Matrix Games Forums

...I suck at it.

I've played about five scenarios and have been lucky to manage some draws against the AI. And I get the basic concept of this game -- it's not for me to micromanage my units, but instead to issue orders to formations, in enough time for them to process and then execute the orders. I've re-read the manual a few times and done all of the tutorials. I'm trying to figure out what I'm doing wrong.

So a bunch of question/comments I'll throw out to the peanut gallery:

I've played as the attacker in all of the scenarios so far -- usually a more interesting tactical situation. Should I try to play as the defender?

I usually control down to the battalion level and issue battalion attack and movement orders. However, many of the scenarios include easily a couple dozen battalions, and that exceeds my span of control. At what level of command do most of you focus on?

How much do you micromanage? I usually suffice giving a BN attack order and maybe including a FUP. Do you select path types? Other waypoints? Change the Rest settings or other settings? Mandate certain formations?

What do you do with your support/enabler units -- like your AAA AWs or Engineers? Do you task org them to a BN or individually move them to supporting positions? Do you use your Engineers for route security and holding Objectives (assuming of course no river crossing missions)?

What do you do with your higher-level (regimental and division and corps) HQs? Do I need to keep moving them forward? Of course they can also do route security, but that's gamey IMO.

When launching a BN toward an objective with unknown enemy forces, do you give it an attack order? Or move order? How deep would you order an attack into an unknown, unreconnoitered enemy area?

And why do I get messages from some of my units that it failed to complete its mission when there is no reason it should have? I ordered a cav troop forward along a road, most of its route through friendly-held areas, and after a few hours I finally got an error that it failed to complete its mission.

When I get messages that a unit is below the minimum strength for an order, does that mean it ceases planning an executing that order? Why would I get a message that a unit is below the recommended minimum strength for an EXIT order?

I was totally struggling with the game and to a certain extent still do then caught this post with Liestes comments and it helped my game no end.

tm.asp?m=3142150

ORIGINAL: Brindlebane

I was totally struggling with the game and to a certain extent still do then caught this post with Liestes comments and it helped my game no end.

tm.asp?m=3142150

Thanks. Definitely helpful. Does anyone have any input on my other issues?

You should take a look at the AAR forum mate.
There are some great examples of how to play the game in there.

There is also the HTTR strategy guide (for the old version, but still very useful) you can download from the members area.
I take it you have watched the excellent tutorial video's that also come with the game?

If you look at all that, and still have questions post them here again, and Ill try to help out as best I can [;)]

ORIGINAL: BROJD

And why do I get messages from some of my units that it failed to complete its mission when there is no reason it should have? I ordered a cav troop forward along a road, most of its route through friendly-held areas, and after a few hours I finally got an error that it failed to complete its mission.

It's probably because it ran out of time. Normally if it hasn't reached its objective by the calculated end time it will slip the task. But sometimes this fails for different reasons. Just give it another Move order.

When I get messages that a unit is below the minimum strength for an order, does that mean it ceases planning an executing that order?

No.

Why would I get a message that a unit is below the recommended minimum strength for an EXIT order?

So you know you still need to exit more to achieve the max victory points on offer.

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

ORIGINAL: BROJD

And why do I get messages from some of my units that it failed to complete its mission when there is no reason it should have? I ordered a cav troop forward along a road, most of its route through friendly-held areas, and after a few hours I finally got an error that it failed to complete its mission.

It's probably because it ran out of time. Normally if it hasn't reached its objective by the calculated end time it will slip the task. But sometimes this fails for different reasons. Just give it another Move order.

Thanks, Arjuna. But I've seen this issue when there was no reason it should have happened -- in this case, it was day 1 of a 4-day scenario, it was through friendly-held territory, there were no terrain issues, etc. The problem with giving it another Move order is, of course, the Orders delay -- another delay after waiting for it to execute its first order.

ORIGINAL: dazkaz15

You should take a look at the AAR forum mate.
There are some great examples of how to play the game in there.

There is also the HTTR strategy guide (for the old version, but still very useful) you can download from the members area.
I take it you have watched the excellent tutorial video's that also come with the game?

If you look at all that, and still have questions post them here again, and Ill try to help out as best I can [;)]

I've read lots of the AARs. Today, I got the HTTR strategy guide and, while finding it very useful, it didn't answer a lot of my questions.

Again, I get the big picture, but I'm also looking for input on how others manage the game.

Today, I had no problems winning Joe's Bridge in HTTR, but that's a simple two-BN attack. Of course, by the end I'm micro-managing the companies, which goes against the spirit of this game. But I can't micro-manage companies in a massive 3-division attack in the Ardennes.

So I'd love to get some different views on how others deal with some of these management and tactical issues:


I usually control down to the battalion level and issue battalion attack and movement orders. However, many of the scenarios include easily a couple dozen battalions, and that exceeds my span of control. At what level of command do most of you focus on?

How much do you micromanage? I usually suffice giving a BN attack order and maybe including a FUP. Do you select path types? Other waypoints? Change the Rest settings or other settings? Mandate certain formations?

What do you do with your support/enabler units -- like your AAA AWs or Engineers? Do you task org them to a BN or individually move them to supporting positions? Do you use your Engineers for route security and holding Objectives (assuming of course no river crossing missions)?

What do you do with your higher-level (regimental and division and corps) HQs? Do I need to keep moving them forward? Of course they can also do route security, but that's gamey IMO.

When launching a BN toward an objective with unknown enemy forces, do you give it an attack order? Or move order? How deep would you order an attack into an unknown, unreconnoitered enemy area?

Heh heh! I've had a long layoff from playing this game due to other demands on my time so I'm having to relearn this game as I'm getting my ass handed to me in the introductory missions. But I'm having so much fun failing.[8D]

ORIGINAL: BROJD


I've read lots of the AARs. Today, I got the HTTR strategy guide and, while finding it very useful, it didn't answer a lot of my questions.

Again, I get the big picture, but I'm also looking for input on how others manage the game.

Today, I had no problems winning Joe's Bridge in HTTR, but that's a simple two-BN attack. Of course, by the end I'm micro-managing the companies, which goes against the spirit of this game. But I can't micro-manage companies in a massive 3-division attack in the Ardennes.

So I'd love to get some different views on how others deal with some of these management and tactical issues.

I usually control down to the battalion level and issue battalion attack and movement orders. However, many of the scenarios include easily a couple dozen battalions, and that exceeds my span of control. At what level of command do most of you focus on?

I focus on battalion level, but I sometimes use regimental for larger attacks, and I have no qualms about micro managing when I need to.
See here for an example of when I use regimental size attacks.
tm.asp?m=3313015

ORIGINAL: BROJD

How much do you micromanage? I usually suffice giving a BN attack order and maybe including a FUP. Do you select path types? Other waypoints? Change the Rest settings or other settings? Mandate certain formations?

Yes all the time.
See here for an example
tm.asp?m=3331688&mpage=3

ORIGINAL: BROJD

What do you do with your support/enabler units -- like your AAA AWs or Engineers? Do you task org them to a BN or individually move them to supporting positions? Do you use your Engineers for route security and holding Objectives (assuming of course no river crossing missions)?

I individually move them to supporting positions, and example is also in the link above.

ORIGINAL: BROJD

What do you do with your higher-level (regimental and division and corps) HQs? Do I need to keep moving them forward? Of course they can also do route security, but that's gamey IMO.

The regimental HQ I move forward, but keep to the rear, usually co-located with the regimental depot, unless its needed for a regimental attack.
The divisional HQ can be left where it is unless its a big scenario where you may need to bring it forward a few times during the game.
They come in handy for making sue the Occupation objective are occupied, as your front line troops move forward, if you move them onto your captured objectives.

ORIGINAL: BROJD

When launching a BN toward an objective with unknown enemy forces, do you give it an attack order? Or move order? How deep would you order an attack into an unknown, unreconnoitered enemy area?

I would usually give it an attack order, or a probe, depending on how badly I need the objective, and on how many men I am prepared to lose to acquire it.
As the attack goes in if it looks like there are to heavily outnumbered, I will either give a defend in situ order, and let them retreat under pressure, or a withdrawal to a safer location, until more forces become available to support the attack.
How deep to go depends on how much risk you want to take, which also depends on how important to your plan the objective is.
An example of this is the Bridge at Arnhem. You need to decide on whether the risk is worth it, and whether you think its a bridge to far or not [;)]
In my Elsenborn Ridge game I do a deep penetration to take the bridge at Butgenbach, but its always a risky endeavour.

ORIGINAL: BROJD
Again, I get the big picture, but I'm also looking for input on how others manage the game.

For further reading, I recommend the resources here (which mostly apply very much as when they were written)

[*] Tactical Hints by Yakstock

[*] Bil Hardenberger’s Operational Combat Principles : 14 Rules for Successful Airborne Assault Play (what this fine man says in this article not only applies to Command Ops, but to any really good model of operational warfare).

I got permission from Bil to repost his article, so as soon as I can find the time, I'll be reposting it on these forums.

Today, I had no problems winning Joe's Bridge in HTTR, but that's a simple two-BN attack. Of course, by the end I'm micro-managing the companies, which goes against the spirit of this game. But I can't micro-manage companies in a massive 3-division attack in the Ardennes.

Don't take the "spirit of the game" as if that spirit came in the form of some rules written on clay tablets, brought from the top of a mountain by a crazy looking guy who claims got them after engaging in a philosophical conversation with a bonfire [:)] Indeed, the design (and the general principle) is to reduce micro-management (especially if you compare with any hex-and-counter computer wargame out there). But reducing isn't eliminating: you'll have at times to "zoom in" and wear the Bn CO hat (or Coy CO hat) to get the best result.

I usually control down to the battalion level and issue battalion attack and movement orders. However, many of the scenarios include easily a couple dozen battalions, and that exceeds my span of control. At what level of command do most of you focus on?

Depends a lot on the situation. In small scenarios (featuring a force smaller than a division) usually Bn's works best. For bigger engagements - such as Race to Bastogne or Advance on the Sauer - you'll need to do this zooming in and out quite often. For instance, in the first phase of Race for Bastogne - when you're trying to break through the US line - you'll find yourself issuing orders at the Bn and Coy level. When the bridges are built and the US lines starts to crack, you'll probably be issuing orders at the Coy (or sub-Bn) level (to probe possible crossing points), Bn level (to assault US positions) or the Rgt level (to get across the bridges the bulk of the force). Once you're exploiting towards Bastogne, you'll find yourself issuing orders in a similar fashion.

Do you select path types? Other waypoints?

Dave discusses the Pathing tools in the Movie tutorials and uses that to figure out what are the routes units will be taking (and also how long it will take to particular units to get to particular places). In non-trivial situations you might want to issue waypoints to constraint the route followed by your units (so to make sure avoid the fire envelopes centered on known or suspected enemy positions). There are no ZOC's in Command Ops: instead you need to think in terms of the area of influence of enemy firepower, what the enemy can spot and to what extent the type of fires enemy units can deliver affect the force you're using.

In general, about routes you should think in terms of the following:

Shortest - Units travel along the shortest route as the crow flies (when terrain allows, since they can't fly)
Quickest - Units travel along the route which is more efficient in terms of time
Covered - Units travel along the route which minimizes the chances of being spotted
Safest - Units travel along the route that minimizes the risk of suffering casualties due to enemy fires
Avoidance - Units travel along the route that offers a reasonable trade-off between Covered and Safest settings

Again, I suggest to you to become familiar with the pathing tools: they do really help a lot to read the situation (as seen from the perspective of your units).

Change the Rest settings or other settings?

That I do quite often, especially when playing German on the Ardennes scenarios, where one wants to get to places quickly regardless of it being day or night, or to ignore units fatigue. Ignoring units fatigue is tricky: if the order given entails engaging enemy units, I never use highly fatigued units. It just doesn't work: too many casualties, outcomes take too long to happen. You'll find yourself sometimes having to pull back individual Coys from the line so they can rest properly.

Mandate certain formations?

This is a tricky one, and the AI usually does a very reasonable job for you. For illustration I'd like to direct you to the movie tutorial, where Dave discusses the usefulness of the Line formation in terms of allocation of firepower. In general:

Line - Maximizes fires to the front of the force. Very useful in defense tasks which might have the role of Fire Support (as discussed in the movie tutorial) or actual Defense.

Wedge - Use it in the attack, when there's enemy presence on both flanks of your force. I use this setting always when I'm launching pure armour assaults (which aren't very common).

Echelon Left/Right - When the enemy is just on the front and one of the flanks.

Successive Lines - Less firepower but better mutual support between units in the force. Enables cooperation between Armor and Infantry/Mixed type units.

What do you do with your support/enabler units -- like your AAA AWs or Engineers? Do you task org them to a BN or individually move them to supporting positions? Do you use your Engineers for route security and holding Objectives (assuming of course no river crossing missions)?

Support units I either assign them to HQ's of forces with specific missions, or issue per-unit Defend tasks to them (see remarks above) when I want to implement a Fix & Assault attack (which the AI can't produce for you), where the Support units is the 'Fixing' element. Note that the notion of 'support unit' can apply to pretty much anything that can produce high volume or high power fires at long ranges.

Engineers, in the current version of the engine, are only different from Infantry in their equipment. I use them usually to bolster infantry formations assaults. Bridge Engineers, however, are actual engineering units. Take care of those to upgrade crossings or rebuild blown bridges.

What do you do with your higher-level (regimental and division and corps) HQs? Do I need to keep moving them forward? Of course they can also do route security, but that's gamey IMO.

I usually use them to have organized and mass artillery support (so I can manage easily things). They're also useful to define areas of operation: which helps a lot to come to grips with the situation usually.

When launching a BN toward an objective with unknown enemy forces, do you give it an attack order? Or move order? How deep would you order an attack into an unknown, unreconnoitered enemy area?

I try to use the notion of Forward Detachments. My way of implementing it in the engine is like follows:

[*] Whatever the size of force, I designate one detachment for each of the axis of advance of the force. This detachment is usually either one Coy or something bigger (say, a Coy of Infantry and some pure AFV unit). The faster the units, the more useful.
[*] I give a Move order to the detachment to the edge of the LOS area (see the Tools tab) centered on the location of interest.
[*] Then I give a Probe order to the detachment, advancing on the objective. I specify Successive Lines if the detachment is composed by a mix of infantry and mechanized.
[*] If the detachment finds significant opposition (the definition of "significant" will vary depending on what's the detachment), I cancel the probe and issue a Withdraw order right away.
[*] Important: The rest of the force doesn't start moving until the detachments finish their Move orders. This can be easily accomplished by issuing a Move order whose start time happens later than the estimated end time for the detachment Move task.
[*] Optional: Having under direct control some artillery assets helps to issue bombard tasks to either support the Probe (or the Withdraw) of the detachments.

I do this whenever I'm advancing beyond my "lines".

Hope this helps [:)]

PS: Added a sentence I forgot to write down.

Brojd, The advice of Daz and others is very good. I particularly recommend carefully watching the tutorial videos (the ST Vith scenario is a lot more complex than Joe's bridge). VERY important in those movies and often neglected in my own play is how to figure out what the enemy is probably going to do and how to plan for it, and how and when to modify your plans.

The Chapter in the manual on maneuver warfare and the Boyd cycle is particularly enlightening. If I may blow my own horn, a relatively simple application of maneuver warfare is my AAR playing as the Allies in the "Hell on Wheels" scenario (it has the word "maneuver" in the title).It is pretty far down in the AAR list, so change the date list to "all" if you want to check it out.

Finally, if you are disappointed in your own play, raise your morale by reading the devastating indictment in the HTTR manual of the Allied leadership in the Market Garden campaign (or watch the "A bridge too far" movie, which is a bit less cruel).

Henri

Thanks, all. Great stuff here.

And I'm very familiar with the debacle on Hell's Highway. I've read plenty about it, seen the movie, and walked the ground a few times. I just finished reading Atkinson's account of it too.

ORIGINAL: BROJD

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

ORIGINAL: BROJD

And why do I get messages from some of my units that it failed to complete its mission when there is no reason it should have? I ordered a cav troop forward along a road, most of its route through friendly-held areas, and after a few hours I finally got an error that it failed to complete its mission.

It's probably because it ran out of time. Normally if it hasn't reached its objective by the calculated end time it will slip the task. But sometimes this fails for different reasons. Just give it another Move order.

Thanks, Arjuna. But I've seen this issue when there was no reason it should have happened -- in this case, it was day 1 of a 4-day scenario, it was through friendly-held territory, there were no terrain issues, etc. The problem with giving it another Move order is, of course, the Orders delay -- another delay after waiting for it to execute its first order.

I think Arjuna was saying the unit ran out of time in its order. If you give a unit a move order, it calculates the time needed to move , and shows an order end time, in the box right below the order begin time.. say for example moving a few km, it gives an order begin time as 0900 to account for orders delay, etc...and an order end time of 1230.. now, after your unit begins, it runs into enemy opposition, some of the units begin to straggle, etc... now, it gets near to 1200, and still looking like a good 2 hours before they can reach destination.. here, despite perhaps having 3 days left in the GAME, the unit did not have enough time left in the PLAN to complete his move. This can be avoided by giving some slack in the plan when you first issue the order.. I usually add in at minimum 5% of the time calculated...just as with your force, it is a good idea to have a "time reserve" when possible as well.

I don't usually join forums but i read this thread after doing a google search for some help with Command Ops. All of my questions were posted by the original poster BROJD in a better way than i can articulate so i just wanted to say thanks for that. I also want to thank everyone who took some time out of there lives to give some great advice that has helped me no end.

Cheers!