Bil Hardenberger

Quick is very tiring for support weapon teams... for infantry not so much as you have said. But for support teams, move is the better alternative if you have long distances to travel (having transport for those units can be essential on large maps). Best method for moving is to mix it up... short quick rushes mixed with hunt and with a lot of listening halts.. but hunt is especially important if you are cresting a rise or entering terrain that you suspect might harbor enemy units. In the below image I moved faster through terrain I felt was reasonably safe and increased the unit's security at the end (switched to hunt) when moving out of their sheltering terrain towards possible danger (Note the two overwatching teams following behind).

It seems to be available here: https://www.biggerbooks.com/kravchenko-case-kern-gary/bk/9781929631735&referrer=bbcj for $27.16 ...and here: https://www.ecampus.com/kravchenko-case-kern-gary/bk/9781929631735 for $27.72 I haven't vetted either of those places. Good luck, Bil

Thanks for that link @Vanir Ausf B I had forgotten about those. Bil

That's my methodology as well (seen in the CMSF2 BETA AAR v Baneman). You are one smart cookie Sly, even if you can't spell "immediately".

@Bud Backer, next time challenge yourself and take only armored cars. Well done, Bil

I'd love to have those so I can examine them closer. Please PM me so we can work out how we can make that happen. Happy my little blog has been of interest to you, Bil

@domfluff hit the nail on the head. Looks to me like your opponent based his defense on the terrain rather than his opposition. While the terrain is indeed very important, the enemy force should be the main objective, always.. take the enemy out and the objectives will come too, like @Bud Backer just proved. Terrain should primarily be used to focus reconnaissance, maneuver, and firepower... it can be a combat multiplier if used correctly, and it can help box you in and kill you when it isn't... like your opponent learned. Defending the village like Domfluff so wisely said trapped him into a static fight he could never win with the assets you fielded. All that being said, sometimes there is no counter to an enemy asset... all depends on what you have been given to work with and what you do with those tools, for example a Stuart is rarely going to be successful against a Tiger, KT, JT, etc... especially if commanded by a competent player (like Bud)... I've had a few games like that too, nothing to be ashamed about. Fun thread Bud.

Using any off map artillery or air assets can be tough.. its all about timing and synchronization. The Battle Command section of my blog gets into battle planning, decision points, estimation of the situation etc. not exactly what you are asking for, but those posts are all at a higher level than most of the others. Bil

At the moment my time is being sucked into other projects. Hopefully in the not too far distant future I'll find a hole to add some additional content. Bil

You can be on the defense, be outgunned by an attacker by the ratios you mention and still gain a local fire superiority over a portion of the attacker's force. The overall combat power comparisons do not matter when it comes to the use of cover and maneuver. It is all situational, what is the size of the map? How much combat power can you keep in reserve? Are spoiling attacks against a part of the attacking force possible? Can you cover every route into the objective(s)? Etc. Tactics cannot be boiled down to one or two bullets, ie. Cover bad, Firepower good. Maybe I'm just being obtuse, but I fail to understand your point.. is it that because the one covered route might be covered by fire that you are suggesting an attacker should take the open route instead? Me? I would recon the covered route, clear it, and use it to close with the enemy force if possible using long range fire to suppress possible defenders on the other end of that route.. but there is not always a good solution to every situation... sometimes there is no good way to advance, due to map design or map size, available combat power, etc. In those cases I would call a cease fire, discuss the issues and then move on to something that won't be an exercise in frustration. But that's me... you guys play in whatever way makes you happy.. if having overwhelming combat power in every scenario is your cup of tea so that its easy, go for it. Just try not to disregard real world tactics in this game, the fact that they work so well in CM is what makes this the best battle simulator on the market in my opinion. And play against a human opponent.. failing to use covered approaches will get your men killed very quickly against a human opponent even if he/she's a beginner... the AI is much more forgiving. Bil

Fire superiority is indeed important.. its the crucial element in micro-tactics success actually... however not taking advantage of cover is asking for trouble and will make closing with the enemy a little tough. You often don't have fire superiority in most cases and will need to create micro-situations where you can create them in order to attrit the enemy's combat power. Maneuver and Firepower - can't bring your firepower to bear if you can't maneuver... can't maneuver if you are outclassed by fire. Using cover to get where you need to in order to ensure local fire superiority is paramount and is the basis of all small arms tactics from the Russo-Japanese War to the present. Ignore the lessons learned, like the major powers did in the opening stages of the First World War, and it will cost you dearly. Being smart about maneuver and protecting your units with cover so you can gain local fire superiority is not only good-tactics, it is common sense. All in my opinion of course... nothing personal, take it for what its worth. Bil

I talk about moving through Open Terrain in this blog post: Platoon Scouts As the gents above have said, recon is the key.. that and Masked Terrain Movement ... even most open terrain has dips and rises that yo can take advantage of. Good luck.

I'm with @Hapless on this one... take or at least threaten the other objectives and terrain features before doing anything with the village... that alone will probably force him to move combat power from the village in order to support the other objectives. Just my 2 cents, but your mileage may vary. Bil

...could be why I specified conventional... you think?

A co-op game using those rules? Sounds fun, count me in as long as the forces are conventional.

All I know is I will NOT be playing any scenarios on that city map. <shudder> Bil

That's very interesting Mark.. I know I have never mapped out the rates of movement as you have done... but I'm not the anal SOB that you are. Bil

All great comments and advice above. I would only add that if you are playing a quick battle, purchase on-map mortars instead of off-map artillery... much more accurate, timely, and flexible. Down side is that they can be neutralized by enemy action, and you need to maintain a radio link if using them indirectly. I am always willing to risk those though, plus you could also purchase trucks to provide resupply rounds to some mortars. Bil

Split ‘Em Mark. I have a blog post on that subject too: Splitting Squads

It's no different than making an annotation on a SITMAP Mark, so definitely not gamey. Bil

You can be very creative when it comes to planning movement.. but I have a few rules of thumb, maybe they will be useful... the following is from my Platoon Scouts post on my blog. Hope this is helpful... more detail in that blog and in other posts on moving... I am a huge proponent of using Listening Halts, I have always had good luck with them.

Starting to look, from what I have seen so far, that Ian has not done good enough dismounted recon for this fight. Well done so far Bud. Bil

Its starting to get ugly out there... looking forward to your next steps. Very interesting fight so far Ian... I like your flexibility and willingness to change course. Your screen-shots are gorgeous too.. so that's a bonus! Bil

Shame about that lead tank Ian... but you look to have some spares.

Doing an excellent job Bud! Your writing is getting better with each CAAR. Give Ian hell. Bil