david06

Attack vs. Defense

288 posts in this topic

Quote

Iif you are an axis inf flag good luck finding a panzer!

According to my sheets the German infantry brigade in tier 3 has 4x PzIII-N, 4x Sdkfz 232, 10x Sdkfz 251, 8x Stug IIIG and 4x StuH 42. With the exception of the 232 and 251 they are all referred to as panzers - even if they don't have turrets or machineguns.................This is supposed to be the quoted part 

This below is my part why in quote no friggen clue.

Quote

1st of a Stug is not a Panzer , it's an assault gun, or Sturmgeschütz aka Stug for short , mostly used as Tank destroyers,  build the most in WWII right after the 251.

2nd yesterday in an IMF brigade we had only Stug 3g and Stugh42, not sure if I seen any 232 in that list or if I overlooked them cause it said zero.

But I for sure know there were NO PNZ Ausf.N in that list, cause HC had to pull a HQ into town so we had something to surpress the Spawn CP that allied captured, cause it's really hard to do with Stugs.

 

Edited by dre21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, knucks said:

it shouldn't be assumed that it is somehow the game's fault for failing to reward poor play. 

it's the game's fault for allowing poor play in the first place. Rule #1, it's the resposibility of the developer to protect the player from himself. You cannot blame the player for playing how he does, we play in the intention that the game is built. I mean, it's safe to say any mechanic or feature has some type of behavior-effecting intention right? We play that intention, which is most certainly in the game's hands. If players are playing poorly, avert them away from it using your game building powers.

I don't know how many 'rule #1s' you have posted, but it seems there's been an awful lot of them.  I thought rule 1 was something about microtransactions or somesuch, or was it about having to have the game be like Post Scriptum...

The game provides the equipment, and the environment.  The players determine the outcomes.  That is the essence of this game.  It's not about blaming players, first of all.  It is about pointing out that choices have consequences in this game, both good and bad.  I can choose to hunt an emfs by myself----when it works, I feel pretty good.  When it doesn't, I kick myself for not bringing Bludngut along...  But either way, it is MY choice as a player on how to accomplish whatever mission has been assigned to me (by myself, or by others).  In the process of pointing out that player choices have consequences, I and others have pointed out that the game design is not at fault for not rewarding poor choices.  This is nothing more than the obvious:  players get the chance to make their own choices in-game.  Some of them will be good, and some of them won't.  Most of the good choices will work, but some won't, and some of the bad choices will work while most do not.  We're not playing against AI, thus even excellent gameplay choices can end up not working, whether as a result of the opposite side making even better choices, or just dumb luck.

I don't know how many times Dfire has appeared facing me when I was about to place charges on an FB, but I know that every time it happens it frustrates me greatly, and I tend to forget (at those moments) the times that Dfire appeared facing the opposite direction, allowing me to place charges and sometimes even put a round in to him.  Crap happens...

I would say that you are incorrect regarding your assertion that 'any mechanice or feature has some type of behavior-effecting intention..'  Again, the game's mission has always been to provide the equipment and the environment, allowing players to determine outcomes at the tactical, and strategic levels.  Thus, when the R35 was modeled, the only intention was to provide players with a tank that was actually in the Battle of France.  How a player chooses to use the R35 is entirely up to the player.  Some of those choices will work just fine on a consistent basis, while others will hardly ever work.  I like that it's my call as to how to use the equipment I spawn.

Players have the ability to set FMS.  How they choose to do that is entirely up to them, within the minimum distance guidelines.  Players choose whether to place it in the open, or in a concealed position.  Players choose whether to place it as close as the rules will allow, or further out distance-wise.  Players choose whether to leave someone at the FMS to defend it, bring a tank to defend it, or not bother to defend it at all.  It is ALL up to the players.  

Now, in this thread, there are those who have decided that the guidelines favor the defender, and have cited 'dead AOs' as evidence of the extreme difficulties faced by attackers.  Others, myself included, believe otherwise.  I (not speaking for others and as my original post in this thread states pretty clearly), believe that there are some in the community to snap to a 'blame the game' point of view for pretty much anything that doesn't go their way, rather than making a serious attempt to locate valid root causes.  Disagreements have ensued, and that is fine.  It may turn out that those who are blaming the game might just end up being correct!!!  Before that can be ascertained, though, I truly believe that folks should focus on some fundamental gameplay decisions that aren't working, that might also end up being the root cause of the perceived issues.

 

3 hours ago, major0noob said:

the defenders are exempt from this forced failure BS

As someone who ends up on the defense more often than not, I disagree with that statement.  In order to stop a 3 man capping crew in a given town, the defenders have to have at least 2 people in every CP, which a lot of the time is not even close to possible.  If that happens, the 3 man capping crew in this example still will have a legitimate shot at killing the initial defenders in the CP of their choice (they don't have to attack all of them simultaneously, after all)----now, in order to defend that CP, defenders must either abandon other CPs to come to the assistance of the one under cap, or we need to have people who aren't otherwise involved in other AOs/missions spawn/surge in.  All of that takes time, and if the 3 man capping crew has any idea of what they are doing, getting back into the CP for defenders is a difficult proposition----and that is if the defenders are lucky enough that the attackers didn't bring a tank along, or a sniper, or LMG taking up a 'cutting' position, which can make it virtually impossible to get back to the CP under cap.  And that's just one 3 man capping crew-----if the attackers have two 3 man teams working to capture CPs, the difficulties involved in defending go up exponentially.  And that assumes that the defenders are working together, i.e. one of them isn't sniping from the windows, or running around on the inside of the CP making it nigh on impossible to hear EI coming near the CP, and so on.   Life as a defender is not nearly as peachy as you are making it out to be, @major0noob  .

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

now is a good time for several guys to get a truck, talk with HC, get some action going and get their team off defense, maybe creating a little fun in the process

oh wait nevermind, that's apparently not real teamwork and those guys deserve to fail lol

I still haven't seen any photos or vids of what a real attack is supposed to look like from the people crapping on the efforts of small teams

it would be really interesting too just because when I add up a gun line, a flak trap, haulers, some cappers and depot guards, a scout car and a few tanks I'm at more players than there are online, and I haven't even gotten to air cover or bomber support yet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BMBM said:

According to my sheets the German infantry brigade in tier 3 has 4x PzIII-N, 4x Sdkfz 232, 10x Sdkfz 251, 8x Stug IIIG and 4x StuH 42. With the exception of the 232 and 251 they are all referred to as panzers - even if they don't have turrets or machineguns.

 

LOL no P3s in the axis inf flags. So all the posts and comments on the axis spawn lists and nobody from CRS looked into it?

It was you said you would jog in from 2km out minimum, any closer and the fru is going to be camped, but yeah run in from the FB and that is an even more likely recipe for an unsuccessful assault.

I would love to see a video of you and your coordinated team running in from the FB (with or without your tank support) and then capping the spawnable in an AO other than as a ninja attack. You might pull it off if you are heavily underpopulated, and it is TZ3. But then you will most likely lose it again because if you respawn when killed at the spawnable your team will have used most of the autos in just one respawn and you will be forced to warp to get a decent supply into the captured depot (always assuming you will use a fru and not drive or run in from the FB again?).

No one is saying make AOs foregone conclusions or instant wins, but if the object of the game (aside from fun?) is to capture territory/towns then the attacking side needs a little "help", or else all you end up with is the map moving to either ninja attacks or to heavily over popped attacks, particularly in TZ3, and historically that means the Axis. The allies used to be OP in TZ2, but their numbers seem to be dropping off. I mentioned the epic fight for Kalmthout on Sunday, it took the allies over 9 hours to Capture the town. It was lost today in TZ1 in about 40 mins, and while Kalmthout was lost it was 911 in Haybes as the axis were capping the bunker AND THE ALLIES WERE OP according to the cap timers, but "balanced" according to the log in screen. Now, I realise that the fact that the Axis attacked and almost took two towns suggests that attacking is working fine, but my point is that the over popped side made little or no headway in their window of opportunity because the defending team has enough to keep them out  when their over pop is 150 v 120, for example, but the other sides over pop might be 30 v 15 in TZ3.

I think two AOs minimum (I believe this is coming with 1.36) in TZ3 will lead to even more axis map rolling. To make attacking "easier", the minimum AOs in reasonable population should probably be three, giving the attackers the chance to drag the defenders around the map and to make their numbers count. The axis at present are much better at switching the P1 focus from one AO to another, and then back again as required. Axis also use attack when the timers favour them to force the allies to commit many players to defend, further negating the allies over pop advantage for their own attacks.

EWS, if we have it, could be delayed for 1min or 90 seconds (afterall it does not deactivate immediately). 1 min is not enough to completely camp a town, but a minute lets trucks switch off their engines before the defenders arrive and start to run straight out to the frus, and losing your FBs is a clue to defenders that an AO could be coming. The ant trails will give the defence a clue to the likely locations, and then either air recon or inf fighting their way out will find the frus, rather than the first attacker to spawn in facing an lmg camping the fru seconds after it is set up. If we have a delayed EWS, then build times can remain the same so when/if a defender hears a truck he does have a chance to get out there and stop it.

EWS should not state heavy or light, it should just activate for ground or armour.

As for the question, what is the best distance to set a MSP, well that is a very long answer indeed, and is rarely the same from MSP to MSP! :) 

 

S! Ian

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, augetout said:

As someone who ends up on the defense more often than not, I disagree with that statement.  In order to stop a 3 man capping crew in a given town, the defenders have to have at least 2 people in every CP, which a lot of the time is not even close to possible.  If that happens, the 3 man capping crew in this example still will have a legitimate shot at killing the initial defenders in the CP of their choice (they don't have to attack all of them simultaneously, after all)----now, in order to defend that CP, defenders must either abandon other CPs to come to the assistance of the one under cap, or we need to have people who aren't otherwise involved in other AOs/missions spawn/surge in.  All of that takes time, and if the 3 man capping crew has any idea of what they are doing, getting back into the CP for defenders is a difficult proposition----and that is if the defenders are lucky enough that the attackers didn't bring a tank along, or a sniper, or LMG taking up a 'cutting' position, which can make it virtually impossible to get back to the CP under cap.  And that's just one 3 man capping crew-----if the attackers have two 3 man teams working to capture CPs, the difficulties involved in defending go up exponentially.  And that assumes that the defenders are working together, i.e. one of them isn't sniping from the windows, or running around on the inside of the CP making it nigh on impossible to hear EI coming near the CP, and so on.   Life as a defender is not nearly as peachy as you are making it out to be, @major0noob  .

But this is low pop TZ3 when the map moves. The problem lies in TZ2 when many more are in game and allies seem unable to make much headway. There are easily 15 or 20 axis in each active DO, and if the DO activity drops away, then you might see a warpable capped, but this is what was previously described as ninja capping. Even then, many new defenders will rally, suppress/camp the  span and usually extinguish the attack. We know that attacks by axis work in TZ3, it is attacks in T2 in particular that seem to be particularly unsuccessful. There doesn't seem to be much we can do to stop TZ3, but perhaps we can help TZ2 to generate more successful AOs?

 

S! Ian

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ian77 said:

But this is low pop TZ3 when the map moves. The problem lies in TZ2 when many more are in game and allies seem unable to make much headway. There are easily 15 or 20 axis in each active DO, and if the DO activity drops away, then you might see a warpable capped, but this is what was previously described as ninja capping. Even then, many new defenders will rally, suppress/camp the  span and usually extinguish the attack. We know that attacks by axis work in TZ3, it is attacks in T2 in particular that seem to be particularly unsuccessful. There doesn't seem to be much we can do to stop TZ3, but perhaps we can help TZ2 to generate more successful AOs?

 

S! Ian

Not sure I followed your post completely and one thing you said seems to contradict another. 

a 150 (?) vs 120 over pop can be managed (your time zone 2 example)

it's the 15 vs 8 (or less) than become problematic ( time zone 3 example) 

Simply put, the lower the total population numbers, the more significant the advantage the overpop side has. Having two AO's in TZ3 would be a disaster. Soft capping in tz3 should be disallowed entirely, and when total population for a side hits a critical number (pick one) there should be only one battle being fought, period. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, major0noob said:

from the above link

german inf brigade armour:

SdKfz 232 Scout Car 4      
StuG III G 10      
StuH 42 4

Investigating. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, david06 said:

I still haven't seen any photos or vids of what a real attack is supposed to look like from the people crapping on the efforts of small teams

You're making up straw men as you go. Who's crapping on small teams?

Read Augetout's essay above. 3-man teams. Heck, even a single wingman will do most of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ian77 said:

As for the question, what is the best distance to set a MSP, well that is a very long answer indeed, and is rarely the same from MSP to MSP! :) 

 

Give it a shot why don't you. You type well enough, and long enough.

Thing is, if it requires a four-page explanation, chances are it's not THAT simply to code a catch-all solution. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, david06 said:

I still haven't seen any photos or vids of what a real attack is supposed to look like from the people crapping on the efforts of small teams

recommend you log in and follow potthead for an hour or two
and take screenshots or video

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

potthead usually makes them under 1km...

doubt he can pull off a 2km FMS assault

Edited by major0noob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, major0noob said:

potthead usually makes them under 1km...

doubt he can pull off a 2km FMS assault

potthead can actually get people to tow and use 88's and decimate every matilda in sight
set up multiple FMS's some of them long distance from town, and get people to actually support the 88's with close infantry support
a network of protective PPO's and anti air, and follow orders etc.

Ive no doubt he could pull of an attack with no FMS at all.
Actually he used to do it all the time, when FMS was not a thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I first joined HC well over a decade ago, I was quite young and was interested in learning. I got on TS with a great man names RG53 .... I asked him about the MAP back then (was no ToE yet but we had still some flags and front line with each town its own supply) ... He said there are military tactics that have been around for thousands of years that can be used in this game like flanking and such and mentioned a book named ART OF WAR... I thought cool.. let me see if I can find it online and read it.. as a young jr officer (OIC 10 of a brigade with 12 or so officers above me in the BRIGADE) I downloaded the Audio book and kept it LOOP while i played the game every night... at first sounded like a bunch of mumbo jumbo.. but SOME and SMALL amounts of it started to MAKE SENSE... To this day the 3-4 min chapters are still in my music playlist and come on every now and then randomly.. i find them quite soothing and refreshes the ideas... each time I connect it somehow to OUR GAME and see HOW can THIS relate in WWIIOL) 

Below is a chapter that came on when I was driving home a few days ago and I thought it is somewhat relevant to this thread)  I hope some other young person gets influenced like RG53 influenced me. I will try to put some stoner theories on it..

 

The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy. (in this game, defend when underpop and then create overpop via defensive victory)

To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself. (In this game, force the enemy to make mistake, split their force away to another objective, bust their FB if they are not watching, if it is a multi AB town under cap, after first or 2nd AB falls, go in about 20-30 min and recap one of the ABs with a small team and create disruption in their flow)

Thus the good fighter is able to secure himself against defeat, but cannot make certain of defeating the enemy. (In this game, accept that AOs can be used to help DEFENSE when underpop and gain defensive VICTORIES to build moral and go back to last point of forcing enemy to make mistake as they get frustrated or simply run out of TIME or supply)

Hence the saying: One may know how to conquer without being able to do it. (this one imo in this game refers to the Leader's BRAND... do they LOVE You? are they willing to INVEST their TIME with you?.. everyone KNOWS HOW to setup ZoC .. and if this was Red Alert or any RTS game, they would but do they have the PULL marketing power to Attract the players to do them without getting MAD when noone just blindly comes forward to listen to someone who does NOT have the BRAND?) 

Security against defeat implies defensive tactics; ability to defeat the enemy means taking the offensive. (pretty self explanatory in this game exactly the same)

Standing on the defensive indicates insufficient strength; attacking, a superabundance of strength. (underpop? DEFENSE is a MUST as insufficient strength is in place... FOLLOW The GOOD defense with a FUN excercise to create a TEAM out of the players ONLINE and have ABUNDANCE of FORCE!)

The general who is skilled in defense hides in the most secret recesses of the earth; he who is skilled in attack flashes forth from the topmost heights of heaven. Thus on the one hand we have ability to protect ourselves; on the other, a victory that is complete. (Know the Terrain.. spend a FEW MINUTES OFFLINE on TRAINING server EVEN if YOU THINK you know the AREA... LOOK again.. KNOW exactly where you are going) 

To see victory only when it is within the ken of the common herd is not the acme of excellence. (This one i think just comes with experience, SMELL when OVERPOP is coming... when MORAL is going down for enemy.... KNOW when OVERPOP is coming before IT COMES and be ready to USE it to SUSTAIN IT) 

Neither is it the acme of excellence if you fight and conquer and the whole Empire says, "Well done!"

To lift an autumn hair is no sign of great strength; to see the sun and moon is no sign of sharp sight; to hear the noise of thunder is no sign of a quick ear. (this one is too poetic for me to understand :) )

What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease. (This is when TZ3 comes in ... fight in TZ2 HARD and be POSITIVE and create an ADHOC brotherhood and LOYALTY to the CAUSE to see if you can KEEP PEOPLE AWAKE more than WHEN they NORMALLY GO TO BED) 

Hence his victories bring him neither reputation for wisdom nor credit for courage. (Have no expectations from anyone, do it FOR LOVE of the game and YOUR OWN FUN-- HOPE that OTHERS will Join and SHARE in YOUR fun!)

He wins his battles by making no mistakes. Making no mistakes is what establishes the certainty of victory, for it means conquering an enemy that is already defeated. (In this game I think if you can BEAT The enemy in a HARDCORE defense that is AGASINT ALL odds by making them make mistakes and exploit those mistakes, the victory follows in the next few hours)

Hence the skillful fighter puts himself into a position which makes defeat impossible, and does not miss the moment for defeating the enemy. (DEFENSE is KEY to a GOOD OFFENSE - and DEFENSE includes harrasement AOs on towns and FBs and Glider drop operations and small paras etc.... ) 

Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory. (know the TERRAIN, know the numbers, know the MORAL and take calculated risk so YOUR BRAND as commander GROWS)

The consummate leader cultivates the moral law, and strictly adheres to method and discipline; thus it is in his power to control success.

In respect of military method, we have:

Measurement
Estimation of quantity
Calculation
Balancing of chances
Victory
Measurement owes its existence to Earth; Estimation of quantity to Measurement; Calculation to Estimation of quantity; Balancing of chances to Calculation; and Victory to Balancing of chances.

A victorious army opposed to a routed one, is as a pound's weight placed in the scale against a single grain.

The onrush of a conquering force is like the bursting of pent-up waters into a chasm a thousand fathoms deep. (Breakouts .... get to MALDEGEM in the north to cut off brussel and Antwerp.... cut off South of Axis by getting to Frankfurt via S flank.. etc etc..) 

 

I will attempt to put some screenshots but I am HOPELESS at this task..  @david06 .. sorry mate I tried.. but none of the photos are coming up.. 

 

Gather FORCES at FB - dont just go on your OWN if you are going to LEAD .. START by making it CLEAR .. YOU are the LEADER .. (ROLE PLAY) .. group them up.. get as many as you can on VOICE ... make jokes, have fun... MAKE IT FUN .. A PARTY...

http://photobucket.com/confirmation?token=3cmuoNwfEG4l3k45aAHo46s42kMfAFvgKHtd34nugQka%2FUv6BA7MoVLwm7Lh%2FbSqHAnfLem0uabMo1lAxdfcO%2FBg4U75yznI

 

DO NOT let MANY MSPs be setup .. KEEP 2-3 trucks in YOUR mission on VOICE and change FMS position as YOU see fit... dont let the HERD run away to other missions... USE Trucks to take them around as much as possible

http://photobucket.com/confirmation?token=3cmuoNwfEG4l3k45aAHo46s42kMfAFvgKHtd34nugQka%2FUv6BA7MoVLwm7Lh%2FbSqHAnfLem0uabMo1lAxdfcO%2FBg4U75yznI

 

Take TIME to KNOW the TOWN you are attacking... TRAINING SERVER is AMAZING tool for this.... 

http://photobucket.com/confirmation?token=3cmuoNwfEG4l3k45aAHo46s42kMfAFvgKHtd34nugQka%2FUv6BA7MoVLwm7Lh%2FbSqHAnfLem0uabMo1lAxdfcO%2FBg4U75yznI

REMEMBER what WORKED and WHAT did NOT and LEARN from it..

http://photobucket.com/confirmation?token=3cmuoNwfEG4l3k45aAHo46s42kMfAFvgKHtd34nugQka%2FUv6BA7MoVLwm7Lh%2FbSqHAnfLem0uabMo1lAxdfcO%2FBg4U75yznI

 

TALK To players.. as MANY PM as YOU can .. as MANY on voice as you can ... dont worry about getting KILLS.. be the DRIVER as much as possible... 

http://photobucket.com/confirmation?token=3cmuoNwfEG4l3k45aAHo46s42kMfAFvgKHtd34nugQka%2FUv6BA7MoVLwm7Lh%2FbSqHAnfLem0uabMo1lAxdfcO%2FBg4U75yznI

 

Take OWNERSHIP of dividing TASKS and GIVE OWNERSHIP of TASKs to INDIVIDUALS and SQUAD LEADERS that is FUN for them as well - ABOVE ALL ELSE promote FUN ... KILL an DIE together! 

http://photobucket.com/confirmation?token=3cmuoNwfEG4l3k45aAHo46s42kMfAFvgKHtd34nugQka%2FUv6BA7MoVLwm7Lh%2FbSqHAnfLem0uabMo1lAxdfcO%2FBg4U75yznI

 

http://photobucket.com/confirmation?token=3cmuoNwfEG4l3k45aAHo46s42kMfAFvgKHtd34nugQka%2FUv6BA7MoVLwm7Lh%2FbSqHAnfLem0uabMo1lAxdfcO%2FBg4U75yznI

Know the squads and be friendly and use their deadliness at the right time.. 

http://photobucket.com/confirmation?token=3cmuoNwfEG4l3k45aAHo46s42kMfAFvgKHtd34nugQka%2FUv6BA7MoVLwm7Lh%2FbSqHAnfLem0uabMo1lAxdfcO%2FBg4U75yznI

http://photobucket.com/confirmation?token=3cmuoNwfEG4l3k45aAHo46s42kMfAFvgKHtd34nugQka%2FUv6BA7MoVLwm7Lh%2FbSqHAnfLem0uabMo1lAxdfcO%2FBg4U75yznI

Edited by potthead
tried to make photos work.. but could not
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must also add.. I hate ToEs for the reason of making attrition near obsolete, giving the power to a few and rendering the efforts of many useless

Many times GOOD Attack setups have become useless as just a new brigade rotates in when the tactic of moving from ZoC to close in on town is called for and everyone gets murdered due to some magical stuff coming via underground tunnels.

It has left such a bad taste in many squad leaders mind that many have left.. many just dont bother to setup on attrition attacks .. 1.36 can not come early for that ONE purpose for me. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post Pott. 

WRT attritition, that too is in the realm of The Art of War, although link setups aren’t always favorable. Study Morihei Ueshima - the master of balance (and thus imbalance).

TOE (a fancy word for spawnlist) is necessary - the alternative would be to have infinite supply and NO chance of attrition ever, except through boredom. When we slash numbers or slow resupply, people argue for more. When we give them more or increase resupply, they argue for less.<shrug>

I must add that real world tactics and classic theory such as above does work in game too. It works in the air, it works on the ground, as have been proven time and again. 

Edited by BMBM
Addendum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yo potthead, the new minimum standards of attacking are currently set for your level.

think it's sustainable?

 

i mean, anyone can log in; see all the state of AO's and make their own conclusions, but these guys kind of put you on a pedestal here

p.s. photobucket is behind a pay wall, imgur is free

Edited by major0noob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, potthead said:

I must also add.. I hate ToEs for the reason of making attrition near obsolete, giving the power to a few and rendering the efforts of many useless

Many times GOOD Attack setups have become useless as just a new brigade rotates in when the tactic of moving from ZoC to close in on town is called for and everyone gets murdered due to some magical stuff coming via underground tunnels.

It has left such a bad taste in many squad leaders mind that many have left.. many just dont bother to setup on attrition attacks .. 1.36 can not come early for that ONE purpose for me. 

Totally in favor. We all hope that what been promised to us at the beginning stays and remove that JWBS. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, BMBM said:

Give it a shot why don't you. You type well enough, and long enough.

Thing is, if it requires a four-page explanation, chances are it's not THAT simply to code a catch-all solution. 

You are right, it definitely is not a simple fix Bmbm, and I certainly don't know what we can do that will insta fix things.

 

S! Ian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, major0noob said:

all AO's are dead ATM

I logged in less than 5 minutes after you posted this, (in a bit of panic, to be honest, as it shouldn't be happening).   In short, the AOs were not dead.

 

 

Great post, @potthead.

Edited by augetout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"To lift an autumn hair is no sign of great strength; to see the sun and moon is no sign of sharp sight; to hear the noise of thunder is no sign of a quick ear."

Greatness is to achieve victory on the enemy while he can field more Tanks that wont die and aircrafts that won't fall.... That's pretty much what it means for us in WW2ol.  :P  

 

He just uses the Negative.... 

 

Haaaa Poetry......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BMBM said:

Great post Pott. 

WRT attritition, that too is in the realm of The Art of War, although link setups aren’t always favorable. Study Morihei Ueshima - the master of balance (and thus imbalance).

TOE (a fancy word for spawnlist) is necessary - the alternative would be to have infinite supply and NO chance of attrition ever, except through boredom. When we slash numbers or slow resupply, people argue for more. When we give them more or increase resupply, they argue for less.<shrug>

I must add that real world tactics and classic theory such as above does work in game too. It works in the air, it works on the ground, as have been proven time and again. 

Thanks BMBM. Potthead here on my phone (wife’s account)- yes she needs an account to hang out with me :)

ok I think you misunderstood me re ToE. In the context of this game I refer to ToE as movable supply by HC via clicking on flags and ordering them to move and then supply follows. A change introduced now over about decade ago and believed it is going away in 2016 but got frozen for steam release and still patiently waiting for it to come.

The AMOUNT of supply, composition of the list is NOT really my concern too much(albeit not a huge fan of unequal amount of SMGs for a side etc It is very much secondary and small concern for me)

what I refer to is... you do all the things I have said above, setup on the terrain properly, cut off roads to the town with ATGs... set scouts far out to hear of any new enemy coming to support... 

you have killed all the enemy tanks and heavy ATGs and now decide to advance to cap.... then the enemy HC just moves another brigade to that SOUROUNDED town... and supply just keeps coming into AB via a magical tunnel underground that you can not stop ( capping link CP did not prove to be sufficient enough solution)

thus creating near infinite amount of supply in that said location.. you can play in same town for 10 hours and still have stalemate... have to either Super camp or fet Bored.. this is what is coined by matamor as Jesus another warping brigade...

this alone made the incentives of doing all the HARD work of setting attrition attacks be much less valuable than having 1 single map oic that can rotate supply and play god with supply...

imo you are sourounded... the  only way should be to FIGHT your way in and reach the sourouded units.

i thought that is why we going back to town supply ..by no means do I endorse an unlimited supply situation as an alternative to TOE. 

Hope that makes more sense. Of course with town based supply there is still need for a Table of Equipment list... but ability of that supply to be stacked and moved won’t be in HC hand (sort of will be but they have to ask players to Drive and move that supply for them. As opposed to them just clicking on a flag and move all of it in one go without need to get help from any actual players)...

same for Air of course.... use all the good planes from say Bertrix... and the only option should be to now fly them from WiltZ not just magically move all the supply in wiltz into Bertrix making the CAP work of hours of pilots on enemy side useless

S! Potthead

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3.16 TBS with a few flags for extra oomph. The flags will likely be marginal.

I'm a proponent of realistic formation movement and maybe more importantly the historical context that the divisions and brigades provide, such as supply-laden towns will not. The legacy orbat concept is OK, but not suited for current population. Stuff doesn't magically warp in as I think you know - flag moves are on timers and supply trickle in, as a representation of actual movement. In the best of worlds we'd see lines of trucks, carts and tanks - but that'd be AI and shooting AI is, well, boring. So we have the invisible yet timed and trickling supply. People don't see the timers, they don't see the trickle, but it's there.

I'm not going to lie and say TBS will solve all your woes. Most likely it will produce woes of a different kind. But it's what you asked for, and by Jove you're getting it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That tactical gameplay issue...that cutting a supply road has no tactical meaning...is fundamentally the same problem as in the TOEs-per-budget-and-historical-mix discussion.

Under the recently added TOEs-budget system, each side gets an equal budget for weapons, and an historical analysis determines their mix of particular weapon types...with reasonable adjustments as needed to compensate for weapons not yet modeled and so forth.

The historical British and French T0 armor forces were equipped for battle. The historical German T0 armor forces were equipped for bypassing and disruption of supply movement, resulting in enemy force defeat via isolation. 

The game's mechanics do provide gameplay functionality for battle. They don't provide gameplay functionality for bypassing and disruption of supply movement, resulting in enemy force defeat via isolation.

If the gameplay offered both battle functionality and bypass/tactical-isolation functionalities, each side could fight the T0 war as they were equipped to fight.

Of course, the task of developing the original game was made easier by not having to simulate WWII's effectively-continuous lines and rear area security, because with no supply lines to disrupt, why bother?

But, now it's a problem. One of those above-mentioned woes, I guess.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.