Re: firing on concealed positions..

From: Dave <warprat_at_...>
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2000 21:44:21 -0000

Hi Bob!

I COMPLETELY agree with what you are saying, and have used the
tactics you suggest in many a game.

But, I think the KEY here is what kind of senario you are playing.
In an advance or assault on an enemy defensive position, you hit
everything you can see. And you don't move in untill you've used
lots of artillery to soften the enemy up.

But most Epic senarios, (the kind where both sides get equal points
to spend), are Meeting Engagements. Both armies are headed in the
general direction of each other. They don't know exactly when
they're going to meet, and how much they're going to meet. You can't
afford to flame/bombard every forest, building and stray animal you
see along the way. It will slow you down too much, and you'll run
out of ammo. Your troops can only maintain a condition of Red Alert
for so long.

Most artillery, used to soften up prepared positions, is fired from
mass artillery groups located far away from the battlefield. Really,
if someone wanted to pre-plan thier fire, before the game began, I
wouldn't have any problem with it. Heck, let them target ANY
building, woods, or other terrain feature. But, then they are
committed to following through. And of course, without a Spotter,
you really don't know if you hit the target or not.


Warprat ;)





--- In netepic_at_egroups.com, "chubbybob" <bob_at_r...> wrote:
> dardman said
>
> But we usually don't fire into the woods unless
> > there are enemies firing from the outskirts, its a little cheesey.
> > Darius
>
> There is nothing cheesey at all about this tactic..
Read "mailed
> fist" and "crocodile". these are written by guys who served in
churchill gun
> tanks and churchill flamers during world war II.. Both stress
strongly
> during an advance against defended positions, the absolute
necessity of
> hosing any greenery or cover in sight with mg fire.... Anything
that could
> hold an infantryman with an MAW was a target.. Any other action was
> potentially suicidal... Suppressive light weapons fire against
potential
> concealed positions was the order of the day not "cheese"
> Furthermore in the absence of confirmed targets, planned artillery
fire
> against wooded skylines that could conceal AT weapons or artillery
observers
> was also a standard tactic.. More weight of fire was poured on empty
> woodland during WWII than on any defended position...
> Any unit with a secondary weapon or infantry weapon should
be
> allowed to fire suppresively into woodland to their front or
flank...
> Regards artillery however, this is best handled by calling it map
fire and
> allowing artillery batteires a preplanned fire plan against
topographical
> targets until opportunity or observed targets are available..
(normal
> artillery real life practice..)
>
> Bob DeAngelis
Received on Fri Nov 03 2000 - 21:44:21 UTC