Tactics: Let your disables finish off his disables

[hcobb]

Advance and disable all hostile armor within strike range of your disables.

Then on your next turn your disables will recover and eliminate his disables while your force continues on.

The pace of your advance is such that you bring three targets into range for every four shooters of your own. You then fire three 1:1s and bring your fourth reserve shooter down on the one of his armor that got the lucky NE.

The overall effect is that D and Xs break his bones, but his D results have little effect.

[ColBosch]

That's some solid advice. Thanks!

[FJCestero]

So in summary:

"Do unto others, and do it first."

Good advice as always, but how do you keep the other guy from beating you to it? OGRE's bloody CRT means that a small advantage seized early can quickly trigger the snowball effect. We need a list of "small advantages".

Edit: Extending my remarks... Thanks to the above mentioned CRT if you have disables you've prob lost the first exchange of fire. In a six-on-six all else equals exchange, if you have disables, it means you've already lost 2/3rd of your force. And the 1/3 left isn't going to impair his intact force much, which means your disables will never get a chance to fire at all.

I am not saying the OP is bad advice, and of course it all depends on the battle -- seldom is it such a cut and dry affair as I simplified it above, but one should keep in mind that if YOU are the one wondering what to do with your disables, you're already well on the road to losing.

[hcobb]

Post is mostly frustration at people who fire on units they just disabled, especially when that D was gotten by making a 3-1 attack.

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by hcobb

Post is mostly frustration at people who fire on units they just disabled, especially when that D was gotten by making a 3-1 attack.

Like anything, context matters. When you say "fire on units they just disabled" do you mean on the same fire phase, or the following fire phase? You need to fire at his disabled units so they don't come back, otherwise that doesn't help the cause. Firing on them next turn with the next wave of units is handy; it buys time to fire at units that can fire back _now_.

Using a 3-1 attack has its own set of strategic issues beyond the discussion about disabled unit attacking ;-)

[woodchuck]

Originally Posted by ColBosch

That's some solid advice. Thanks!

That's what makes Henry a tough and fun opponent.

[dwalend]

Originally Posted by hcobb

Post is mostly frustration at people who fire on units they just disabled, especially when that D was gotten by making a 3-1 attack.

Maybe less nuanced advice like: "Any D or X will keep a target from shooting next turn. Any X or two Ds (one now and one either now or later) will keep a target from shooting ever again. Count up the Xs from that 3:1 attack. Now count them for 3 1:1 attacks. Which stops more targets from shooting?"

Also, you can't save everyone.

[hcobb]

Note that local concentration of force is...

4 to 3 against armor
2 to 1 against inf
and
3 to 1 against Ogres

Be afraid, be very afraid.

[ianargent]

Random thoughts inspired by this (and it really was inspiring)

One: most OGRE/GEV scenarios are not "meeting engagements." There is almost always a clear and distinct Attacker and Defender; and the Attacker has an advantage in units while the defender has an advantage in time and space. There's rarely a "mirror match" where you have to "keep your enemy from doing it to you first." Even in a "meeting engagement" (I've played a couple), there should be an objective or other "spoiler" to break things up.

Two: This is a corollary of the basic Ogre principle that one should try and obtain as many 1:1 attacks as possible, to get the most efficient bang for your buck.