View Single Post
Old 01-13-2018, 01:55 PM   #18
tbeard1999
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Tyler, Texas
Default Re: Hold Fire in Ogre/GEV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mack_JB View Post
I would have not placed a lone LT there in 1608, but rather, say, one at each hex 1806 and 1906. Your opponent in that game merely had bad tactical location. The GEV's have to be at the water's edge to move off it, so then the LT move up and blast the GEV as they are trying to come off the water. The LT then in perfect location to force the surviving GEV to overrun through the bottleneck.
I agree that the deployment was sub-optimal. But it hard to reply when he says, "Okay, my tank is sitting there just waiting for them. It can't fire when they close the range? Then they can move out of range after taking a shot? I can't be in some kind of overwatch? How is that reasonable?"

All I could say is that the game abstracts certain things. Not the greatest answer. Hence my suggestion for a Hold Fire mechanic. It solved this very problem in A Fistful of TOWs so I figured it would work with GEV.

I also began to think about the artificial tactics GEV rewards. It makes no sense for a stationary tank not be able to fire at an enemy tank when it moves into range, until after the enemy tank has fired(!) If the stationary tank is engaging another target - i.e., it fired in its last combat phase - then finem I have no problem with denying it the ability to shoot at another enemy until its next combat phase. And the hold fire mechanic reflects that.

But what happens is that enemy tanks moving on a defensive position can force the defenders to retreat (or launch an attack despite being badly outnumbered) without ever firing a shot.

The attackers move to a position that is out of the defender's range, but close enough to move into the attacker's range next turn. This is 3-5 hexes if the target and attackers are heavy or light tank.

If the defenders stay in their position, they will be attacked and possibly wiped out by the attackers in the attackers' next turn and the defenders won't be able to fire until they've absorbed this attack. If the defenders are outnumbered (the usual case with defenders), they may be wiped out or badly damaged.

So, the defenders can withdraw so that they cannot be engaged by the attackers on the next attacker turn. Poof, a defensive position has been eliminated without the attacker firing a shot. Worse, the attackers can use the exact same "tactic" next turn.

"We have to retreat sir; they're gonna attack us on their turn!"

Or, the defenders can launch an attack (also giving up their defensive position).

Either way, the defenders are forced out of a defensive position solely because of the artificial turn sequence. Such "tactics" resemble tactical armored warfare about as much as chess resembles ancient warfare.

Sorry, but that stretches my willing suspension of disbelief too far.

Fortunately, the hold fire mechanic will solve the problem at very little cost to playability.

Wargames are filled with compromises. If this is a compromise that doesn't trouble you, then you don't need the Hold Fire mechanic.

Unfortunately, some folks seem bound and determined to rationalize this artificial occurrence.

But the the real world nature of AFVs and the known assumptions and extrapolations of the Ogre universe make these explanations most unconvincing.

Oh, and we were playing an older version of the rules where GEVs didn't have to stop when they leave the river. Of course, requiring the GEVs to stop doesn't address the problems I identified above. I do like the beach rule though.
tbeard1999 is offline   Reply With Quote