#3 backs you up against the swamp and does not screen the 3rd division. #2 is a frontal attack against superior forces. #1 gives some terrain advantage and also puts you between enemy and 3rd division (our mandate is to screen their retreat)--that's why it is optimal.
I would utilize the advantage of the high ground and leave a detachment in the rough terrain SE of the hills to slow the enemy approach and keep contact to know the enemy’s direction of movement After watching: looks like I came to the right solution, Moltke added more in his explanation though
Okay paused: from the terrain #1 looks very promising. The problem is the size of the enemy. That reason makes #2 very bad in my opinion. #3 sounds good on paper but the enemy can just bypass me without entering into difficult terrain. Therefore I go with #1
#3 backs you up against the swamp and does not screen the 3rd division. #2 is a frontal attack against superior forces. #1 gives some terrain advantage and also puts you between enemy and 3rd division (our mandate is to screen their retreat)--that's why it is optimal.
I would utilize the advantage of the high ground and leave a detachment in the rough terrain SE of the hills to slow the enemy approach and keep contact to know the enemy’s direction of movement
After watching: looks like I came to the right solution, Moltke added more in his explanation though
Good! Pattern recognition at work. Well done.
Okay paused: from the terrain #1 looks very promising. The problem is the size of the enemy. That reason makes #2 very bad in my opinion.
#3 sounds good on paper but the enemy can just bypass me without entering into difficult terrain.
Therefore I go with #1
@@langbart8218 Good analysis! Well done. Thanks for commenting.