Tactical Tasks: Words Have Meaning

 Introduction

While there are many instances of good leadership throughout the military (or any profession for that matter), there are just as many examples of poor leadership. We can, however, still learn quite a bit from bad leaders, so it is important to not always write people off. I had one such experience in my career from a military instructor, let's call him Major Flowers. He'd always say, "Words mean things," which upon first glance sounds pretty... stupid. But after I was exposed to more challenges and experienced some pitfalls of inadequate language, I appreciated what he meant all the more. 

I do not recommend listening to most of what Major Flowers said, but he was onto something there. With this in mind, we will examine the US Army's use of a particular vocabulary: Tactical Mission Tasks. As always, I don't think you should be drafting mission analysis slides during your games of Warhammer. Quite the contrary, this guide is a continued attempt to help develop a framework to expedite how you analyze the battlefield and, as the kids say, "git gud." I'll be trying to make these a bit less formal and more to-the-point after some recent and valid criticism. That being said, if you enjoy this content, I'd really appreciate a follow and/or share. If you didn't enjoy it, I would love to know how I can make it better. Let's begin today's discussion.

Background (the "so what?")

In real-world operations, one of the greatest challenges is overcoming the hurdle that is variance in how people interpret information. Something may be crystal clear to you as you explain it, but may incomprehensible to your audience. To combat this, the Army has adopted a very specific vocabulary do describe their operations. One set of this vocabulary is known as "Tactical Mission Tasks." This creates a universal and explicit set of words that don't have room for interpretation. 

Age of Sigmar 4.0 (and Warhammer 40K before it) is also seeming to try and achieve a similar end state by incorporating more explicitly defined keywords and language in our rules. This makes for a more functional and, in the case of wargaming, enjoyable experience. The reason we are going to review tactical mission tasks in the context of Warhammer is so we can better understand how we are committing our resources and ensuring we are pairing the right tool for the job. Any efficiencies we can create to take up fewer brain-bytes enables us to make better decisions and win more games.

Relevant Tactical Tasks

Let's look at which tasks are most relevant to our endeavors in Warhammer:

Defeat, Destroy, and Neutralize

Each of these sound quite similar, no? Well, they each have a specific definition as tactical tasks. This is because sometimes you do not have the resources to destroy (physically rendering a force combat ineffective, to damage a combat system so badly that it cannot perform any function) a unit, you may opt to neutralize (rendering enemy incapable of interfering) it. Defeating and element occurs when an enemy force has temporarily or permanently lost the physical means or will to fight, this is a broader and more abstract term that can be accomplished a number of ways. 

Your aim is to defeat your opponent by creating dilemmas and giving them no recourse to outscore you. You destroy their units by inflicting casualties and making them combat ineffective so they cannot perform their intended function. And finally, you could neutralize a shooting unit by engaging in melee with them so they cannot interfere with you by shooting at targets of the enemy's choosing. 

Breach

We've discussed screening as an essential task to maintain security of our own formations. The enemy will certainly be making the same efforts. A breach is a tactical task that seeks to break through or secure a passage through that screen. 

Contain

"To stop, hold, or surround forces of the enemy to center activity on a given front," (ADRP 1-02 p.1-9). The unit archetype of "tar pit," such a Horrors of Tzeentch or Dryads close enough to overgrown terrain are effective performing this tactical task. Essentially it is a way of move-blocking your opponent to keep them off objectives or otherwise containing their ability to influence your scheme of maneuver.

Canalize

The tactical task of restricting enemy movement "to a narrow zone by exploiting terrain coupled with the use of obstacles, fires, or friendly maneuver." We will get into a "fun" concept called Engagement Area Development (EA DEV) some day, a concept that capitalizes on effective canalizing of the enemy. For now, let's use an example: You can canalize the enemy into unfavorable position by arraying your forces (friendly maneuver) in conjunction with terrain and resources like endless spells (obstacles). This puts them at risk for counterattack and juicy, overlapping engagement ranges for shooting units (fires). 

Disrupt

The use of your resources to "upset an enemy's formation or tempo, interrupt [their] timetable, or cause [their] forces to commit prematurely or attack in piecemeal fashion," (ADRP 1-02 p.1-13). Armies that want to get into your face quickly to concentrate and mass their forces depend on tempo and creating conditions for their plans to be effective. You disrupt them by giving them a problem, or at least a speed-bump, to deal with. 

Fix

"A tactical mission task where a commander prevents the enemy from moving any part of [their] force from a specific location for a specified period of time," (ADRP 1-02 p.1-17). This is particularly useful to set up follow-on operations, or to simply stall your opponent so you can pull ahead on primary objective points and create the necessary deficit. 

Demonstration

A form of attack designed to deceive the enemy as to the location or time of the decisive operation by a display of force. You may commit some forces to become decisively engaged in a demonstration, but it is merely a ruse for you to perform your decisive operation. 

Feint

A form of attack used to deceive the enemy as to the location or time of the actual decisive operation without becoming decisively engaged. This is particularly effective with high-mobility armies. Being able to "flip the board" by massing your forces asymmetrically, then rapidly redeploying or maneuvering them to the opposite end can keep your opponent out of position so you can create more favorable conditions.

Exploitation

An exploitation force follows a successful attack to take advantage of the opportunity you just created. This task limits your opponent's ability to reconstitute their forces and ability to respond in a meaningful capacity.

Frontal Attack

The most unga and bunga of all forms of attack, the frontal attack does exactly what it says on the tin. You push your dollies toward your opponent's and let the fates decide. Generally this is only recommended if you are trying to accomplish another tactical task, or if you enjoy numerical superiority or overmatch.

Envelopment

A form of maneuver in which an attacking forces seeks to avoid the principal enemy defenses by seizing objectives to the enemy rear in order to destroy the enemy in their current position. In short, this is what is generally considered "flanking." This is generally regarded as superior to a frontal attack because you suffer fewer casualties and maintain a better tempo for your operations.

Conclusion

Hopefully with this you can build a vocabulary in your mind to have a more clear and defined approach to your plans. In a game of dice and variability, having a means to control the chaos can be extremely valuable. Part of that is having a framework to work within. Furthermore, if you can build on this lexicon amongst your play group or friends, you can have a better foundation to build a shared understanding. These are the key components of what you use to build a mission statement. "My leftmost unit of 10 Dryads will move to the northern portion of the leftmost objective to fix the enemy Horrors of Tzeentch in order to enable the decisive operation." The decisive operation in your mind might then be, "The unit of 6 Kurnoth Hunters will conduct an envelopment in order to destroy the enemy Lord of Change." 

You need not go to these extremes, but if you are having trouble decided what to do, this can help you formulate more definitive plans. Not having intentions for how you commit your forces is going to leave it up to the dice to decide. Or worse, it will allow your opponent to pick you apart at their discretion. Hopefully this is something you can use to build up your playbook of possible operations you can employ successfully. Perhaps I am just like Major Flowers and this has been a complete waste of your time. If that's the case, then let me know so I can get better. Thanks again for joining us at Sparkle Strategy. Don't forget to sign up for email notifications, follow, or to give us any feedback you might have. Stay sparkly, my friends.

AoS Homework: IPOE Step 4

 

Introduction

If you've made it this far, then you are pretty much ready to be an intelligence officer in the US military. Joking aside, thank you for continuing to learn with us using military doctrine as a framework for becoming a better wargaming general. If you haven't already, give us a follow, leave a comment, and now you can sign up for email updates for when articles are published. Today we will finish up with the last step of the IPOE process and discuss how we can perform all 4 steps in a pretty expedited fashion. Pull a seat up to the table, warmaster, and we will discuss some tactics.

Step 4: Determine Threat Courses of Action

All of the previous steps we performed culminates to this: what is the enemy going to do? Or at the very least, we aim to determine what they are very likely to do. But allow me to drive this home yet again, in each of our actions, the best possible maneuver we can perform is one that places the initiative firmly in our hands. If we can position ourselves in such a way that we limit the options available to the enemy commander, we are retaining the initiative. In the US Army, a commander has a staff they utilize to game out what they think will happen based on all of the factors we have reviewed thus far. When executed properly, the staff can help the commander choose an approach that will allow for tactical flexibility and "accept all comers" when it comes to the enemy's choices. 

The enemy will be trying to do the same exact thing (or at least you should be anticipating that they will be doing so). The following steps will reduce the chances of you being surprised by their actions and help you maintain control of the game. The substeps for determining threat courses of action are to develop threat courses of action (COAs) and to develop an event template and matrix. The former is merely a process of molding the Threat Template from the previous article into the context of the terrain and other operational environmental factors. 

Develop threat COAs

This is simply a process of putting yourself in your opponent's shoes and considering what they are likely to do. Consider the exact some factors when you are formulating your plan: how will I score primary objective points? What battle tactics are available to me? What part of the board do I want to control? The list goes on, but let us focus on what is most likely to happen (MLCOA) and the most dangerous course of action (MDCOA). This is a useful, expedient way to prepare for what might happen next. Let's say you are matched up against the Ogor player from the previous article. It is the bottom of turn one after your opponent moved up the board, took some objectives, and did some chip damage with shooting their ironblaster.

Now consider what you think are the MLCOA and MDCOA. The MLCOA would probably be to put themselves in a position that they can continue to score battle tactics and that they will commit part of their force to melee combat in order to do so (many of the current battle tactics would require this). If you are considering the characteristics of the defense effectively, they likely won't see an opportunity to exploit the following turn, and you can maintain the initiative, or at least trade it back and forth as the rounds progress. The most dangerous course of action could result from you taking a calculated risk by overextending, banking on the double turn to mitigate their ability to charge and therefore inflict maximum damage. If you do not get the double turn, the tables have turned and now you have provided the Ogor player with exactly what they have been trying to create: an opportunity to exploit. This is your MDCOA. 

Right now we are just trying to generate these contextualized COAs with all the information we have and visualizing second and third orders of effect that might take place. Take the threat template we have generated previously and let's massage it into the operational environment. If the player can utilize some impassible terrain near where they've deployed, that will likely give them the ability to screen out an ever larger portion of the board because they need not fear being flanked from that side. Is there key terrain or an objective they can move block you from? Their defense will likely gravitate around that area. These are the sorts of "branches and sequels," what the opponent will do based on their current postures and actions for subsequent plans, we can envision and interact with when we go through this process. A common trend during our opponent's turn is to focus on what they are doing, but it is just as important, if not more so, to think think about what we are going to do in response during their turn.

Develop the Event Template and Matrix

These steps focus largely on information collection and reconnaissance efforts for military commanders, so we are going to distill it to the most basic and necessary information. Usually you would use the Event Template and Matrix to lay out when throughout time and space you expect things to happen. You then use this information to direct collection assets to these "named areas of interest" (NAIs) so you can observe indicators that a particular enemy COA is happening. In the example below, indicators for each of the threat COAs may be the emplacement of obstacles, multiple linear defensive positions perpendicular to obstacles, and setting up near intervisibility lines, respectively, clue us in as to what the enemy's intentions are while we rule out other COAs. 

What's the significance of this? If we have a better idea of what the enemy can do, we have more opportunities to affect their operations. Namely, it helps us understand where their key components will be in space and time, and helps us develop strategies to create opportunities so we can neutralize or destroy those components. The key here is tactical flexibility. Try to find your own courses of action that can account for different enemy decisions. Taking it back to our Ogor scenario, you could theoretically set yourself to tie or even go down on points in order to put your opponent in a position that they have to abandon the defense to continue to get battle tactics and disallow you from pulling ahead as the tempo shifts. This can be a viable path to victory, depending on your army capabilities. 

Conclusion

There is not a panacea that I can tell you, "in this scenario do this," because it does not exist. Rather, I aim to help you reconsider how you view and process information as the game progresses. This process can be clunky and protracted, but luckily the vast majority of it you can do outside of the game. You need not ask your opponent to wait while you furiously mark up a sheet of acetate with NATO symbols. I'm just asking you to consider how you go about accounting for what your enemy may do and what you plan to do in response. The more prepared you are, the less likely you are to make poor decisions and you reduce the amount of mental fatigue you incur. This is just a way to do it in a procedural manner. Thanks again for joining Sparkle Strategy once again on this journey. Remember to leave some feedback, subscribe for updates, and most importantly, stay sparkly.

AoS Homework: Intel

Introduction

Hello again and thanks again for joining Team Sparkle on another installment of the AoS Operations series. Previously we examined the first two steps of the Intelligence Preparation of the Operational Environment (IPOE) and how they apply to your calculus as a commander in AoS. Today we'll continue discussing another part of the process and build a quick example of what it might look like from beginning to end. I do not recommend you actually perform IPOE on every single Army in the game (because I probably will later). You already do this in your head and after reading this, you will see that it is merely a process to ensure you are accounting for every facet of info you can. Rather, I want to walk you through this framework so you can have a new perspective to understand your opponent and their list. We'd love to hear your feedback and have you give us a follow so you can stay plugged into our analytic adventure and to share with your gaming buddies so we can all become better commanders. Now, without any further delay, let's get to the matter.

IPOE Step 3: Evaluate the Threat

Having completed steps to define the operational environment and how the battlefield effects will impact our operations, we narrow our focus on the enemy. Doctrinally this is the process that "determines threat forces capabilities and the doctrinal principles and TTP (Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures) threat forces prefer to employ," ATP 2-01.3, p.5-1. For our use, evaluating the threat is understanding the rules that govern how it can operate and understanding how those capabilities can be used to shape the battlefield. The Army categorizes the types of threats further into regular, irregular, and hybrid threats. This is a useful device to understand in the broadest terms how an army in AoS operates. Regular forces are the "honest" approaches to combat, not relying a complex mechanics or tricks. Irregular forces do not tend to fight their opponents face to face, they degrade their abilities, use unconventional engagement tactics, and tend to fight in a more asymmetric fashion. Hybrid forces are simply armies that can do a bit of both. 

With the most basic categorization completed, we get to the "How to do it" portion of the doctrine and we have our first diagram:

Identify Threat Characteristics

In figure 5-1 we can see several factors to consider. We'll focus on the ones most relevant to our discussion with some in-game examples.

Composition

Figure 5-2 illustrates the composition, aka the list your opponent takes to the match. This is an organizational chart for a Mechanized Infantry Brigade, a common maneuver element. It has several capabilities from direct fire (shooting an enemy you can see), indirect fire (shooting an enemy you can't see with artillery), and support roles (Air Defense, Engineering, Maintenance, Transportation, and Chemical Warfare). Let's not get too into the weeds of this Mechanized Infantry Brigade, just suffice to say that this tells the commander how many of what resources the enemy has and the associated capabilities of those weapons and support systems. Instead, let's see how we can translate this to an AoS list so we can understand the capabilities and limitations.

Here we've repurposed the organizational chart to understand an Ogor Mawtribes Meatfist list. This provides the framework for the composition so we can build on it later.

Disposition

As we examined in the previous installment, how the threat forces are arrayed can give you many indications. Doctrinally, we use this as a means of identifying what tactic or maneuver the enemy may execute based on where specific elements of their forces are. In the previous organizational chart, we can identify a common power-pair in the infantry screen Gnoblars and the self propelled artillery, the Ironblaster. For your opponent in this scenario to use this significant points investment properly, they need to have an effective firing lane. If they deploy in such a way that they have a clear line of sight and range to a unit (even better yet if they measure to one of your units that tells you their intentions exactly), it gives you a hint on what their target priority looks like. If they set it up more defensively so they can punish you from contesting an objective, that tells you another course of action they may be taking. The point is, the enemy's disposition in conjunction with their composition tells a story. The homework you can do is understanding how those elements piece together so you can understand the significance of that story and give it a not-so-happy conclusion.

Strength

Assessing a unit's strength is a matter of understanding what it is most effective at. There is a significant incentive in Warhammer to take the most efficient lists as is possible. In this way, your opponent is telling you their intentions. If you stare across the board at two units of Ironguts and a Frostlord, they probably intend to smash you Dryads to splinters and stick Durthu's Greenwood Gladius up his own trunk. Further, what is the unit's loadout? Are there any potential aspects you can exploit such as rend or damage reduction? Pile these considerations onto the previous two while we continue.

Combat Effectiveness

A threat's Combat Effectiveness is a characteristic you should frequently re-analyze. As you inflict casualties, the enemy will logically become a less effective fighting force. Fewer models making attacks means less damage and fewer models to stand on objectives. On the other hand, untouched units that have combat power remaining are clearly more valuable to your opponent. This dynamic characteristics helps you keep spinning the plates that matter and let the less important ones fall to the ground. Don't try to address every single problem. Exterminate the most important problems with extreme prejudice.  

Doctrine and Tactics

Because of our glorious and beloved friend HeyWoah (easily the best AoS content creator in this author's humble opinion), we know that Ogors want one thing and it's disgusting. Always be charging. Let's put this into context of our list example. We can see this Meatfist list (say that 8 times fast) has several minimum strength units (MSU) instead of reinforcing. This in conjunction with what we know about the Ogor tactics tells us that the enemy commander wants to create many opportunities to inflict mortal wounds on the charge. If this player can charge in all of their Ogor infantry and the Stonehorn, they will inflict roughly 17 mortal wounds on average. That damage potential is massive and a wise Ogor commander will exploit it at every opportunity. 

Create or Refine Threat Models

With these characteristics in mind, we can begin to create our threat models. A good way to imagine this to place the army in the previous example in a giant parking lot. We'll call it an additional realm, uhh, Lotqshy. There are no terrain features in this realm, just pure flat. We have two outputs to make:

Threat Template

The Threat Template is what we might consider the "playbook" of what an army does. We'll construct a specific example below, but this is the set of techniques that a commander uses to win the game. They can employ different strategies, each which would serve a different purpose. As a parallel, we'll use a mobile defense threat template with the Ogor list to see what this looks like.

This is a very rough example of a threat template that you can use to quickly visualize what this list wants to do. It wants you to move toward the unit of Gnoblars (performing the guard tactical task, preventing direct fire with the ironblaster and main body of the army, i.e. charging) so the main source of damage, the charging MSUs can be committed to the decisive operation. Several of the Ogor book battle tactics depend on being able to charge and get into combat, so this commander wants to set up situations to accomplish those battle tactics and get points. The Firebelly, depicted with the Air Defense Artillery icon, exists in this list to provide ther wholly within 12" bubble to hand out -1 to hit penalties, making the army more survivable. The Slaughtermaster exists to issue commands and hand out buffs to troops, so it is going to be in a position where it can be within range to do so. Finally, we have the armor, the big thicc boi. The Frostlord on Stonehorn exists as a counterattack element to commit to the fight when the commander sees a gap they can exploit. The model's great mobility, durability, and monstrous rampage makes it a terrific piece to capitalize on gaps the opponent leaves open. 

The subsequent steps of IPOE results in the output of the High-Value Target List (HVTL). This is typically broken down yet further (are you seeing a trend here?) to be evaluated by phase. In some parts of the battle, a commanders assets are more valuable than others. This illustrates how at different points of the battle, the most important piece to a player can change. Let's say you're about to take your turn and you are considering what to do. Is your opponent's only remaining battle tactic Surround and Destroy (GHB 23-24)? If you can remove one of the three units they will have the chance to select the next turn they have

to choose from, you can deny them a battle tactic. These sorts of insights are hard to keep in mind at times when you are hyper-focused on destroying the most damaging unit your opponent has. Sometimes that unit is merely a distraction. Remove yourself from the immediate, tactical level, focus on the broader, strategic level. The game is won with points, not by killing models (even though sometimes this gives you points). 

In our next installment, we will perform the last step of the IPOE process, which mostly is a matter of molding the "parking lot" scenario that was the Threat Template to the area of operations (how does the terrain influence maneuver, disposition of troops, etc.). We hope that you've enjoyed the installment today and that you're starting to see the house start to form together around the framework we've been building. Remember, we won't be painstakingly drawing these plans on sheets of acetate while our opponent impatiently taps their foot. We will have this in the back of our minds as a means of systematically assessing the ever-changing battlefield so we can make the best decisions and retain the initiative. Thanks again for the read. If you've enjoyed this, we'd love if you give this blog a follow, a share, or just tell someone you know something you've learned. Stay Sparkly.

AoS Homework: Intel Preparation Part 1

Strap in, this one is going to be a doozie. Luckily, the bulk of this concept is something you do not do while you are playing, but a task you perform when you are no doubt lying in your bed, anxious and unable to sleep because you are ruminating about this engrossing game. Before we get into it, I just want to encourage you to hit that follow button so you can receive regular updates on this blog. I plan to make several posts a week until we finish examining US Army doctrine then we will dive into some faction-specific analyses. If you want to see a specific topic or have any other feedback, leaving a comment or emailing me is a great way to get in touch. That being said, let's get into it.

Today we will discuss Intelligence Preparation of the Operational Environment (formerly known as Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield). Refer to ATP 2-01.3 if you want it from the horses mouth. This is the process of giving yourself the most information possible to make informed decisions. This process has four sub steps that we will break into separate posts for further examination. They are: Define the Operational Environment, Describe the Environmental Effects on Operations, Evaluate the Threat, and Determine Threat COAs. Today we will examine the first two steps of the process.

Define the Operational Environment

Defining the Operational Environment (OE) in wargaming is quite straightforward. We do not have to request intelligence collection assets, consider multiple domains of warfare, or argue with commanders about conflicting areas of operations. Our OE is a 44"x60" space with about eight pieces of (usually poorly placed) terrain. 

Let's take another look at a complex figure to glean some insights for AoS. The two pieces to give our consideration are the Enemy and Features (there isn't really a distinction in AoS for Natural and Man-made ones). The rest of these factors either do not really exist in the game, or they exist solely in a few battleplans. In short, when it comes to considering weather or ASCOPE, imagine it as the "Limited Resources" battleplan in the GHB 23-24 book: each turn you control an objective, it affects the operational environment as if it were a weather factor or a civil consideration. 

We can divide the enemy characteristics even further for a better understanding: 

Identity

Luckily you will not have to contend with insurgent forces blending into a local populace, deconflicting to avoid fratricide, or any of the other horrific aspects of identifying the enemy and mitigating collateral damage. The significant takeaway here is that we know with perfect as soon as we get the pairing what we are playing into. I'd argue the only case that you don't know really know the entire identity of an army is when they have the capability to summon from a pool of units. But that really is quite limited and won't change the identity of the army. What this means for you is that you can study the capabilities that every single army has. The only limitations are the amount of time you are willing to dedicate and your ability to retain and recall the information. 

Location

This is understandably easy to conflate with disposition. In short, there are some things your opponent generally cannot really hide about their intentions. The location of their forces on the battlefield is one of those things. Is your opponent lined up in close proximity to two narrow pieces of terrain? Their location is likely betraying their intentions, because it's likely their aim is to control that piece of terrain. Are they lined up so they have two fast flanking units on the edge of their territory? They're likely using them for a battle tactic (e.g. Surround and Destroy in GHB 23-24) or a flanking maneuver to impede your movement in subsequent rounds. Depending on turn priority and when these locations are changing throughout the game, this gives you the opportunity to respond in kind and reseize the initiative. 

Size

This is not as applicable for the purposes of matched play as there is a point limit that each commander is permitted to bring to the table. One may be tempted to cite the relative size of formations on the battlefield, such as when a player sets up a "castle" in a tight, regimented formation, that this would be their size. This is really, however, a better fit for disposition. One factor to consider for size, though, is the physical space, the footprint that an army can occupy. This can affect your ability to mass and concentrate forces if they have a means of projected area denial over large portions of the battlefield. 

Disposition

This characteristic can reveal a great deal of information about your opponent and their intentions. Warhammer operates in quite restrictive spatial distances. When a commander can maneuver their forces while simultaneously maintaining a formation that allows them to grant bonuses and issue command abilities, they have a greater chance for success. In this sense, it operates quite similarly to principles of command and control at the tactical level. The effective commander must reel in their forces so they don't get spread too thinly, lest they lose control. It also reveals portions of their plan. Are the opponent's main damage-dealing pieces lined up as close as they can be within the deployment zone with no screens and they have the turn priority? They're telegraphing that they are going to attempt and alpha-strike (an immediate decisive engagement to attempt destroying or defeating you in a single turn). Have they deployed in a corner, staying as far away from you as possible? They are anticipating or fearing that you might conduct an alpha-strike. The manner in which your opponent arrays their forces will usually give you an indication of their intentions. With more experience, however, players can obfuscate their plans and use deceptive formations that allow them to flexibly adapt to different plans. 

Describe the Environmental Effects on Operations

The products of this step in the IPOE process are the Modified Combined Obstacle Overlay (MCOO) and a Threat Overlay. The US Army uses sheets of acetate or digital layers that go on top of the basemap and Area of Operations maps to provide a holistic understanding of the situation. 

MCOO

The MCOO is homework that you complete in a couple of different ways. Let us liken the GHB Battleplans as our Area of Operations maps. These clearly outline with no margin of error exactly where you and your opponent can start the game and where each of the primary objective will lie and how the points are scored (one, two, more, or another system). From this, you can perform some analysis on how your capabilities will match up to the battleplan. Are you using an army that has comparatively slow movement? It probably isn't worth pursuing an objective point that would take you more than one turn to get to. You can do the math before you even get to the table so that you definitively know what you can and cannot do, thereby reducing the amount of decisions you have to make and helping you perform with a clearer head. 

Now for the MCOO itself, this is an additional overlay that describes the effects that terrain impose on operations such as restricted and severely restricted terrain, key terrain, and areas in which you cannot operate, amongst other factors. For our purposes, you can generate a hasty MCOO in your head by analyzing where the terrain is, whether its impassible or garrisonable, and assess what areas you want to consider key terrain. Objective markers also should factor into this analysis. Contesting objectives is tantamount to retaining key terrain .

This example MCCO illustrates how it provides more context on how the environment effects operations. The terrain restricts and shapes your ability to maneuver and limits options for both commanders. It also helps you identify, since you aren't sure which side of the map you'll be on, how one deployment zone may be more advantageous than another. Terrain rules in Age of Sigmar are not profoundly impactful, unfortunately, or at the very least they can be inconsistent from one tournament to another. So, do not ruminate too long on this step.

Threat Overlay

"The threat overlay depicts the current physical location of all potential threats [...] the overlay includes the identity, size, location, strength, and AO for each known threat location," ATP 2-01.3, p.4-3. 

This example shows how an enemy commander has arrayed their forces, the composition of those forces using NATO Joint Military Symbology, and the effective range they can influence. This is the sort of framework you can use to understand the limits of what your opponent can accomplish. For instance, you see that your opponent has deployed a unit that can move 6" and fire 24". This means that if you are within 30" of that unit, it can fire upon you. This simple example illustrates how you can fundamentally discern information about your opponent. Next consider how far they can move and cast the next turn. If you move to a certain position, can you contest an objective without allowing them to receive a buff? If you attack a screening unit of Kairic Acolytes, will that Lord of Change back there be able to turn you into a Chaos Spawn? Your opponent cannot surprise you with new technology or ambush you from hidden spots. You know with perfect information what their capabilities are, and if you can train yourself to learn their capabilities and combine it with their disposition, you can more reliably predict what your opponent's options are and interact with them. 

Thank you for joining me in the war room today. Next time we will discuss the final two steps of the IPOE process and things will get much more exciting. If you'd like some more explanation of these examples, or for me to provide some more specific scenarios with warscrolls and in-depth analysis, leave a comment or drop me a line and we'll take a closer look. If you don't want to miss future articles or just want to keep up to date on what the Sparkle Team is up to, give us a follow. Until then, Stay Sparkly.

Characteristics of the Defense

 

Overview

I hope you've enjoyed our journey thus far! If you want to keep up to date, we've recently added the option to follow this blog and enter your email for regular updates. With the housekeeping stuff out of the way, let's get to the main event.

It is a bit of a mistake to consider the offense to be inherently proactive and the defense to be reactive. Properly executed, the defense can still very much be a proactive move when it is used to set conditions for subsequent operations. Today we will examine the defense and walk through a specific AoS example to give us some more insights. 

Doctrinally, the purpose of the defense is "to create conditions for the offense that allows forces to regain the initiative," (ADP 3-90, 4-1). Some more specific examples in doctrine include retaining decisive terrain (think a key gap around impassible terrain that your opponent must maneuver through), attriting or fixing an enemy as a prelude to the offense (reduce the unit's combat power or efficacy, to make your subsequent charge and combat easier), countering enemy action, and increasing an enemy's vulnerability by forcing the enemy to concentrate subordinate forces where it is less advantageous. 

Before we get into reviewing the characteristics of the defense, I want to really drive home a key concept here: the proper defense is not passive. Do not simply march your forces forward without consideration of what problems it will present to your opponent. The doctrine states this concept effectively, "a defending force maneuvers to place enemy forces in a position of disadvantage and attacks those enemy forces at every opportunity," (ADP 3-90, 4-1). As a sports analogy, your defense is just a quick jab to disrupt your opponent's timing and set up a knockout punch.

Bearing this in mind, the characteristics are:

Disruption

This characteristic focuses on taking actions that desynchronize an enemy force's preparations. Simply put, this is a matter of not allowing your enemy to maintain their formations, such as command bubbles, ability auras, and opportunities to execute the combos they want. Depending on what resources you have access to (think countercharges, redeploys), in conjunction with what the enemy has (fights first, fights with a leader unit) you can disrupt their timing. Give your the opponent the dilemma of "sure, you can charge this unit, but you won't be able to give it commands," or only allow a frontage wide enough so that a single unit can get into combat. The orientation, shape, and relative position to terrain are all factors that are in your control to influence how effective your opponent can engage you. If you push your units up wide enough so they can all swing at the enemy, there's a really good chance that the opposing unit can do the same. If your screening unit has the ability to bully that other unit, that's precisely what you want. But if they do not, why provide that opponent the opportunity? If their job is to just disrupt the enemy through desynchronizing their movement into your massed forces, the damage they can inflict on the disrupted unit is immaterial. Better yet, limiting their ability to inflict damage (such as units with limited reach at the time of writing of this article) even by a model can be the difference between that screening unit being destroyed or not. This helps with force economy and provides us with subsequent options for the surviving unit. Which leads us into our next characteristic.

Flexibility

Being able to anticipate likely enemy actions is critical to an effective defense. A defensive plan that is only accounting for one enemy course of action but is very well executed is inferior to a defensive plan that is less watertight but accounts for multiple enemy actions. The enemy always gets a vote. The clever opponent will simply circumvent your defense a la Maginot Line if they are provided the opportunity. Part of your list building and battleplan analysis should strive to account for variance in the terrain placement, deployment zones, and disposition of enemy forces. When you make your first movement phase, the deployment of your army, don't do it in such a way that you are pigeonholed into one direction. A clever opponent may be able to exploit something you've missed and gain the initiative themselves. Plan your defenses, even if it is just for one turn, in depth. This means that you are utilizing mutually supporting pieces so that the sacrifice of that screen is not in vain. 

Maneuver

Avoid thinking of a defensive posture as an entirely static stance. There are a finite number of opportunities to have agency in the combat phase and even fewer opportunities to fight outside of the combat phase. Capitalizing on controlling your combats in your and your opponent's turns is essential and a great way to accomplish this is through maneuver. This is why the movement phase is arguably the most important phase in Warhammer. Seek and create opportunities for your forces that won't be engaged so you can quickly transition to the offense. You can concurrently use this approach to set up compounding efficiencies, such as battle tactics or abilities that require certain criteria such as the Gnoblars' "Nasty Traps and Tricks" ability, or the "Bait and Trap" battle tactic for GHB 23-24. Furthermore, you can maneuver in such a way to also incorporate flexibility if your opponent doesn't make a decision you expect or dice rolls don't go how you expect. The most efficient and therefore desirable moves have multiple branches that allow for alternative paths to victory. This includes all opportunities to move your models. Consider how many different opportunities you get to move your models in your analysis of maneuver, and don't get caught in mind traps. Sometimes the best moves that score you points happen on charges, redeploys, and pile-ins. Open your mind to the totality of what the rules allow you to do. 

Mass and Concentration

Similar to the previous article on the Characteristics of the Offense, massing and concentrating your forces produces local overmatch and allows you to dictate the tempo more reliably. Your defensive posture ideally will not only account for one turn. With the uncertainty of priority rolls, you need to have the mindset that your opponent will be at the top of the next round, whether they get the double or not. When you can mass and concentrate your forces at decisive points so you can effectively employ your resources, you are set up for the transition and success. The aim is to get your opponent's offensive to culminate without your ability to destroy, defeat, or neutralize your forces. 

 As always, thank you again for following me on this supremely geeky adventure of exploring US Army doctrine as a framework for improving your wargaming strategy. Next time we will examine a way to become more prepared as a commander outside of your games. You know, since we all don't spend enough time on this game as it is. If you enjoyed this read, give a follow, sign up for the email notification, share, or just tell a friend about what you learned. Stay sparkly, my friends.

Characteristics of the Offense

We have discussed the merits of being a proactive player in Age of Sigmar, but not so much what that really characterizes. Luckily, yet again the ever-wise (I say this with a great deal of sarcasm) institution that is the US Army has a doctrinal explanation for this very topic. Let us take a closer look at the characteristics of the offense: audacity, concentration, surprise, and tempo.

Audacity is understanding where and when to take risks and not become tentative in the execution of your plan. "a difficult situation [...] handled boldly often leads to dramatic effect," (ADP 3-90, p.7). A good example of this is employing the correct high variance strategy in a "bad" matchup. Your opponent will often assume they hold a position of relative advantage due to the inherent strengths their faction enjoys relative to your inherent weaknesses. You can accept this, or you can accept risk and employ an audacious approach.

Concentration is "the ability to mass effects without massing large formations," (ADP 3-90, p.8). In other words, it's the practice of putting the correct resources into the enemy without committing your entire force. A common misplay in this game is diluting your forces so wide that they cannot benefit from the desired effects. There is a sweet spot to strive for in remaining compact enough to maintain these benefits while still being able to score primary points and achieve battle tactics. 

Surprise is achieved by "striking the enemy at a time, place, or manner for which the enemy is not physically or mentally read," (ADP 3-90, p.8). Understanding how to employ this is largely by developing an intimate understanding of what your army's capabilities are. Sometimes it is a manner of movement tricks, spells or abilities, or even weapon ranges (at least while we are in 3.0). But the most effective means of achieving surprise is inducing psychological shock by doing something they were not expecting. I heartily avoid performing any "gotcha" tactics, rather I am encouraging clever play by setting up enticing trades, shaping the battlefield for your to employ a favorable deepstrike, or setting up for a big combo. There are a number of psychological traps a player can fall into. At the most basic level, most beginning players will feel compelled to send their resources crashing into yours. If you are struggling to get wins, one of the easiest ways to achieve surprise is appropriately screening then beta-striking your opponent (if your army has the capacity to do this). Incorporate this concept into your planning and list-building sessions.

Tempo is "the rate of speed and rhythm of military operations over time with respect to the enemy," (ADP 3-90, p.8). Tempos vary widely across armies in AoS. If we were to put it on a spectrum, on the left let us consider an alpha-strike plan with an army like Ironjawz. This is a high tempo, early game, chips in approach. There are benefits and drawbacks to this, but it capitalizes on inflicting maximum damage as early as possible to put their opponent in a position that they cannot mass their forces effectively. At the other end of the spectrum would be armies that focus on recursion or summoning and rely on grinding out a battle of attrition. Soulblight Gravelords, Flesheater Courts, and a Disciples of Tzeentch summoning list are examples of mid to slow tempo approaches at the game. Understanding where your army fits on this spectrum and not forcing the square peg into the round hole is what we are trying to achieve. 

A final note: there are times that you will not be able to maintain the offensive. Remember the enemy always gets a vote. There are also characteristics of the defense in ADP 3-90, which we will discuss in the next read. Again, thank you as always for joining me in this profoundly geeky approach to an already geeky endeavor. If you have any thoughts, feel free to leave a comment or drop me a line. Stay sparkly, my friends.

AoS Operations

 

In a game where the litany of nuanced abilities, rules, and interactions cloud your mind, it is hard to bear in mind the “big picture.” Time and again, though, you will see that the best Warhammer players exhibit the same or similar characteristics: a strong command of the macro game. Movement, playing the primary, and playing to the battleplan. While it is important to understand the insane amount of information to be a successful player, it is all for not if you cannot perform the fundamentals.

This guide will attempt to do just that within the framework of an organization that is well-established in the science and art of destroying the enemy (though you will not actually be killing your opponent and you don’t really have to listen to the Geneva Convention. Namely, I will be using the US Army’s Unified Action model to illustrate how you can manage your macro game. It is not possible to go through every “what if,” you need to develop your mind to analyze the board state (Operational Environment), make a plan, and execute it.

This preposterous alphabet soup and list of jargon is how the US Army fights and wins land wars. We’ll examine the aspects that are applicable to Age of Sigmar only, and I can guarantee you a Drill Sergeant will not be yelling at you. Let’s begin with the Tenets and Principles of Operations through the lens of wargaming. First up: Principles. These are concepts that aren’t universally applicable to every operation but something you should strive to use when you can.

Objective: don’t get it twisted, your aim if you’re reading this article is to win the game. Your army(ies) has multiple paths to achieve this but when the fifth round has concluded, you need to have more points than your opponent.

Offensive: this is the mindset to be proactive as opposed to a reactive player. You need to be dictating the flow of the battle and creating problems for your opponent instead of just responding. This does vary from player to player, but this guide will recommend you to have a proactive mindset.

Maneuver: this game is won and lost in the movement phase. You and your opponent have access to all the same warscrolls and movement characteristics. What they don’t have access to is your means to plan and shape the battlefield by maneuvering your resources. Funneling your opponent, screening off objectives, setting up a counter-charge, these are maneuvers.

Economy of force: imagine this- you send your big hammer in to clear a unit of skeletons and they do it in one go! Wow great job! Except not really. You just expended valuable resources to overkill something that wasn’t that valuable to your opponent. If you cannot accomplish what you need to given the board state, then do not commit that resource to the fight.

Unit of command: this is not really applicable in singles but could come into play in team or doubles environments.

Security: a very common mistake with novice players is insufficient or incorrect screening. You need the right amount and just as importantly they need to be sufficiently spaced. More on this later.

Simplicity: a common phrase in military operations-”No plan survives first contact.” Your path to victory is more likely to fail if it hinges on multiple, cascading series of events unfolding in perfect Tzeentchian fashion. Know what your army does, invest in amplifying those strengths, and develop a linear plan that has branches. The enemy always gets a vote.

Restraint: No. But seriously, when you’ve got a less-glorious way to get a battle tactic and sit on an objective vs. a flashy, killy means to take a turn, go with the former. This may seem extremely obvious to the more “Spike” minded players, but less so to others. 

These are really broad concepts for you to try and incorporate from list building through your execution of the game. When you and your list can follow these principles, you will find that you are more in control and your opponent is on their back foot. 

Next, let’s discuss elements of decisive action through the lens of Offensive and Defensive operations. Remember, we are wanting to remain in a proactive mindset, which you can still accomplish while on the defensive. 

Let’s focus primarily on the “Purposes” portions of these sections. 

Dislocate, isolate, disrupt, and destroy enemy forces: very often units in AoS depend on buffs within auras or command bubbles. Forcing your enemy to separate their forces in order to isolate or dislocate them allows you to disrupt their economy of forces and deprive them of their vital resources.

Exploitation: this is when you see a gap in your opponents positioning and you seize the initiative. Here is where being a proactive player is so effective. If you just wait for your opponent to eventually make a mistake, the opportunity may never arrive. This is how you are rewarded for being on the offensive, you are shaping the operational environment to create opportunities to exploit. Your job is to present problems for your opponent in which there isn’t a “good” choice. 

Seize key terrain: in military doctrine terms, key terrain is a feature that whoever controls it will possess a decisive advantage. This is very common in AoS. This is why impassible terrain and effective screening is so important. You may not be an active (or at the least a less active) player during your opponent's turn, but effective movement is your means of shaping the battlefield and constraining their capabilities. And don’t forget, your first movement phase isn’t in the first battle round, it is in deployment. It is your first and often most important chance to influence the game. 

Now, let’s talk about the Tenets of operations. These differ from the principles in that tenets are more fundamental and “should be built into all plans and operations.” They are: 

Simultaneity: the intent of this tenet is to bring your resources to bear in a way that overwhelms your opponent and create a dilemma. You want any options they have to be a bad one, or at least to have a downside. While this is a turn based game with sequenced activations, you do have control in using the rules to order activations in your favor. You can stay outside of activation range of targets you do not have resources to deal with and pile in creative ways to force your opponent into multiple units’ activation range, even in your opponent’s turn. 

Depth: this is how your forces effects are layered in time, space, and purpose to achieve results. For example, it is how you array your screens, hammers, and supporting units. You have to constantly bear in mind not just the range of your abilities, but how they will change throughout your turn. Do not over-extend your forces so you lose out on your ability to protect your forces. Let’s say your opponent makes a charge that allows you to make a pile in. Will this take you out of range for any abilities that you need? Keep the template in your mind of this disposition and how you can maintain it while scoring battle tactics and objectives.

Synchronization: this is very easy to conflate with simultaneity. This is more focusing on unit pairings that complement one another in time and space, such as body guard units, a cavalry hero that allows another unit to activate with it, etc. 

Flexibility: “The employment of a versatile mix of capabilities, formations, and equipment for conducting operations,” or in our terms, don’t be a one-trick-pony. In the matched play format, you have no control of what army you’re going to be paired into. You have some ability to recognize what is prevalent in the meta and taking a variety of means to deal with what you’re expecting to match into. At the time of writing, for example, Blades of Khorne is difficult for many matchups because it is a proverbial toolbox of flexibility. The Blood Tithe mechanic allows for multiple pieces of tech to ensure tactical flexibility. Part of this is in your control with your faction selection, list building, and your planning. It’s great to have a plan that allows you to get all five battle tactics and your grand strategy. But have you considered how your opponent can influence it? Are some of your tactics dependent on certain unit types? Are they dependent on casting, and if so, do you have a means to ensure that happens? Minimizing the variance in your planning portions of the game is one of the most vital practices. 

The goal here was to use some well-established, institutional framework for combat to learn some lessons about how to think. If you’re going to take one thing from this guide it is this: use this framework as a way to constantly analyze the boardstate. The myriad of different situations that could arise against opponent a or b and their use of command trait x or y is immaterial if you do not first consider the factors YOU are in control of. These concepts allow you to identify these factors and hone them in a more intentional and productive way. If you are interested in more content like this, drop me a line or leave a comment. Keep it Sparkle, keep it in Motion.

And Napoleon Wept: Defeat in Detail in AoS

 In the continuing series of analyzing real-world military strategies to improve our AoS aptitude, we will be taking a look at a specific concept: defeat in detail. Many brilliant commanders used this technique throughout history to destroy numerically superior enemies with their quick wits. The concept is straightforward, calling back to simplicity, a principle of operations we discussed in the previous article. Simply put, defeat in detail is focusing your resources into smaller pieces of your opponent’s army instead of spreading out. But the enemy always gets a vote. They won’t allow you to just focus your combat power into their valuable resources. So again, you need to think about how you can set conditions to give yourself a position of advantage. So let’s use some more doctrine to explain how to analyze the battlefield.

There are two subcomponents to operations. The decisive operation and shaping operations. There is only one decisive operation and this is a helpful framework for you to consider as well. What piece does your opponent need (known as a center of gravity in Armyspeak) to be successful? Destroying, defeating, or neutralizing (and yes, these all mean different things) that piece is often going to be your decisive operation. Your shaping operations can be numerous and are the means by which you will shape the battlefield to complete the decisive operation.

Shaping operations can include a range of things in combat: gathering intelligence, creating obstacles, indirect fires (artillery). For our purposes, let’s focus on two concepts: delaying and disrupting. Delaying is imparting onto your opponent a problem to deal with before they can put their resources into what they really want to, usually by creating a physical barrier with a unit. Disrupting would be more like tying up a unit that wants to be able to do the most damage with a certain ability, or maybe their utility comes from shooting or the charge phase. Sometimes this is a matter of understanding that your opponent’s units need to charge the nearest unit, or have other limitations they have to observe. 

The totality of these shaping operations should funnel into setting conditions for your decisive operation. Sometimes discerning what your decisive operation ought to be is pretty simple, such as removing your opponent’s most damaging model from the game. Other times it is destroying a piece that creates an economy of force for them, like a hero that buffs battleline units. This is called target priority and helps you weigh the centers of gravity across the table.

Back to defeat in detail. A common approach to the game is to distribute your forces uniformly across the board to provide maximum coverage and the ability to reach objectives and meet the enemy in combat. I propose, instead, to reevaluate how you think about this. Let’s check our assumptions and see the value of arraying our forces in a more unconventional method.

First: is your army more elite or horde-oriented? If it is the former, it struggles to maintain a broader frontage because there are fewer, though more quality, resources at your disposal. Horde-oriented armies can maintain a larger frontage because they are a tool suited for a different purpose: overwhelming the enemy and excelling at scoring primary points. 

Second: are you screening in such a way that you are losing out on opportunities to score points and, therefore, winning the game? Armies that can deepstrike or perform movement shenanigans inflict a psychological effect on opposing generals. It is an easy trap to fall into. Before you cover up every single inch of every flank, consider what position your opponent would be in if they tried to exploit that gap. Would they be able to inflict so much damage that you’d become combat ineffective? Would they get into your screens and that is all? Would they pose the risk of losing a valuable resource if they take that chance? If you can screen in such a way that they may get into your chaff but nothing else, and you are posed to strike back and destroy their attacking unit, that is very often a worthwhile trade to take. So just in your deployment, you have performed a shaping operation and created a dilemma for your opponent, “do I take a swing and put my resources at risk, or bide my time?” This puts the initiative back into your hands to continue to analyze the battlefield and continue to execute or adjust your plan.

Third: Can I score the same amount of points deploying in an asymmetric fashion as I can if I deployed uniformly? This is a matter of understanding the scoring mechanics of the battleplan (one, two, more, etc) and the number of objectives there are for you and your opponent to fight over. If you know that you can likely score more battle tactics or achieve your grand strategy and deny your opponent’s, you may not have to get max points every turn.

When you are able to deploy asymmetrically, you are performing a technique called the “deny flank,” you are trading that space for time or another valuable resource, such as points or a position of relative advantage. Again, this guide is not a linear, processual approach to winning. Such a thing does not exist. We are trying to retrain ourselves to think with a broader perspective and understand how to analyze developing situations.

This technique isn’t limited to deployment, either. These are situations you can make into shaping operations with your movement. You can isolate, delay, or disrupt your opponent’s pieces to maneuver yours where they need to go. And finally, we get to the meat of today’s lesson. Create situations where you are performing feinting maneuvers or otherwise to overwhelm your enemy in piecemeal (make it look like your intent is to go straight at something, but charge in an unexpected direction, use your rapid movement to quickly flip the board, deploy in a deny flank fashion). 

Then it is simply a matter of you having more war dollies than they do in a local firefight as opposed to a 1:1 ratio. People that win in combat don’t take fair fights. The US Army doctrinally will not willfully engage with a foe unless they have a combat ratio of 3:1. It is your job to create those situations so you can overwhelm your opponent in combats that you know you can win. Thank you for following along with me. If you've enjoyed this article then we'd appreciate any feedback or shares you'd be inclined to make. Stay sparkly.