Question for seasoned players (and Dave)

[JudgeDredd]

Dave

You have created such a good command AI that if a player gets his orders right, he can literally sit back and watch the game unfold.

I had to clean our hall carpet this morning - so I started Day 4 of Return to St Vith off by giving my HQs their tasks and off I went. I came back an hour or so later and the game was done albeit only getting a draw. It's possible that if I had been keeping my eye on the battle I might have noticed that unit sneaking up and pinching Steinebrucke Bridge from me. But the orders I gave to the 318th and the 10 Armd to take and defend St Vith were carried out - and I controlled St Vith.

But if I had been a bit more careful about my planning for my HQs - I could have actually won this game by giving my orders and going about my daily chores - only to pop in now and again for a bit of fine tuning...

Question is - what do you others do for play. It's true that a plan goes to crap when the battle starts - but it is fair to say, is it not, that in a 5 day scenario (like Return to St Vith) you could maybe only need to interact with your units - what - less than a dozen times? It is possible - right?

So if the AI is that good - what do you get from the game and how you play? Maybe I'm just still stuck in the mentallity that I have to control everything - but there is a nagging feeling there that if I don't, it's the AI playing the game and not me...

I guess what I wonder is how others see their play value from this game? Perhaps I personally would be a little happier if the enemy AI was as good as it is, but I had to take care of my own units...set my lead unit - send out scouts - setup my arty units at a base...or maybe I just have a different view and need to change that...I just wonder - if I do change my mindset and stop micro managing - if I do change my mindset and take the role of commander (as I'm sure most of you would agree that is what the game is about) - I wonder if I would feel that I didn't actually win - that the computer won...I just gave it a kick here and there...

[Lieste]

There is a lot of scope for smaller operations - aimed at taking the next village with minimal casualties, rather than merely 'bludgeoning' across huge swathes of the map in one push (though sometimes that is the appropriate order).

You can usually obtain tolerable results as the attacker without any finesse (the force preponderance is there for that reason - and not infrequently real-world attacks lack sophistication and care), but you can transform the attack (or defence) with appropriate initial planning, and timely and correct adjustments - true you might not need to frequently change an order, but doing so at the right time and in the right way is something that can open up a stubborn position, or cripple a devastating attack.

So yes... the game is essentially planning and sit back.
But... the planning isn't something that you do once at the beginning - it and intelligence assessment and balancing effort vs capability is an ongoing process that should never stop, and if anything intensify once the plan is in motion, as you must have 3-4 plans (current, enemy, future intent, contingency) and the relative merits/desirability of each (and you may have elements of several conflicting plan sets running concurrently - with troops needed for your attack still tied up elsewhere - scrub the attack? send it in understrength? cancel some other operation to scrape together forces while preserving the reserve? or commit the reserve here to allow the attack to go in??

Usually there is also a need to reduce the tempo of operations once the battle is underway - fatigue and supply delivery rates both prevent full-tempo, and retaining the reserve and committing it at the best time is the only way to side-step it temporarily...

A thrill a minute? Possibly not, but I've never felt I had 'nothing' to do, even if it is only actively monitoring a critical movement, or assessing my attack/defence from 'his side of the wire'.

[JudgeDredd]

And all those points are totally valid.

I think I just have to detach myself from the company level battle (as much as that really appeals to me) and go with Battalion or even Regiment level

But it's true when you think about all the things I clearly didn't do that there is enough to do - looking after supply routes (keeping them open), watching fatigue, moving a unit to the right place at the right time, placing the right defender in front of the right attacker and vice versa

As an example of this, I had pushed an inf Bn forward to St Vith and it came across 2 SS tank units - 16 Panthers and 12 Tigers. Now had I been watching what I was doing, I should have sent one of my Armd units to help out...as it was, the inf unit halted because it just couldn't break through.

So yes - when you actually think about the other things you should be doing, then it can be a busy game for the player.

Nuff said [:D]

[wodin]

I usually give orders out at Battalion level possibly regiment...you still have to think about what Obj's you should try for first and how to attain them...then the AI always throws a spanner in the works...there are times during the game you have loads to think about...then times of watching the action...then times you have to reasses and so on and so forth...it's all about planning then reassessing...

Think less at the low level tactical level and more at the higher level tactical\ low level operational....thats the best way I can think of as desrcibing it.

I have as an experiment given out orders at a very high level and let them get on with it until the end of the scenario..it rarely ends well...