Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miamieagle

I disagree with you Gentelman. What we need is more speed options. Some times we need more speed to be able to settup our units in a Battle senerio. Most of us do not have the luxury of four or five hrs a day to play a senerio. So I believe we need more options added to our speed option.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Abqjohnd

I'm new to the series and the Forum so if I'm being redundent, I appologize. My major concern has to do with a game-play concept that based on my reading has become a standard 'tactic' that lacks realism. When a tank, or other AFV, takes fire that has a retreat result, the game engine retreats the unit by turning it 180 degrees which puts the most vulnerable portion of the armor 'front-on' to continued enemy fire. A more realistic withdrawl would be in reverse, especially since the retreating vehicle is only moving one hex. Perhaps a random chance that the vehicle would turn and run could preserve the current tactic with the majority of the vehicles actually reversing away.

Thank you for considering this modification.

Being new to the series I have only played East Front but expect this to be a function of the game engine and not limited to one game of the series.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MCS_HINTS_TIPS.doc in the Manuals folder

Armour Facing Rules
________________________________________
This is based on my experiences playing on the Eastern Front, generally playing larger scenarios.

Armour Facing Rules are optional, although most players tend to play with them ON. There are a few proponents of leaving the rule turned OFF, and design their scenarios accordingly.

Personally, I play with them turned ON. Those familiar with platoon tactics for the combatants during the war understand that most platoons operated as a unit typically in formations. Formation types includes; line, row, wedge and double row. The wedge most often used when conducting an attack. With these formations, the vehicles tend to be facing in one direction, although the turrets may be turned to one side or the other.

Tank sides vary in armour thickness. They tend to have more armour in the front as that is the general direction of the enemy. The weakest area tends to be the rear. Maneuver to shoot at the sides or preferably the rear of armoured vehicles will rest in more “kills”.

“I hate the way the tank rear armour is exposed when they are forced to retreat!” I have heard time and again. A few comments on that:

1. Terrain is your friend. Try to fire from the edge of a town, forest, field, or hillside where if you have to retreat, the terrain blocks your opponent from firing at your rear.

2. Smoke is your friend. If you have to operate in an area of open ground, use a line of smoke to retreat into. Planning ahead with engineers and artillery can save the day!

3. Forethought is your friend! Plan ahead; do not unnecessarily expose your armour to sustained fire from your opponent that will cause retreats and losses. Overwhelm and be victorious!

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1925frank

I think tanks go low-on-supply sooner because they tend to stray farther from their battalion headquarters.  Conversely, tank battalion HQ have a harder time keeping up.  Battalion HQ are easy kills and expensive losses.

I'm not sure what the thinking was behind the visibility question. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1925frank

Thanks, Junk2Drive.  I took a quick look in the US WF OOB for June 1945 and didn't see this unit.  I looked in the plattoon files, and I looked for "Mobile Supply."  Where do I find them?  Are these available just for certain countries and for certain time periods?  It looks like they are supply units in both the verb (like HQs) and noun sense.

Is there anything comparable like I described?  Something that can't be moved without the help of another unit?  I was thinking in terms of scenarios involving partisans or some other aspect of the war where vehicles or fuel were in short supply -- like in China or Burma?