It is currently Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:43 pm


[DZCommenter] Command School 2: Building Better Battlegroups

Discuss tactics and general army concepts not specific to a faction
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

DropzoneCommenter

  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 6:15 am
  • Location: Portland, Oregon, USA

[DZCommenter] Command School 2: Building Better Battlegroups

PostWed Sep 09, 2015 8:04 pm

Hey folks,

New week, new article - this time, I'm going from principle to practice and talking about constructing battlegroups for fun and profit (mainly profit):

http://gamerati.com/command-school-part ... tlegroups/

Take a look and let me know if you think articles like this are useful to you. I look forward to hearing what you think!
Check my biweekly blog on tactics, hobby, and fundamentals in DZC and DFC at dzcommenter.com!
Offline
User avatar

feindusmaximus

Hawk Talon

  • Posts: 1279
  • Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2014 10:37 am

Re: [DZCommenter] Command School 2: Building Better Battlegr

PostThu Sep 10, 2015 1:05 am

Thx 4 the great article Sir
Offline

Amitverse

  • Posts: 91
  • Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2015 3:44 pm

Re: [DZCommenter] Command School 2: Building Better Battlegr

PostThu Sep 10, 2015 8:31 am

As a new player I find these really useful ( I will be playing my first 1500 game on Friday)

I have a follow-up question.

Do you always keep squads in battle groups generally grouped together on the battle field? As in do you keep the squads in a battle group in the same area or spread them out? My thinking is that you want battle groups to support each other, so that after the first activation, you other battle group(s) can threaten the squads that are threatening the previously activated squads ( who can no longer react), Which to me means spreading out a little. Right, wrong or maybe both?
Offline
User avatar

DropzoneCommenter

  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 6:15 am
  • Location: Portland, Oregon, USA

Re: [DZCommenter] Command School 2: Building Better Battlegr

PostThu Sep 10, 2015 6:57 pm

Amitverse wrote:As a new player I find these really useful ( I will be playing my first 1500 game on Friday)


Awesome! Glad to know this type of stuff is helpful.

I have a follow-up question.

Do you always keep squads in battle groups generally grouped together on the battle field? As in do you keep the squads in a battle group in the same area or spread them out?


I think it really depends, mainly on the character of your force and of your battlegroup. Using my own terminology, Specialist and Proactive groups are probably going to stay close together - they are mission-oriented battlegroups which you start with a clear plan for before a single model hits the table. Conversely, Generalist and Reactive groups are more likely to spread out, since they have diverse functions in the group or are being used to counter or undermine enemy actions.

My thinking is that you want battle groups to support each other, so that after the first activation, you other battle group(s) can threaten the squads that are threatening the previously activated squads ( who can no longer react), Which to me means spreading out a little. Right, wrong or maybe both?


Bit of both, I think. I favor Generalist/Reactive groups (typically, I will support my non-armor groups with AT firepower via Reaver gunships, or add AA to as many BGs as possible to give me a chance to destroy the opponent's airforce and control the skies) so I don't have these sorts of dilemmas ;) If you're the type who likes more mission-oriented BGs, the trick is you can't dictate your opponent's activation order - for instance, if you've got the first activation, chances are the opponent has the last, so if he/she knows you're going to counterpunch an important BG, he/she may deliberately hold that activation back and in so dictate your activations. So sometimes you're going to try to take "safe" moves, like moving squads that are not in engagement range or that are just pulling back or jumping in dropships, to bide your time.

Other times, you'll also want to pounce on unactivated enemy squads before the opponent has a chance to move them (an unactivated Infantry squad whose transport is in the open and in range of your AA is the perfect example), in which case you're going to need to go aggressive. This IMO is where the balance between reactive and proactive groups within a force is important; you can make your "bait" or aggro moves with your specialized, mission-oriented groups (since you need to play the missions to win), and hold off your reactive groups for later in the turn to react to your opponent's countermoves.

Make sense?
Check my biweekly blog on tactics, hobby, and fundamentals in DZC and DFC at dzcommenter.com!
Offline

Amitverse

  • Posts: 91
  • Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2015 3:44 pm

Re: [DZCommenter] Command School 2: Building Better Battlegr

PostFri Sep 11, 2015 10:00 am

yeah, makes sense. Thanks for the reply.

Return to General Tactics and Army Building Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron