Assault Troops lessons learned

Adanac's Strategic level World War I grand campaign game designed by Frank Hunter

Moderator: SeanD

Post Reply
sbaxter1
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 8:46 am

Assault Troops lessons learned

Post by sbaxter1 »

I once started with the 1917 scenario to see assault troops but found that I could only create one unit. I was puzzled about this limit and resolved to find the answer by starting in 1914 and, once I had achieved level 2 trenches, to spend one point per turn on assault troops.

That took nine economic points and the first troops could be sent off for training in May 1916.

If you have auto refit enabled for your units, don't count on being able to have assault units unless (quite unlikely) that you have more arms available than you need to outfit your regular troops. During the strategic phase, you need to click on a unit for assault training and send it off for a turn (it comes back to the place it left and I have no idea what happens if that place is in enemy hands at the beginning of the next turn).

Now the bad news. Assault training costs 12 arms points no matter what the strength of the unit being sent. Yikes! Expensive, but, I thought, potentially worth it to break down the heavily entrenched Anglo-French line. The limit I mentioned above is simply a function of available arms.

Worse news. After that assault unit goes into combat and takes losses, it takes TWO arms and TWO manpower points to add one strength point. Wicked expensive.

I don't know for sure, but it seemed to me that the Assault Troops suffer greater drops in readiness after an offensive than do the other troops attacking with it. This would make sense, since they spearheaded the attacks.

I did not try to go to level 2 assault troops and thus have no idea if they cost even more than the level 1s do.
SMK-at-work
Posts: 3396
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 8:00 am
Location: New Zealand

RE: Assault Troops lessons learned

Post by SMK-at-work »

Interesting - I've never managed to develop assault troops (or tanks for that matter) in the 1914 scenario - there always seems to be something more important to do with resources!!
Meum est propisitum in taberna mori
lettowvorbeck
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 3:22 pm

RE: Assault Troops lessons learned

Post by lettowvorbeck »

Exactly. Both are an unaffordable luxury, IMO. It is too bad that ahistorical resource constraints keep one from indulging in much of the flavor that the game offers.
ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Interesting - I've never managed to develop assault troops (or tanks for that matter) in the 1914 scenario - there always seems to be something more important to do with resources!!
SMK-at-work
Posts: 3396
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 8:00 am
Location: New Zealand

RE: Assault Troops lessons learned

Post by SMK-at-work »

For me it is more that players know how to win the game much more quickly than WW1 general staff did - so they go for the jugular - food hexes for Russia for example.

Once the game has been analysed to death the optimal strategies get worked out & become hte only viable ones - if you play someone who knows htem when you don't, the game will be over by 1916!!

Such is the way of things with "single battle" wargames - it will happen with the other 2 WW1 games under way ATM too.

Not sure what can be done about it expet load up players with more restrictions on how/what they can do

Edit - recalling what I can about the Storm units, IIRC only 1 counts per stack doesn't it? Historically only a few dozen battalions were actually specifically trained to lead assaults - many when troops were released from Russia. So the idea is to train up a handful of corps to lead assaults by stacking them 1 per hex, not retrain the whole army. (not that I'm saying this is what anyone has done, but for teh record...)

And pretty much everyone was using them by 1917-18 anyway - including the British.
Meum est propisitum in taberna mori
sbaxter1
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 8:46 am

RE: Assault Troops lessons learned

Post by sbaxter1 »

Yes, one unit per stack gives the benefit to the entire stack, so it is pointless and costly to try to make all the units assault ones.

I have not yet decided if the time and expense is justified by the results. Maybe if you only used them to take out key entrenched hexes and not use them for fighting where you can win without them.

I haven't tried to develop tanks yet, either.
hjaco
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:09 pm

RE: Assault Troops lessons learned

Post by hjaco »

You definitely need assault troops as early as possible to wage effective warfare in the mid to end game.

You also need strong artillery which can lower readiness against level 4 trenchs prior to an attack and for the CP places defensively behind the front with fresh reserves to counter attack and take the hex back or you will quickly be steam rolled.

Tanks is overpriced though and very expensive to research but I do it none the less as the Entente. If Germany attritions France in the early game you will be down on manpower and need those tanks.
Hit them where they aren't
hjaco
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:09 pm

RE: Assault Troops lessons learned

Post by hjaco »

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Once the game has been analysed to death the optimal strategies get worked out & become hte only viable ones - if you play someone who knows htem when you don't, the game will be over by 1916!!

Guess I am one of those guys [;)]

I give you that greater knowledge about the game is an advantage but on the other hand you need to invest time and be able to convert that into grand strategies.

And yes there are counters to those strategies you just need to figure them out.....

And too much early succes for the CP against late succes for then Entente is a disadvantage for the CP as victory points are halved each year. So 100 CP victory points in 1916 is 50 VP in 1917, 25 VP in 1918 and 13 in 1919 which is all clearly documented in the manual. So no reason just to give up early if you have a chance of doing some real damage with the Entente in the late game (which you need to figure out how to do off course) ...
Hit them where they aren't
SMK-at-work
Posts: 3396
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 8:00 am
Location: New Zealand

RE: Assault Troops lessons learned

Post by SMK-at-work »

Yes you are certainly one of those guys!! :)

I'd recvommend anyone play a game or 3 vs HJ if you can arrange it - it's a learning experience!! ;)

One of the things to remember in the game is that even if Russia is out of it early, as HJ says, the TE has the long term game to play - but if, say, Russia, Italy, Romania and Serbia are all KO'ed by the end of 1915 or mid 1916 it still might not be enough!!!
Meum est propisitum in taberna mori
hjaco
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:09 pm

RE: Assault Troops lessons learned

Post by hjaco »

The big mistake you made as you have probably thought out was not to be prepared for Italian entry. Entente must have stockpiled units at the French border to rail/walk/sail as much as possible into Italy an start digging in. You simply must keep either Venice or Milan to keep Italy in the war which is very possible. And keep researching poison gas from the beginning to try denying CP from that devastating advantage.
Hit them where they aren't
sbaxter1
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 8:46 am

RE: Assault Troops lessons learned

Post by sbaxter1 »

ORIGINAL: hjaco

keep researching poison gas from the beginning to try denying CP from that devastating advantage.

So, if TE keeps pace with poison gas technology, the CP use will be ineffective?
hjaco
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:09 pm

RE: Assault Troops lessons learned

Post by hjaco »

When both sides have the same gas technology its advantage is void yes.
Hit them where they aren't
Post Reply

Return to “Guns of August 1914 - 1918”