ShermansWar
09-10-2005, 01:38 AM
Author Topic: Mass of force
SHERMANS WAR
Recruit
Member # 3
posted August 20, 2003 23:18
As we are going to be playing against a lot of players who have a lot more experience than us(me anyway)I think it would be advisable to develop some tactics that can negate or minimize the advantages of a superior gunner. I think in certain situations a massed engagement at an unexpected time or place will utilize the A1s ability as a gunner.that is to say, if I fight a good player with my tanks one at a time, he will defeat them one at a time, and I will lose the majority of my force.if however, I can engineer an engagement where many tanks are engaged in one area simultaneously, the human gunner can man only one tank at a time and A1 handles the rest.
The A1 on A1 engagements will break down fairly equally, and although I may lose the one on one engagements,in the confusion of a large simultaneous engagement, the enemy human gunner may not be able to pick me out, and if he does, while i engage him, at least the A1 is getting a roughly equal exchange rate, and after the engagement,if a lot of tanks are lost, even though i may have lost a few more tanks, at least i got some return on them. also, players tend not to push in a spot once they got a bloody nose, they will look for another spot to advance , a weahness to exploit, at least keeps them off objective from that approach for a while.They may abandon that approach altogether. At the very least they will proceed cautiously from that direction for the immediate future.
A good gunner in SB will engage his tanks one at a time for this very reason, so that he can personally man the tank engaged, getting maximum benifit from it until it is destroyed, then he will bring out his next tank, usually from a nearby concealed location and repeat the process.he doesnt want all his tanks engaged at once, as he has minimal control over them.anything we can do to throw the enmy off balance will work to our advantage. i have used this approach repeatedly, and although i have been massacred at times, usually because it wasnt the time or place for it,it some scenarios it has worked very well, and i have bested better players or at least broken even, in situations where the terrain is favorable to this approach.i have used this approach in several scenarios with great success, particularly maybe baby and bridging the river.
As most players of the game tend to ignore the objective till the last 15 minutes of the game, and instead divide the map into areas of responsibility assigned to individual players,and then engage in individual sniping duals,, a massed attack usually will acheive at least temporary numerical superiority, as the enemy force is usally dispersed equally
, and massing at a point can bring the advantage of superior firepower at the point of attack.
in addition, in real life, tanks are not used dispersed, or one at a time, this i know from my study of warfare, and even the manual of operations from a real unit included in SB makes and stresses this point
We can play to the advantages of better gunners , or we can try and find ways to equalize the situation on the battlefield, and suprise and shock do just this.
Massed armor delivers shock every time, and while the engagement may be lost, shock was acheived, even if it couldnt be exploited.if you can achieve shock,(by Massed armor) and suprise(by appearing at an unexpected point),then you have acheived an immediate initial advantage.
if you beat a better player or team, you gonna do it quickly, not slowly.Shitty players you beat slowly, waiting for them to make mistakes.a big guy you hit him hard and early.
The experience of the French and British armies in the second world war demonstrate the inherent flaws in the approach of distributing the armored force equally all over the battlefield
The Germans massed their armor, abandoned the rest of the battlefield, massed at the point of attack, overwhelmed the defender and achieved a breakthrough, then exploited by disrupting the enemies rear and forcing him to pour in reinforcements from all over the battlefield, arriving piecemeal, from diparate locations and in the process weakening the sectors the came from, creating more possibilities for us to exploit. This is the way armored warfare is waged in real life, and I want to explore the possibilities of transferring these tactics to the game. While as we try them, we may get our ass kicked a few times, I hope we as a unitcan learn something from what works and doesn’t work, and we may be able to have an advantage over those who view the game as a sniping contest, by applying what is essentially an unbalanced approach, concentrating at the point of attack in greater numbers than most players are used to or have come to expect.
SHERMANS WAR
Recruit
Member # 3
posted August 20, 2003 23:18
As we are going to be playing against a lot of players who have a lot more experience than us(me anyway)I think it would be advisable to develop some tactics that can negate or minimize the advantages of a superior gunner. I think in certain situations a massed engagement at an unexpected time or place will utilize the A1s ability as a gunner.that is to say, if I fight a good player with my tanks one at a time, he will defeat them one at a time, and I will lose the majority of my force.if however, I can engineer an engagement where many tanks are engaged in one area simultaneously, the human gunner can man only one tank at a time and A1 handles the rest.
The A1 on A1 engagements will break down fairly equally, and although I may lose the one on one engagements,in the confusion of a large simultaneous engagement, the enemy human gunner may not be able to pick me out, and if he does, while i engage him, at least the A1 is getting a roughly equal exchange rate, and after the engagement,if a lot of tanks are lost, even though i may have lost a few more tanks, at least i got some return on them. also, players tend not to push in a spot once they got a bloody nose, they will look for another spot to advance , a weahness to exploit, at least keeps them off objective from that approach for a while.They may abandon that approach altogether. At the very least they will proceed cautiously from that direction for the immediate future.
A good gunner in SB will engage his tanks one at a time for this very reason, so that he can personally man the tank engaged, getting maximum benifit from it until it is destroyed, then he will bring out his next tank, usually from a nearby concealed location and repeat the process.he doesnt want all his tanks engaged at once, as he has minimal control over them.anything we can do to throw the enmy off balance will work to our advantage. i have used this approach repeatedly, and although i have been massacred at times, usually because it wasnt the time or place for it,it some scenarios it has worked very well, and i have bested better players or at least broken even, in situations where the terrain is favorable to this approach.i have used this approach in several scenarios with great success, particularly maybe baby and bridging the river.
As most players of the game tend to ignore the objective till the last 15 minutes of the game, and instead divide the map into areas of responsibility assigned to individual players,and then engage in individual sniping duals,, a massed attack usually will acheive at least temporary numerical superiority, as the enemy force is usally dispersed equally
, and massing at a point can bring the advantage of superior firepower at the point of attack.
in addition, in real life, tanks are not used dispersed, or one at a time, this i know from my study of warfare, and even the manual of operations from a real unit included in SB makes and stresses this point
We can play to the advantages of better gunners , or we can try and find ways to equalize the situation on the battlefield, and suprise and shock do just this.
Massed armor delivers shock every time, and while the engagement may be lost, shock was acheived, even if it couldnt be exploited.if you can achieve shock,(by Massed armor) and suprise(by appearing at an unexpected point),then you have acheived an immediate initial advantage.
if you beat a better player or team, you gonna do it quickly, not slowly.Shitty players you beat slowly, waiting for them to make mistakes.a big guy you hit him hard and early.
The experience of the French and British armies in the second world war demonstrate the inherent flaws in the approach of distributing the armored force equally all over the battlefield
The Germans massed their armor, abandoned the rest of the battlefield, massed at the point of attack, overwhelmed the defender and achieved a breakthrough, then exploited by disrupting the enemies rear and forcing him to pour in reinforcements from all over the battlefield, arriving piecemeal, from diparate locations and in the process weakening the sectors the came from, creating more possibilities for us to exploit. This is the way armored warfare is waged in real life, and I want to explore the possibilities of transferring these tactics to the game. While as we try them, we may get our ass kicked a few times, I hope we as a unitcan learn something from what works and doesn’t work, and we may be able to have an advantage over those who view the game as a sniping contest, by applying what is essentially an unbalanced approach, concentrating at the point of attack in greater numbers than most players are used to or have come to expect.