Possible FUP/Assault Issues?

[Marshal Villars]

Situation F - follow up 3

Note that after it seemed they weren't moving, I decided to try a replan thinking they weren't moving because the woods might be causing problems. Perhaps I should have left it to see how long it would take.

[Marshal Villars]

Situation F - Follow up 4

They have been sitting here for almost three and a half hours now doing not much. I would have reissued the orders in between, but I wanted to see what would happen and decided to wait it out. Deciding that trying to find out what was happening was more important than winning the scenario.

[Marshal Villars]

Situation F - Follow up 5

Note. After trying to carry out the attack near Stavelot all day, and thinking they might not have been moving because I had just been pushing them too hard or had perhaps run out of fuel, I decided to test that hypothesis out. So, I got sick of waiting for the attack and decided to order a march to the south...away from the enemy to take another victory location with all due speed.

KG Peiper performed admirably in this task. Astoundingly well in my opinion and within a few hours were well under way.

So, at this point I am discinclined to believe that they sat jammed up like this at the foot of the hill most of the day because of fatigue.

But who knows.

[Marshal Villars]

Simovitch. Yes. Your points are well taken. And since I have been taking it easier on my men, I do seem to get a bit more out of them. However, when reviewing Situation F, in light of the fact that they sprung to life and immediately ran to another portion of the map without any problems, makes me disinclined to believe they didn't attack up the hill because they were tired. I am not sure on all of the task symbols and what they mean -- or when exactly they are used -- but I have provided Situation F as one example of a situation where no movement was seen during a critical period, but an order to put them elsewhere was immedately followed. Arjuna has agreed there is a minor issue with a) occassional HQ leaving their units behind, b) occassional non-movement when orders given, when in his opinion there should be, c) occasional "lost battalions" (units being left behind). I am merely trying to help him pin down areas in the code, on his request, to help him find these curious moments so the program can be further improved. I must admit, I am not sure in every situation what is happening and I have admitted to him that in many cases, I will come up with red herrings. But I am not the expert in his programming that he is, so I have to report most of the odd instances I see. Actually, I haven't even reported that there was an SS artillery unit which I could not get to move more than 1 km all day. I should check to see if they lost all of their trucks in an engagement. But I should post that instance in here as well.

Please note that in Situation F, I did have my units on "normal" rest and after giving orders, they got up early and got moving on their own accord.

Also, I do know that if you put "aggro" to low, they will be less likely to engage everything around them and try to move to their objectives around them. Notice in Situation F, my aggro was set to medium.

Also, in some of these screenshots, you will see that I have my orders set to "rest: NONE". This is not how I started out in many of these situations. I have long since learned that "rest: NONE" gets me nowhere fast. But, when I have been trying to get an attack going for hours, I will often switch from normal rest to "Rest: NONE" to get them moving...which seems to sometimes give them the kick in the pants they need.

But! I do thank you for your tips and input. And again, thank you for helping Arjuna put together the single best operational wargame in the history of mankind.

[Marshal Villars]

Situation G - Follow up 1

As early as Day 5 at 6 pm attempts begin to form a defensive perimeter around Stavelot.

[Marshal Villars]

Situation G - follow up 2

At 9:44 pm, no change.

[Marshal Villars]

Situation G - Follow up 3

So frustrated with my defense's lack of change, I reissue orders (but now I wish I would have let them stand to see how long it would take to react). My newly ordered perimeter is smaller than the last.

Note in desperation I have changed from "Rest: Norm" to "Rest: None".

[Marshal Villars]

Situation G - Follow up 5

Seems some units are moving now. With units infiltrating into the town behind me, it appears I have reissued orders--though I wish I wouldn't have to see how long it would have taken. But in the heat of battle when Stavelot is at risk, an SS commander will sacrifice anything for his objectives.

[Marshal Villars]

Situation G - Follow up 6

The situation is now out of control. As can be seen by the position of the units, there was still little change in their positioning. I reissue orders, try giving them a little rest.

Anyway. Remember, I am not saying that there IS something wrong here. I am saying it was a disappointing situation (and it would be for any commander). If Arjuna thinks there is a problem he would lke to take a look at, then I can get him the files.

Again, I LOVE the fact that troops can get tired. Too tired to do anything. But I am not sure that the task indicators showed they were resting instead of following orders, but rather, were just sitting there "defending" during this situation.

[Marshal Villars]

Johndoesecond

Thanks for your tips. Very helpful.

[Marshal Villars]

I guess my question is...will the units assume "rest" orders when too tired to move or do anything? Knowing this would help me a lot.

[simovitch]

ORIGINAL: Marshal Villars

I guess my question is...will the units assume "rest" orders when too tired to move or do anything? Knowing this would help me a lot.

Yes. Unless they (or more likely their HQ) has 'none' for rest setting. Then, even if unengaged in the rear areas they will likely not rest until completely drained. That's why I always do an evening bed check for formations that I may have given the no-rest order to.

[johndoesecond]

Hi Marshal,

We’ve already discussed this and I think we’ve developed some mutual understanding, but allow me make few comments on your situation F from the tactial point of view.

Situation 1: You’re planning an attack to Armémont. The route to Stavelot you picked seems to be reasonably clear, even if I’d be worried a bit since it is downhill and somewhat exposed to artillery sitting on top of the hill futher north, and you should expect to be sighted once the daylight break out.
However, the route to and the FUP itself seems definitely too exposed to artillery, and those tank, mech inf. and AT companies uphill. You’ll be way into their fire range and downhill, which will put you in a disadvantaged position.

Situation 2: So, they made it through to the FUP, more or less. But there, they really should start reorganising and preparing for a coordinated attack. However, now they are in the open, and some of your companies start to be seriously engaged (I see 3.1 Pion firing). All sorts of nasty enemy companies can clearly see and shoot at you from the hilltop.

Situation 3. Yes, it would definitely have been better that you left on the initial plan. Seeing those new waypoints and the balance of forces, I would from the beginning predict that the probability they manage to carry out that attack in the short run was close to zero.
Your troops are already seriously engaged, your 1.84, 2.84 and 3.84 flaks are engaged, receiving fire and some even suffering casualties, it’s really hard to build up an attack under such circumstances.
Furthermore, the waypoints are too close one to another, and passing from one to another slows down the whole movement (I believe Dave is working on to see if there are few software glitches with the whole waypointing amechanisms, but still, only from looking just how exposed and close to enemy units that route is, it’s hard to think Peiper’s gang would be able to form up undisturbed at your new FUP) .

As a suggestion, you should really try to rely more on your troops to find the correct paths, so maybe you should put less and more distanced waypoints.

Situation 4 and 5: It could be plain fatigue, but also the heat of the battle. A proper selection of the FUP and the route to is one of the most essential parts of an attack. If it is so much exposed to be constantly under fire, suffer serious casualties or heavy bombardments, you cannot really expect the attack to be carried out swiftly.


Let me conclude: I don’t know what you and Dave are after in all these examples, and I cannot rule out the possibility there are bugs and glitches with the engine, BUT from what I’ve seen, you’ve really made few dubious tactical decisions, and you’ve got properly spanked by the AI.
You should be sad for the destiny of your silicon soldiers, but joyful for having such a wonderful simulation under your hands.

One last suggestion: if you haven’t tried it yet, make some experiments trying not to set the FUPs yourself. Just set the attack point, and let your HQ’s AI decide the FUP, firebases and all the rest. Sometimes you’ll be positively surprised, and surely, given all the available intel information, the AI will definitely not be as recklessly daring as you were in this case.

Cheers.

[Marshal Villars]

Oh. Yes. I am playing just to get these mistakes to appear with little "tactical finesse". I know that.

Rarely do I really try to make a good decision at the moment. Because I am always trying to get these examples of what we are looking for to occur.

I downloaded and played the St. Lo scenario. And with all of the units, I am catching them rather often now.

But thanks! I know a lot of what I am doing looks silly. Because it is.

[johndoesecond]

ORIGINAL: Marshal Villars

Oh. Yes. I am playing just to get these mistakes to appear with little "tactical finesse". I know that.

Rarely do I really try to make a good decision at the moment. Because I am always trying to get these examples of what we are looking for to occur.

I downloaded and played the St. Lo scenario. And with all of the units, I am catching them rather often now.

But thanks! I know a lot of what I am doing looks silly. Because it is.

What exactly are your looking for to occur, if I may ask?

[Marshal Villars]

1) HQs "leading the charge" or allowing themselves to get way out ahead of their subordinate units, or totally exposed. Happens "a lot" (not often...just often enough to irk me ). Just a few minutes ago, I had an FSJ battalion HQ leading a regimental march and got ahead of the rest of the gang and just about ended up getting killed. See the first example in the "Battalion HQs leading the charge" posting of mine for an OBVIOUS case. The first graphic is the perfect example.
2) assaults which are ordered which do not result in movement (Arjuna mentioned this is a problem occassionally). Kind of a subset of number 6 below.
3) something I call "the lost battalions"... units getting left behind in an advance which are never called up again.
4) Slippage problems (the problem of a FRESH battalion at the beginning of a scenario having an assault time on D2 at 0600 and they are sitting on the FUP, but they insist that they will be four minutes to two hours late even though they are ready and on the FUP and it is 18 hours ahead of schedule)
5) Tonight I caught units not accepting assault time changes at all, even though it was several hours to go before the time I wanted to enter. It would simply not let me change the times.
6) Units not taking orders - having to re-issue orders after waiting 2 full days for action (I caught that tonight as well by CCB6 in the Bastogne Breakout scenario...it's a bit frustrating when you wait 2.5 days for a formation to move to take an objective--I finally broke it into its components to get some use of it).
7) Formations not "launching" at set assault times (not sure this is a serious issue...because maybe they can have a set assault time, and not officially "slip" it, but be too tired to move...in which case it may be a (somewhat confusing) non-issue).

So, I go through a process of
1) pause game
2) give orders
3) create save file with description of which orders were just given
4) keep playing
5) see if something weird/totally wrong happens
6) create report for Arjuna

Basically that is it.

Doesn't mean it isn't the greatest tactical/operational game ever. And these don't happen A LOT. But I want to stamp them out for good.

Though even when playing to catch these errors and not to win, I managed to score a decisive victory in the "Bastogne Breakout" tonight--and think I am about to win as the Germans at St. Lo. It seems micromanaging your artillery is the key to the game.

[Marshal Villars]

Example H

OHARA and 3/501 Bn are not assaulting -- even though they are fresh, they are on the FUP, and the time is after the assault time. Neither of them. Have save file for orders and for problem. Note I have just switched to "Rest: None" in a desperate effort to get them moving. To no avail.

[Marshal Villars]

D1 1304. Ohara starts to move.

Now, remember he was fresh. His assault time was supposed to be 11:30. But he starts moving at about 1304. Even though I have him a thorough kick in the pants by setting him to "No Rest"!!!!

I have other examples but I don't have time to post them today.

I will play two more monster scenarios for record keeping purposes and submit the incidents. Then I have to get back to my life.