Jump to content
Chibot Mk IX

Operating your IFV/APC under the threat of Javelin

Recommended Posts

23 hours ago, IICptMillerII said:

Others have touched on it, but I'll repeat because I think its worth stating again. A good fires plan goes a long way to mitigating all sorts of anti-tank threats, be it javelins, AT-14s, or guys with RPGs. As an example, I know a lot of people expressed frustrations with the "Passage to Wilcox" scenario in the SF2 demo, but from the American side. There is a battery of AT-14s that can cause some real havoc if you aren't careful. However, the briefing warns you of this threat, and even tells you roughly where they are on the map. So, as part of my overall fires plan, I made sure to dedicate a section (2 tubes) of 120mm mortars to put the suspected AT-14 position under a constant rain of fire during my initial movement phase. I did that by setting the fire mission to a long mission, but a light rate of fire. That way only 4-6 or so shells were landing a minute, thus preserving the mortar ammunition, but this was still more than enough to suppress the AT-14s and even knocked at least one of them out. The rest I was able to destroy with direct fires from my tanks and Bradleys, which didn't take any fire from the AT-14s as the gunners were too busy hugging the dirt from the mortars. 

For Red Forces, be it Russian or Syrian, a detailed and accurate fires plan is extremely important. You can suppress, destroy, or at the very least deny enemy javelin teams from setting up in advantageous positions. That can buy you time to maneuver into an advantageous position for your own forces, where you can start to bring direct fires to bear on suspected and known anti-tank positions. Easier said than done of course, but it is certainly doable. 

I absolutely agree on this. Reading briefing and study map is a must. However , not every scenario gives you a lot of artillery support. And in a PBEM game, your human opponent may deployed to a different place.  Or put the ATGM in safe place , deploy them as soon as the barrage stops. Javelin team in a good human opponent's hand are nasty, because before you bring up enough direct area fire onto their exposed position, they may already be 20m away.  Before your artillery drops, they may have already jumped on a Humvee and go to the other side of the map

 

But I agree, if you have enough artillery assets in the beginning, plan the fires. ID the possible ATGM position ,  put yourself in the other side's shoes, think about where you would like to deploy ATGM at.  Suppress those area.  It is always good to have a plan. The best case scenario is the attack goes with the plan most of the time,  react to unexpected situation once a while.

It is easier said than done

Share this post


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

Scouting before you move is something you think doesn't occur in real life?

If you read the thread, we're talking about scouting with infantry, as opposed to sending vehicles first.  In the game, we tend to use scout vehicles  as light support.  On most maps, there is not distance enough to keep them alive.  So, it's always best to either dismount and send as inf scouts or send inf ahead to flush out ambushes by the inevitable AT assets before one sends tanks.

 In the game nearly all our battles are essentially short range knife fights

No they're not.

In modern warfare we have weapons that can kill at several Km range.  We rarely have that sort of LOS outside of CMSF which usually features the best long range features.  But it's rare to see long range (2Km-3Km+) LOS in scenarios from the European titles.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sburke said:

You mean the Russians right?  and escalating to tactical nukes for an anti armor threat you might as well not bother sending your tanks forward and just toss a few nukes as the war is gonna end shortly thereafter.

No, I mean Soviets , in a what if scenario that Soviet Union still there in 2000s.

Why not? Each soviet division has 4 SS-21  , why let the SS-21 crew drink vodka and enjoy the sunshine while the others are fighting a bloody war,  the division commander would love to assign some tasks to them  :)

 

 

 

 

Edited by Chibot Mk IX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read the thread @Erwin, and scouting is scouting. The bulk of it is dismount work unless the situation is utterly fluid. Having been a recce man myself back in Canada, I say this with some authority.

I have a humble request: stop spouting nonsense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we not saying the same thing?  Yes, in the game my experience has been that it has been suicide in modern era games for vehicles to be used in a scouting role.  Reading AAR's it seems that many players generally accept that the role of the vehicular scout is to locate enemies by getting blown up.  

My SOP in a CM game is different.  I cannot think of a single modern era game I have played where I have not led with inf to locate enemy assets with armor being kept in safe locations - perhaps keyholed to reduce the change that an ATGM can see or fire at them.  

in the WW2 era games, one can afford different tactics (which is the point of the thread) as some tanks are relatively impervious to enemy fire - or at least can withstand a hit or two without being badly hurt.  This all relates to the game btw.  Not commenting on RL tactics.  

Of course a typical game designer will ensure balance of forces.  So, if you have (say) a King Tiger, the enemy will almost always be provided with a counter.  So in the game, yes, I also try to lead with inf as I know there is a high probability that my Tiger will be facing something that can kill it.

Edited by Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just agreeing with you in a joking manner, no worries 👍😎

 

I personally find @Rinaldi's assertions to be the opposite of mine. I spent a few years in the Bundeswehr myself and I clearly had a vastly different experience when it comes to recon. We didn't put much faith in scouting vehicles.

Edited by sid_burn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sid_burn said:

We didn't put much faith in scouting vehicles.

So the Bundeswehr would concur with the way scouting vehicles survive (or rather don't survive if actually used for scouting) in CM2?    :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite...  :)

Note that in the game however, when intensively playtesting MOS' TOC scenario, we found the UAV's (even Elite with Elite JTAC controllers) did not do a good job of spotting infantry or even moving vehicles.  It took a few WEGO turns/minutes for an Elite UAV "team" to spot stationary vehicles in the open.  I can't recall ever spotting any enemy infantry - altho the inf would have been in woods.

(BTW: My comments are based on my experience re what works/doesn't work in the game - not trying to make any points about RL.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*sigh*

Another thread, derailed by the same old clowns, spouting the same wrong opinions, beating the same dead horses. These forums can certainly be quite the test of patience sometimes. 

@Chibot Mk IX The good news is I think that there are some good nuggets of information here. Unfortunately you'll have to sift through all the refuse, but its better than nothing. My main takeaway would be to treat the javelin like any other effective anti-tank weapon. Maneuver in a way that does not expose yourself to fire, use direct and indirect fires, and make sure units that are moving are being covered/supported by other units.

Quick note on the word "tactics." Tactics are a set of rules that can be applied to any situation. For example, a tactic is 'find the enemy, fix him with fire, flank/close with the enemy, then kill him.' The nuance of accomplishing the find, fix, destroy is exactly that, nuance. Its very easy to get lost in the sauce (as this thread is a great example of) over small things like this. Remember that the entire point of tactics is that they are supposed to be extremely simple and applicable to all manner of situations. Don't let weapon systems or savants distract you from the basics. Don't want to get shot? Then don't be seen. And so on and so forth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Erwin said:

Quite...  :)

Note that in the game however, when intensively playtesting MOS' TOC scenario, we found the UAV's (even Elite with Elite JTAC controllers) did not do a good job of spotting infantry or even moving vehicles.  It took a few WEGO turns/minutes for an Elite UAV "team" to spot stationary vehicles in the open.  I can't recall ever spotting any enemy infantry - altho the inf would have been in woods.

Well yea spotting with UAVs is wonky and takes time, but why you always got to be in a hurry? 😋

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, IICptMillerII said:

*sigh*

Another thread, derailed by the same old clowns, spouting the same wrong opinions, beating the same dead horses. These forums can certainly be quite the test of patience sometimes. 

@Chibot Mk IX The good news is I think that there are some good nuggets of information here. Unfortunately you'll have to sift through all the refuse, but its better than nothing. My main takeaway would be to treat the javelin like any other effective anti-tank weapon. Maneuver in a way that does not expose yourself to fire, use direct and indirect fires, and make sure units that are moving are being covered/supported by other units.

Quick note on the word "tactics." Tactics are a set of rules that can be applied to any situation. For example, a tactic is 'find the enemy, fix him with fire, flank/close with the enemy, then kill him.' The nuance of accomplishing the find, fix, destroy is exactly that, nuance. Its very easy to get lost in the sauce (as this thread is a great example of) over small things like this. Remember that the entire point of tactics is that they are supposed to be extremely simple and applicable to all manner of situations. Don't let weapon systems or savants distract you from the basics. Don't want to get shot? Then don't be seen. And so on and so forth. 

Have a like - I couldn't have put it better myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BTR said:

Well yea spotting with UAVs is wonky and takes time, but why you always got to be in a hurry? 😋

Trust me, we tested extensively over many turns.  The drones never spotted any inf or moving vehicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2019 at 4:52 AM, BTR said:

I found out that javelins miss when you move your vehicles around at high speeds. So that would be my guide to operating them - don't park them around one spot and have deliberate and fast transitions between covers. 

Fine if you have tracks, although even  then muddy ground can strike. With BTRs +muddy you're taking a 30% chance of bogging at Quick or Fast speed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On January 20, 2019 at 5:15 PM, Erwin said:

Trust me, we tested extensively over many turns.  The drones never spotted any inf or moving vehicles.

How were you using the drones, point, area, or linear? Using point means that you basically have a good idea that something is there, and you're just verifying it, and has the best chance of spotting it. Linear will give you almost as good a chance of spotting along the path, but only out to about 50m to either side. Area is the least accurate method because your chances of spotting something are directly related to the size of the area you are scanning. I've used drones a lot as blue ( I don't remember using them as Red though ), in both AI battles, and PBEM. I've been able to detect vehicles and personnel in all of the modes. If you're not detecting anything or anyone, you're looking in the wrong place of with too large a area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy moly! I just noticed my horrible typing. That last line should be "the modes. If ... Wrong place OR with too late AN area."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/19/2019 at 5:18 AM, BTR said:

Your scouting vehicles should be your UAVs, this is a 21st century battlefield dammit 😄

This is 100% the single critical game difference from CMBS to all the other titles.

@Erwin I'm surprised. It sounds more like an issue of how you're using them, because every single time I deploy UAVs, in any game, I spot vehicles within 3 turns (US) or 10 turns (RUS).

It's a terrible flaw on the UKR side that they don't have UAVs. I really hope they're added in the CMBS expansion..BFC et al accounted for a lot with regard to UKR forces, but obviously not for their practical can-do innovation & resilience.

I usually give them 1 x US UAV team per Co, using the crappier drones. It makes a hell of a difference. 

Edited by kinophile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I have no idea why people are having trouble with drones. I have a game going on right now with a Raven that has several infantry units fully IDed and it certainly can and has been following moving vehicles. Well at least as long as they are still operational :)

I use the widest area observation. Sorry I am not trying to look through the windows of some building, I am interested in finding out where the bad guys are ahead of my troops. That's the best way to do this. If the drone gets a ? I'm happy and I try to find and KO whatever it is from the ground. If the drone finds and IDs something then I try to kill it with air or artillery. If i have time and rounds available then I go after ? from the drones as well.

Adjust observation mission.

Rinse the blood off and repeat :D

Works a treat for the Russians too BTW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In one of the PBEMs I played last year, I had Blue with two Ravens and a Grey Eagle (one Raven to Start and one Raven and Grey Eagle as reinforcements). My opponent had six Tunguskas. One of my Ravens was brought down by a Tunguska that my opponent had moved in close to my lines (I learned a valuable lesson from that one). I spotted that Tunguska and another with my fwd scouts, brought up Strykers with 40mm AGLs, and took them out. Then I used my Grey Eagle, which is invulnerable to AAA and SAMs to find the rest of the Tunguskas. My opponent had brought all his Tunguskas up close to the line to support his infantry, so I had to teach him a harsh lesson by taking out all of them by precision and point fire based on spotting with my Grey Eagle.

Bottom line is to know the limitations of your assets, and use them based on that. A Tunguska can take down a Raven with it's guns, but a Grey Eagle Is invulnerable in Observe mode because it flys so high. If you use a Grey Eagle in Strike mode, it flies low, and is no longer invulnerable. And ALWAYS keep your Tunguska away from the ground fight. If you're given a Tunguska, it's because your opponent has Air Support of some kind. The Tunguska is too valuable an asset to use foolishly!

Edited by Vet 0369

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, kinophile said:

Fine if you have tracks, although even  then muddy ground can strike. With BTRs +muddy you're taking a 30% chance of bogging at Quick or Fast speed. 

Sure, it's a limitation to keep in mind. 

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

×