Jump to content

CM Final Blitzkrieg - ALLIED (Defense) BETA Battle Report


Recommended Posts

OCOKA TERRAIN ANALYSIS - PART 3

AVENUES of APPROACH - the main enemy avenues of approach (AA) as I foresee them follows.  

I expect a tentative approach march followed by a rapid movement down one,a couple, several, or all of the following avenues.  Personally I expect him to spread his attack across the entire front in order to stretch my defenses and make a penetration easier to achieve. 

AA1 will allow him to bypass a large part of my defenses by skirting the edge of the L shaped wood and driving for the two left most objective 1 locations.

AA2 and AA3 could see him attacking through the center with the ability to move either left or right depending on the situation.  I expect that Cobru is a major objective for him and he will want to envelop the town before clearing it, and really he does not need to clear it at all so I expect a movement down AA3 so he can bypass the main part of the town.  AA2 in combination with AA1 would give him the left side objectives, probably rather easily and allow him to position long range fire assets on KT1 and KT2.

AA4 is the least likely route as he will not want to slog through the town, but he could bypass it to the right (from my perspective) and like AA3 envelop the town avoiding the built up area.

Avenues0fApproach.PNG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 524
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

Talking from memory, there were at least two towed tank destroyer battalions attached to VIII US Corps at the start of the offensive, one of them committed to Rocherath-Krinkelt. 

Just checked the OOB in Robert Caddick-Addam's "Snow & Steel: Battle of the Bulge 1944-45", and in effect, of the three TD battalions attached to Middleton's Corps, the 630th and 802nd were equipped with towed ATGs, and the 803rd is listed as equipped with M-10s.

Edited by BletchleyGeek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OCOKA TERRAIN ANALYSIS - PART 3

AVENUES of APPROACH - the main enemy avenues of approach (AA) as I foresee them follows.  

I expect a tentative approach march followed by a rapid movement down one,a couple, several, or all of the following avenues.  Personally I expect him to spread his attack across the entire front in order to stretch my defenses and make a penetration easier to achieve. 

AA1 will allow him to bypass a large part of my defenses by skirting the edge of the L shaped wood and driving for the two left most objective 1 locations.

AA2 and AA3 could see him attacking through the center with the ability to move either left or right depending on the situation.  I expect that Cobru is a major objective for him and he will want to envelop the town before clearing it, and really he does not need to clear it at all so I expect a movement down AA3 so he can bypass the main part of the town.  AA2 in combination with AA1 would give him the left side objectives, probably rather easily and allow him to position long range fire assets on KT1 and KT2.

AA4 is the least likely route as he will not want to slog through the town, but he could bypass it to the right (from my perspective) and like AA3 envelop the town avoiding the built up area.

The AA4 variant may be the slowest but it is also the most covered one, ideal to infiltrate and fall on your outposts from close range (and his infantry may be found lacking in a lot of departments, but sure doesn't lack short-range firepower). But I can't really argue against a big push on KT1/KT2 being the most logical immediate objective for Baneman, and indeed AA1 looks like the "optimal" route for that.

Edited by BletchleyGeek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Talking from memory, there were at least two towed tank destroyer battalions attached to VIII US Corps at the start of the offensive, one of them committed to Rocherath-Krinkelt. 

 They were never very popular, the US take on turreted TDs looks quite good on paper and in Cm scenarios, though. 

VIII Corps was not at Rocherath-Krinkelt, that was V Corps

US VIII Corp did have some towed AT units though:

630 TD Battalion - A co towed, B and C co M36

802 TD Battalion - towed

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good idea, but they are very expensive and I'd rather purchase another tank or infantry platoon for that amount...  

Yes, but if the mines take out at least one tank or keep your opponent afraid of using the roads it would be worth it.

Anyway, I see you are playing in light snow, so the bog affect might not be enough to make it worth the effort at all.

 

Also I know  a lot of players don't like mines, its almost a insult to use them against others. Like its not playing fair.

so I understand, just pointing out a good way to bring instant pain to a German Heavy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but if the mines take out at least one tank or keep your opponent afraid of using the roads it would be worth it.

Anyway, I see you are playing in light snow, so the bog affect might not be enough to make it worth the effort at all.

 

Also I know  a lot of players don't like mines, its almost a insult to use them against others. Like its not playing fair.

so I understand, just pointing out a good way to bring instant pain to a German Heavy.

I don't think they are an insult at all.. fair game for sure.  I just don't like the cost.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UNIT FORCE PURCHASE OPTIONS

For this fight I plan on being very active, which means I need an all mobile force.  I cannot have leg infantry that could get pinned and bypassed, I need an infantry component that is light, mobile, fast, that can take on the expected German heavy tanks on relatively even (or close to even) terms, by firepower, superior mobility and superior numbers.  I HOPE Baneman did not go with an all tank force.. I expect he purchased at least two PzG companies and a battery or two of artillery.  If so that will keep the number of enemy tanks to about 8-10 (hopefully). 

My core unit in this battle is the Recon Platoon.  I want to be clear that I do not intend to stand toe to toe with Baneman's infantry.  I intend this force to have an information gathering task only.  However I do not want this formation to be totally toothless so I intend to back it up with some Hellcat Tank Destroyers.  They will be backed up by a strong and capable armored formation that will provide long range overwatch and be my quick action force. 

I have two force pick options.  Option A has 10 Hellcats and a total of 14 tanks (2 Shermans and 2 M36s).  

Option B is the way I am leaning and it has 12 tanks, 4 Hellcats supporting the Recon Platoon and 8 additional tanks, 4 Shermans and 4 M36s.  I have a feeling I will need the additional Sherman and M36 support this option provides.

Please examine my suggested picks and let me know what you think!!  

By the way I had wanted to bring a battery of VT fuze artillery but they are VERY expensive so opted to go with more tanks instead (the cheapest VT fuze arty battery costs as much as two Jumbos).

Option A:

Unit%2BPurchase-Option%2BA.PNG

Option B:

Unit%2BPurchase-Option%2BB.PNG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bud, yes very light teams with no AT capability (thus the Hellcats in support).. they are meant to look-listen and run away when threatened.  If I end up getting into firefights with these recon teams I will lose them quickly.  I am placing a lot of emphasis on recon in this battle obviously.. with the size of the map and the open terrain I need to know where he is and in what strength.  

I will get into some detail of what I plan on doing with this force hopefully later today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I WILL BE THE OUTCAST

I like option "A"

I prefer the fact you have more armor, the two extra guns is worth more than what the guns are in my book.

Plus with how you talking about mobility being a key. They help with that, having more numbers always help in a mobile battle plus they are hellcats , so faster than the other tanks you are thinking of selecting.

 

They are open top, but since I do not see you sitting still or going toe to toe much. It will be hard pressed for the Germans to ever get any arty on them. So should not be a factor in this battle really.

So I will be a vote for Option A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Sly.. FWIW I have yet to make a determination.. I see advantages to both force compositions.  Option A I can even squeak out at least one more Hellcat if I get rid of the TD Platoon HQ and M20s.. those things will be worthless in this battle. I agree the more guns the better, however... Option B provides more capable firepower with the two extra M36s, and the Shermans are more survivable than any of the TDs, especially the Jumbos... I could push to 4 Jumbos (instead of two Jumbos and two Easy 8s) but I would have to sacrifice something else to do that and I am already pretty thin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Option B sounds good and I like the mobile defense idea generally. Also a good pick to showcase some the new US units in CMFB, though I´d wished to also see the VT fuzed artillery in action. Surely some nasty stuff, when put on the right enemy units and when surprise can be achieved (TRP). But if it´s too costly.... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The AA4 variant may be the slowest but it is also the most covered one, ideal to infiltrate and fall on your outposts from close range (and his infantry may be found lacking in a lot of departments, but sure doesn't lack short-range firepower).

I agree. If I was the attacker I would have come down Approach #4.

Yes, but if the mines take out at least one tank or keep your opponent afraid of using the roads it would be worth it.

From what I can see of the map terrain, using mines would only be worth it if you could cover a road on each approach route. Otherwise you're wasting points on what is essentially a gamble.

Please examine my suggested picks and let me know what you think!!

Those are two good options Bil, but given the fact you want to focus on mobility option A makes the most sense.

Keeping your Hellcats in their own integrated platoons would allow a more flexible deployment, and would enable you to keep multiple smaller groups with their own C2 links. However, the danger is if you run into some super heavy armor, you might suffer for lack of an extra pair of 90mm guns, and the extra heavy armor of the Jumbo Shermans.

So if you want my personal opinion, go with option B, because Jumbo Shermans are my favorite, and 90mm guns are awesome!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Option B sounds good and I like the mobile defense idea generally. Also a good pick to showcase some the new US units in CMFB, though I´d wished to also see the VT fuzed artillery in action. Surely some nasty stuff, when put on the right enemy units and when surprise can be achieved (TRP). But if it´s too costly.... 

I can bring some VT artillery along.. but to be effective in a moving battle which I expect this to be I would also need TRPs... the cheapest artillery is a Howitzer section (missed that one before) at around 250 points, add another 150 for TRPs and I think you can see that would require some major sacrifices from somewhere else.  I'm sure Chris will be showcasing VT fuzed arty in one of his broadcasts so hopefully you'll still be able to see it in action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this shows my inexperience but I'd be concerned that if the Germans have a reasonable complement of infantry, I would not have something to deal with them. 

Good point Bud, to be honest I'm not concerned with this... if Baneman brings a lot of infantry they will have to be mounted, either on tanks or in halftracks (I doubt he'd mount them on trucks in this terrain), in that case stripping them from the tanks or killing their tracks would be a priority, and this is a long map which would not be an easy thing for him to walk his infantry down the length of.  To be honest I hope he bought A LOT of infantry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point Bud, to be honest I'm not concerned with this... if Baneman brings a lot of infantry they will have to be mounted, either on tanks or in halftracks (I doubt he'd mount them on trucks in this terrain), in that case stripping them from the tanks or killing their tracks would be a priority, and this is a long map which would not be an easy thing for him to walk his infantry down the length of.  To be honest I hope he bought A LOT of infantry.

Between snow, a long map with deep objectives, and fatigue issues for anyone walking, I suppose you're right. This is why I love your AARs; they're like staff college! ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...