed presence should indicate other hostile troops in the area (Just because you only saw one guy, it doesn't mean that there aren't others that you can't see).

The point I've tried to make is that there are many units that cannot hold ground that are allowed to do so in the game. Some people feel that snipers have too much freedom of movement and are to stealthy. That is balanced by they're being easier to kill, once spotted. Others feel that it is the perception created in the mind of the commander by the type of unit taking the hex. But if you don't have eyeballs looking at the hex, how do you know what is there?

The time scale for this game is what? 1 turn = 2-5 minutes. How fast (real world, wartime conditions, battle ongoing in area) is a villager going to get word to brigade that there are troops worth worrying about are at Chateau Blecht? Would the Colonel then take the villager's word that "but, of course, it is only a sniper", or will he send some poor schmucks schlepping over to have a peek? If it is not a matter of combat power, but rather perception, with no intel (because you posted no secutity at this key position) what will you do when you get any report about any enemy activity near this key feature?

Commando teams and partisans are also part of Version 4. Sneaky fellows. Don't even start out on their own side of the map. Might want to post some security...

Bonzo

------------------
Robert (Bonzo) Lindsay, Coordinator
28th (North-west) Battalion Headquarters
http://dreadnaught.home.icq.com
nwbattalion@icqmail.com

Tank · Post by **Tank** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 9:13 am

Hmmm... well. Should reality be the issue here or should gameplay be the issue? In reality, I could see a sniper (supported by at least a few buddies) trying to take and hold an important area. Say a crossroads with a tall building or a farmhouse with a fine field of fire. And with a leader type, perhaps a gung-ho sarge. But just a snipe? Cut off from his C&C. All alone? No disrespect to any actual snipers, (God no!) but sometimes, in reality, you just gotta say, let the chips fall where they may. I'm out of here! I think the game rationally puts limits on the possibility of grandma or whoever taking Stalingrad whilst the tank troops are in the loo. Yes, I know, an extreme example. I have no prob with a depleted platoon sneaking around and taking a vhex. That's my bad. But a sniper crawling through my lines to take a 900 pt vhex? Naw, my patrols would have gotten his ass. And if they didn't...

Well then, ANY troops of mine in the back lines INCLUDING REMF's would have him for dogmeat.

But gamewise, no REMF's no cover, the vhex is good to go. No?

Tank

Bonzo · Post by **Bonzo** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 9:28 am

Exactly! your patrols would have got him. So let the sniper try to take it.

The problem is that by denying the sniper the ability to take the hex, means that when I send a mixed recon (sniper, ATR squad & a couple of recon patrols) group hunting for a way to your V-hex (& maybe your mortars) I must use the ATR squad or a recon patrol to actually step on the hex. They're all there, had to sneak them all in, but the sniper doesn't count?

Bonzo

------------------
Robert (Bonzo) Lindsay, Coordinator
28th (North-west) Battalion Headquarters
http://dreadnaught.home.icq.com
nwbattalion@icqmail.com

Fredde · Post by **Fredde** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 3:02 pm

A realistic approach is to leave security details, have your retreat way under surveillance etc etc to try to spot any possible threat. As anyone who has made military service (at least in the lower ranks) knows, most of the time boring guard duty is an often reoccuring part of military life

Without security details actually spotting the area you have no clue on what's going on at that vital point. In SPWAW, you are managing your units in detail.. so you should think about your security details as well.

Any enemy unit who happens to show up can trigger a big response, like someone stated.. local population sending a message of unidentified enemy troops at point X:X. A sniper, the only man seen, can well have a whole inf company as companions hiding in the nearby forest. Is it one sniper or actually 20? If the area isn't guarded, who knows. Not the commander anyway.

Key point: Letting small units (snipers, tank crews, a trucker with his colt 45, jeeps or whatever) take victory hexes forces (or better put encourages) the other party to protect his victory hexes. This is realistic. I find it more unrealistic to leave key points unguarded, at least without having to pay for it. Leave an infantry squad and you can easily deal with the pesky sniper and even easier with the lone trucker. Leave an infantry platoon and you can deal with bigger enemy units coming at you. Leave an AT gun or a tank and you can even attempt to deal with tanks coming at you. This is realism to me.

[This message has been edited by Fredde (edited September 16, 2000).]

Charles22 · Post by **Charles22** » Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:19 pm

I don't have a preference for either side of the sniper issue, but I must say, that having security details makes sense. If the sniper can take it, then this gives another valuable role to the recon infantry. The recon infantry, even one by itself, may be able to retake the area from the sniper, and is a very good observor to possibly spot the sniper before the objective is even taken. This adds another dimension to those campaigners out there, as it's another reason to keep a recon infantry platoon in core, and to try and get it's experience up along the way.

Imagine, your recon team is stealthily set up to "invite" sniper infiltration. When he's spotted, the recon doesn't react, but will help in the attack once a HT or something is quickly whisked over to eliminate the threat. So, in this sense, the sniper's worst nightmare is being precisely where he thinks he can do the most damage. What better way to eliminate those pesky snipers, than to know precisely what areas he's very likely to be in? As well, even if recon infantry must fight the sniper on their own, because the sniper was particularly sneaky as to wait for the last turn to take the hexes, the recon is a cheaper unit, with more shots. I don't think a previously spotted sniper is likely to hold objectives (they may at least retreat him from the hexes) from two or more recon infantry squads (even the two man variety).

Also, if you're playing with objecitves that only matter as to who possesses it at the end, you could have these recon infantry, and other units as well, TOTALLY involved with the warring at the front, and then later have them get back to their objective duties in still enough time to hold the area from last turn cheapshots. My main point is that there's more than one way to deal with a rat, the objective area is merely our piece of cheese. Here mousey, mousey!

[This message has been edited by Charles22 (edited September 16, 2000).]