The most common mistake I see FNG's making is fighting their scouts like they were normal infantry. Scouts should scout. They should only fight enemy scouts. Without your scouts you are fighting blind. It is very rare that blind men win a fight. Once you find your opponent, pull your scouts back, and let your regular units take over. There are other jobs that need doing that you scouts can do a lot better then regular legs. Such as rear area protection. If you are playing me I promise you that I will have as many guerrillas or special ops teams in your rear as I can afford. Scouts are great for tracking them down. They also protect your on board arty and can be used as trip wires on the flanks. Unless, of course, you get them killed off assaulting dug in MG positions. While the little 2 and 4 man teams spot better, they are dog meat for an armored car with a heavy MG. And those AC's are dog meat for the midrange AT guns and AA guns. You need a mix. I nearly always build my own Recon teams using the Assign command. Put an AC with a gun that has some AT capability in the same platoon with a vehicle carring a MG(the bigger the MG the better) and at least 1 scout team. The US recon platoons from the Late '44 period on are great. As are the brits from the same period. A 37mmAT Gun on a fast AC, 2 scout teams and some fast vehicles to carry them in. If your country doesn't have the armed AC's like the grayhound or the puma, then buy a truck and put a scout platoon in it and just go like 4ell. At the end of each turn unload the truck and on your next turn move one scout team off into the weeds and hide him. Load up the rest of the scouts and repeat untill the truck explodes. You will now have a line of hidden scouts across the map. Set their range to zero and they are real hard to find. Done right, you should never be suprised by your enemy again. Plus you will know where he is going almost when he does(before he does, if you don't mind playing mind games). If you can keep him from doing it to you, then you can spring some real nasty traps.
T.
Small Question / Recon Units
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
Thoughts on scouts for rookies;
"The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
-
Belisarius
- Posts: 3099
- Joined: Sat May 26, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
- Contact:
Or, it's pretty much like this:
You can accept taking a punch in the face although it hurts, but you scarcely let someone stab you in the eyes :p
Reckon is everything. I have to fight Jedi right now w/out it and GOD do I need it!
And oh yeah, Tomanbeg; I pretty much decided to dislike your sig.
You can accept taking a punch in the face although it hurts, but you scarcely let someone stab you in the eyes :p
Reckon is everything. I have to fight Jedi right now w/out it and GOD do I need it!
And oh yeah, Tomanbeg; I pretty much decided to dislike your sig.
Got StuG?
Originally posted by Belisarius
Or, it's pretty much like this:
You can accept taking a punch in the face although it hurts, but you scarcely let someone stab you in the eyes :p
Reckon is everything. I have to fight Jedi right now w/out it and GOD do I need it!
And oh yeah, Tomanbeg; I pretty much decided to dislike your sig.
I'll be more then happy to discuse my sig, but only on the AOW forum. I don't do politics anywhere else. It gets me in trouble.
T.
Or, it's pretty much like this:
You can accept taking a punch in the face although it hurts, but you scarcely let someone stab you in the eyes :p
Reckon is everything. I have to fight Jedi right now w/out it and GOD do I need it!
And oh yeah, Tomanbeg; I pretty much decided to dislike your sig.
I'll be more then happy to discuse my sig, but only on the AOW forum. I don't do politics anywhere else. It gets me in trouble.
T.
"The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
That article proves that someone with an axe to grind and tons of data that is willing to spend the time to comb the data can extract nuggets to prove their point. I, for one, have never doubted that.
"I. Gooderson, Allied Fighter-Bombers Versus German Armour in North&endash;West Europe 1944&endash;1945: Myths and Realities (Journal of Strategic Studies, vol 14, No 2 June 1991) p. 221. The basic sources for the data on destruction of German tanks and other equipment used by Gooderson are th e reports of the operations research teams that investigated the battlefields after the end of the battles and examined the wrecks found. These are probably the most reliable sources for such information avialable today."
Notice how the writer hedges his bets. And His contention that "These are probably the most reliable sources for such information avialable today" has been challenged on this forum already. These are the same group of people that worked for Col. Marshall and there is a group of historians that challege the intigerity of these reports. I think the reports are right, that the people making them had no motive for expending the extra effort to lie, since the 'lies' weren't discovered until the 1990's when it was possible to make money off challenging the reports. What is possible was an officer who had never been in a tank or aircraft to look at the blacked hulk of a german tank torn mostly apart by the normal internal explosion and come to what ever conclusion his commander ordered him to. The Politics of the day dictated that AIR power be downplayed because the Army Air Corps was trying to cut the string to the Army and become just the Air Force. The Army was not happy about this and quite capable of spinning Data to 'prove' it's point. So if there was any doubt about why a german tank exploded and spread bits all over the place, the Army got the credit in the offical reports.
BTW, 5" HVAR's being inaccurate is bull. You had to practice. The same rockets were used in Korea, where there is anecdotal material about the accuracy of the rockets when used by experienced pilots. I think that when they were tested in England, the pilots were rookies. There is plenty of gun camera film showing a pair of rokets hitting a tank and blowing it apart. Was there ever any attempt to cross reference the film to the after action reports?
T.
"I. Gooderson, Allied Fighter-Bombers Versus German Armour in North&endash;West Europe 1944&endash;1945: Myths and Realities (Journal of Strategic Studies, vol 14, No 2 June 1991) p. 221. The basic sources for the data on destruction of German tanks and other equipment used by Gooderson are th e reports of the operations research teams that investigated the battlefields after the end of the battles and examined the wrecks found. These are probably the most reliable sources for such information avialable today."
Notice how the writer hedges his bets. And His contention that "These are probably the most reliable sources for such information avialable today" has been challenged on this forum already. These are the same group of people that worked for Col. Marshall and there is a group of historians that challege the intigerity of these reports. I think the reports are right, that the people making them had no motive for expending the extra effort to lie, since the 'lies' weren't discovered until the 1990's when it was possible to make money off challenging the reports. What is possible was an officer who had never been in a tank or aircraft to look at the blacked hulk of a german tank torn mostly apart by the normal internal explosion and come to what ever conclusion his commander ordered him to. The Politics of the day dictated that AIR power be downplayed because the Army Air Corps was trying to cut the string to the Army and become just the Air Force. The Army was not happy about this and quite capable of spinning Data to 'prove' it's point. So if there was any doubt about why a german tank exploded and spread bits all over the place, the Army got the credit in the offical reports.
BTW, 5" HVAR's being inaccurate is bull. You had to practice. The same rockets were used in Korea, where there is anecdotal material about the accuracy of the rockets when used by experienced pilots. I think that when they were tested in England, the pilots were rookies. There is plenty of gun camera film showing a pair of rokets hitting a tank and blowing it apart. Was there ever any attempt to cross reference the film to the after action reports?
T.
"The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
I think I dig Recon ("reckon," BTW, is what they used to say in Missouri. I reckon I might get to liking recon. 
), but here's a question: What's with turning the range down to 0? Does it provide any software advantage (eg, players know when you're getting opfire chances?), or is it just to keep you from accidentally hitting 'Y' when cycling through your opfires?
), but here's a question: What's with turning the range down to 0? Does it provide any software advantage (eg, players know when you're getting opfire chances?), or is it just to keep you from accidentally hitting 'Y' when cycling through your opfires?
Tomaberg:
A little story about the accuracy of 5" Rockets: Period 1951, Atlantic area, Firing from Neptune (P2V) at a towed sled using solid head rocket. We fired one rocket from the Port wing (left for any AF types here) It (rocket) crossed our bow and scared the **** out of the pilot, it missed the sled so far ahead of it that the Tug that was towing gave us ****. On the next pass the starboard rocket also crossed out bow from right to left, I was nose gunner at the time and I swear I could have touch that sob. This was not a rare situation and these were WW2 rockets. When you (we) fired a salvo (4) each wing you usually got one or two in the target which was the way quite a few were fired in Korea by close air support.
A little story about the accuracy of 5" Rockets: Period 1951, Atlantic area, Firing from Neptune (P2V) at a towed sled using solid head rocket. We fired one rocket from the Port wing (left for any AF types here) It (rocket) crossed our bow and scared the **** out of the pilot, it missed the sled so far ahead of it that the Tug that was towing gave us ****. On the next pass the starboard rocket also crossed out bow from right to left, I was nose gunner at the time and I swear I could have touch that sob. This was not a rare situation and these were WW2 rockets. When you (we) fired a salvo (4) each wing you usually got one or two in the target which was the way quite a few were fired in Korea by close air support.
"God Bless America and All the Young men and women who give their all to protect Her"....chief
Originally posted by chief
Tomaberg:
A little story about the accuracy of 5" Rockets: Period 1951, Atlantic area, Firing from Neptune (P2V) at a towed sled using solid head rocket. We fired one rocket from the Port wing (left for any AF types here) It (rocket) crossed our bow and scared the **** out of the pilot, it missed the sled so far ahead of it that the Tug that was towing gave us ****. On the next pass the starboard rocket also crossed out bow from right to left, I was nose gunner at the time and I swear I could have touch that sob. This was not a rare situation and these were WW2 rockets. When you (we) fired a salvo (4) each wing you usually got one or two in the target which was the way quite a few were fired in Korea by close air support.
Exactly. My dad was in P2V's a few years later. Practice was the answer. When dad was flying out of Corpus Christy he said there was one pilot who could routinly hit barrels(55 gallon drums, I assume) floating on the ocean with 2 rocket salvos. Now he was a WW2 pilot flying an avenger, with thousands of hours in type and a lot of combat time. So for some chair bound army col to say that a P-47 pilot with lots of practice couldn't fire an 8 rocket salvo and pot a tank is BS. Or 4-2 rocket salvos. plus the 9th airforce didn't assign 2 plane sorties. If you got 1 P-47 you got between 16 and 48 depending on when it was. And Smart Flak gunners would hide and shoot up the last plane, because as soon as they started firing they went to the top of the target list. While SPAA shot down a lot of Jabo's, more SPAA's died then Jabo's. Look at the production numbers and figure how many were left to surrender. No this was about Politics. The Army didn't want to admit that the Tank Destroyer Idea was stupid and cost the lives of a lot of brave men. And they didn't want to lose control of the Army Air Corps. So they fudged the numbers, which is still an Army tradition. Gundecking is not just a naval diesese. It's done in all the armed forces, I just don't know the slang is for the boys in blue or the Army. It could be worse, the RAF still won't admit that the night bombing campaign was a colossal waste of men and money.
T.
Tomaberg:
A little story about the accuracy of 5" Rockets: Period 1951, Atlantic area, Firing from Neptune (P2V) at a towed sled using solid head rocket. We fired one rocket from the Port wing (left for any AF types here) It (rocket) crossed our bow and scared the **** out of the pilot, it missed the sled so far ahead of it that the Tug that was towing gave us ****. On the next pass the starboard rocket also crossed out bow from right to left, I was nose gunner at the time and I swear I could have touch that sob. This was not a rare situation and these were WW2 rockets. When you (we) fired a salvo (4) each wing you usually got one or two in the target which was the way quite a few were fired in Korea by close air support.
Exactly. My dad was in P2V's a few years later. Practice was the answer. When dad was flying out of Corpus Christy he said there was one pilot who could routinly hit barrels(55 gallon drums, I assume) floating on the ocean with 2 rocket salvos. Now he was a WW2 pilot flying an avenger, with thousands of hours in type and a lot of combat time. So for some chair bound army col to say that a P-47 pilot with lots of practice couldn't fire an 8 rocket salvo and pot a tank is BS. Or 4-2 rocket salvos. plus the 9th airforce didn't assign 2 plane sorties. If you got 1 P-47 you got between 16 and 48 depending on when it was. And Smart Flak gunners would hide and shoot up the last plane, because as soon as they started firing they went to the top of the target list. While SPAA shot down a lot of Jabo's, more SPAA's died then Jabo's. Look at the production numbers and figure how many were left to surrender. No this was about Politics. The Army didn't want to admit that the Tank Destroyer Idea was stupid and cost the lives of a lot of brave men. And they didn't want to lose control of the Army Air Corps. So they fudged the numbers, which is still an Army tradition. Gundecking is not just a naval diesese. It's done in all the armed forces, I just don't know the slang is for the boys in blue or the Army. It could be worse, the RAF still won't admit that the night bombing campaign was a colossal waste of men and money.
T.
"The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
Originally posted by Katana
It's for when you swith off op-fire. You set the range to 0, so you don't give away you position until the enemy is right on top of you.
you can also switch off weapons, but it leaves your unit rather defenseless. Doesn't stop anyone from assaulting a tank, though:rolleyes:
Something to try is recon by fire. I have turned my unit to range 0 to prevent it giving away it's location, and have it go to full range when fired on by arty. I havn't ran any tests yet in 7.1 so I'm not positive that the game is still doing this. But if it is you can put a few rounds into suspected ambush locations(using area fire) and if there is an enemy unit there, it will sometimes shoot back. That might cost you the unit firing , but it will save you what ever else the ambush would have gotten.
T.
It's for when you swith off op-fire. You set the range to 0, so you don't give away you position until the enemy is right on top of you.
you can also switch off weapons, but it leaves your unit rather defenseless. Doesn't stop anyone from assaulting a tank, though:rolleyes:
Something to try is recon by fire. I have turned my unit to range 0 to prevent it giving away it's location, and have it go to full range when fired on by arty. I havn't ran any tests yet in 7.1 so I'm not positive that the game is still doing this. But if it is you can put a few rounds into suspected ambush locations(using area fire) and if there is an enemy unit there, it will sometimes shoot back. That might cost you the unit firing , but it will save you what ever else the ambush would have gotten.
T.
"The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
I like using Assault guns or light mortars for this. Even if it doesn't get retrun fire all the time, it usually has a serious enough effect that I either get to see the unit or surpress it enough that I can get close enough to do some real damage without losing entire squads.
Challenge
War is unhealthy for die-stamped cardboard and other paper products.
War is unhealthy for die-stamped cardboard and other paper products.