Fulda - a second try

[MikeJ19]

The battle continues to rage...

[CapnDarwin]

Sometimes mass beats tech. [8D]

[Seer]

That's the gamble. Do the precision munitions do enough or is the mass too powerful?

[MikeJ19]

It is an interesting challenge in this battle. I wish that I could give some ground while stopping the Soviets, but then I loss the key VPs at the front. Oh well.

Here is the latest update:

[CapnDarwin]

PArt of the trick is placing and moving the techy bits to maximize the mass reduction. Planning and terrain use is a must.

[MikeJ19]

Agreed, this is a very challenging battle for the Americans. They have lots of firepower, but it is hard to keep it alive.

[MikeJ19]

A hard turn for me...

[MikeJ19]

I'm in trouble

[Secret45]

Great AAR. Very challenging scenario. When I played it before I really overestimated the fire power of my 105mm M1 Abrams due to being used to the better variants with a bigger gun you usually get in most scenarios.

[MikeJ19]

Thanks, this is certainly a tough battle! Hopefully, I can pull it out.

[MikeJ19]

Not sure that I will be able to come back to win this one...

[fluidwill]

You got to get these OPFOR casualty numbers UP Mike! These are rookie numbers!

Just joking, good luck and thanks for the read [:'(][:D]

[MikeJ19]

I'm taking a beating, that is for sure. I wish I could trade some ground for time, but that just gives away VPs that I need to get a draw.

[GloriousRuse]

Interesting. A quick question - is the MLRS over-modelled for play balance, or to reflect the (in hindsight, rather erroneous) cold war assumptions about it's capabilities?

[MikeJ19]

Good morning,

I'm not sure, I have no real experience with the MLRS. However, it can be very effective, both in real life and in the game. Artillery (both tubes and rockets) is always a difficult thing to measure - the is the straight destruction it causes, but it also affects the pysche of those receiving the fire. Very difficult to simulate...

[GloriousRuse]

I figured I would ask because coming out of the cold war, everyone had this assumption it would be a grid-square killing trump card, smashing the deep area up no matter what was in it. You can see it in the old professional articles floating about online where people are talking about sending just a couple pods to go 5/6 on a battery. Then between the two conventional gulf campaigns - as with most things to good to be true - a more realistic assessment came out. A lot of the softer target kill metrics were only somewhat overblown - you might need, say, 12 rockets to neutralize a battery rather than go 5/6 on it - but the effects on armor were found to be watning. I think we're now at the point where killing 30% of a tank company would require basically firing a "battery everything" from a cold war sized battery. (You'll be happy to know 72x HE per tank is still considered accurate)

It's kind of like a lot of the cold war tech assumptions - the tech does provide a marked advantage, but maybe not quite what was promised.

[MikeJ19]

I have six MLRS firing at a time, so I think the results make sense.

The battle will be decided over the next 45-60 minutes. I'm not that confident that I can turn the flow.

[MikeJ19]

The battle continues...

[fluidwill]

Nail biting stuff![8D]

[MikeJ19]

Thanks, I do not think that there is anyway I can get a draw, but on Monday I will give it a shot...

Off to the cottage. Have a good weekend,