Go Back   Project Reality Tournament Forums > PUBLIC FORUM > General Tournament Discussion

Welcome to the Project Reality Forums! Join the Project Reality forums! Contact Us

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2017-02-27, 20:51   #1
Stark38
C12 Member

 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 473
C12 Intel/Battleplan Sharing Thread

Vadso City Draft Deployment / City Defense: https://docs.google.com/presentation...it?usp=sharing

Saaremaa Scrimmage Deployment: https://docs.google.com/presentation...it?usp=sharing
__________________


Stark38 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-27, 21:30   #2
[T-CON]​Raidonrai
Tournament Contributor
 
Raidonrai's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Liverpool laa
Posts: 255
Re: C12 Intel/Battleplan Sharing Thread

Vadso

Saaremaa

Grozny

Fools Road

Wanda Shan

Xiangshan

coloured circles with numbers in them = OP
__________________
Raidonrai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-28, 07:26   #3
Senshi
Lead Admin / Retired EMC CO
 
Senshi's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Wiesbaden
Posts: 2,369
Re: C12 Intel/Battleplan Sharing Thread

Op Marlin

Burning Sands
__________________
Senshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-28, 19:46   #4
[R-COM]​Michael_Denmark
Retired PELA/CATA CO

 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 3,810
Re: C12 Intel/Battleplan Sharing Thread

Thank you for sharing.

In relation to the first battle on Xiangshan, I hope it is okay asking a few questions to the EMC battle-plan, Route 2 RED.

From the very start, the plan make the following statement:

Quote:
We will most likely not attack PLA Outpost. Too risky, too little benefit.
I fully agree in the analysis. At least as long as the attack would come from the west. Which it did too, later on in the battle. A move that as we know, surprised everyone, with that spirit of EMC audacity. A move that almost succeeded and perhaps could have captured the PLA Outpost?

But what I dont understand, are the reasons behind the decision, to go for the attack anyhow?

Also, when the surprise attack was launched, what made you decide, not to reinforce the harassment force in and around the Blue Box?

Fog of war? What happened?

Again, I hope it is okay to ask these questions. Please accept my apology, should it not be the case.
__________________
Speed Surprise Strength

500 million combat boots... One heartbeat
Michael_Denmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-28, 21:22   #5
Senshi
Lead Admin / Retired EMC CO
 
Senshi's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Wiesbaden
Posts: 2,369
Re: C12 Intel/Battleplan Sharing Thread

The attack was mostly motivated by everyone being insanely bored after the very slow first hour. Also, we were aware that we had a ticket deficit, and a successful push to a new good position (such as PLA outpost and the riverline are) usually means a big ticket gain (bc of squadwipes).

Blue box was planned as a simple AT hunter place, to kill damaged vehicles that try to RTB. It soon showed that APN was happily commiting way too many people there, our few recon guys drawing much more APN manpower than it warranted. So we kept recon there, drawing forces off the frontline, making it much easier to brute-force our assault on the front with superior numbers.
__________________
Senshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-28, 22:33   #6
Fisen
Task Force Member

 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 625
Re: C12 Intel/Battleplan Sharing Thread

Heyho! So who did all the work on your BPs on APN? And would be super interesting to take a look at em all.

In EMC is was mostly me making them with a lot of help/input from senshi and timings from our Intel department. I Also saved up most of the BPs in c11 which helped me at the start but in the end I mostly made our BPsfrom scrath. I usually prioritised making them simple and tried making as few slides as possible.
__________________
Fisen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-28, 23:16   #7
Stark38
C12 Member

 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 473
Re: C12 Intel/Battleplan Sharing Thread

YTMan has the rest of the documents, whenever he shows up. I think he's still too sad to come back online here.
__________________


Stark38 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-28, 23:30   #8
[R-COM]​Michael_Denmark
Retired PELA/CATA CO

 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 3,810
Re: C12 Intel/Battleplan Sharing Thread

Boredom became decisive. Yes, that first hour was quite static. And here I thought you deliberately had planned, to slow down the pace of battle, in order to strengthen your surprise attack later on.

I just watched your great offensive move again. I forgot that squad 8 did in fact, draw in a good portion of the APN force. Frontliner even got an FOB.

Quote:
...and a successful push to a new good position (such as PLA outpost and the riverline are) usually means a big ticket gain (bc of squadwipes).
I need to learn to think like that.

Fisen, if you also made the battle-plan for Xiangshan, please allow me to congratulate you on that surprise attack. That move will be what I will remember Campaign 12 for. True organised Audacity.
__________________
Speed Surprise Strength

500 million combat boots... One heartbeat
Michael_Denmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-28, 23:34   #9
[T-CON]​Raidonrai
Tournament Contributor
 
Raidonrai's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Liverpool laa
Posts: 255
Re: C12 Intel/Battleplan Sharing Thread

Xiangshan was nothing compared to Wanda and Vadso m8
__________________
Raidonrai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-28, 23:36   #10
Vista
C12 Member

 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 433
Re: C12 Intel/Battleplan Sharing Thread

Wanda was pretty sweet, probably the closest match in C12. Vadso however was just spam 4 inf squads to get the southern hill, build a TOW, GG.
Vista is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
c12, intel or battleplan, sharing, thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:42.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All Content Copyright ©2004 - 2016, Project Reality.

Project Reality is a computer game and the Project Reality Tournament is an organized simulation of that game.
The PRT is not affiliated with and does not seek to emulate the practices or ideals of any current military force, foreign or domestic.
Name or organizational similarities are aesthetical only.