So... The old "minimize losses" trick does not work?

[Emp_Palpatine]

Back in the days (I play TOAW since, well, 1999), minimize losses was the trick, except perhaps in WW1 scenarios where it did not have any results.

In my attempts with TOAW IV, it seems minimize losses is now quite... bad. Lot of losses for nothing.
Or are the flanking/terrain/meteo effects way more important efficient now?

[Oberst_Klink]

ORIGINAL: Emp_Palpatine

Back in the days (I play TOAW since, well, 1999), minimize losses was the trick, except perhaps in WW1 scenarios where it did not have any results.

In my attempts with TOAW IV, it seems minimize losses is now quite... bad. Lot of losses for nothing.
Or are the flanking/terrain/meteo effects way more important efficient now?

I take it you refer what was called 'ant' attacks, e.g. one small unit attacking with minimize losses and using heavy artillery/air support to dislodge a larger and even fortified force...? That's since 3.4 no longer possible; the key are the new flanking rules as well as other factors.

Klink, Oberst

[gerardo]

What about the old '100 Jeeps against a Tiger' trick?

[ralphtricky]

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

ORIGINAL: Emp_Palpatine

Back in the days (I play TOAW since, well, 1999), minimize losses was the trick, except perhaps in WW1 scenarios where it did not have any results.

In my attempts with TOAW IV, it seems minimize losses is now quite... bad. Lot of losses for nothing.
Or are the flanking/terrain/meteo effects way more important efficient now?

I take it you refer what was called 'ant' attacks, e.g. one small unit attacking with minimize losses and using heavy artillery/air support to dislodge a larger and even fortified force...? That's since 3.4 no longer possible; the key are the new flanking rules as well as other factors.

Klink, Oberst

Specifically, I believe that if you attack at less that 1/10 odds, there are special rules in effect to reduce the effects of those 'ant attacks'

[ralphtricky]

ORIGINAL: gerardo

What about the old '100 Jeeps against a Tiger' trick?

Depends, 100 jeeps would probably be less than 1/10 odds and not be enough to make the Tiger lose any supply.

It's an interesting visual though.

[winkr7]

Can we use jeep carriers with the new naval rules?

[Emp_Palpatine]

No, not the ant trick. That always has been cheating.
I was refering to using mainly minimize attacks but repeated ones that were actually more efficient when attacking after the WW2 era.

[DanNeely]

ORIGINAL: gerardo

What about the old '100 Jeeps against a Tiger' trick?

IIRC that was something fixed all the way back in TOAW2.