Matrix Games Forums

Curious if there are tips on actually seizing and holding an objective? In Hofen, I find that, at the end, I do not have an objective because a single enemy unit is still within whatever range is needed to deny, however, my forces which were ordered to take it never seem to focus on completely securing the objective.

If tried simply ordering an attack on the objective. I've tried expanding the size of the objective. I've tried ordering defend and different formations.

Am I missing a trick or technique?

I always micromange the final stages to clear it, Andrew. The AI does not place defensive screens where you would need them to clear these stubborn units, even if you widen the defensive box to full size, I've found. Best place each unit in the force yourself, at a wide enough position to either engage units within the objective circle, or to prevent entry, then, once they're in position, re-attach and give the HQ a defend in-situ order. At least that's what I've done in Hofen to clear them. Plus massive focussed bombards on each stubborn unit bothering you (uncheck 'avoid friendlies') until it moves - do them all one at a time on day 3 in Hofen.

Of course, you can always (very easily) reduce the size of the objective circle in scenmaker..... Joking, but, that said, some of them are very wide (not in Hofen, perhaps, but other scenarios).

Interesting. How does the AI ever win if attacking and it can't manage this?

Well you need a 10:1 ratio over your enemy in strength (not necessarily in # of units, or in manpower)...it is not needed necessarily to entirely clear out every stubborn unit. The AI seems to win just by rushing so much combat power in, that they overwhelm you in numbers more than trying to eliminate every last unit as well.

Also is it a objective you get points for holding at the end or that gives you points over time for holding it?

ORIGINAL: AndrewKurtz

Curious if there are tips on actually seizing and holding an objective? In Hofen, I find that, at the end, I do not have an objective because a single enemy unit is still within whatever range is needed to deny, however, my forces which were ordered to take it never seem to focus on completely securing the objective.

If tried simply ordering an attack on the objective. I've tried expanding the size of the objective. I've tried ordering defend and different formations.

Am I missing a trick or technique?

What works for me is first attaining the objective, and then working to build a cushion around the unit(s) which has attained the objective to assure there is no ability for the AI to counterattack effectively.

Involves combined arms with bombardment to reduce morale of attacking units, mobile units necessary to respond to fractures in the defense at the objective, and well emplaced and rested units to defend at the point of the enemy's counterattack.

It's more important with high value objectives (e.g. those with the most points assigned) than with lower valued objectives that are intermediate to the ultimate goal for the scenario.

By my experience, the AI is less inclined to use significant assets to retake a minor objective when it has been secured sufficiently to move onto the next high value target, even if the friendly force occupying it isn't sufficient to start counting up victory points.

Yeah, the ratio necessary to "secure" a contested objective is a problem, but not if you use your extra assets (those above the minimum necessary to occupy the objective with no risk of losing it to a counterattack) to either isolate counterattacking forces or push away those enemy units most prone to counterattack because of their proximity to the mutual goal.

The other aspect is to consider time and space necessary to win.

If you've got 10 days to accomplish all your goals, it helps to take the minor objectives between FLOT and a major objective before attempting to take a critical high value objective.

Puts the enemy at a disadvantage for its communications / supply status and truncates the enemy's ability to interrupt friendly resupply, allowing you as a commander to keep your own units relatively fresh for defensive or offensive operations. Also tends to isolate the major objective, allowing freer friendly troop maneuver into advantageous positions for taking the major objective.

Hope this helps.

But in Hofen, Jim, you don't really get all those luxuries, do you? I mean - Involves combined arms with bombardment to reduce morale of attacking units, mobile units necessary to respond to fractures in the defense at the objective, and well emplaced and rested units to defend at the point of the enemy's counterattack. Is that how you won your Hofen scenarios? The bombardment you can do ,yes. But well-rested units? At Day 3 in the Hofen scenario? Mobile reserves? Seriously - you have these things available on day 3 in Hofen when you play it? How? I'm doing it wrong, clearly.

ORIGINAL: phoenix

But in Hofen, Jim, you don't really get all those luxuries, do you? I mean - Involves combined arms with bombardment to reduce morale of attacking units, mobile units necessary to respond to fractures in the defense at the objective, and well emplaced and rested units to defend at the point of the enemy's counterattack. Is that how you won your Hofen scenarios? The bombardment you can do ,yes. But well-rested units? At Day 3 in the Hofen scenario? Mobile reserves? Seriously - you have these things available on day 3 in Hofen when you play it? How? I'm doing it wrong, clearly.

What I suggested is almost straight from the story of Rommel's operations in North Africa (both on offense and defense) and Guderain's operations on the Eastern Front (both offense and defense).

They aren't "luxuries" but necessities for success, even if "success" is in delaying an overwhelming enemy force's advance.

The golden rule of operational command is "always maintain a reserve. Once you commit it, create another." That may mean thinning out the forces assigned to other objectives but without a reserve you have very little options for controlling the battle space.

The AI controlled forces have access to Secure doctrine. This is not available to the human player primarily because we wanted to maximise human involvement. A Secure mission is like a defend except that it can assign peripheral delay tasks on the likely approaches and can launch counter attacks to clear the perimeter. The human player is expected to manage these peripheral aspects manually by issuing Delay and attack orders directly. But to do this you have to maintain a reserve.

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

The golden rule of operational command is "always maintain a reserve. Once you commit it, create another." That may mean thinning out the forces assigned to other objectives but without a reserve you have very little options for controlling the battle space.

The AI controlled forces have access to Secure doctrine. This is not available to the human player primarily because we wanted to maximise human involvement. A Secure mission is like a defend except that it can assign peripheral delay tasks on the likely approaches and can launch counter attacks to clear the perimeter. The human player is expected to manage these peripheral aspects manually by issuing Delay and attack orders directly. But to do this you have to maintain a reserve.

Ah Ha!! <light bulb goes on>

That is good to know...........explains much. Now I know why the AI is often so much better with contested obj. than I am.

Good stuff!!

Rob.

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

The golden rule of operational command is "always maintain a reserve. Once you commit it, create another." That may mean thinning out the forces assigned to other objectives but without a reserve you have very little options for controlling the battle space.

The AI controlled forces have access to Secure doctrine. This is not available to the human player primarily because we wanted to maximise human involvement. A Secure mission is like a defend except that it can assign peripheral delay tasks on the likely approaches and can launch counter attacks to clear the perimeter. The human player is expected to manage these peripheral aspects manually by issuing Delay and attack orders directly. But to do this you have to maintain a reserve.

I've been accused of telling people how to build a watch to get to the point of answering "what time is it?" [;)]

Better explained than mine.

ORIGINAL: jimcarravallah

I've been accused of telling people how to build a watch to get to the point of answering "what time is it?" [;)]

Better explained than mine.

Too funny! Thanks to everyone for the comments. Very enlightening...however we'll see if enlightening can be turned into victory.

All very interesting! Especially that the AI has that capability! Thanks Dave.

However, Andrew, you can get a decisive victory in the Hofen scenario (honest!) without any reserves at all, certainly without rested men (how you would acheive that by day 3 at Hofen and win is beyond me - but I would love to see the AAR proving it) and there are quite a few AARs showing you how in the old AAR section. As I said, how I have done it, without the luxury of reserves (they all have been, of necessity committed much earlier in this battle), is more or less outlined above. It sometimes seems to me that the pure military doctrine is a very different thing to the circumstances you encounter playing this game (maybe in real life too), which, with Hofen, for example, is that you have a bunch of very poorly trained VGs, no way near what you were promised, no where near enough, and a very capable (if small) defending force against you, with tight time limits to clear way too many objectives for the forces at your disposal. Because of the paucity of resources and tight time limits things like rested reserves vanish around day 2. To have rested mobile reserves to clear the objectives on day 3 you would have needed to put together probably 3 groups of such reserves (for 3 of the objectives) from the forces available, and if you'd done that you would never have got into the objectives in the first place. You're dealt a weak hand. But you still have to win, somehow. So, my simple answer was don't trust the AI to place defenders because it will place them too close to the centre of the objective and you won't thus clear the perimetres. Use arty as much as you can to batter units stuck within your perimetres.

That's not to say Dave's advice about reserves isn't beautiful and true. I just doubt you'll have that ability by day 3 in Hofen.

I'm awful for never having a reserve..every scenario I feel I need everything at once..not good planning on my part that though.

A point to consider for sure is that friendly and AI Obj Locs, as well as control radii are not necessarily the same (which is quite realistic and one the many features I like in CO). If they´re (almost) the same, then it can´t hurt to push a bit farther than necessary.

It´s a bit like with that "take that bridge" situation. If you HAVE that bridge, that doesn´t necessarily mean that you CONTROL it. Thus there´s need to push farther, build a bridgehead and clear all locations that the enemy can use to observe the actual crossing site and call/deliver effective fire on it.

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry

A point to consider for sure is that friendly and AI Obj Locs, as well as control radii are not necessarily the same (which is quite realistic and one the many features I like in CO). If they´re (almost) the same, then it can´t hurt to push a bit farther than necessary.

It´s a bit like with that "take that bridge" situation. If you HAVE that bridge, that doesn´t necessarily mean that you CONTROL it. Thus there´s need to push farther, build a bridgehead and clear all locations that the enemy can use to observe the actual crossing site and call/deliver effective fire on it.

I view the objectives as intermediate steps toward winning the battle . . . making the enemy ineffective by the end.

Holding the bridge gets points, but controlling the bridge to either deny maneuver to the enemy, or increase friendly options for maneuver wins battles.

One minor issue I have with the game is that once an objective is bypassed and totally denied to the enemy, unless it's occupied it stops counting points to victory.

In theory, one could destroy the enemy forces yet end up with a less significant victory because the high value objectives 20KM behind friendly lines were not garrisoned long enough to add significantly to the point totals.

Sometimes causes me to reposition higher headquarters, base units, long range artillery, and some of the less mobile / essential combat support units in areas not necessarily conducive to support for units at the front.

Jim it depends on the scenario maker whether they want you to hold it at games end..many objectives just last a certain amount of time..others only active at games end.

Wodin has a point, Jim. You could set up the objectives so that you got all the points on Completion only - that way you would only have to occupy them at the point they expired, which you could also set to whatever time you like - not necessarilly the end of the scenario. That's a kind of workaround, and easy to do. Not perfect, because, it you might set the objective to expire at day 5, say, of a 10 day scenario, guessing that would be a reasonable time to get in there, but events might prevent that, and then your chance of getting the points through a later occupation would be gone. It's a bit artificial, but might be better than having to constantly marshall lesser assets to hold and keep something.

I could see how it makes sense that an objective doesn't change state simply because you move units away. It only changes state when new units are within the control radii.

So once you control it, it stays in your control until the enemy gets a unit within the control radii.

However, to be clear, this isn't my Hofen challenge:)

Not at all, it can change state with the state of units remaining inside the area ~ routed units don't add much to the control.

All that is required is a force preponderance of around 10:1 (exact force required varies a bit, depending on circumstances) ~ this pretty much forces the 'holder' to eject most of the enemy major formation occupying the area, but a battalion attack into a platoon outpost should pretty reliably succeed, even if the platoon holds for some time after the successful occupation.

Note that it takes a lot more to dislodge a steady and full strength artillery Bn than a platoon of MPs, or even tanks...

Control is lost for the enemy at *his* 10:1 ratio as well, so there is a wide range of 'contested' objective occupation... this is useful even when you fail to occupy, as it denies the enemy *his* occupation or completion points ~ although beware, sometimes one side only has a "defend" or 'maintain presence' order, rather than a "secure" one, and the other side must remove the enemy entirely to prevent success for *this* objective.