Move attack/assault

Command Ops: Battles From The Bulge takes the highly acclaimed Airborne Assault engine back to the West Front for the crucial engagements during the Ardennes Offensive. Test your command skills in the fiery crucible of Airborne Assault’s “pausable continuous time” uber-realistic game engine. It's up to you to develop the strategy, issue the orders, set the pace, and try to win the laurels of victory in the cold, shadowy Ardennes.
Command Ops: Highway to the Reich brings us to the setting of one of the most epic and controversial battles of World War II: Operation Market-Garden, covering every major engagement along Hell’s Highway, from the surprise capture of Joe’s Bridge by the Irish Guards a week before the offensive to the final battles on “The Island” south of Arnhem.

Moderators: Panther Paul, Arjuna

Post Reply
asdf12
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 8:00 am

Move attack/assault

Post by asdf12 »

How does a move/attack differ from an assault?

Lieste
Posts: 1823
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 10:50 am

RE: Move attack/assault

Post by Lieste »

Once the attack has been decided on by the AI, there is no difference. Against lighter opposition the move order may be sufficient to brush past/over the threats, in which case it is far more time/effort efficient... OTOH the initial contact will often be in road column, and may be repulsed with moderate losses requiring some additional recovery time before a good attack can be launched.

If the enemy position can be firmly identified in advance, the Attack order is more likely to do well - especially with manually selected move routes and form-up points in covered terrain, and a short distance from the objective (possibly using darkness/bad weather to amplify terrain effects).

Where the enemy has an outpost line, and a main position, the use of move/attack order may give more effective 'single' order, particularly where not all positions are known... as the situation unfolds the AI will develop plans to support continued movement without needing to 'kill' the current orders and replan from a standing start.

Particularly 'bad' are contacts during the move to the form-up or at the re-group waypoint of a formal attack order - the AI really doesn't like these, so if in doubt use move-to-contact for the unknown 'meeting engagement' portions of an offensive..
asdf12
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 8:00 am

RE: Move attack/assault

Post by asdf12 »

Thanks for your reply I've been using FUP's before move/attack orders in combination with different formations, how is this different from setting an FUP/assault/formation selection. Which one is more efficient? Just need more clarification please.

Thanks
Lieste
Posts: 1823
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 10:50 am

RE: Move attack/assault

Post by Lieste »

You only get an explicit FUP with a waypointed Attack task. For all other tasks the AI selects the FUP and attack routeing.

When you have limited visibility/intelligence, you will probably make better judgements about where the FUP should be - the AI will frequently 'miss' the FEBA/FLOT and will send the march column into indian country. Even if it gets the attack route safe, it will frequently push the HQ/Base/Support waypoint into hostile territory, as it assumes that no knowledge means no troops, while I assume a covered FLOT and plan accordingly.

Still, when you have no idea how far off the FLOT is, and think it may be protected by a weak outpost line, then the AI can do a quick and dirty attack from the march without much risk.

The three main options are:

Move (or rest (with not in-situ formation)/defend) without attacks selected). The movement will tend to stay on-route, but with options for high loss/high aggression the units will deploy and brush enemies aside with fires. Dropping aggression will allow the unit to then resume the movement. Not very lethal, but good for keeping control of momentum against light opposition.

Move (etc) with attacks allowed. If the initial contacts don't displace the hostile forces, then the AI will quickly improvise a hasty attack, overrunning the hostile position. This may be desirable, or not, depending on terrain/forces available. Quick, effective, flexible, but limited control. I use this least against the AI, but I do run a highly modified Estab and Map, so this may differ in the stock game.

Attack/Probe - player decides what the attack objective is, and defines the march/approach route if there is more than 1 waypoint. The FUP is explicitly the penultimate waypoint - you don't want contact or to receive fires before the FUP, or while re-orging there. Takes a bit long to get the troops moving - the attack planning happens before the start enroute, but the attack happens when and where you want. Options to define determination, and to fine-tune assault times/coordination with other columns. All of this is wasted if the enemy isn't where the attack is planned to land though, so best for set-pieces. Distance of FUP to Objective shouldn't be too far, as the assault movement is tiring/stressful, and you don't want to out-run your regimental supports. Attack is more 'lethal' than a move order, but will usually tire your troops more.



(The actual 'assault task' is an AI only task, performed as part of any attack, whether specified by the player or arising from a move/defend with attacks order).
asdf12
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 8:00 am

RE: Move attack/assault

Post by asdf12 »

Great that covers everything. Thanks for the quick reply.
gabeeg
Posts: 292
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:20 pm

RE: Move attack/assault

Post by gabeeg »

Lieste,

I have just got to say, I really appreciate and enjoy your posts and responses. Not just in this thread but in all the others as well, I find your knowledge deep and your explanations thorough and very helpful. Thank you!

I really hope Panther notices and extends an invite to beta patches and future products (if they already haven't). IMO you would make a great addition representing us players.
Kind Regards,

Harry
Post Reply

Return to “Command Ops Series”