Gamey or not? Opinions sought (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series



Message

PaulWRoberts -> Gamey or not? Opinions sought (12/13/2011 12:17:32 AM)

Very simple question:

When starting a turn as German, do you

1) Lead with your Panzer units, moving them first and clearing the way for slower follow-on forces?

or

2) Use your slower units to push resistance out of the way and claim some hexes, thus maximizing the distance your Panzer units will be able to travel?

My instinct is to do 2, but I've started to wonder if this is gaming the movement mechanics somehow. Historically, shouldn't my armor be making the breakthrough?



elmo3 -> RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought (12/13/2011 12:20:47 AM)

Neither is gaming the system.



Flaviusx -> RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought (12/13/2011 12:42:40 AM)

2 is the pro way to do it. Not gamey, either. In fact, that's the way it ought to be: infantry opens up the holes, and the mobile units exploit.








ragtopcars_slith -> RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought (12/13/2011 1:06:32 AM)

Agree...  not gamey...  infantry opens the hole and the armor pours through!



Aurelian -> RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought (12/13/2011 1:43:26 AM)

Were not both methods used at Kursk by the Germans? A bit hazy on that am I.



Flaviusx -> RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought (12/13/2011 1:47:58 AM)

Yeah, but this was more due to force of circumstances than doctrine. The landsers got separated from the panzers as time went on, and the Germans were forced to rely on heavy tanks with little infantry support to force the advance. Not an ideal situation. The Tiger was reasonably good at this if it didn't break down. Then there was the elephant...




PaulWRoberts -> RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought (12/13/2011 3:08:14 AM)

My fuzziness on this comes from the fact that, whether or not I move my armor or infantry first, both moves are supposed (in reality) to be simultaneous. Two units that use up all of their movement points are both busy throughout the whole week, regardless of whether I touched them first or last in my turn.

I guess choosing to move one or the other first reflects certain local (daily) tactical choices about who engages and who exploits.

There! Now I'm satisfied. ;)



krieger -> RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought (12/13/2011 3:54:25 AM)

A combination of both depending on the requirements of the sector in question. Coperation between diferent panzer corps is sometimes essential (in this case move first the corps that is further from the attack point so the other corp(s) will have more MPs to get into the breach than otherwise would be the case) and others neglectable. The enemy force you're facing in your plan determines the force to be used too so it's imposible to come up with a rule of thumb for this. The only one would be trying to adapt to the situation and you need good recon for it too. A 4vs1 odds in favor of the attacker is recomended in the manual if you want a good attack. Before all this you have to know your geographic objectives clearly and also how to best achieve them in strategic and tactical terms. If you choose a wrong strategy it may be imposible to take some sectors later on or at least much more dificult (like Leningrad or Krimea).



wadortch -> RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought (12/13/2011 4:53:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul Roberts

Very simple question:

When starting a turn as German, do you

1) Lead with your Panzer units, moving them first and clearing the way for slower follow-on forces?

or

2) Use your slower units to push resistance out of the way and claim some hexes, thus maximizing the distance your Panzer units will be able to travel?

My instinct is to do 2, but I've started to wonder if this is gaming the movement mechanics somehow. Historically, shouldn't my armor be making the breakthrough?

You adapt as needs arise based on where you need to get to with each arm. I have found that tanks way out ahead of the infantry can be spectacular but rarely create a sustained and powerful offensive over time on their own. Combined arms. Tanks creating pockets that infantry can reduce the following turn is the recipe for success. If your tanks sit for a turn stalled because they are mobbed by Soviets you have moved them out too far.



Monsieur Pinke -> RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought (12/14/2011 9:49:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul Roberts

Very simple question:

When starting a turn as German, do you

1) Lead with your Panzer units, moving them first and clearing the way for slower follow-on forces?

or

2) Use your slower units to push resistance out of the way and claim some hexes, thus maximizing the distance your Panzer units will be able to travel?

My instinct is to do 2, but I've started to wonder if this is gaming the movement mechanics somehow. Historically, shouldn't my armor be making the breakthrough?



Hi Paul

Option 2 is the way to go if there is judged to be no real defense in depth and capturing territory is your goal. Otherwise a combination of the two options to suit the situation, as several of our colleagues have mentioned in this post.

At this point I just want to mention that this aspect of the game, is for me, the one real weakness of this great game. Troops of an armoured division that wait around for the best part of a week for an infantry division to move up and attack from over a hundred miles away, still have their full movement allowance when in reality, they would only have the MP's remaining for the fraction of the week left after the combat. They can proceed through the combat hex after the above mentioned combat as though no time has passed. It would be more realistic to have combat zone movement penalties in hexes where combat has taken place to prevent the above happening. It was used in a favourite boardgame of mine, "Trial Of Strength". Worked a treat.
Cheers All.



JJKettunen -> RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought (12/14/2011 12:58:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Yeah, but this was more due to force of circumstances than doctrine. The landsers got separated from the panzers as time went on, and the Germans were forced to rely on heavy tanks with little infantry support to force the advance. Not an ideal situation. The Tiger was reasonably good at this if it didn't break down. Then there was the elephant...


Not really. Model used method 2 (north) and Hoth method 1 (south). Their success or lack thereof was dependent on the force ratios. Soviets had more troops concentrated against Model. Tiger tanks didn't have any significant role although some fantasy books claim so.




Mehring -> RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought (12/14/2011 7:21:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul Roberts

Very simple question:

When starting a turn as German, do you

1) Lead with your Panzer units, moving them first and clearing the way for slower follow-on forces?

or

2) Use your slower units to push resistance out of the way and claim some hexes, thus maximizing the distance your Panzer units will be able to travel?

My instinct is to do 2, but I've started to wonder if this is gaming the movement mechanics somehow. Historically, shouldn't my armor be making the breakthrough?

Anyone who knows how the game works uses method 2 if they can. It is to some extent historical, but many tank comanders claim it was often forced upon them by higher command. They wanted to lead with tanks to make a rapid breakthrough and avoid taffic snarl ups associated with one unit passing through another.



gingerbread -> RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought (12/14/2011 9:16:06 PM)

Isn't that one of the reasons to have a higher command?



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.578125