Mounted Ops for Command Ops 2

"To do the east front stuff we definitely need mounted ops and this in turn really should be proceeded by sequential tasking."

Can someone please explain to me why Command Ops needs mounted ops to play an Eastern Front scenario?  Can't this be abstracted?  This abstraction is being done with motorized units already for the Western Front and North Africa scenarios.  

Is it because early Russian motorized units largely consisted of infantry riding on tanks?  Is this focus on mounted ops because of cavalry divisions? 

I keep reading about  a need for mounted ops but I don't understand why.


Jason Rimmer said…
For the reasons you mention and also for the large areas of forest. I also think he is wanting to make bigger maps which require mounted Inf at some point and for the Inf to be able to dismount and meet up with their transport at a further objective. Mounted Ops was and still is I believe the promised major feature in the next game version.

Anyway Mounted Ops will greatly improve CO2 more so than anything changed since release of BftB.
Jason Rimmer said…
Remember at the moment Mounted Inf units can't travel through certain terrain where really they would have just dismounted and met their transport later or left them behind.
JC said…
Back in the HTTR days there was much discussion and heartbreak over this. I can't avoid the feeling that there is a slight tendency to over-engineer this aspect. I can only help it is done because as your scenarios have proven, the Eastern Front is THE front to play at this scale.


Peter Winship said…
It's interesting. In the EF scenarios I did I just made the forests etc all passable to motorized units, but with a movement rate of 1. This doesn't simulate realistically, of course, but does mean you can move mech units through woods, and it does ok, I think. To be honest I think I would be happy with something like that because in a way I feel the scale is wrong for mounted ops to be 'engineered' instead of abstracted. Basically, at normal CO scale, you're going to get an entire company in dismount, whereas, in real life it must often have been a platoon decision, a tactical thing. In any event I feel they aren't going to go that far without their carriers - mech units especially - so this is possible. When it comes to doing the platoon level game, however, which Bill H, I think, is developing, then you would certainly need a tactical solution. Maybe I'll post about this in the dev forum. You could too, Chris, since you're in there, no? Sequential tasking, by the way, which comes before Dave develops mounted ops, would be very welcome. A different thing entirely.

Chris said…
Hi Peter! I am interested in sequential tasking too. And I agree with your view of mounted ops.

Popular Posts