Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
- 11/17/2002 3:34:10 PM   
Colonel von Blitz

 

Posts: 262
Joined: 12/4/2000
From: Espoo, Finland
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Toontje
[B]Paradrops I can see the problem with on turn 0, as it's advanced troops with little risk, but infiltrators I don't think should be much banned etc. The infiltration is a good option, so long it's not 50% or so infiltrators.[/QUOTE] [/B]

I like to ban infiltration in all Meeting battles and in most of the Advance/Delay battles, because I find it 'unrealistic' to have infiltrated troops in a battle that is randomly occurred (Meeting) or in a battle where neither side has had that much time to prepare the attack/defences (Advance/Delay).


[QUOTE] [B]Hmua, rocket launchers are just onboard arty.. if it's much trouble, plot an airstrike over it or use your own arty.[/QUOTE] [/B]

And exploit the 'eye of god' feature? The rule was created because the game engine simply reload too quickly...it took 15-20 minutes to reload most of the multitubed WW2 era Rocket Launchers, this is why I choose to create this rule.


[QUOTE] [B] Disagree as you otherwise would be unable to counterbattery. OffB arty can also be hit without LOS. [/QUOTE] [/B]

I hate to exploit the 'eye of god' feature, by targeting On-Board artillery using only smoke puffs as guidance. If my opponent is stupid/incompetent enough ;) to let me see his/her On-Board arty, that's when I'll call the strike.


[QUOTE] [B] The 1 turn later of arival usually means hit probabilities are worse. [/QUOTE] [/B]

Use FO to target on randomly selected coordinates (not the Golden Point), and most of the time, you'll get 0.3 - 0.5 delay. Now choose 0-unit of a mortar platoon, and you'll get, most of the time, a 0.1 - 0.2 delay. The rule was created in order to 'correct' this.


[QUOTE] [B] I personally use a guideline of 20%. Besides, I cannot see the point in having so much arty as it's not that interesting to watch nor really efficient. [/QUOTE] [/B]

This must always be negotiated, of course. Depending on battle, the percentage may wary quite a lot. My suggested percentage is just a rough guideline that works most of the time :)


[QUOTE] [B]OffB will get out of ammo. Usually I myself take a battalion of light plus a battery of heavier. Again, it's not interesting enough to play with too much arty, which means more boring play => maybe other players [/QUOTE] [/B]

I usually don't mind to fight against arty-heavy opponents, because these opponents usually are the ones that are most easily beaten ;)


[QUOTE] [B] Again, doing such a thing is kinda cheap. However, what is that tiger doing unsupported anyway? [/QUOTE] [/B]

I've found that if you have a tank and supporting infantry in position, the tank opens fire when your opponent drives around with empty truck...deliberately drawing fire, though a single MG could take out the truck with a single burst.


[QUOTE] [B] realistic might be a problem if you don't know what was used at the time. And rigidly adhering to used tacics leaves less rome for creativity. [/B][/QUOTE]

To really enjoy playing SP-series, I think player have to know quite a bit about WW2 doctrines and equipment. Of course I don't want to kill creativity, but one can TRY to be creative and in the same time stick with general doctrines of the nation he/she is playing.

Colonel von Blitz

_____________________________

--Light travels faster than sound, that's why some people appear bright until you hear them speak--

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 31
- 11/17/2002 6:06:17 PM   
Frank W.

 

Posts: 1958
Joined: 10/18/2001
From: Siegen + Essen / W. Germany
Status: offline 		how about mass using of panther g uhu and sturmtigers??

i noticed, that sturmtigers are rather cheap but VERY effective against INF in good defensive positions. of course the neighbouring hexes are effected ,too.

there were only a view build of these weapons...

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 32
- 11/17/2002 10:37:12 PM   
Colonel von Blitz

 

Posts: 262
Joined: 12/4/2000
From: Espoo, Finland
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Frank W.
[B]how about mass using of panther g uhu and sturmtigers??

i noticed, that sturmtigers are rather cheap but VERY effective against INF in good defensive positions. of course the neighbouring hexes are effected ,too.

there were only a view build of these weapons... [/B][/QUOTE]

You can really ruin a game by mass using any unit. Sure, it was effective to use 350 snipers in some version of SP:WaW, or it may be fruitful to use 150 50cal Jeeps to storm around. Is it fun? I don't think so.

While purchasing you may ask yourself: does this produce historically accurate as well as good and enjoyable battles?

If your answer is yes, then go ahead. If your answer is no, then you may want to go back to the purchasing screen.

Most of the time I purchase more rare units based on how many was built. If I really need heavy infantry support, I may purchase a platoon of Sturmtigers. If I need heavy AT-capability as german in late 1941, I'll buy a section of 10.5cm Tank Destroyers (there were only two prototypes on the field anyway). etc.

Though I 'published' this list of rules, I urge players more to agree with opponents what is allowed and what is forbidden. Moreover, I urge players to forget modern combined arms and try to go back in time and try to simulate WW2 era way of waging a war...trust me, it'll be more fun and you'll get even more out of SP:WaW! :)

Colonel von Blitz

_____________________________

--Light travels faster than sound, that's why some people appear bright until you hear them speak--

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 33
- 11/17/2002 11:12:38 PM   
Drex

 

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline 		Colonel: What is the difference between modern combined arms and WWII combat style? I've always tried to balance my force with infantry, armor, arty etc. Is this the modern style or WWII style? My knowledge of WWII tactics is difficient to know if I'm historical or not.

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 34
- 11/17/2002 11:54:20 PM   
VikingNo2


Posts: 2918
Joined: 1/26/2002
From: NC
Status: offline 		No one commented, what about deleting units from formations ?

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 35
- 11/18/2002 12:29:35 AM   
Colonel von Blitz

 

Posts: 262
Joined: 12/4/2000
From: Espoo, Finland
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Drex
[B]Colonel: What is the difference between modern combined arms and WWII combat style? I've always tried to balance my force with infantry, armor, arty etc. Is this the modern style or WWII style? My knowledge of WWII tactics is difficient to know if I'm historical or not. [/B][/QUOTE]

This depends on the nationality you're playing and on the date.

If you're playing as French in the summer of 1940, I'd suggest you do not use armor in large units, but rather use small sections among infantry.

If you're playing as American in 1944-45, you should probably use well balanced combined arms.

There is no simple answer here, but hope this helps.


[QUOTE]Originally posted by VikingNo2
[B]what about deleting units from formations ? [/B][/QUOTE]

I usually do not delete units from formations. Sometimes I rearrange the support weapons of a company, in order to get more concentrated firepower to my kill zones. Other situation when I modify formations is to attach truck or APCs to infantry.

Colonel von Blitz

_____________________________

--Light travels faster than sound, that's why some people appear bright until you hear them speak--

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 36
Not that I'd disagree with a COLONEL - 11/18/2002 4:12:44 AM   
Capt. Pixel

 

Posts: 1219
Joined: 10/15/2001
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]Ok, here are some "rules of honor" that I've created and honed while playing A LOT of PBEM games. These were created to counter some SP:WaW 'flaws' :

Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]


Permission to speak freely! Sir! :D


* 1) Reinforcements are allowed if both players agree.

I think that's as far as that rule needs to go, with a slight modification. 'Reinforcements are allowed [U]unless one[/U] player disagrees.'

* 2) Paradrops and infiltrations are forbidden in ME and Advance battles.

It's not hard to justify SO Partisans appearing in either of these situations. A meeting engagement doesn't necessarily mean that neither side is supported by other elements. That ground force rushing towards the objective may be doing so to support a paradrop that was planned days before. But look! there's an enemy formation. Also, paradrops could (and did) occur concurrently (eg. A Meeting of Devils).

* 3) In Meeting Engagements only engineers are allowed to place mines.

I kind of like this. Although I sometimes do it to protect myself, I find slathering your rear area VHs and map edge flanks with mines a particularly gamey thing to do. Why, for instance, would you even know where your opponent's objectives are? Or the 'edge of the map' for that matter. In Advance or Assault battles, I'd just expect there to be stiff defenses. ( I see little difference in the two, in terms of PBEM generated battles).

* 4) Rocket launchers ...

I think these are already pretty self-limiting. Fully reloading a Nebelwerefer with one ammo truck is going to take 6 turns, anyway. I think the time scale estimate is ~2 minutes per turn, so this would fit in your time estimate. And ammo trucks cost more than most tanks. I do agree that there ought to be an outgoing ammo limit on the trucks/dumps themselves, but that's a game engine issue.

* 5) The deliberate usage of FlaK-weaponry to counter armor is forbidden.

Umm, why? I gather by this that you mean using AA exclusively in the AT role because that countries AT capability is so pathetic? (early war British 2 pdr, for instance). Unless we had agreed to play an historically probable, or re-enactment battle of a particular theatre situation, I wouldn't even bother mentioning #5.

* 6) To counter enemy On-Board artillery, it is forbidden to use only smoke puffs as guidance.

This is certainly reasonable in some types of terrain, but given open, 'flat' ground, it's not hard to see smoke plumes at 2-3 km. With any kind of altitude advantage, you could see twice that range. Spotting smoke rounds ( a device not even modelled in SPW@W) were used to bring in barrages on target.

Besides, each side's artillery assets are executing their battle at a whole different level. Strategic employment of smoke around batteries, the 'Shoot-and-Scoot' tactics are all elements of this game-within-a-game. Shoot at my smoke puffs - chances are usually better than 50% that there's nothing even there. :p
(and how could your side know there's "1 Casualty" from your bombardment?)

* 7) Calling Off-Board artillery is allowed only by using Forward Observers or HQ.

I generally do this because it's prudent. With C&C on, however, I use [I]any[/I] unit that has excess orders to call in continuing fire plots. I then use the more precise FOs to call in new plots and adjust existing ones. If my opponent isn't using these guys for his arty plots, woe to him. I'll just skip underneath his slowly adjusting barrages. (That's not very realistic either, is it?)

* 8) It is forbidden to use 0-units of On-Board artillery batteries to direct their own fire.

I agree, this is kind of cheesy. But if you're down to using the battery's 0-unit, you may already be in pretty bad shape. You could also 'game' this one and justify that the battery has an built-in FO (guy with radio).

* 9) Players are allowed to use 10% (15% in Assault/Defend battles) of their points for artillery.

This is generally the limits I would request. 10% makes you think pretty hard about what you're going to use. 15% is just enough to pound the pee-waddin' out of your opponent. 20% is just obnoxious. I consider those limits to apply the amount of points on the map. That is, 10% of the initial buy plus 10% of any reinforcements purchase later. Limits on calibre and number of batteries should be discussed at the outset, but otherwise assumed to be whatever is available to that country at that time.

* 10) Reconnoitering is allowed but it is forbidden to drive around within the vicinity of enemy units with empty trucks, motorcycles etc. with the sole purpose of drawing fire.

Well, I agree, but how does one adjudicate this? Trucks might be pushing the issue, but they're already modelled to retreat automatically in certain situations. As far as MCs and jeeps and kubelwagens, I use these as reconn and they get shot at sometimes. Who's to say if that was 'baiting the Tiger' or not?

There are tactics one can use to reduce the effect of this 'abuse', like setting your Opp Fire range to shorter distances. Place less critical units forward to deliver Opp Fire first, etc.

Historically 'accurate' battles might be more enlightening, but I think they tended to be rather one-sided affairs. Many were won or lost due to conditions [I]behind[/I] the front lines. (logistic collapse, equipment breakdowns, sabotage).

I think SPW@W's features of Availability, Rarity and Reduced squads do a fine job in keeping things 'real'.

It's the 5,342,126,785 possible 'What Ifs' that keeps this game so interesting. I think you could 'eliminate' 3,756,483,011 through rules and still have great game to play for entertainment. :cool:

_____________________________

"Always mystify, mislead, and surprise the enemy, if possible. "
- Stonewall Jackson

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 37
- 11/18/2002 6:07:56 AM   
VikingNo2


Posts: 2918
Joined: 1/26/2002
From: NC
Status: offline 		Okay Capt P; what are your terms. how about 8-9K large map

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 38
- 11/18/2002 6:21:47 AM   
Drex

 

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline 		Hey Guys could give us a running AAR?Put it on the AAR forum.

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 39
- 11/18/2002 7:00:44 AM   
VikingNo2


Posts: 2918
Joined: 1/26/2002
From: NC
Status: offline 		Drex have I played you ?

Are you up for one?

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 40
- 11/18/2002 8:32:16 AM   
Drex

 

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline 		I'll be easy meat but I love a good battle. Do you concur with the Colonel's tenants or do you have some modifications?

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 41
- 11/18/2002 8:57:39 AM   
VikingNo2


Posts: 2918
Joined: 1/26/2002
From: NC
Status: offline 		Not really tell me your prefs I'm sure we can come to something :cool:

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 42
PBEM - 11/18/2002 9:04:42 AM   
Drex

 

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline 		There is a PBEM form that I will email to you. What is your email?

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 43
- 11/18/2002 9:20:07 AM   
VikingNo2


Posts: 2918
Joined: 1/26/2002
From: NC
Status: offline 		[email]gregoryjj@hawaii.rr.com[/email]

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 44
- 11/18/2002 5:23:10 PM   
Capt. Pixel

 

Posts: 1219
Joined: 10/15/2001
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by VikingNo2
[B]Okay Capt P; what are your terms. how about 8-9K large map [/B][/QUOTE]

9k, Large random map, 10% arty no caliber limits
Let's try no infiltrators, no paradrops
All options On except Rarity and C&C
Spotting, Hitting, etc. at 100%
No renaming of units :wink:

7'43, Me US, You GE

Any slot except #6 or #10

How's dat? :D

_____________________________

"Always mystify, mislead, and surprise the enemy, if possible. "
- Stonewall Jackson

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 45
JJ - 11/18/2002 7:30:39 PM   
Gary Tatro

 

Posts: 1213
Joined: 2/1/2002
From: MA, US
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by VikingNo2
[B]Not really tell me your prefs I'm sure we can come to something :cool: [/B][/QUOTE]
Can't you use your own posts to get opponets. I had a good heated discussion going with the forum and you have to go and rain on it with your PBEM obsession. :D I mean sheeesh you have your own two sub-forums.

_____________________________

"Are you going to do something or just stand there and bleed"

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 46
The code... - 11/18/2002 11:13:34 PM   
challenge

 

Posts: 465
Joined: 10/10/2001
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]1) Reinforcements ... [/QUOTE]
I agree the default on this should be whether one or the other player disagrees. The player needing the reinforcements is just trying to keep a game from being a total wash and gives points to his opponant's score for taking them. Meeting engagements, IRL, often had reinforcements sent in after the amount of resistance was determined. I think a specific turn should be given as the earliest you can call them in, however.
[QUOTE]2) Paradrops and infiltrations are forbidden in Meeting Engagements and in Advance/Delay -battles. Paratroopers and Special Forces can still be used as regular infantry in those battles. Both are allowed in Assault/Defend battles.[/QUOTE]
I agree that a meeting engagement might occur under the conditions Capt P mentioned, but if that's the situation your paradrop is likely on the other side of a very big map. Stipulations of minimum turn before arrival are rediculas... If you are sending ground troops in to support an airdrop you want to coordinate the attack. Turn 1 should have a defense set up in the Defend battle, so what difference is it whether the airborne drops on Turn 1 or Turn 10? In fact, by Turn 10 you may have committed your reserve and be in worse shape when they drop.
[QUOTE]3) ... mines ...[/QUOTE]
I agree on all counts. Placing mines on the fly in meeting engagements is more than fun... It's... cathartic.
[QUOTE]4) Rocket launchers must reload for a minimum of 7 turns before firing another salvo (this is used with my modified 7.1 OOBs, where the ROF of Rocket Launchers was increased to 99).[/QUOTE]
I think the ammo reload rates covers this nicely. Personally, I don't want to try to remember the last time I fired something. If it's ready, use it. As CP pointed out, the time frame of the game pretty much covers it.
[QUOTE]5) The deliberate usage of FlaK-weaponry to counter armor is forbidden, unless the weapon was actually used in such a manner (for example german 88mm).[/QUOTE]
I think buying flak purposely as AT weapons is silly. In most cases there are better AT guns available, cheaper. Flak has a good rate of fire, but size and low armor ratings can make these much less effective. I agree with the rule, I just don't see the logic behind buying AA instead of AT guns. If you drive a tank infront of my 3.7cm AA gun, however, expect to be shot at by it.
[QUOTE]6) To counter enemy On-Board artillery, it is forbidden to use only smoke puffs as guidance. When you have or have had visual contact (both ground and air units qualify) to enemy On-Board artillery, you may target them.[/QUOTE]
Isn't that one of the ways CB fire was set IRL? I would be willing to compromise and say you need a line of sight to the smoke, but if you conceal the tubes in the trees and I can't see them, smoke is a dead give away that something is there. Whites-of-their-eyes stuff went out with muzzle loaders.
[QUOTE]7) Calling Off-Board artillery is allowed only by using Forward Observers or HQ.[/QUOTE]
I disagree with this because it specifically favors the Soviets and minors without a specific artillery doctrine and discards actual doctrine for both the US and German armies in particular. One of the reasons the German and American Armies had so many radios was to make command and artillery more convenient to reach. There are serious time lag and accuracy issues when you use other than FO and HQ units to call artillery, and that should be adequate for most games.
[QUOTE]8) It is forbidden to use 0-units of On-Board artillery batteries to direct their own fire. On-Board artillery fire is allowed to be called only by using FOs, HQ OR Platoon/Company leaders.[/QUOTE]
Hmmm, this is a tough one. Yes, you get the .1 or .2 time lag, but then the units in the formation would respond to the local command faster than higher levels. I would like to see it restricted somehow, but not eliminated. I can think of a few logical reasons to do it.
[QUOTE] 9) Players are allowed to use 10% (15% in Assault/Defend battles) of their points for artillery. This percentage is calculated from the amount of points available in the beginning of the inital purchase, thus the possible reinforcement points have no effect in the maximum points that are allowed to be spent for artillery.[/Quote]
Yes
[Quote] a) In meeting engagements the Off-Board artillery is limited to a maximum of 1 battery (2 batteries in Advance/Delay battles). The allowed maximum caliber of this battery is 140mm. Rest of the artillery must be On-Board.[/Quote]
No. Quantity is low; it should be more like a Btln. The size limitation specifically penalizes the 150 mm of the Germans while allowing essentially the equivalent size for others.
[Quote] b) In Assault/Defend battles, with the 15% of points players may purchase the units they wish.[/Quote]
Yes.
[Quote]10) Reconnoitering is allowed but it is forbidden to drive around within the vicinity of enemy units with empty trucks, motorcycles etc. with the sole purpose of drawing fire. (For example it is forbidden to drive in circles in front of Tiger to get her to "empty her tubes" and then finish the Tiger with your own tanks).[/Quote]
Personally, I think any use of vehicles to drain off a unit's op fire rounds or the "sacrifice" of nonessential units is gaming the game. If my MC squads are closing on you, or moving quickly across your front, it's because it's the only way to get where I want it. But that's just me. Zigzagging "waste" units is just cheezy.

While I see many of your comments as a good attempt to address some of the gamy aspects of SPWaW, some just seem like ways to reduce the threats you find inconvenient: Artillery, Paradrops, Infiltrators. As someone who ground a better player to a halt using artillery, I understand that we need limits on some aspects. The 10 - 15 percent agreement limits it enough, IMO.

Mission type really isn't an indication of what is going on around you. Your mission is part of a greater whole that you do not see. It's tough to model that, but it means the possiblities are incredible.

_____________________________

Challenge

War is unhealthy for die-stamped cardboard and other paper products.

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 47
- 11/19/2002 12:14:29 AM   
VikingNo2


Posts: 2918
Joined: 1/26/2002
From: NC
Status: offline 		Oh Gary, I'm wounded:rolleyes:

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 48
- 11/19/2002 1:37:54 AM   
Gary Tatro

 

Posts: 1213
Joined: 2/1/2002
From: MA, US
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]Ok, here are some "rules of honor" that I've created and honed while playing A LOT of PBEM games. These were created to counter some SP:WaW 'flaws' :

1) Reinforcements are allowed if both players agree. If not agreed, then rule of thumb is: reinforcements are forbidden in Meeting Engagements and allowed in Advance/Delay and in Assault/Defend -battles. Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]

As far as reinforcements are concerned I think it should be agreed upon ahead of time, or like in many games that I play in player tell their opponents on the turn that they call for reiforcements. I have also played games were my opponets on turn one requested as many reinforcements as they could get. I still won the game, but it certainly was a lot more difficult.

QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]
2) Paradrops and infiltrations are forbidden in Meeting Engagements and in Advance/Delay -battles. Paratroopers and Special Forces can still be used as regular infantry in those battles. Both are allowed in Assault/Defend battles. Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]

I like to keep paradrops only limited to none on turn 1/0. The reason for this is that if I go first and set up my paradrops on turn 0, my units will drop and I will get a chance to rally them then use them on turn 1 before my opponent even knows that they are there. I had this happen to me once. Did not like much.

As for infiltrators I can agree. I like to set limits on this also depending on the size of the battle. I try to limit them to no more than 3 platoons. I once played a game where I was USMC vs Japan and my opponent took over 200 units of Japan Militia (the kind with the bambo spear and anti-tank weapon that has 25 men in it) and had them all infiltrate. Now if you know how the assualt rules work is that you get a percentage point for each man in the unit then you get a bonus if you have an anti tank weapon. Well these squads have like a base success of assualting at about 50%) The game ended in a draw. I had more points and almost all of my units were out of ammo when the game ended. Let me just say that that was not a fun game for me either.

QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]
3) In Meeting Engagements only engineers are allowed to place mines. In Advance/Delay battles in addition to engineer placed mines, player is allowed to buy some mines: small map = 15, medium map = 30, large map = 45 etc. In Assault/Defend battles the number of mines is unlimited. Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]

I completly agree with this

QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]
4) Rocket launchers must reload for a minimum of 7 turns before firing another salvo (this is used with my modified 7.1 OOBs, where the ROF of Rocket Launchers was increased to 99). Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]

I have seen a lot of people contest this but I do not think that they are thinking this threw. First it does not take long at all for a rocket launcher to reload. I play Russia a lot and if I set my Katayashas next to a ammo depot and have them fire with a .0 or .1 turn delay I can fire 3 rounds of rockets EACH TURN. This is at half the round capacity, but as some of my opponents can tell you it is still devistating. Now think about this if you were playing the USA. I like to limit rockets to only one platoon of batteries on board (4) EVER (If my opponent is folish enough to buy off-board rockets, more power to him) no matter what size game. And just leave it at that.

QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]
5) The deliberate usage of FlaK-weaponry to counter armor is forbidden, unless the weapon was actually used in such a manner (for example german 88mm). Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]

Part of the game. I have played countries and time periods where the flack is the only thing that can stop the Armor of my opponent.

QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]
6) To counter enemy On-Board artillery, it is forbidden to use only smoke puffs as guidance. When you have or have had visual contact (both ground and air units qualify) to enemy On-Board artillery, you may target them. Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]

Though I like the idea in general, there are many ways to avoid this. I tend to purchase a company of motor cycles and have them dump smoke in artillary smoke patterns all over my back field. Then let my opponent figure out where my artillary is. If he/she waists artillary on barren land I smile to myself every replay (hi Don Doom) :)

QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]
7) Calling Off-Board artillery is allowed only by using Forward Observers or HQ. Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]

Why would you want to use anything else? Wouldn't these units give you the fastest times?

QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]
8) It is forbidden to use 0-units of On-Board artillery batteries to direct their own fire. On-Board artillery fire is allowed to be called only by using FOs, HQ OR Platoon/Company leaders.Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]


I agree with this. Though many time playing Lost Victories I use my 0-unit on-board artillary to call in strikes. You never get a FO.

QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]
9) Players are allowed to use 10% (15% in Assault/Defend battles) of their points for artillery. This percentage is calculated from the amount of points available in the beginning of the inital purchase, thus the possible reinforcement points have no effect in the maximum points that are allowed to be spent for artillery. Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]

I agree. Artillary is extreemly powerful.

QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]
a) In meeting engagements the Off-Board artillery is limited to a maximum of 1 battery (2 batteries in Advance/Delay battles). The allowed maximum caliber of this battery is 140mm. Rest of the artillery must be On-Board. Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]

Not sure why you are limiting the size of the calibur in off-board. I kind of agree but off-board artillary has its own disadvantages. 1-can not reload and 2-out of contact. In long games/big battle (more than 20 turns) I very seldom buy off-board artillary. It runs out and then you are cocked. Learn to place your infantry in more defensive terain. This will prevent them from taking damage from the large calibar guns. Better yet put them into a halftrack and they take no suppression at all. (well as long as the halftrack is not hit) :)

QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]
b) In Assault/Defend battles, with the 15% of points players may purchase the units they wish. Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]

Not really sure what you mean by this?

QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]
10) Reconnoitering is allowed but it is forbidden to drive around within the vicinity of enemy units with empty trucks, motorcycles etc. with the sole purpose of drawing fire. (For example it is forbidden to drive in circles in front of Tiger to get her to "empty her tubes" and then finish the Tiger with your own tanks). Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]

Well I don't do this as a rule, 1-because I don't buy units just to through them away. 2-Once a unit is fired on I try to find a different route. 3-If there is a lot of open space I set up a smoke screen to cover my advances. 4-This seldom happens to me because I set up range fireing limits for my tanks/ATG and MG. Also I tend to keep my tanks hidden with an infantry screen in front of it.

QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]
In addition to these rules, I always encourage the usage of "realistic" unit compositions and doctrines. I've found that this is the only way to truly get excellent and fun battles.

Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]

I think that about covers it. One thing JJ did bring up that I will have to say that I do do often is the purchasing of a company of units then deleting out units that I do not want. This way I can get the +10% bonus to units I would not normally get. I also tend to purchase only one type of infantry when I am playing a certain country (ie Russia-Russian Guards).

_____________________________

"Are you going to do something or just stand there and bleed"

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 49
Load of - 11/19/2002 12:08:17 PM   
Tomanbeg

 

Posts: 4385
Joined: 7/14/2000
From: Memphis, Tn, CSA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]Ok, here are some "rules of honor" that I've created and honed while playing A LOT of PBEM games. These were created to counter some SP:WaW 'flaws' :

1) Reinforcements are allowed if both players agree. If not agreed, then rule of thumb is: reinforcements are forbidden in Meeting Engagements and allowed in Advance/Delay and in Assault/Defend -battles.[/B]

Why? What possible rational could you have for this, and what does it have to do with honor? It was normal for All the Armies involved in WW2 to send another formation out on the heels of another. The Germans didn't do it so much after mid '43, but that is because they didn't have extra formations. But this is just exactly how they went thru France. The first Unit would contain the enemy, while the follow up unit went around or reinforced the assault, depending on how strong the position was. Soviet Doctrine called for just exactly this tactic. And it was normal for a Combat Command to send out a 'heavy' recon unit. Sometimes the entire Combat Command would act as a recon unit, which is what a meeting engagement of this perod represents. If you are looking for historical accuracy then the Reinforcements on a movement to contact should be 90 % of your total force. I have built PBEM Scenarios that way and nobody liked them, so Matrix got this right. Although 20% is to small a number.

[B]2) Paradrops and infiltrations are forbidden in Meeting Engagements and in Advance/Delay -battles. Paratroopers and Special Forces can still be used as regular infantry in those battles. Both are allowed in Assault/Defend battles.[/B]

Why? On the Eastern Front the number of Soviet guerrillas was in the millions. They played a critical part in the 'Great patriotic War". Have you ever heard of operation Market Garden? That was one long meeting engagement to relieve an air drop. You can't call it an assault because the germans were not fixed in position when the brits attacked, but moved into the path of the brits as they moved forward. That is a meeting engagement.

[B]3) In Meeting Engagements only engineers are allowed to place mines. In Advance/Delay battles in addition to engineer placed mines, player is allowed to buy some mines: small map = 15, medium map = 30, large map = 45 etc. In Assault/Defend battles the number of mines is unlimited.[/B]

What about the mines laid by guerrillas, or left over from the last battle.

[B]4) Rocket launchers must reload for a minimum of 7 turns before firing another salvo (this is used with my modified 7.1 OOBs, where the ROF of Rocket Launchers was increased to 99).

5) The deliberate usage of FlaK-weaponry to counter armor is forbidden, unless the weapon was actually used in such a manner (for example german 88mm).[/B]

Why just the 88? The british 3.7" was used this way also. During the Crusader battles A British Gunner won the VC for knocking out 2 Panzers while his 3.7" AA gun still in trail. That was claimed to be impossible by alll the experts. But when faced with a choice between dying or doing the impossible, most men give it a try. Some suceed.

[B]6) To counter enemy On-Board artillery, it is forbidden to use only smoke puffs as guidance. When you have or have had visual contact (both ground and air units qualify) to enemy On-Board artillery, you may target them.[/B]

You are trying to ruin all my fun. I will set building and forrests on fire, shoot smoke in my on rear areas and do other things to get dummys to shoot off their rounds at nothing.

[B]7) Calling Off-Board artillery is allowed only by using Forward Observers or HQ.[/B] This is good for minor powers by bogus for the US, Germany, GB Canad, Oz, etc. Now if you were complaining about switching to the US OOB to get that .1 for your Russian Forces, I would say you had a point.

[B]8) It is forbidden to use 0-units of On-Board artillery batteries to direct their own fire. On-Board artillery fire is allowed to be called only by using FOs, HQ OR Platoon/Company leaders.[/B]
This was a bug reported in the original SP, IIRC Matrix aquashed it in 2.3 or so. I wasn't aware that it had crept back in.

[B]9) Players are allowed to use 10% (15% in Assault/Defend battles) of their points for artillery. This percentage is calculated from the amount of points available in the beginning of the inital purchase, thus the possible reinforcement points have no effect in the maximum points that are allowed to be spent for artillery.

a) In meeting engagements the Off-Board artillery is limited to a maximum of 1 battery (2 batteries in Advance/Delay battles). The allowed maximum caliber of this battery is 140mm. Rest of the artillery must be On-Board.

b) In Assault/Defend battles, with the 15% of points players may purchase the units they wish.[/B]

Dunnigan has about 25% and he has made a lot more money doing this then you have. Where did you pull those percentages from?

[B]10) Reconnoitering is allowed but it is forbidden to drive around within the vicinity of enemy units with empty trucks, motorcycles etc. with the sole purpose of drawing fire. (For example it is forbidden to drive in circles in front of Tiger to get her to "empty her tubes" and then finish the Tiger with your own tanks).[B]
You are a real wooze, arn't you. Ever heard of combined arms? Put a MG or a track next to your Tiger and it's shoot up that truck. AC's are great for this.

[B]In addition to these rules, I always encourage the usage of "realistic" unit compositions and doctrines. I've found that this is the only way to truly get excellent and fun battles.

Any comments and suggestions are welcome :)

Colonel von Blitz [/B]

Almost all your rules violate what is "realistic". I think your Idea of fun is sitting on a hill blowing things up with your Tiger. Have you ever considered a tank sim? Almost all the things you are against are reasonale models of actual events, given the handicap of a Igo-Ugo system. And they can be countered with the proper tactics. I you take the time and learn the proper tactics, all these things that you consider dishonerable yet actually happened won't panic you because you will know how to deal with them. Here is a clue. ALWAYS buy a few AC's and SPAA's to use for anti-commando work. The Recon AC's will spot them and then the pair( you always work your units in pairs, right?), can use the small auto cannons to chew them to rags. Partisans are more bark then bite. Flamthrowers you deal with by backing up and leaving enough small mortars droppin on your old position to button them up and cut down on their movement points so they can be killed with a tank gun. Tigers you smoke and kill them on the move. Ditto for Panthers. The Big AA guns that move and shoot in the same turn have lousy hit numbers and not much AP. Suppress and over run. Snipers are wonderful for taking out 88's, you just have to figure out a way to get your opponent to leave the 88 in place long enough to get a sniper to within 300 meters. If you are playing with the astrick on, use it to trick your opponent to move his high value units. Somtimes you can figure out where he will move that unit to and have a little something waiting for him. Count hexes and only move one hex at a time. That will let you spot mines often enough so that they become a nuisance and not a threat. But most of all, remember that you are playing your opponent, not his equipment. the units are just symbols, once you understand your opponents mind, it doesn't matter how he manipulates his symbols, you will be inside his cycle and you can impose your will on him.
T.(I think that you are thinking of the modern conditions that define meeting engagements or movement to contact. The modern defination is an evolution of the WW2 term. In WW2 meeting engagements were when ever one side was NOT dug in in what would be termed fortifications(mines, and wire laid). SP2 is more of a venue for what you are thinking of as a meeting engagement. The Term was coined by the Soviets to describe what happens when opposing armored columns collide. That happened a lot in late '43 and in '44. The Germans never really had the time to build a real line and had to use counterattacks to stop the Soviets. But they weren't the same movement to contact like what the US Army teaches).

_____________________________

"The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 50
- 11/19/2002 12:35:06 PM   
AmmoSgt

 

Posts: 1002
Joined: 10/21/2000
From: Redstone Arsenal Al
Status: offline 		We are still arguing over historical V balanced ? Forget it .. there is no balanced battle in history. The minute you agree to equal points or the same 2 to 1 points defend for every battle, history is out the window. The minute you start limiting US or Brit Arty, History and Doctrine both is out the window.
Mines ? I can see mines being something to agree on in meeting engagements, but thats about it.
Why not just let each player buy what they want? There is no free lunch , you go Arty heavy , then you are weak in maneuver forces. On board arty is easy to kill, off board arty usually runs out of ammo. There is a tactic to defeat any force composition. Players tend to develop their own styles and force mixes, if they are allowed to buy what they want. IMHO by trying to restrict players to buying along the same lines as the AI , and thats what you are doing, basically from the rules folks are posting for the the other players purchasing. you are reducing your own flexibility to develop your own style and doctrine.
Historically speaking , for example, The Germans massed their armor, that means 90% of the time the Germans only had Infantry, there would be no armor at this game scale , except as reinforcements if the Germans were delaying or defending. which would be about 80% of the time after Stalingrad. Historically speaking Allies would almost always have Air if it was flying weather. US would have more Arty batteries than Tank Companies, 90% of the Time. and only the US would be able to use anything other than Company Comanders or FO's to call Arty. The US ammo carriers would cost 1/3 what any other nations ammo carriers would cost Historically.
In other words .. history don't count at all if you want a balanced game. Thats fine , but once you admit that much, and Once you admit that most of the rules you guys want your opponent to follow are to cancel out Allied national doctrine that was developed to defeat the Axis national doctrine. Then why don't you just agree to equal points in meeting engagements , and 2 to 1 or whatever for delay/ defend that seems right to you and give each other the freedom to develop a personal doctrine and personal force composition that might or might not work against the other guys personal doctrine and personal force composition. Trying to force the other palyer to buy like the AI makes as much sense as trying to force the other player to play like the AI.
Smoke in the backfield IMHO is totally fair.. firing on smoke in the backfield that you could not possibly see in real life is gaming the game IMHO.
Somebody back up the thread ask "how could the British ever win against the Germans with those dinky AT guns?" simple answer Arty and supply. But supply is the same for everybody in the game and everybody wants rules to make arty the same , and every nation gets about the same ammount of ammo for the same number of points. Thats great for balance, but it also means you never have to learn the tactics or the doctrines that the various Armies used to win, or lose , because you never have to face the problems and limitation they had to overcome, and you never allow the advantages they enjoyed into the game.
Every game is a mix of Armor and Infantry, seldom foot infantry, usually Mech or at least truck for mobility, and limited Arty , usually the same for both sides, WHY ? You can't do that much about the VHexs being almost the same all the time, You can't do much about the Game lenght being nearly the same, you sure as heck can't do much about the same tired old AI force composition and same old mine belts. Why not let the other guy suprise the heck out of you in PBEM, or you suprise the heck out of him. Why not find a way to totally defeat somebody that buys Arty heavy forces or find a way to make a totally foot infantry force hold the line?
When I was playing PBEM alot I never asked the other guy to restrict what he bought, after the first couple of games I played. And I agreed to whatever silly restriction the other guy thought he just had to have. Heck i usually agreed to follow the other guys restrictions, and told him he could buy whatever he wanted. It never really made any difference in the outcome, skilled players did better regardless of the restrictions or lack there of than inexperienced players.

_____________________________

"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 51
- 11/19/2002 12:54:34 PM   
Tomanbeg

 

Posts: 4385
Joined: 7/14/2000
From: Memphis, Tn, CSA
Status: offline 		Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz


[B]And exploit the 'eye of god' feature? The rule was created because the game engine simply reload too quickly...it took 15-20 minutes to reload most of the multitubed WW2 era Rocket Launchers, this is why I choose to create this rule.
[/B]
That is how long it took to reload all 18, 24, 36, or however many tubes. But an Ammo truck reloads 1 or 2 rounds per turn and an ammo dump 2 or 3. I think 2 or 3 minutes is kinda slow to shove 2 rickets in a tube and hook up a wire.

[B]I hate to exploit the 'eye of god' feature, by targeting On-Board artillery using only smoke puffs as guidance. If my opponent is stupid/incompetent enough ;) to let me see his/her On-Board arty, that's when I'll call the strike.
[/B]
But the UK and the US did just this ALL the time. All infantry officers were taught crater anaylsis. they learned to look at a crater and determine the size, bearing and range of the shell that produced it. A few million rounds were fired off over two wars using this type data.

[B]I've found that if you have a tank and supporting infantry in position, the tank opens fire when your opponent drives around with empty truck...deliberately drawing fire, though a single MG could take out the truck with a single burst.[/B]

This is what the range thingy is for. you set the Tiger so it won't shoot until after the protection team does.

[B]To really enjoy playing SP-series, I think player have to know quite a bit about WW2 doctrines and equipment. Of course I don't want to kill creativity, but one can TRY to be creative and in the same time stick with general doctrines of the nation he/she is playing.[/B]
Those general doctrines are a matter of controversy between historians, so that pretty much puts it up in the air.

Colonel von Blitz [/B]

One of the problems with any model is that if it can't predict the past, It won't predict the future. Where any war game comes to grief is that while you can model the equipment without much trouble, you cannot model the men, and it's the men running the equipment that make the difference. Look at the Soviet German war in the East. German equipment was inferior from '41 to '43( when the Tiger started showing up in enough numbers to be more the a curiousity). Yet the Germans kicked butt. But after the Tiger and the Panther showed up, the germans got spanked. That is because the Soviets killed off the men that made the germans so good in the first 2 years. And by early '44 the Soviets that had lived through the lean years were very good soldiers. I bring this up becuse to make a playable game that people would buy gary had to do certain things within the system. Matrix was locked into some of those issues. A game built to be as historical as possible would be unplayable with a Igo-Ugo system. So this is as good as you will get. But I can find instances that contradict all your pet peeves. My only real problem is the point cost for certain units is way to low. Tiger # 20 didn't clank out the factory doors until October '42, IIRC. The ON War site used to have a spread sheet with monthly production totals for all the german armored vehicles. So I can shake my head when I see 24 Tigers in August of '42. Tigers 16 thru 24 should cost about 1,000 points each. But if my opponent has bought 24 Tigers, he thinks he needs them, and he might be right. So for me to say that they are not allowed and he is dishonerable for using them is a crock. Your likes and dislikes are yours, please don't attack us that disagree with them. At Kursk, the Soviet averaged 200 guns per Km in their artillery park. That is 10 per hex. It is also way more then 10% of their point total. And while the start of the Battle was a German Assault, the last part was fought between Soviet Armor [B]coming out to meet[/B] the German Armor. Most of those field guns were still firing. So how about a little slack for those of us that don't play your style, but still love the game.
T.

_____________________________

"The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 52
- 11/19/2002 11:54:53 PM   
Jack

 

Posts: 309
Joined: 5/25/2000
From: Canada
Status: offline 		Having been away for a couple of months I found this the most interesting thread because I only play SPWAW in the email form. Human opponents are the best.
I think everybody has good points. I think the best way to play is for the two individuals involed to make the own rules.

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 53
- 11/20/2002 12:13:40 AM   
VikingNo2


Posts: 2918
Joined: 1/26/2002
From: NC
Status: offline 		Whats silly is playing Ammo Sgt and thinking you can win, but it didn't keep me from trying again and again and again, and oh yeah again:D

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 54
- 11/20/2002 1:58:34 AM   
Frank W.

 

Posts: 1958
Joined: 10/18/2001
From: Siegen + Essen / W. Germany
Status: offline 		i agree with most things said in this thread. i agree with some limitations, but also the "let them buy what they want" thing.
after all it´s still a game and as tomanbeg says: you can´t get much more out of this game system.

sure perhaps it´s stupid to limit the arty+air for US (or late war russins or brits) players, because mass using of them was their doctrine and they HAD actually enough guns and ammo and the best fire control system as well.

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 55
- 11/21/2002 11:36:27 PM   
Tomanbeg

 

Posts: 4385
Joined: 7/14/2000
From: Memphis, Tn, CSA
Status: offline 		Originally posted by AmmoSgt
[B]We are still arguing over historical V balanced ? Forget it .. there is no balanced battle in history. The minute you agree to equal points or the same 2 to 1 points defend for every battle, history is out the window. The minute you start limiting US or Brit Arty, History and Doctrine both is out the window.
Mines ? I can see mines being something to agree on in meeting engagements, but thats about it.
Why not just let each player buy what they want? There is no free lunch , you go Arty heavy , then you are weak in maneuver forces. On board arty is easy to kill, off board arty usually runs out of ammo. There is a tactic to defeat any force composition. Players tend to develop their own styles and force mixes, if they are allowed to buy what they want. IMHO by trying to restrict players to buying along the same lines as the AI , and thats what you are doing, basically from the rules folks are posting for the the other players purchasing. you are reducing your own flexibility to develop your own style and doctrine.
Historically speaking , for example, The Germans massed their armor, that means 90% of the time the Germans only had Infantry, there would be no armor at this game scale , except as reinforcements if the Germans were delaying or defending. which would be about 80% of the time after Stalingrad. Historically speaking Allies would almost always have Air if it was flying weather. US would have more Arty batteries than Tank Companies, 90% of the Time. and only the US would be able to use anything other than Company Comanders or FO's to call Arty. The US ammo carriers would cost 1/3 what any other nations ammo carriers would cost Historically.
In other words .. history don't count at all if you want a balanced game. Thats fine , but once you admit that much, and Once you admit that most of the rules you guys want your opponent to follow are to cancel out Allied national doctrine that was developed to defeat the Axis national doctrine. Then why don't you just agree to equal points in meeting engagements , and 2 to 1 or whatever for delay/ defend that seems right to you and give each other the freedom to develop a personal doctrine and personal force composition that might or might not work against the other guys personal doctrine and personal force composition. Trying to force the other palyer to buy like the AI makes as much sense as trying to force the other player to play like the AI.
Smoke in the backfield IMHO is totally fair.. firing on smoke in the backfield that you could not possibly see in real life is gaming the game IMHO.
Somebody back up the thread ask "how could the British ever win against the Germans with those dinky AT guns?" simple answer Arty and supply. But supply is the same for everybody in the game and everybody wants rules to make arty the same , and every nation gets about the same ammount of ammo for the same number of points. Thats great for balance, but it also means you never have to learn the tactics or the doctrines that the various Armies used to win, or lose , because you never have to face the problems and limitation they had to overcome, and you never allow the advantages they enjoyed into the game.
Every game is a mix of Armor and Infantry, seldom foot infantry, usually Mech or at least truck for mobility, and limited Arty , usually the same for both sides, WHY ? You can't do that much about the VHexs being almost the same all the time, You can't do much about the Game lenght being nearly the same, you sure as heck can't do much about the same tired old AI force composition and same old mine belts. Why not let the other guy suprise the heck out of you in PBEM, or you suprise the heck out of him. Why not find a way to totally defeat somebody that buys Arty heavy forces or find a way to make a totally foot infantry force hold the line?
When I was playing PBEM alot I never asked the other guy to restrict what he bought, after the first couple of games I played. And I agreed to whatever silly restriction the other guy thought he just had to have. Heck i usually agreed to follow the other guys restrictions, and told him he could buy whatever he wanted. It never really made any difference in the outcome, skilled players did better regardless of the restrictions or lack there of than inexperienced players. [/B]

Beer!
T.

_____________________________

"The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 56
And How! - 11/21/2002 11:59:03 PM   
Tomanbeg

 

Posts: 4385
Joined: 7/14/2000
From: Memphis, Tn, CSA
Status: offline 		Originally posted by VikingNo2
[B]Whats silly is playing Ammo Sgt and thinking you can win, but it didn't keep me from trying again and again and again, and oh yeah again:D [/B]

My Sister is a retired Marine Gunny sergent and used to play SP. Not to be sexist, but I think the Female of the Species has an edge in sneaky things. My sister beat me like a drum. That Girl from OZ that invented the Tow jeep offense in SP2 was inside my cycle from set up till they threw dirt on the box.
And on the using a truck to draw fire thingy, read von Luck. That is an actual tactic used by the germans. They would drive a vehicle up and down in front of the American lines, pretending to be lost and looking for their comrades, in hopes that some FNG would shoot at them and give away his position. Light tanks were favored for this, with captured vehicles being second. When whining about truks being used for recon, keep in mind that the jeep is just a small truck, in military terms. And both jeeps and full sized truks were used to carry recon troops to the area that needed reconning. If the found something they would go back to the truck to report, since it would carry a more powerful radio.
T.

_____________________________

"The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http

(in reply to Gary Tatro)
Post #: 57
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

8.906