I was in the middle of agame and I accidentally started an assault and then cancelled it. This made me think.
Is it gamey to purposely start an assault to draw enemy fire and then cancel the assault? I can see where one might want to exhaust (or reduce) a hex's defensive fire, before firing with another unit in a different hex. This tactic could be considered a feint.
If it is done in a consistent manner turn after turn it would cause me to become bored with that player and never play them again.
Accidental assaults happen from time to time. It is easy to do in the heat of a tense battle.
I really hate it when my tired fingers fire the artillery at an empty hex, or touch the "T" key when I meant the "Y" key, esp when this triggers a disruption to a unit from defensive fire. :pullhair:
Courts martial take too long in this system and need to be addressed. I just end up fragging the unit's officer, esp. when I play the Russians. :kill:
Makes you say nasty things and pound your head on the table. :bang:
Dog Soldier
If a player does it for the purpose you describe, then, I would say it is gamey. If it is done on accident, then, it is not.
Regards,
CptCav
Do assaults draw more defensive fire than regular, shooting, attacks?
If not then it seems moot - good play demands timing your attacks to try to spread the defensive fire where you want it. It would be no different in declaring an assault. Actually it would be worse; no chance to do damage while drawing the fire.
There's another reason - besides accident - to cancel, just having done it myself. Two battalions committed to assault. One is disrupted by defensive fire. Foolish to not cancel the assault if you really thought two were needed.
I will also cancel an assault if the fire drawn, from undisrupted defenders, is stronger than I expected, causing heavy losses and so making the assault look like a fiasco in the making. That is rare though, I normally have a good feel for the defender strength before starting the assault but sometimes it is against a new unit that I hadn't probed yet.
Rick
Couldn't a canceled assault be equated to a probing attack that could rightly be used in RL to intentionally distract the enemy and draw their fire away from the real point of attack?
I mean, unlike in some op level games, we do not have the option to tell our units what level of commitment they should have in their assaults. We can't tell them to attempt maximum casualties, etc. This is really the only way available for the player to simulate this, isn't it?
So, I don't see how this is gamey.
I do not think that the defensive fire against assaults counts against the full complement that the defender otherwise receives. Am I wrong? Anyway, the Cancel Assault Button is there as a valid playing option so it is okay to use it. I play like Rick - if I draw a 20 man loss from the volley I will abort the assault.
Marquo
I guess it would all depend on the intent. If the opponent did that to draw fire on a unit which could not realistically be hurt (with no intent on actually assaulting), then yes it is gamey. If it is to cancel an assault made by accident, or to cancel an assault that would now be foolish (because some of the attacking units got disrupted, or, due to volume of fire, because you now determine that those are not three infantry companies stacked in the hex -- it is really three battalions) then I don't see a problem with it.
Canceling an assault due to the disruption of one or more of the assaulting units, thus lower the success chances is perfectly reasonable. there are other reasons for canceling an assault that are valid. VM Makes a good case.
I took the question to be how could this be abused?
My initial reaction was to the type of game play where moving in units that could not or would not assault to draw off fire. An example would be a unit of tanks, less than 10 setting up and assault then canceling just to draw an infantry units HA fire. This type of fire has little chance of a bas result against many rested tank units in the series. Other less valuable hard targets can do the same with high MP allowances. Repeat this with other small hard target units. Once the three defensive fires are made, move in the infantry for an assault that will only take defensive bombardment from artillery, if any is left. This can be done to guarantee no defensive fire to disrupt the assaulting infantry.
Good tactics or gamey play? In reality would the defending infantry unit coolly hold fire against the demonstrations of the armor? How is this different than "dancing"?
There was a rule devised to prevent units from performing the tactic of moving into an defender's ZOC, taking a shot, then retreating. Wash, rinse, repeat until desired results are achieved. A limit was put on the number of men equivalents that could fire from a single hex in a turn. Assaults being ordered then canceled do not count against this limit.
Dog Soldier
"Once the three defensive fires are made, move in the infantry for an assault that will only take defensive bombardment from artillery, if any is left. This can be done to guarantee no defensive fire to disrupt the assaulting infantry."
This is my question - does the reaction fire to a potential assault count as classic defensive fire? YOu can move adjacent to a unit, stop and often it will not fire a defensive shot. If you come back later and organize an assault, it may then fire - but does count against th etotal of 3 for moving adjacent? I thought not.
Marquo