- Location
- Germany
- Pronouns
- They
Why would his troops be in the open? He has no reason to place them in the open, unless he is afraid of a sudden charge by us.
Yes, he would be afraid by a sudden charge of us?
Thats basic artillery deployment
Why would his troops be in the open? He has no reason to place them in the open, unless he is afraid of a sudden charge by us.
And this is what I mean. I bring up reasons for somebody to evaluate anything different than you, and of course that means they are an absolute idiot. Tell me, is wanting to preserve munition sign of complete idiocy? Do you know how much munitions Trotha has? Do you know how many battles he expects? No? Then maybe, just maybe there are more considerations than "I can attack with artillery, end of thought".This is once again you assuming that von Trotha is an absolute idiot, not only a bad commander but an utter incompetent who is not even able to understand the outcome of an incredible simple assault operation.
Yes, if von Trotha is incredible dumb we easily win.
The wargames rely on him deploying his entire force behind a hill range. This is not a flexible strategy, nor a good idea in general if the opponent could deploy in a myriad of ways. You can't assume "obviously he's going to win" if I refuse to seriously engage with scenarios that require precognition.The wargames didnt go further because you saw what i was doing and said that von Trotha would never do that, I presume because you realised that it would win.
And this is my critique of the underlying concept: You assume he has to assault somehow, and that this assault will allow us to inflict meaningful casulties. Why? We assumed Wachenheim would charge, and after a point he didn't. Here we would give up our ability to pressure the assault and rely on the same hope again. Why not plan how to make him attack us along certain lines instead?Since he's not going to do that, he's gonna have to try SOME KIND of an assault before that happens.
How does your plan "make him attack us" in ways that defending Kinzberg doesn't? What are we threatening of his from the Turm that we aren't from Kinzberg and the south end of the valley? An extra quarter mile of road? If he wasn't going to attack he wouldn't be forming up lines at all, and all three plans accomplish the same end of "either he comes down the western forest or eats a bunch of artillery fire coming down another way". All three assume he's going to advance because he...has to, in order to accomplish his objective. If he doesn't, we win and the strategic balance in this region shifts massively in Arné's favor. If he does, then he's forced to deal with a fortified position.And this is my critique of the underlying concept: You assume he has to assault somehow, and that this assault will allow us to inflict meaningful casulties. Why? We assumed Wachenheim would charge, and after a point he didn't. Here we would give up our ability to pressure the assault and rely on the same hope again. Why not plan how to make him attack us along certain lines instead?
And this is what I mean. I bring up reasons for somebody to evaluate anything different than you, and of course that means they are an absolute idiot. Tell me, is wanting to preserve munition sign of complete idiocy? Do you know how much munitions Trotha has? Do you know how many battles he expects? No? Then maybe, just maybe there are more considerations than "I can attack with artillery, end of thought".
The wargames rely on him deploying his entire force behind a hill range. This is not a flexible strategy, nor a good idea in general if the opponent could deploy in a myriad of ways. You can't assume "obviously he's going to win" if I refuse to seriously engage with scenarios that require precognition.
The main difference is that he has to take Rotholz to move anywhere. Since his task is an assault, he needs to move forward. The threat isn't to a quarter mile of road, but his ability to position units there.ow does your plan "make him attack us" in ways that defending Kinzberg doesn't? What are we threatening of his from the Turm that we aren't from Kinzberg and the south end of the valley? An extra quarter mile of road?
No, basic artillery deployment means he wants to keep the artillery protected. If the enemy (us) are turtling in an entrenched position, the units protecting his artillery do not have to be out in the open in front of the artillery, they just have to be close enough to be able to intercept any sudden enemy charge.Yes, he would be afraid by a sudden charge of us?
Thats basic artillery deployment
It did. You called a frontal assault braindead because he could use artillery instead, but there are reasons to use artillery.Trothas munitions has nothing to do with why i would call an frontal attack idotic? Its the fact that he mechanically cant win unless he crits or rolls 80 or higher for 15 rolls.
That's false. Here is the exact quote:The wargame had him deploy his entire force in the center and move it out of the way once he saw what we were doing
That is the "very real danger" I refused to entertain.No, all his units are still in his deployment zone, fully covered by the hills. You would currently be unable to see western Räuberholz tho because the hills block LOS. I just wanted to give you the ability to react to this unexpected development
And in the other plans he has to deal with bombardment to move anywhere. Like yes obviously in your plan he's forced to assault Rotholz, but you also lack a fallback position that isn't vulnerable to cavalry and artillery so that by the time he takes Rotholz he's won the battle. Meanwhile in the Kinzberg plans we force him to attack Kinzberg and it becomes the same thing but several turns later (and several more turns of moving units through flat terrain on his part).The main difference is that he has to take Rotholz to move anywhere. Since his task is an assault, he needs to move forward. The threat isn't to a quarter mile of road, but his ability to position units there.
Ok, how do I lack a fallback position? I put my forces south of the hills, just like I outlined. This creates multiple battles, with the first one exhausting him.And in the other plans he has to deal with bombardment to move anywhere. Like yes obviously in your plan he's forced to assault Rotholz, but you also lack a fallback position that isn't vulnerable to cavalry and artillery so that by the time he takes Rotholz he's won the battle. Meanwhile in the Kinzberg plans we force him to attack Kinzberg and it becomes the same thing but several turns later.
Every attached image in your plan features a bunch of inf and art sitting on the open plains with no cover for the sake of artillery ranging, which is not something I consider a viable fallback position.Ok, how do I lack a fallback position? I put my forces south of the hills, just like I outlined. This creates multiple battles, with the first one exhausting him.
No, basic artillery deployment means he wants to keep the artillery protected. If the enemy (us) are turtling in an entrenched position, the units protecting his artillery do not have to be out in the open in front of the artillery, they just have to be close enough to be able to intercept any sudden enemy charge.
At medium range (7 hexes), an infantry charge would take 2 turns to reach his artillery, so he only has to worry about cavalry. And our cavalry can be covered by his cavalry, by keeping them hidden in the back and ready charging.
Think about it, how would you counter the strategy you are proposing? You would not place half your army in the open taking enemy fire if the enemy is passive and non-threatening, would you? Instead you would move up the artillery, protect them by nearby units that are in cover, and start bombarding.
Ok, why? What threat is that position under? He's first forced to exhaust his infantry, bleed them out and then has to take a new forward position making his screening forces weak. A forward position under threat of cavalry, since I'm contesting the battlefield. Fallback positions don't just come down to artillery cover, the freshness of infantry also matters.Every attached image in your plan features a bunch of inf and art sitting on the open plains with no cover for the sake of artillery ranging, which is not something I consider a viable fallback position.
Come on. He deploys all of his artillery in a straight line? He doesn't set up batteries in cover? If you want to realistically simulate it, at least put holes for the cavalry to rush trough.Because all these theoreticals are really hard to grasp, i made a quick illustration of his artillery formation for a medium range bombardment of Kinzberg:
It did. You called a frontal assault braindead because he could use artillery instead, but there are reasons to use artillery.
Alright, the battle has started, you have reached your positions you wanted. von trothas troops that you have seen at the beginning have ducked east and west behind the hills so you do not see any of them.
Come on. He deploys all of his artillery in a straight line? He doesn't set up batteries in cover? If you want to realistically simulate it, at least put holes for the cavalry to rush trough.
The threat of all the artillery and cavalry he didn't dedicate to routing our units from Rotholz Turm? That's not going to take his entire force, and again, he can pretty easily put forces on the southern edge of the Schloss to bombard any positions we are sitting in outside the Kinzberg cover.Ok, why? What threat is that position under? He's first forced to exhaust his infantry, bleed them out and then has to take a new forward position making his screening forces weak. A forward position under threat of cavalry, since I'm contesting the battlefield. Fallback positions don't just come down to artillery cover, the freshness of infantry also matters.
Why would he place his artillery like that, rather than using terrain and spreading them out? Surely he would cover his flanks as well, and not allow the 108th and 13th to come that close?Because all these theoreticals are really hard to grasp, i made a quick illustration of his artillery formation for a medium range bombardment of Kinzberg:
![]()
Could you explain how he would screen against the 3 cavalry units i put there, but without us being able to feint and shoot his own cavalry once it gets out of its own cover?
I wouldnt be able to counter the strategy I am proposing. Thats literally it, if I were von Trotha I would have no Idea how to win this battle.
If I were von Trotha and would see this plan, I would retreat to the Raoulle and start fortifying in preparation for the arnese assault
Why would he place his artillery like that, rather than using terrain and spreading them out? Surely he would cover his flanks as well, and not allow the 108th and 13th to come that close?
View: https://imgur.com/a/fyIl8Or
Here is how I would try to position, if I were him. Sure, it is a bit risky, you might be able to charge one or two of the guns. But doing so would likely be a suicide mission for the cavalry as well, and risking that is surely better than risking a all-out attack on Kingzberg?