Wodin,
Thanks for that - what are your thoughts on giving move orders (with attacks selected) rather than attack order with FUPs.
I have given this a go this afternoon, and my main issue with the move order is that troops tend not to push the right DBE units forward first, also HQ units lead the move rather stay at the rear.
For me, I am a little frustrated that issuing orders at the Regt level is so useless - what of the complex attacks that the manual outlines - isn't this where the Regt level orders comes into its own.
I may sound like I am bleating on, but the game is been extolled for the following features:
•Realistic command decision making at the operational level. Assess, plan, order and react just like a real Corps, Division and Brigade commander.
•The AI can manage subordinate commanders and handle micromanagement
Has anyone completed the Losheim Gap scenario by mainly giving orders at the Regt level?
And your final point: I would love to be able to stack up the orders at the start - like attack objective 1, then attack objective 2 - also to include reaction triggers - as per any Battle Group planning exercise using a sync matrix or other planning tool at the start.
Ade
Losheim Gap AAR - completed
Moderators: Arjuna, Panther Paul
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
You can easily complete the scenario giving only Regimental level orders, and you will get a very historical result playing as Germany.....you will lose!
You will lose because you are fighting against the odds.
The Allies are numerous, and powerful. Their supplies increase daily, while yours dwindle.
Their artillery is all powerful. Supper quick to react, and deadly accurate, not to mention the new VT fuse that was used in this battle for the first time.
They have many armoured cars, with heavy machine guns, while you are reliant on mostly infantry.
They have time on their side, while you have to battle bad weather, and stick to a tight schedule.
If you really want to beat the AI playing as Germany in this scenario, or any of the BFTB scenarios you need to take control of it yourself, and not rely so heavily on yet another AI and expect it to carry out your orders to the letter.
Via trial and error, luck and god willing you will prevail in the end [;)]
You will lose because you are fighting against the odds.
The Allies are numerous, and powerful. Their supplies increase daily, while yours dwindle.
Their artillery is all powerful. Supper quick to react, and deadly accurate, not to mention the new VT fuse that was used in this battle for the first time.
They have many armoured cars, with heavy machine guns, while you are reliant on mostly infantry.
They have time on their side, while you have to battle bad weather, and stick to a tight schedule.
If you really want to beat the AI playing as Germany in this scenario, or any of the BFTB scenarios you need to take control of it yourself, and not rely so heavily on yet another AI and expect it to carry out your orders to the letter.
Via trial and error, luck and god willing you will prevail in the end [;)]
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
I have seen at regiment level an attack the AI put in with two battalions doing it so they attacked from different sides and surrounded then enemy..which was very cool..I never gave an FUP either as then the AI has a chance of doing this sort of thing. The AI is very good but not perfect..just more perfect than most. I've always considered it a battalion scale game to be honest.
I never knew that alot of people did move orders with attack box ticked only rather than attack orders..something I never did myself..but have tried it out recently.
Not sure what to think of it.
To be honest with you I'm not a huge player of the game..infact I haven't sunk that many hours at all into BFTB but I did with COTA. So really others here are in a far better position to deal with your issues.
Dave is a good person to ask aswell..sometimes the game is working properly and we think it isn't, though when it's explained it can turn out it was our error either overlooking something or missing something.
I certainly wouldn't see the game as a regiment level game though..as I said more battalion. Though I have given regiment orders depending on the OBJ's and size of scenario etc etc (also if I feel abit lazy aswell)..I will say that even at battalion your not having to micromanage much if at all.
Complex attacks will happen though again it depends on the terrain and units it's up against and command stats etc etc..but I have seen it attack from different directions all beautifully timed aswell, that wasn't long after release infact.
I never knew that alot of people did move orders with attack box ticked only rather than attack orders..something I never did myself..but have tried it out recently.
Not sure what to think of it.
To be honest with you I'm not a huge player of the game..infact I haven't sunk that many hours at all into BFTB but I did with COTA. So really others here are in a far better position to deal with your issues.
Dave is a good person to ask aswell..sometimes the game is working properly and we think it isn't, though when it's explained it can turn out it was our error either overlooking something or missing something.
I certainly wouldn't see the game as a regiment level game though..as I said more battalion. Though I have given regiment orders depending on the OBJ's and size of scenario etc etc (also if I feel abit lazy aswell)..I will say that even at battalion your not having to micromanage much if at all.
Complex attacks will happen though again it depends on the terrain and units it's up against and command stats etc etc..but I have seen it attack from different directions all beautifully timed aswell, that wasn't long after release infact.
ORIGINAL: Reaper
Wodin,
Thanks for that - what are your thoughts on giving move orders (with attacks selected) rather than attack order with FUPs.
I have given this a go this afternoon, and my main issue with the move order is that troops tend not to push the right DBE units forward first, also HQ units lead the move rather stay at the rear.
For me, I am a little frustrated that issuing orders at the Regt level is so useless - what of the complex attacks that the manual outlines - isn't this where the Regt level orders comes into its own.
I may sound like I am bleating on, but the game is been extolled for the following features:
•Realistic command decision making at the operational level. Assess, plan, order and react just like a real Corps, Division and Brigade commander.
•The AI can manage subordinate commanders and handle micromanagement
Has anyone completed the Losheim Gap scenario by mainly giving orders at the Regt level?
And your final point: I would love to be able to stack up the orders at the start - like attack objective 1, then attack objective 2 - also to include reaction triggers - as per any Battle Group planning exercise using a sync matrix or other planning tool at the start.
Ade
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
Oh also I wouldn't say it's an operational game..more Grand Tactical to be honest..
Another thing..I don't feel the Bulge battle and terrain really show off the engine or show it at it's best. Not because of the engine but due to the mud and terrain in general. A reason why I preferred COTA was the fact scenarios varied greatly in terrain and many really showed the engine off...
Another thing..I don't feel the Bulge battle and terrain really show off the engine or show it at it's best. Not because of the engine but due to the mud and terrain in general. A reason why I preferred COTA was the fact scenarios varied greatly in terrain and many really showed the engine off...
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
To be honest I would be very disappointed in the game if I was able to win by giving just a few orders at Regimental level, playing as Axis.
It would make the scenarios very short lived, with hardly any replay value. As it stands now you have to really work at getting a win.
I wonder if for future expansions, and marketing it should be stated that it is primarily a Battalion level game, with capability to conduct, Regimental scale attacks, and Divisional moves.
My Elsenborn battle that I micro managed for example took 4 days of almost constant game play to get a win.
That was after many failed attempts as well, at all kinds of interference levels.
That's the kind of complexity, and longevity I would expect from a game of this kind. When I commanded at Regimental level in that Scenario I got quite accurate historical results, so in that regard the game balance is pretty spot on I think.
There are a number of annoying little things still though that you spot when you follow the action closely like we have already discovered. I would love to see them all fixed but then that often throws up other problems.
I would also love to see the new features we have been talking about in other threads as well, but at the end of the day it all comes down to time, money and priorities.
The game is very playable, and enjoyable at all levels of command, once you accept the fact that it is not, and probably never will be perfect, and adapt your play style and interference level to a point where your happy with the results.
It would make the scenarios very short lived, with hardly any replay value. As it stands now you have to really work at getting a win.
I wonder if for future expansions, and marketing it should be stated that it is primarily a Battalion level game, with capability to conduct, Regimental scale attacks, and Divisional moves.
My Elsenborn battle that I micro managed for example took 4 days of almost constant game play to get a win.
That was after many failed attempts as well, at all kinds of interference levels.
That's the kind of complexity, and longevity I would expect from a game of this kind. When I commanded at Regimental level in that Scenario I got quite accurate historical results, so in that regard the game balance is pretty spot on I think.
There are a number of annoying little things still though that you spot when you follow the action closely like we have already discovered. I would love to see them all fixed but then that often throws up other problems.
I would also love to see the new features we have been talking about in other threads as well, but at the end of the day it all comes down to time, money and priorities.
The game is very playable, and enjoyable at all levels of command, once you accept the fact that it is not, and probably never will be perfect, and adapt your play style and interference level to a point where your happy with the results.
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
Daz..I too wouldn't like that..but what I had in mind would still have loads of replay..you'd be constantly trying different orders and different planning..etc..the game would need to be heavily redesigned though to really give you lots of decisions at the planning level. Not just a case of giving a few orders..but giving a whole battle plan and all that entails..with say a chance to change the plan every so often during the attack. Again I'm thinking along the lines of a serious planning game and then you watch it unfold. Next time you could give totally different set of orders and planning from initial arty bombardments and times etc to reenforcement schedules...casualty clearing stations and where to set them up...phase lines..in depth supply planning. Again really a totally different game but thats the sort of design you'd have to go for if your really after a planning combat sim at a high scale but with coy level units..
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
ORIGINAL: Reaper
I have given this a go this afternoon, and my main issue with the move order is that troops tend not to push the right DBE units forward first, also HQ units lead the move rather stay at the rear.
What does DBE stand for? It's a good idea if you are using an acronym that has not been used previously here in this forum to spell it out in full the first time you do - eg Forming Up Place (FUP) or dammed bloody English (DBE)[;)].
Why do you say they are useless? Please elaborate.For me, I am a little frustrated that issuing orders at the Regt level is so useless - what of the complex attacks that the manual outlines - isn't this where the Regt level orders comes into its own.
We refer to this as a sequential tasking, triggers and planning graphics and yes I would dearly like to see these too. In fact we are discussing the next lot of new features right now on the Panther Dev Forum and these three definitely look like getting a Guernsey. We won't get to a full sync matrix this time round but it would entail being able to sequence a set of tasks; placing Named Areas of Interest (NAIs) and specifying triggers using time or the status of the NAI - eg. end if enemy enter area X.And your final point: I would love to be able to stack up the orders at the start - like attack objective 1, then attack objective 2 - also to include reaction triggers - as per any Battle Group planning exercise using a sync matrix or other planning tool at the start.
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
Eventually I would like to have a planning mode where you can create contingency plans as a 'future ops' staff would do. You would issue orders like you now do but with the ability to set sequential orders using triggers and planning graphics. These would not have an immediate affect on the forces assigned. Rather they would form part of a plan that could then be saved. At some point the user could select the desired continency plan and commit it. Then it would scrub the current active plan and substitute the newly committed plan as the active plan.ORIGINAL: wodin
Daz..I too wouldn't like that..but what I had in mind would still have loads of replay..you'd be constantly trying different orders and different planning..etc..the game would need to be heavily redesigned though to really give you lots of decisions at the planning level. Not just a case of giving a few orders..but giving a whole battle plan and all that entails..with say a chance to change the plan every so often during the attack. Again I'm thinking along the lines of a serious planning game and then you watch it unfold. Next time you could give totally different set of orders and planning from initial arty bombardments and times etc to reenforcement schedules...casualty clearing stations and where to set them up...phase lines..in depth supply planning. Again really a totally different game but thats the sort of design you'd have to go for if your really after a planning combat sim at a high scale but with coy level units..
It would also be need to have triggers for whole plans. Eg if the enemy are forced out of the town we go to Plan B, which may entail changing from attacks along the line to pushing through the gap and enveloping the enemy line. That type of thing.
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
Sounds fantastic Dave.
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
ORIGINAL: Arjuna
using triggers and planning graphics.
Yes please [&o]
This could transform the way you prepare, and execute your game.
To have on screen overlays that you can draw on, and hide at will, then use as a planning, and a battle aid to stay on that plan or adjust as you see fit would be a massive improvement. You could plot observed enemy direction of movement, locations that you suspect will still have enemy in them even when the sighting expires.
It would also be great for AAR's, and for bug finding to make it easier for people to take screen dumps with their own notes on the image, that they did without having to close the game or load it into a graphics program for editing first.
You could even write across the middle of the map DON'T FORGET TO PICK UP WIFE AT 10:30
The aplications for it are endless, I don't know why it has taken you so long to realise [:D]
Edit: Sorry about disrupting your AAR thread Ade.
Kind of got a bit off topic.
I am enjoying it, please contiue when you get time.
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
Arjuna,
Some great thread posts on here since yesterday evening.
DBE - Direct Battlefield Engagement. Basically Direct Fire units such as armour and inf, anti-tank etc ( generally mutually supportive) Those units that use line of sight to engage and destroy the enemy - that's how I understand it anyway.
Regt attacks. I struggle with issuing Regt Level attacks because it appears to take so much longer than issuing orders straight to the Bdes. Very rarely and not once in the Losheim Gap scenario have I seen a successful plan.
Additionally, in the Losheim Gap scenario, I linked the Stugs at Regt Level and then gave an attack order. Now I would have thought that the Regt HQ would have re-organised the Stugs to provide one Coy per Inf Bn - acting as Combined Arms - Is this ability coded into the AI decision process? If not could it be an option to select the AI to Reorg Combined Arms units
Planning. Great that you have thought about this already. Named Areas of Interest / Target Areas of Interest as triggers would be a great feature for both own units and enemy AI. But simply been able to stack the Attack orders up at the start and then been able to edit the plan would be great - i.e attack one active - still able to provide limited edits to future tasks (incorporating some delay - to simulate Staff review process).
Additionally - At Regt Level been able to provide direction to what sort of offensive action is preferred -(i.e frontal / pincer / L/R Flanking / Breakthrough / Encirclement etc
This has the potential to become a very powerful Combat Sim indeed
Ade
Some great thread posts on here since yesterday evening.
DBE - Direct Battlefield Engagement. Basically Direct Fire units such as armour and inf, anti-tank etc ( generally mutually supportive) Those units that use line of sight to engage and destroy the enemy - that's how I understand it anyway.
Regt attacks. I struggle with issuing Regt Level attacks because it appears to take so much longer than issuing orders straight to the Bdes. Very rarely and not once in the Losheim Gap scenario have I seen a successful plan.
Additionally, in the Losheim Gap scenario, I linked the Stugs at Regt Level and then gave an attack order. Now I would have thought that the Regt HQ would have re-organised the Stugs to provide one Coy per Inf Bn - acting as Combined Arms - Is this ability coded into the AI decision process? If not could it be an option to select the AI to Reorg Combined Arms units
Planning. Great that you have thought about this already. Named Areas of Interest / Target Areas of Interest as triggers would be a great feature for both own units and enemy AI. But simply been able to stack the Attack orders up at the start and then been able to edit the plan would be great - i.e attack one active - still able to provide limited edits to future tasks (incorporating some delay - to simulate Staff review process).
Additionally - At Regt Level been able to provide direction to what sort of offensive action is preferred -(i.e frontal / pincer / L/R Flanking / Breakthrough / Encirclement etc
This has the potential to become a very powerful Combat Sim indeed
Ade
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
RESTART - OK, given all that I have learned through till now, I am going to restart the scenario incorporating all of the advice that I have been provided thus far.
The initial plan remains the same, however, I will be operating this much more up close and personal. My Officers will feel like I am in their in-tray.
I will also provide more detail as to my rationale and battle plan as the scenario unfolds.
Am going to take a look in more detail at the various soft traits of the units such as experience etc.
So, therefore - Losheim Gap (Take 2) is on.
Orders:
Day 1 Orders:
1. 294 Grenadier Regt (attached units: 2bty 74 Flak Bn and 2 Coy 1818 Pion Bn)advance to Maderfeld. Secure objective (3 FJD Feldersatz Bn to provide security) then probe SW towards the Bridges at Andler.
2. 295 Grenadier Regt (2nd Bn - supported by 3Stug Bty) to move though Roth to objective Auw. Also secure area around Shlausenbach to form defence perimeter against enemy inf and eng units retreating from the Schnee forest area. Elements of 295th to then probe W to Andler and Sw to link up with the 293rd.
3. 293 Grenadier Regt ( supported by 1 and 3 Bty 74 Flak BN) to advance through Muhlenberg/Alferberg towards objective Radscheid. Once completed elements to probe W towards the bridge at Schonberg.
4. 190 Grenadier Regt to Advance to Grosslangenfeld and Winterspelt. Once completed elements to proe NW towards the bridge at Steinebruck and Berg-Reuland.
5. 18 Feldersatz Bn to provide security in-situ - until such times as enemy unit move NW. Then to move NW to provide Security on all roads entering the forest area.
6. Artillery will support advancing units as well as providing counter-battery fire on enemy Artillery positions (North of Radscheid and South of Laudesfeld).
I will be mainly at the Bn level - and also actively seek to maintain momentum - only engaging units that are directly in the path of my advancing line.
The initial plan remains the same, however, I will be operating this much more up close and personal. My Officers will feel like I am in their in-tray.
I will also provide more detail as to my rationale and battle plan as the scenario unfolds.
Am going to take a look in more detail at the various soft traits of the units such as experience etc.
So, therefore - Losheim Gap (Take 2) is on.
Orders:
Day 1 Orders:
1. 294 Grenadier Regt (attached units: 2bty 74 Flak Bn and 2 Coy 1818 Pion Bn)advance to Maderfeld. Secure objective (3 FJD Feldersatz Bn to provide security) then probe SW towards the Bridges at Andler.
2. 295 Grenadier Regt (2nd Bn - supported by 3Stug Bty) to move though Roth to objective Auw. Also secure area around Shlausenbach to form defence perimeter against enemy inf and eng units retreating from the Schnee forest area. Elements of 295th to then probe W to Andler and Sw to link up with the 293rd.
3. 293 Grenadier Regt ( supported by 1 and 3 Bty 74 Flak BN) to advance through Muhlenberg/Alferberg towards objective Radscheid. Once completed elements to probe W towards the bridge at Schonberg.
4. 190 Grenadier Regt to Advance to Grosslangenfeld and Winterspelt. Once completed elements to proe NW towards the bridge at Steinebruck and Berg-Reuland.
5. 18 Feldersatz Bn to provide security in-situ - until such times as enemy unit move NW. Then to move NW to provide Security on all roads entering the forest area.
6. Artillery will support advancing units as well as providing counter-battery fire on enemy Artillery positions (North of Radscheid and South of Laudesfeld).
I will be mainly at the Bn level - and also actively seek to maintain momentum - only engaging units that are directly in the path of my advancing line.
- Attachments
-
- scenario..rsfinal.jpg (358.01 KiB) Viewed 525 times
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
7 am - initial Orders executed
Momentum has been key in the opening. My aim was to close in on the enemy positions such that my forward line of troops engaged enemy positions before sunrise - this to prevent my attacks been shelled by artillery and mortars on the advance.
Orders were given to advance quickly, with FUPS close to the front line and not wait for stragglers - this has proven very useful in preventing delay.
See below North and South images - I have outlined future Regt HQ base positions.
Another key lesson learned has been to ensure Regt HQs keep closer to my front line - this to reduce the command delay.
Anyway, see below.
Momentum has been key in the opening. My aim was to close in on the enemy positions such that my forward line of troops engaged enemy positions before sunrise - this to prevent my attacks been shelled by artillery and mortars on the advance.
Orders were given to advance quickly, with FUPS close to the front line and not wait for stragglers - this has proven very useful in preventing delay.
See below North and South images - I have outlined future Regt HQ base positions.
Another key lesson learned has been to ensure Regt HQs keep closer to my front line - this to reduce the command delay.
Anyway, see below.
- Attachments
-
- 7amsitrep.jpg (238.88 KiB) Viewed 527 times
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
Sounds good [:)]
I think you will enjoy the experience a lot more.
I think you will enjoy the experience a lot more.
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
Day 1 - 12pm Sit-rep
1. 294 Grenadier Regt and 295th have achieved initial objectives. However, i'm still stuck with units with 1M8 and 4 troops seemingly immortal - The will continue forward to Auw and Manderfeld- where they will rest overnight.
2. 293 Grenadier Regt have met with more substantial resistance in the south. However artillery has managed to break the resolve of enemy units to remain in-situ and the advance continues North.
3. 190th joined by 164th in the SW of my advance are an Eigelscheid - will continue NW towards Winterspelt where they will rest overnight.
I have found it useful to attach a Stug Coy to the 294th (1 per Coy). This is providing the Inf more firepower around Weckerath and Krewinkel.
Regt HQ units have moved into forward positions.
Artillery have moved to forward firebases.
1. 294 Grenadier Regt and 295th have achieved initial objectives. However, i'm still stuck with units with 1M8 and 4 troops seemingly immortal - The will continue forward to Auw and Manderfeld- where they will rest overnight.
2. 293 Grenadier Regt have met with more substantial resistance in the south. However artillery has managed to break the resolve of enemy units to remain in-situ and the advance continues North.
3. 190th joined by 164th in the SW of my advance are an Eigelscheid - will continue NW towards Winterspelt where they will rest overnight.
I have found it useful to attach a Stug Coy to the 294th (1 per Coy). This is providing the Inf more firepower around Weckerath and Krewinkel.
Regt HQ units have moved into forward positions.
Artillery have moved to forward firebases.
- Attachments
-
- day112pmsitrep.jpg (268.38 KiB) Viewed 525 times
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
Day 1 5pm Sit-rep
Starting to consolidate my day 1 gains.
Fresh troops moving to the front in order to push forwards under cover of night to the objectives.
See below
Starting to consolidate my day 1 gains.
Fresh troops moving to the front in order to push forwards under cover of night to the objectives.
See below
- Attachments
-
- day15pmsitrep.jpg (262.04 KiB) Viewed 525 times
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
Day 2 0001hrs Sit-rep
1. 294 Grenadier Regt are just short of objective Manderfeld. With support from 3 FJD they should be able to take and hold the position after sunrise.
2. 295 Grenadier Regt are at objective Auw. Will commence push west after sunrise.
3. 293 Grenadier Regt, have taken Radschied and are awaiting supporting troops advancing north in order for them not to be encircled. 190 Grenadier Regt are moving NE through the night to add fire power to that front.
4. 164 Grenadier Regt have reached Winterspelt and are remaining in-situ over night to recover before pushing NW in the morning.
Other points
Enemy units seem overly difficult to dislodge - have seen units with one vehicle or 2 troops halt advances.
Artillery working in support of advance appears to work well.
1. 294 Grenadier Regt are just short of objective Manderfeld. With support from 3 FJD they should be able to take and hold the position after sunrise.
2. 295 Grenadier Regt are at objective Auw. Will commence push west after sunrise.
3. 293 Grenadier Regt, have taken Radschied and are awaiting supporting troops advancing north in order for them not to be encircled. 190 Grenadier Regt are moving NE through the night to add fire power to that front.
4. 164 Grenadier Regt have reached Winterspelt and are remaining in-situ over night to recover before pushing NW in the morning.
Other points
Enemy units seem overly difficult to dislodge - have seen units with one vehicle or 2 troops halt advances.
Artillery working in support of advance appears to work well.
- Attachments
-
- day20001amsitrep.jpg (269.41 KiB) Viewed 525 times
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
Day 2 -0700hrs sit-rep
Pretty much managed to hold onto all fronts overnight - looking forward to some additional troops today.
See map.
That's me for this session
Ade
Pretty much managed to hold onto all fronts overnight - looking forward to some additional troops today.
See map.
That's me for this session
Ade
- Attachments
-
- day20700hrs.jpg (993.18 KiB) Viewed 525 times
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
Ade,
One of the biggest problems I see with users issuing attack orders for a Bde/Regt is they specify an FUP too far or too close to the objective. If the FUP is too close, then the force will make contact with the enemy as the advance guard for the move pushes into the FUP. This will result in it halting or retreating and the whole Move will get bogged down. If the FUP is too far then the force will take a very long time in the assault phase to close with the enemy on the objective. They will get fatigued and may decide to rest if allowed or just mode at a crawl.
Another problem is assigning an FUP or route to the FUP that necessitates the force having to make contact with the enemy. This is not good and will invariably end badly. So try and choose secure FUP locations. If you are not sure of the terrain between their current loc and the FUP then you may be better off doing a Move there first and allow attacks for the Move. That way if they encounter something on the way they can respond to clear it out of the way. Once at the desired FUP issue an Attack with the FUP set as its current loc.
One of the biggest problems I see with users issuing attack orders for a Bde/Regt is they specify an FUP too far or too close to the objective. If the FUP is too close, then the force will make contact with the enemy as the advance guard for the move pushes into the FUP. This will result in it halting or retreating and the whole Move will get bogged down. If the FUP is too far then the force will take a very long time in the assault phase to close with the enemy on the objective. They will get fatigued and may decide to rest if allowed or just mode at a crawl.
Another problem is assigning an FUP or route to the FUP that necessitates the force having to make contact with the enemy. This is not good and will invariably end badly. So try and choose secure FUP locations. If you are not sure of the terrain between their current loc and the FUP then you may be better off doing a Move there first and allow attacks for the Move. That way if they encounter something on the way they can respond to clear it out of the way. Once at the desired FUP issue an Attack with the FUP set as its current loc.
RE: Losheim Gap AAR - Ongoing
Dave,
Thanks for that. My only issue thus far experienced with the move order is that it does not necessarily ensure that HQ and mortars don't lead the way. Can you confirm whether if you select attacks that the AI will move the inf / armoured units before the HQs and support units.
Ade
Thanks for that. My only issue thus far experienced with the move order is that it does not necessarily ensure that HQ and mortars don't lead the way. Can you confirm whether if you select attacks that the AI will move the inf / armoured units before the HQs and support units.
Ade