Tactics opinion.

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Tactics opinion.

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Conflict of Heroes Series >> Tactics opinion.

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Tactics opinion. - 5/15/2012 5:56:29 PM

stormbringer3

Posts: 875
Joined: 7/26/2007
From: Staunton, Va.
Status: offline

I'm very happy with my purchase of this game. However, when I play something doesn't feel quite "right " to me. It concerns having to move armor units to adjacent or very close hexes to be effective enough to win the scenario. It is probably due to the scenario time constraints. You do not have the turns to take time and fire from longer ranges. I understand that certain times will require this such as a PzIIf vs. T34a in order to get a rear or flank shot. However, don't I feel that you should have to close range as you must in order to have a meaningful hit chance such as when you have a PzIIIe vs. a BA10 or a T26. I feel that increasing the hit chances at longer ranges would make armored combat more realistic. I'd love other opinions about this.
Thanks.

Post #: 1

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/15/2012 6:19:04 PM

michaelincol

Posts: 77
Joined: 6/17/2009
Status: offline

I just had this experience playing KV2 this morning - I carefully moved one of my remaining tanks for a flank shot up to the left on the hill while my other remaining tank was in front alongside two burning hulls from the KV2 spending it's APs. But to get a decent % flank shot I remember I had to move next to and even on the square with the KV2 (I got lucky with my timing and obviously AI had run dry on APs killing my other tanks) to nail it. I forgot exact percentages for shot and I had to keep what APs I had for moving and not bumping dice odds - but I had the same feel you just describe. Maybe just because of the armor thickness of the KV2? Or more to your observation? In my frenzy, I wasn't checking attack and defense values and I forget which of my tanks was left and did the firing, and I guess I should just be happy I killed the KV2 and won. But it did feel as you describe.

michael

(in reply to stormbringer3)

Post #: 2

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/15/2012 8:14:02 PM

Lebatron

Posts: 2166
Joined: 5/30/2005
From: Upper Michigan
Status: offline

You should let the Flak 88 kill the KV2 and use your tanks to clean house in the town behind. Use a truck to move the Flak 88 to the hill near the reinforcement point. Find a hex that gives LOS to KV2 and it should not take long for the 88 to make it a smoking hull.

_____________________________

Jesse LeBreton, AKA Lebatron
Development team- GG's WAW A World Divided

(in reply to michaelincol)

Post #: 3

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/15/2012 10:21:35 PM

chrisdk

Posts: 20
Joined: 5/12/2012
Status: offline

As to why it is so hard to do anything meaningfull against armor:

The designer of the game has posted extensively at www.boardgamegeek.com on the topic and how the research shows that even though theoretically all the tanks were capable of very long range fire in reality most actual casualties were caused at very short distances and the game is modeled to recreate this historical situation rather than some theoretical specification capability.

And it is true that many of these tanks only had a chance to cause effective hits when they got really close and to the rear. Also remember that "close" still means roundabout 50-100 meters.

< Message edited by chrisdk -- 5/15/2012 10:22:36 PM >

(in reply to Lebatron)

Post #: 4

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/15/2012 10:24:44 PM

chrisdk

Posts: 20
Joined: 5/12/2012
Status: offline

As to the mission: I like to go via the right side, laying down one Hex of smoke to block LOS and then speed across the open to then come around between the houses with 2-3 tanks, if possible with a dual action to then get him with a group fire shot at close range into the back.

Using smoke to block LOS is the key to this one for me.

(in reply to chrisdk)

Post #: 5

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/15/2012 10:55:05 PM

michaelincol

Posts: 77
Joined: 6/17/2009
Status: offline

thanks for info, all. The background on range for armor makes sense. And the tactical advice is always welcome.

(in reply to chrisdk)

Post #: 6

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/15/2012 11:32:53 PM

Jim D Burns

Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline

One tactic I'm learning in game is to do all your housekeeping stuff early in a round. Things like creating hasty defenses, hiding units, rallying troops etc. Then do rear area moves etc. and save all your front line stuff for last. With a decent amount of bonus APs to spend, you can run rampant if you manage to save a tank till the very last and spend 100% of your bonus APs on it to keep it moving.

Personally I think there should be an upper limit to how many bonus APs a single unit can get, but as things stand now it's pretty powerful if your enemy has already used up all the APs for his units in the area of your chosen tank. Even the T-34s go down fast to such a tactic.

< Message edited by Jim D Burns -- 5/15/2012 11:34:32 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to stormbringer3)

Post #: 7

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/16/2012 5:15:11 AM

Mr. Z

Posts: 1048
Joined: 3/24/2005
Status: offline

Don't forget that strategy advice can also be put in the The War Room sub-forum :)

(in reply to Jim D Burns)

Post #: 8

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/16/2012 7:24:19 AM

Sarkus

Posts: 42
Joined: 7/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: chrisdk

As to why it is so hard to do anything meaningfull against armor:

The designer of the game has posted extensively at www.boardgamegeek.com on the topic and how the research shows that even though theoretically all the tanks were capable of very long range fire in reality most actual casualties were caused at very short distances and the game is modeled to recreate this historical situation rather than some theoretical specification capability.

And it is true that many of these tanks only had a chance to cause effective hits when they got really close and to the rear. Also remember that "close" still means roundabout 50-100 meters.

The designers reasons make sense but I do think its a bit odd that he chose 50 to 100m hexes for a game where units are squads and individual vehicles. It's an odd mix of scales, and in a game where the unit fills up the whole hex its not very obvious that is what is going on. Then you throw in the ranges of the units and it gets even harder to understand why my tank has to be right next to another tank to get any kind of decent odds.

< Message edited by Sarkus -- 5/16/2012 7:25:38 AM >

(in reply to chrisdk)

Post #: 9

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/16/2012 11:56:54 AM

chrisdk

Posts: 20
Joined: 5/12/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sarkus

quote:

ORIGINAL: chrisdk

As to why it is so hard to do anything meaningfull against armor:

The designer of the game has posted extensively at www.boardgamegeek.com on the topic and how the research shows that even though theoretically all the tanks were capable of very long range fire in reality most actual casualties were caused at very short distances and the game is modeled to recreate this historical situation rather than some theoretical specification capability.

And it is true that many of these tanks only had a chance to cause effective hits when they got really close and to the rear. Also remember that "close" still means roundabout 50-100 meters.

The designers reasons make sense but I do think its a bit odd that he chose 50 to 100m hexes for a game where units are squads and individual vehicles. It's an odd mix of scales, and in a game where the unit fills up the whole hex its not very obvious that is what is going on. Then you throw in the ranges of the units and it gets even harder to understand why my tank has to be right next to another tank to get any kind of decent odds.

The hexes are 40-50 meters each, so center to center, vehicles would be about 50 meters apart, far edge to far edge about 100.

If you look at tactical doctrine during WW2 you will find that the frontage of units is pretty well represented by one squad being in such an area. Obviously frontage changed depending on the situation (offense, defense, etc.). As to vehicles, in most documentations I have watched you would see vehicles spread out to a similar degree so it does fit very well with the historic evidence that I am aware of.

Overall my experience with the boardgame is that in most situation what would have made the most sense to a field commander in those situations is also what makes the most sense in the game.

(in reply to Sarkus)

Post #: 10

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/16/2012 1:30:54 PM

wodin

Posts: 10762
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline

40 - 50 m is usual size for a squad level game. 100m to 250m for platoon. So this game follows the norm.If it had been 100m then yes that would have been to big.

_____________________________

My website

https://www.awargamersneedfulthings.co.uk/

(in reply to chrisdk)

Post #: 11

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/16/2012 2:54:28 PM

76mm

Posts: 4688
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline

I've bought this game but haven't played it yet. Am I reading that for one tank to destroy another it has to move adjacent to it?! I sure hope not!

(in reply to wodin)

Post #: 12

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/16/2012 3:02:48 PM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm
I've bought this game but haven't played it yet. Am I reading that for one tank to destroy another it has to move adjacent to it?! I sure hope not!

No, that's not true. However, if you are trying to take out a KV-2 with a 37mm cannon, good luck.

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to 76mm)

Post #: 13

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/16/2012 3:44:29 PM

Lebatron

Posts: 2166
Joined: 5/30/2005
From: Upper Michigan
Status: offline

Once the Tiger and Panther are introduced in Storms of Steel then the need to try for the +3 adjacency bonus is not so important anymore. Combats between tanks start from distances that cross the entire board. The German tanks in AtB has a blue AP firepower of about 4-5. No wonder everyone tries to squeeze in an extra +3-4 when they can. The Tiger and Panther has a 12 and 13 firepower and 18-19 hex range before suffering a -2 long distance penalty! When you fire with those tanks things get trashed very quickly. To those that think it's odd that these early war German tanks need to rush in and rely so much on the +3 bonus you are not taking into account that that is exactly what the Germans discovered they had to do to take the Soviet tanks out. Your knowledge of tank tactics on the Russian front is more mid war I would say if you find these early war tactics odd. Germany rushed to develop better penetrating guns after they realized Russia had heavy tanks. This new breed of tank does not appear until the Storms of Steel box set comes out. Once SoS hits you will love the German tanks better.

_____________________________

Jesse LeBreton, AKA Lebatron
Development team- GG's WAW A World Divided

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 14

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/16/2012 4:17:57 PM

stormbringer3

Posts: 875
Joined: 7/26/2007
From: Staunton, Va.
Status: offline

Thanks for all the info. I have no quarrel at all with this game's treatment of the early Axis tanks vs. the Soviet medium and heavy tanks. The French Army had tanks that were hard to kill. Mostly, it's the game's treatment of Axis tanks vs. the Soviet light tanks and armored cars is where I think that you should be able to have more of a kill chance at a longer range even at this stage of the war. I really like this game so I'm only giving my opinion for future consideration as the game evolves.

(in reply to Lebatron)

Post #: 15

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/16/2012 4:28:03 PM

76mm

Posts: 4688
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
No, that's not true. However, if you are trying to take out a KV-2 with a 37mm cannon, good luck.

OK, that makes more sense!

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 16

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/16/2012 5:41:33 PM

Joram

Posts: 3198
Joined: 7/15/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: stormbringer3

Thanks for all the info.�I have no quarrel at all�with this game's treatment of the early Axis tanks vs. the Soviet medium and heavy�tanks. The�French Army had tanks that were hard to kill. Mostly, it's�the game's treatment of Axis tanks vs. the Soviet light tanks and armored cars is where�I�think that you should be able to have more of a kill chance at a longer range even�at this stage of the war.�I really like this game so I'm only giving�my opinion for future consideration as the game evolves.

That's a fair question. I'm not involved in the original numbers in any way but if it were I designing the defensive values, I'd also take into consideration size and speed into consideration. Maybe since the BA10 and T26 are so small, that has increased the defensive values? But that's speculation. Clearly the gun on say the Pz38t could rip right through the BA10 even at long range (1500m+) but given the size and speed of the target, that would be extremely difficult to hit to begin with.

(in reply to stormbringer3)

Post #: 17

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/16/2012 8:08:37 PM

stormbringer3

Posts: 875
Joined: 7/26/2007
From: Staunton, Va.
Status: offline

Joram, your observation is correct. In fairness, a lot of my opinion about this is based on my 15-20 years of playing Steel Panthers where IMO the weapon parameters are more advanced than in this game. I'm currently using the Camo version that is still being updated. That doesn't mean that Steel Panthers has it correct over this game, just a thought. Still, if the game developers are are happy with current model, so be it.

(in reply to Joram)

Post #: 18

RE: Tactics opinion. - 5/16/2012 9:38:14 PM

Joram

Posts: 3198
Joined: 7/15/2005
Status: offline

Just for the heck of it and to test my own thought process, I was comparing the sizes of the BA-10 to the T-34. It is fully 40% smaller from either the front or side and while this doesn't correlate to a 40% reduction in percent to hit (unless make some vastly simplifying statistical assumptions), it would be hard to argue that it doesn't have some benefit to the defensive value of the armored car in relation to that of the tank. This would seem to indicate that what is there now is reasonable for what at first glance seems like a high defense number if you are only considering armor thickness.

(in reply to stormbringer3)

Post #: 19