Developer Feedback: Style of Play

[Prince of Eckmühl]

So, how do you play the game?[&:]

By example, I have my own style. I organize things (as does the AI), and then I tend to take command of individual battalions. If I try to run the show via a higher command echelon, regiment, Bde, or division, I've found that my "play" tends to develop too slowly, and my side suffers as a result.

[TeTeT]

I'm new to the series and I tried several styles so far:

1) Running the game for an hour at a time, then issuing new orders to formations in need.
2) Issuing orders to div/reg/bn at the beginning of the scenario and then run in 8 hour increments, pausing and issuing new orders when in need. Every 8 hours I assess how my overall plan works out.
3) Run in 'normal' speed and issue orders on the fly.

In the beginning I was quite keen to take command over all the Korps level artillery (mostly played the German side so far), but now I leave it on call most times and just make sure its bombardment range reaches the front. On the defense I found it handy to issue orders to individual companies to move them out of harms way and later reattach them. I'm still challenged to find a good way to get HQ units out of the way without utterly messing up my defense line.

[wodin]

My play changes on the fly....in a high unit scenario I give initial orders to regiment of kampfgruppe level...I gather all arty\nebelwerfer units that are under division level and above and give them defend orders and leave them on call...this way I can see exactly what their upto via the FS tab, I will slowley move them forarwd to keep them in range.

As I feel fit during a large scenario I may intervene at battalion level or even adjust my coys.....it all depends on the situation and what I feel needs to be done as the situation arises...I normally have the speed at normal (the double arrows) if requiered I put it on fast as in a large scenario fast isn't as fast as a smaller one.

With smaller unit load scenarios I play at battalion level, never go higher.

[bairdlander2]

I give orders to regiments with initial objectives.Once they complete these orders I see how ai reacted and issue new orders.Though things change quickly and usually not in my favour.I find playing Germans to be difficult.I am useing avoidance paths as much as possible to cut eneamy supply lines,but it usually doesnt work.i kicked ass in the tutorial but in other scenario's have a difficult time.

[FredSanford3]

I try to command at as high a level as possible, especially on initial orders, but as things progress, the Bn level is generally the most time efficient. I will sometimes group direct-fire gun units under Regt/Div HQ to use as support groups while most of the manuevering is done by Bn's. I leave the mortars/IG's under the Bn HQ control, but I'll create Brigade (3-5 arty units) ARKO's for my big guns. Most of the time, I let them respond automatically, but occasionally I'll select key targets manually. I do not think that's gamey at all- I think the system was deliberately designed that way, and it's my understanding that brigade shoots were common in WW2 by most everybody.

I think the assault command is overrated and time consuming, unless you know where the enemy is and you have to go through them- I'm a believer in the 'hit where they ain't' approach mostly. If you have to attack into the face of effective artillery (i.e. just about always), you are many times better off moving close to your target at night (set the depth of your formation to a shallow setting initially), and then trying to win by firefighting at close range (by adjusting the depth of your formation to a deeper setting, causing the line units to advance), where the artillery can't get to you. I'll often use the move or defend command with the bypass and/or attack options selected.

For bases, I usually just group all the bases together and give them a group in situ defend command.

[MarkShot]

Although I have yet to find my BFTB style, my general style is probably the best documented on the Web of any players of this series.

I can just see George C. Scott shouting, "Kratzer, you magnificent b*st*rd, I read your book!".

[JaguarUSF]

ORIGINAL: Franklin Nimitz

I try to command at as high a level as possible, especially on initial orders

That is an interesting approach. I usually just control all the brigades and stick the higher level units on a defend order way in the back.
It's a testament to the game engine that there are so many posts in this thread displaying different ways of managing your troops. Flexibility is king.
There's certainly no "I move every single one of my troops every turn hex by hex." "Oh yeah, me too!"
I'm never going back to other, lesser wargames.
I certainly have to wait a while before reviewing another one; it's just not going to be as friendly to my hand-off macromanagement approach. I'll have to forget about BftB before giving a fair and balanced review to another wargame

[jomni]

Haha! A reveiwer who actually playes the game for keeps!

[Frank.Costanzo]

I am viewing the tutorials for the second time, and using the methods I have learned in my play. I think once I master the methods in the tutorials, then I can experiment with other command styles.

Also, Having a clearer understanding of features such as "cohesion" is influencing my play. The last time I played, I let a hour pass, so my troop had better cohesion before the attack.

[wodin]

Fatigue is the biggest killer in this game. I real juggling act I find. It is one of the major reasons why you need to keep your thinking hat on constanttly and use realistic tactics. Try pushing your troops over a day in the mud or snow...you need your reserves...send them back and use that rest order....infact I've never used the rest order as much in the previous games as I do with this one.

[Seydlitz69]

Generaly I macromanage for attacks and I micromanage for defense.

[hank]

So far the style I try to hold to is to give orders to the highest HQs on the map.  In other words if I have a full division with three regiments (plus supports), I'll order the Div HQ to do ... whatever.  If the Regiment is the largest HQ on the map and the Div HQ has not arrived, the Reg HQ gets the orders.  If a Div HQ arrives before its Reg's, I give it a reorg order somewhere safe if its Reg's are soon to arrive and as they arrive I reattach them (same with support units) then give the Div HQ the orders to move out (usually after one full Reg has arrived). This all depends on timing, threats and the overall plans.

That's How I start out.  But as things change, my style changes usually toward how Seydlitz69 described.  I tend to micro in defense.  I try to stay at the macro level for attacking.  I do a lot of reattaching of units I've broken off from their HQ's after their independent tasks are settled.

I too keep my fatigue indicator on most of the time.  I toggle the F6 and F7's a lot and adjust my plans accordingly.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: MarkShot

I can just see George C. Scott shouting ...

I think Patton said something to the effect that if you allow your subordinates some leeway in accomplishing their tasks, you won't be disappointed by their outcomes.

I am just as surprised when I decide not to micro-mange the AI; it often finds routes to the objective I never noticed were there.

[JaguarUSF]

ORIGINAL: jomni

Haha! A reveiwer who actually playes the game for keeps!

I've gotten to the point now that I get enough games where I can simply request ones I think I'll like, or that are popular and need to be destroyed. I do have a number of games I still play after I am finished with the review: Europa Universalis III, DiRT 2, Bad Company 2, Distant Worlds, Frozen Synapse, Just Cause 2, Elemental, ArmA II, World in Conflict, Section 8, Scourge of War, and this one.
I've found that it's a lot cheaper to get games for free than to pay for them.