Jump to content

Red Tide '85 - Message to BLUEFOR


Gibsonm
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 174
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Moderators

Thanks all for playing the Recon Battle yesterday. We didn't have any many people as before (15 this time), but I guess that this is either because twice a week is too much for many people or perhaps it is starting to lose some popularity, which always happens in a campaign once you get over the halfway hump.

In any case, we are going to adjust the Wednesday missions to probably have less units and less map area to compensate, and we are also going to start moving more into a "specialized" role for the scenarios (delay, route recon, raid etc) and away from the battle-royale-with-cheese that we built up to at the halfway point (the last battle was a movement to contact) because apparently this only confuses those that deliberately want to be confused as to what the nature of the recon outcome is (ie. capturing objectives is not taking it, it is reconnoitering it in force). Anyway, next week should be something very different here, back to the origin of what the recon battle was intended to be (smaller and more specialized).

Back to the drawing board...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks all for playing the Recon Battle yesterday. We didn't have any many people as before (15 this time), but I guess that this is either because twice a week is too much for many people or perhaps it is starting to lose some popularity, which always happens in a campaign once you get over the halfway hump.

In any case, we are going to adjust the Wednesday missions to probably have less units and less map area to compensate, and we are also going to start moving more into a "specialized" role for the scenarios (delay, route recon, raid etc) and away from the battle-royale-with-cheese that we built up to at the halfway point (the last battle was a movement to contact) because apparently this only confuses those that deliberately want to be confused as to what the nature of the recon outcome is (ie. capturing objectives is not taking it, it is reconnoitering it in force). Anyway, next week should be something very different here, back to the origin of what the recon battle was intended to be (smaller and more specialized).

Back to the drawing board...

This is very good news IMHO. I didn't turn up for the last recon battle (first time I've missed a RT session) because I hadn't enjoyed the previous ones, which seemed to be like mini main battles but without a satifactory number of players or the necessary command and control. However, I appreciate that the American concept of Reconnaissance is quite different to the British one. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would've been attending, but unfortunately I have to work Wednesday nights. I specifically requested Friday nights off a long time ago for TGIF. I just didn't anticipate the campaigns and Wednesday battles.

I'll just have to tell the folks at work that they're interfering with a matter of global security. :biggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks all for playing the Recon Battle yesterday. We didn't have any many people as before (15 this time), but I guess that this is either because twice a week is too much for many people or perhaps it is starting to lose some popularity, which always happens in a campaign once you get over the halfway hump.

In any case, we are going to adjust the Wednesday missions to probably have less units and less map area to compensate, and we are also going to start moving more into a "specialized" role for the scenarios (delay, route recon, raid etc) and away from the battle-royale-with-cheese that we built up to at the halfway point (the last battle was a movement to contact) because apparently this only confuses those that deliberately want to be confused as to what the nature of the recon outcome is (ie. capturing objectives is not taking it, it is reconnoitering it in force). Anyway, next week should be something very different here, back to the origin of what the recon battle was intended to be (smaller and more specialized).

Back to the drawing board...

Sounds like a welcome change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
Sounds like a welcome change.

Perhaps, but it does mean it will change to the type of mission that you were complaining about in the beginning (actual reconnaissance type missions of delay for X minutes at phaseline Y. But oh well, everyone can't be happy I guess. ;)

In any case, I posted the comment in the wrong thread -- it was supposed to be in the discussion thread. Whoops!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL. See here. :sonic:

I was very disappointed with the performance of my AI infantry on this occasion. I couldn't position them in buildings as briefed because they have no view in the direction of the attach due to surrounding trees. So I put them down in the treeline with Stay tactics (my SOP) and an engagement range of 200m for the rifle squads and 400m for the HMG teams. However, the aar shows that when they were killed - mostly by T72s at around 600m, they were up on their feet and advancing in the direction of the threat. :(

If anyone has any ideas why that happened, I'm all ears.

The only kill was by a HMG team who were positioned in a building without screening trees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TJay,

Where and when did that happen? I engaged infantry with a couple of

T72s just south of Hameln: if that was you, I can tell you what I saw and that might answer a few of your questions.

Tango29

Many thanks for the offer. I'll go back to the aar and come back to you with time and place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rgr.

T29

Having been over the aar shot-by-shot, I have to witdraw my whinge. On the occasions when the infantry stood up they were actually running away, not advancing! But overall they were not very aggressive - probably due to poor positioning on my part. Not one kill with a RPG despite several vehicles driving right past the rifle squads. Maybe 200m for thos guys and 400m for the HMG teams was too conservative.

e

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I engaged infantry south of Hameln, and reduced their strength by about 50-60% before I bypassed and headed for the town. Crossing on the railroad bridges on the southern perimeter, I was engaged with RPG weapons from the building NW of the bridge, but the rockets exploded on the bridge structure itself - a bit of an unexpected advantage to me! That was about the extent of my "tank - infantry" activities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I engaged infantry south of Hameln, and reduced their strength by about 50-60% before I bypassed and headed for the town. Crossing on the railroad bridges on the southern perimeter, I was engaged with RPG weapons from the building NW of the bridge, but the rockets exploded on the bridge structure itself - a bit of an unexpected advantage to me! That was about the extent of my "tank - infantry" activities.

Thanks Tango. My infantry were defending the extreme Easterly extension of Hammeln, and were intended originally as an 'anti-infantry screen - knowing Dark's tendency to push infantry forward for reconnnaisance. However, that meant they facing tanks approaching head on. Perhaps I should have put them along the Northern and Southern boundaries so they could engage tanks from the flank as they passed by. But hindsight is a wonderful thing. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...