|
Post by Proteus454 on Mar 25, 2009 15:57:13 GMT -5
The main attraction for me is the ability to field more properly "discrete" units. Maybe I've just been spoiled by FoW and the like, but one thing I've never quite gotten over is how random Detachment-based forces can seem (the changes I've been talking about lately, as well as OTW #11 having gone some ways towards repairing my perceptions in that regard)
A mishmash of "Elite" and "Regular" infantry might be acceptable, even at such a small scale as AE-WIII plays, if you take into effect the somewhat mutable nature of that distinction in-game. Or that it might be an ad-hoc formation welded together in the field. But leashing a pair of mobile Rocket Troopers or sneaky Psi-Commandoes to the direct command of a bunch of regular groundpounders just doesn't make much sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by evernevermore(john) on Mar 26, 2009 9:58:09 GMT -5
but Ad-hoc commands have a long history so its not completely unbelievable. The best sources I have are for snipers and Vietnam era LRRPs where different specialists would essentially be pasted onto an existing squad. In the case of the snipers, the two man squads would go out with a patrol in Vietnam, find a jump off point and then leave the squad to go hunting.
While I agree that an ad-hoc unit doesnt feel so right for the Russians, the Germans and Americans used them as needed.
|
|
|
Post by Proteus454 on Mar 26, 2009 12:03:35 GMT -5
I agree that pasting specialists - Snipers, K-9 teams, etc. - into what is essentially an oversized squad is one thing.
But stuff like the Rocket Troopers or Psi-Commandoes, like I mentioned...in the former case, especially, their mobility is their greatest asset. Parcelling them out in pairs and tying them to General Infantry and other similar patron strings (when you'd think they'd be coherent at at least the platoon level or so) feels like...well, I dunno, a bit like the French and their deployment policy of armour for the battle of France. Only, upside-down reverse.
Okay, I'm not a very good explainer, but I hope you see what I mean?
|
|