tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6055491912637469469.post8847769694485795336..comments2024-03-11T02:40:47.444-04:00Comments on Real and Simulated Wars: North German Plain 85 / Steel Beasts ProPE - The Futility of Battle Position 1JChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00770262108283393835noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6055491912637469469.post-43265089765910403762011-11-06T15:11:39.707-05:002011-11-06T15:11:39.707-05:00Hello,
What most people are not appreciating here...Hello,<br /><br />What most people are not appreciating here is that I am in command of just 12 or 13 tanks ... Not a pretty prospect to face 72 tanks with such a tiny force. Compromises had to be made.<br /><br />For BP1, you are totally incorrect in saying that BP1 would force me to face a Soviet tank regiment at once. Coppenbrugge itself is not the best terrain for the Soviets to deploy. Indeed, the first contact was against just a Co. (+). My error was not counting on such a strong Soviet probing north of Coppenbrugge. The tanks that I had to counter that were just flank protection, and I payed dearly for that miss-assesment.<br /><br />In any case, BP1 was part of a delaying mission (see tactical plan). I had no plans to engage decisively from BP1, neither I was forced to stay there for 15+ minutes. Poor decision making on my part on when to withdraw ... And how I withdrew too!<br /><br />Bessing is a very poor choice for a battle position. You can surely bag some tanks from there, but any Soviet tanks moving west from north of Coppenbrugge (as they did in the last blog entry) would get a great covered approach to fire positions aiming at Bessing. A battle position at Bessing would also make it trickier to withdraw: fire from the north and who knows what is in store from south (route L425).<br /><br />The L425-K16 approach is only observed for the time being. Your "classic" reverse slope defense at L425 is a no go. You must not forget that you have to bring your troops up there from 4+ kilometers away, maneuver them in restrictive terrain (surprise! terrain restrictions also apply to your troops) and deploy in something less than 10 minutes.<br /><br />Cheers,JChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00770262108283393835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6055491912637469469.post-346361028494367682011-11-06T12:27:32.630-05:002011-11-06T12:27:32.630-05:00Hello Anonymous,
1) About: "... but in game,...Hello Anonymous,<br /><br />1) About: "... but in game, I suppose, it's not about crushing the enemy will to advance in a select direction, it's about killing all the tanks he have already sent along pre-computed path, right? 9 burning tanks would make even a Soviet commander nervous and willing to try other routes. But not a computer, I think. Or is AI so good that it can alter an axis of advance"<br /><br />I created the routes for the Soviets in this scenario.<br />You are totally right: losing tanks would make any attacker doubt whether his plan is the right one or not.<br />It is possible to simulate this in SB to a certain degree - but I did it only partially:<br />* Some Soviet units will go for a plan B, and alter their routes, if key terrain (in their opinion) is held by NATO.<br />* What I did not implement, was the possibility that the Soviets decide to halt or even retreat, after X % of losses (that can be a fixed or random %). <br />Why not implemented: not enough free time to do so - maybe later.<br /><br />2) About your other comments: over to JC for that for now.<br /><br />Best rgds, KoenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6055491912637469469.post-91104270158158747902011-11-06T11:50:53.885-05:002011-11-06T11:50:53.885-05:00An intersting idea, I'm really intrigued how t...An intersting idea, I'm really intrigued how the battle will unfold further.<br />I am not very familiar with Steel Beasts inner workings, so I'll ask a couple of questions.<br /><br />First of all I'm very surprised with your choice of BP. <br />Putting up a head-on fight against at least a battalion without even dug-in positions? Leopards are great tanks but everything has it's limits as this short skirmish had shown. <br /><br />"Liddell Hart once compared a successful offensive to the flow of a stream of water in a hilly landscape, avoiding points of high resistance and eventually succeeding finding a way through low ground."<br />He is surely right about real life, but in game, I suppose, it's not about crushing the enemy will to advance in a select direction, it's about killing all the tanks he have already sent along pre-computed path, right? 9 burning tanks would make even a Soviet commander nervous and willing to try other routes. But not a computer, I think. Or is AI so good that it can alter an axis of advance?<br /><br />From my point of view Bessing seems to be an excellent BP1 candidate. From there Leopards could have made flanking shots and attrit enemy faster than he could concentrate enough firepower to deal with panzers. And somewhat short range provides security against AT-11 missiles which outclass even 120mm L\44 in range. Retreat would be tricky, but nothing impossible with preplanned smoke missions. So, why not Bessing?<br /><br />And what is the reason behind leaving L425 uncovered? The terrain is no doubt rough, but as the saying goes "The best tank terrain is that without anti-tank weapons". Slowly but steadliy whole regiment could have made it through and attack along K16.<br />It seems like a perfect place to use short-ranged Milans to their best effect against vehicles and soldiers crossing the ridgeline. Trees would also provide a variety of ambush positions for dismounts. That's a classic reverse-slope defence - the enemy would have to come up piecemeal, unable to put his whole firepower on your units.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6055491912637469469.post-31461448981556137072011-11-06T10:13:34.149-05:002011-11-06T10:13:34.149-05:00Hi James,
The thing in this scenario that limits a...Hi James,<br />The thing in this scenario that limits a lot of your freedom of action is that you have only 13 tanks. :)<br /><br />More is coming stay tuned.<br /><br />Cheers,JChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00770262108283393835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6055491912637469469.post-20080361883621211602011-11-06T09:26:04.724-05:002011-11-06T09:26:04.724-05:00Other than the messy withdraw do you think the def...Other than the messy withdraw do you think the defensive line was effective? I thought you might employ small counterattacks rather than straight up displacement and repositioning.<br />Either way this has been very entertaining!!! :)<br />regards,<br />JamesJameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07823484590752342922noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6055491912637469469.post-58817450307125141682011-11-06T07:51:08.590-05:002011-11-06T07:51:08.590-05:00hindsight is always 20/20hindsight is always 20/20JChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00770262108283393835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6055491912637469469.post-63061185579334347152011-11-06T02:52:31.522-05:002011-11-06T02:52:31.522-05:00Ah well better to learn here than in a shooting wa...Ah well better to learn here than in a shooting war. :)gibsonmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6055491912637469469.post-43979870662657476162011-11-05T20:31:05.919-04:002011-11-05T20:31:05.919-04:00I had conditional ("retreat if") orders ...I had conditional ("retreat if") orders on pre-plotted waypoints for each platoon. Of course the guy who fucked up the entire withdrawal was me giving the "proceed" order to every single platoon at the same time.JChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00770262108283393835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6055491912637469469.post-15863953049496843602011-11-05T17:56:00.731-04:002011-11-05T17:56:00.731-04:00So did you not manage the withdrawl (or did the AI...So did you not manage the withdrawl (or did the AI just displace the whole Coy)?gibsonmnoreply@blogger.com