Jump to content
Bil Hardenberger

CMSF 2 BETA AAR #2 – Syrian Probe (Quick Battle)

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Even though the other BETA AAR is still going on, I expect it will end very soon.  I had already promised to take IanL on in a second game to fill the time, so here 'tis.  I hope it fills the time left until release.

BACKGROUND

A NATO attack is in progress and they are making massive gains.  In an attempt to slow them down high command has decided that a spoiling attack is required.  We are the tip of that spear.  Our task is to Probe into the assigned sector on the flank of the NATO attack and determine the strength of the Canadian flank security force in front of us and if possible, destroy it or force it to withdraw.  Our force will not be reinforced unless successful, so if we fail, another unit will become the spearhead for the main attack.

Hopefully that will suffice to set the stage for what we are doing in this action.  Ian and I are playing a Quick Battle (QB) Medium Probe, with me as the Syrians on the attack, force selection for both sides was Mixed (Infantry, Mech Infantry, and Armor are all okay to purchase) with no restrictions set for either side. 

I do not expect an easy time of it, as the Canadians are tough and Ian is no slouch tactically.  He even uses some of the same movement techniques I use so I expect this to be a hard struggle

ORDER OF BATTLE

My purchases:

Budget.png

Purchase.png

Order+of+Battle.png

MAIN BODY

This element will be my main combat element in this action.  They will be tasked with capturing early objectives, ascertaining enemy strength and capabilities, and recovering the enemy Order of Battle.  

A Company Mechanized Infantry on BMP-2s 

  • Company HQ Element
    • Tanks are intended for anti-infantry support
    • ZSU-23-4 is mainly for AA support, but also is intended to be used in an anti-infantry role

A+Company+HQ+Element.png

  • 1st Platoon
    • Will have one AT-13 team attached

A+Company+1ST+PLT.png

  • 2nd Platoon
    • Will have one AT-13 team attached

A+Company+2nd+PLT.png

COMBAT SUPPORT 

  • 120mm Mortar Battery with FO
    • Also purchased four TRPs

Support+-+Mortar+%2526+FO.png

  •  AT 13 Platoon
    • One of the two sections will be assigned to the Main Body, one AT team per platoon
    • Note:  truck was purchased specially to carry the remaining section and the HQ element

Support+-+AT13+PLT.png

  • AT 14 Platoon
    • One of the two sections will be assigned to the Reserve, both AT teams in the Mech Infantry platoon
    • Note:  truck was purchased specially to carry the remaining section and the HQ element

Support+-+AT14+PLT.png

RESERVE - This force will be husbanded until needed, or until I can identify the main enemy positions

  • Airborne Mechanized Infantry Platoon on BMP-3s
    • Will have one complete AT-14 section attached

Reserve+-+Mech+Inf+PLT.png

  • Tank Platoon on T-72M1 TURMS-T
    • Technology Note:  These tanks feature the TURMS-T computerised fire control system by Galileo Avionica.  It will be interesting to see how that helps in action.

Reserve+-+Tank+PLT.png

Edited by Bil Hardenberger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Oh,this will be good! I look foward to see your aar and, as i canadian, see ianL destroy your forces! 

 

Seriously your aar are always a thing to look foward too and i hope that both side fight well so that we witness some glorious CCSF moments!

Edited by Panzerpanic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bah. You left a point on the table! That will come back and haunt you, mark my words. ;)

Looks a well-balanced force. Popcorn’s a poppin’.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, c3k said:

Bah. You left a point on the table! That will come back and haunt you, mark my words. ;)

Looks a well-balanced force. Popcorn’s a poppin’.

Thanks Ken, I was going for balance in this one, plus I wanted to compare the different equipment options.. thought it might be interesting.  I am already kicking myself for leaving that one point behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'm pretty hyped for this one. The Syrian models look great. I don't know who would drive in a canvas covered UAZ in the hot desert, though. Let's Go... Syria!

So, how does Rarity work in this one? Did you specifically purchase ubiquitous units or is it disabled/not implemented?

Are T-72M1 with TURMS-T common? I only remember seeing a platoon of T-72BAs with it. (mark the T-72 variants bingo space)

Edited by DerKommissar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DerKommissar said:

So, how does Rarity work in this one? Did you specifically purchase ubiquitous units or is it disabled/not implemented?

Not implemented yet.. either that or just not working in the current build.

Quote

Are T-72M1 with TURMS-T common? I only remember seeing a platoon of T-72BAs with it. (mark the T-72 variants bingo space)

I am far from an expert on this kit and what the percentages are within the Syrian Army.. I would bet nobody will know for sure.. probably even those serving in said Army.  ;)   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DerKommissar said:

I'm pretty hyped for this one. The Syrian models look great. I don't know who would drive in a canvas covered UAZ in the hot desert, though. Let's Go... Syria!

I work in a preety much desert environmet and all our utility vehicles are covered. ofcourse we open up the tarp when it gets extremely hot, bad thing is you eat dirt like a mofo.

when we are allowed to do what we want (or are in a place where they dont see us...) we ussually role like this: 

d5f5573d-c1bc-466e-b25d-be40b1ec3e43.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Bil Hardenberger said:

Not implemented yet.. either that or just not working in the current build.

I am far from an expert on this kit and what the percentages are within the Syrian Army.. I would bet nobody will know for sure.. probably even those serving in said Army.  ;)   

Not an expert myself. Apparently, those weren't T-72BAs, but T-72M1Vs!

Ian better take advantage of the Rarity, and roll out some MEXAS or even 2a6Ms.

6 minutes ago, boche said:

I work in a preety much desert environmet and all our utility vehicles are covered. ofcourse we open up the tarp when it gets extremely hot, bad thing is you eat dirt like a mofo.

when we are allowed to do what we want (or are in a place where they dont see us...) we ussually role like this: 

That's right. I forgot about that giant ball of plasma at the center of the solar system. I can imagine shade is very much desired in desert conditions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Looking forward to this as well. All the new models look great, both the infantry models and the T-72 tank models. It'll also be nice seeing TRPs put to use in SF2. 

Speaking of those TRP's, why did you choose to only take mortars? Was it a tactical or budgetary consideration?

A note on the TURMS, in my experience it only marginally improves spotting ability, and still puts you far behind the typical NATO spotting cycle. Still, they are better than nothing. 

Edited by IICptMillerII

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:

Speaking of those TRP's, why did you choose to only take mortars? Was it a tactical or budgetary consideration?

Had to weigh value versus cost...  I expect the armor to be the main actors in this action (as they usually are in the modern games) and I prioritized my anti-armor assets (AT13 and AT14 platoons) over anti-infantry (artillery).  Though I think I have enough assets to handle his infantry and their LAVs.. it's his armor that concerns me.  If he brings Leopard C2s then we should be on par (give or take, mostly give really), but if he brings Leopard 2s.. well, in that case my armor will stay behind cover and wait for the ATGMs to do their job.. then they'll come out to play.

Quote

A note on the TURMS, in my experience it only marginally improves spotting ability, and still puts you far behind the typical NATO spotting cycle. Still, they are better than nothing. 

Thanks, good to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Yes, as others noted it is very useful to understand WHY you choose the units you do, what their purpose is etc.  Also, during the AAR, it's invaluable to have explained the thinking/intentions behind the tactics used.   While so far, CMBS is by far the most lethal of all the CM2 titles, this is probably the best form of tutorial for modern-ish CM2 games.

Edited by Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bil

the BMP 2s seem surprisingly expensive. I haven’t had much success with them in CMBS. What was your thought process when selecting? Also, do Canadians have Javelin in the game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, AlexUK said:

Hi Bil

the BMP 2s seem surprisingly expensive. I haven’t had much success with them in CMBS. What was your thought process when selecting? Also, do Canadians have Javelin in the game?

You are right, they are way too expensive for what you get.. BMP-2s are not very impressive... in the CMBS BETA AAR my BMP-3s took out all of Scott's BMP-2s and I don't think they even made one kill in return.  The recon BMP-2s I have in the other AAR have never spotted anything.. even the enemy technicals drove right through their area of observation without ever being spotted.  So I am not very impressed with them... really with Syrian equipment in general.  

The only Syrian unit that has BMP-3s (about the same cost as BMP-2s actually) is the Airborne Mech Infantry Company... and I chose that in the other AAR, didn't want to repeat myself.  I knew I wanted an infantry Company base and I never considered the point cost for the vehicles, I was thinking formation cost only.  

I also wanted to compare and contrast the capabilities of different Syrian vehicles, so I actually wanted at least two different IFVs, tanks, and ATGMs..

I do not think Canadians have Javelins.. but I am not sure.  I have yet to do an analysis of their available equipment.

Still working my initial setup and orders.  That always takes me a day or two.. so try not to get too bored in the meantime.  ;) 

Bil

Edited by Bil Hardenberger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's get ready to rumble!

Really though, as far as the game is concerned what is the difference between a "probe" and "attack" since both are "attack/defend" battles? I always prefer the dynamics of "meeting engagement" for multiplayer since both players must find themselves in one role or another or both of attack and defend.

Look forward to following

the show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BMP2 for recon...would be to use their dismounts, not try to spot from the vehicle.

An option to keep the turret properly manned would be to split the squads and then cross load them back on the BMPs. This way they won’t automatically recombine. Then you just unload the rump team and leave the hq team on board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, c3k said:

BMP2 for recon...would be to use their dismounts, not try to spot from the vehicle.

An option to keep the turret properly manned would be to split the squads and then cross load them back on the BMPs. This way they won’t automatically recombine. Then you just unload the rump team and leave the hq team on board.

That is basically my plan with them Ken.  By the way, in my setup I already did as you describe, I split off a two man scout team from each squad and cross loaded them on to BMPs separate from their inherent squad.   It scares me that our brains are aligned in this fashion... 😨

I learned the lesson about moving BMPs in to hull down positions in my game against Baneman... I try not to make the same mistake more than a couple times.  ;) 

Edited by Bil Hardenberger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, boche said:

AFAIK Canadians in SF1 didnt have javelins, they had the eryx? and their wierd own atgm with lots of letters 

The only Javelin Canadians used was the MANPAD, which has long been deprecated. ERYX left service in 2016, so it should still be around. I don't know if it's in SF, though.

ERYX isn't even comparable to the Javelin. It's designed for very short range (half a kilometer, roughly). Still, it's relatively light, mobile and can tackle an MBT. Kind of like a, more potent, wire-guided, Carl Gustaf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, DerKommissar said:

The only Javelin Canadians used was the MANPAD, which has long been deprecated. ERYX left service in 2016, so it should still be around. I don't know if it's in SF, though.

ERYX isn't even comparable to the Javelin. It's designed for very short range (half a kilometer, roughly). Still, it's relatively light, mobile and can tackle an MBT. Kind of like a, more potent, wire-guided, Carl Gustaf.

Thank you.  I really appreciate the technical details like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought we couldn't split Syrian infantry (outside of Special Forces) into squads?

 

Mord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×