Gembloux Gap campaign

Moderators: Vis Bellica, Laffe

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 8788
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Gembloux Gap campaign (updated 06 01 20)

Post by Truscott Trotter »

I tend to use my support section (if available) for that task rather than a core one
User avatar
MLB
Posts: 1204
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:57 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Gembloux Gap campaign (updated 06 01 20)

Post by MLB »

I’d tend to agree, but in this instance the odds were very favourable and the chance to take out a senior leader, a junior leader, wipe out a team and capture a jump-off-point all in one attack was a risk worth taking.
The Tactical Painter
Painting little soldiers for tactical battles on the table top
Munin
Posts: 1319
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 7:49 pm

Re: Gembloux Gap campaign (updated 06 01 20)

Post by Munin »

Yeah, the leader casualties alone will really hurt the French in the next scenario.
User avatar
DougM
Posts: 661
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 7:22 am

Re: Gembloux Gap campaign (updated 06 01 20)

Post by DougM »

I can appreciate the reasoning, but I always felt it was pretty gamey throwing away your supports like that. I'm certainly very glad I wasn't some poor bloody private whose section was attached to a gung-ho lieutenant and his platoon.
---------------------------------------------
https://aleadodyssey.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------
User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 8788
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Gembloux Gap campaign (updated 06 01 20)

Post by Truscott Trotter »

Not throwing away - sacrificial attack - now if you had to track your supports for a PSC that would be different.
It is still worth making a close assault sometimes even with core troops - did one recently and lost best part of 2 sections - but I did wipe out a US Para section and then capture the JOP they were holding and thus winning the mission, so was worth it in the overall campaign.
...you can't take the Russian out of the gamer!
poiter50
Posts: 784
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:23 am

Re: Gembloux Gap campaign (updated 06 01 20)

Post by poiter50 »

ROTFPML
Truscott Trotter wrote: Tue Jan 07, 2020 11:35 pm ...you can't take the Russian out of the gamer!
User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 8788
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Gembloux Gap campaign (updated 06 01 20)

Post by Truscott Trotter »

There is a good reason why I have a picture of Georgy Konstantinovich as my avatar :lol: :twisted:
User avatar
MLB
Posts: 1204
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:57 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Gembloux Gap campaign (updated 06 01 20)

Post by MLB »

DougM wrote: Tue Jan 07, 2020 10:34 pm I can appreciate the reasoning, but I always felt it was pretty gamey throwing away your supports like that. I'm certainly very glad I wasn't some poor bloody private whose section was attached to a gung-ho lieutenant and his platoon.
We count support casualties when calculating severity of losses for the Men’s Opinion. So we don’t get away completely with being too cavalier with them.
The Tactical Painter
Painting little soldiers for tactical battles on the table top
Munin
Posts: 1319
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 7:49 pm

Re: Gembloux Gap campaign (updated 06 01 20)

Post by Munin »

MLB wrote: Wed Jan 08, 2020 4:02 am We count support casualties when calculating severity of losses for the Men’s Opinion.
Same.
User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 8788
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Gembloux Gap campaign (updated 06 01 20)

Post by Truscott Trotter »

Yup so do we ....
but it doesn't make me change my tactics 😁
Post Reply