Bil Hardenberger

Unfortunately I have the sun against my back in this scenario, which doesn't help the image quality. Still, yes, the infantry look amazing in the game. It is about time you came over to the dark side.

MINUTE 1 ..and we are finally under way. No action this turn, so sorry @c3k, no gifs showing stuff blowing up yet. In order to ascertain whether there are any of Ian's units in the far left of Snake Ridge, I send 2nd Platoon to reconnoiter this area... They were still on their way at turn end, and the following image illustrates their routes.. the small arrows indicate dismounted infantry taking a peek over the lip of each ridge line. Only two BMPs are in this area now as the third was held back to overwatch the movement. The last BMP will join them next turn. On Star Hill I am deploying two AT-13 teams and the AT-13 Platoon HQ. One team will crawl over the nearest crest in order to look down on the initial objective (North East Farm), one will be kept in reserve. The HQ team will crawl over the opposite crest in order to get eyes on the other side of the valley. The truck will return to the SP. 1st Platoon is moving dismounted toward the nearest crest overlooking the North East Farm Objective. They are being overwatched by the rest of A Company. ENEMY I finally did an analysis of what Ian could bring to the fight... he can potentially field a platoon of tanks, plus a few extra tanks if he sacrificed infantry. If he went full Mechanized, then I can expect about a Company of infantry, give or take, depending on the number of tanks he bought, the type of tanks, and whether he bought any support units. I think with this terrain I would have gone armor heavy , so worse case I will expect to see a Tank Heavy Company Team in front of me with up to 6 or 7 tanks. I expect Leopard C2s as the Leopard 2A6Ms are very expensive, about 200 points more than the C2s, however they are much more capable, so its a trade off. If he decided not to go with LAVs or the Nyala APC then he could buy a lot more infantry and support assets, ATGM and artillery, maybe even some air... but then he would have no flexibility, so I expect to see most of his infantry with either LAVs or the Nyala... but that will impact the amount of support units and numbers of infantry he can bring to the party. I actually expect our forces to be close in size... though his will be far superior in capability. However it shakes out its going to be interesting.

Still waiting for Baneman to forward the next turn.. so, though this one is still alive, I suspect it is on life support.

SETUP & INITIAL ANALYSIS This view from my side of the map shows the two main terrain features on the map, what I am calling Snake Ridge and Star Hill. Note how close the initial objectives are to my start position. That makes me very nervous. In the background of the above image, you can see the four positions where I dropped my TRPs. These are what I think could be the main Hull Down positions for Ian to use against me. They are labeled HD1 to HD4. With those TRPs in position (slightly on the reverse slope) I can either smoke them or make targeting that position easier. If he has ATGM positions on them, I can drop HE quicker and more accurately. From the other side of the ridge, you can see how close those first objectives are to my Assembly Area (AA). This could be a major problem as Ian can, and probably will have units as close to Snake Ridge and Star Hill that I am.. and his positions on the right side of this image could be so close to Snake Ridge over there that I could immediately be in trouble. A nightmare scenario for me would be if he bought a Company of Leopards and rushed my troops before they could jump off and while loaded. he could feasibly end this game in the first couple of turns. Wouldn't be sporting, but hey.. things happen. If he seizes the right end of Snake Ridge in the early turns, again this could be a very short game. The terrain from Snake Ridge all the way through the rest of Ian's AO is pretty flat. So a close defense would make sense. The red line indicates where I suspect the Forward Edge of the Battle Area (FEBA) lies. It could be closer, it could be farther back. Regardless, the initial turns could be scary and edge of your seat stuff. We'll also see how sporting or ruthless Ian can be. You can see from the below that my AA sits behind a high ridgeline, this is Snake Ridge. Star Hill is very clear in this GIF as well. The following image shows the proximity of the first objective. I am not normally one to instantly go for objectives, but I suspect he will have a unit of some sort there, so first task is to find out. I will dismount the infantry platoon assigned this sector and move them on foot to the ridge to peek over the top. They will be on Hunt orders in case he sends a vehicle or two over the top as well. Star Hill from my lines. I will be sending the AT-13 Platoon (-) to this position in order to look down on the initial objective.

SURPRISE!!!!

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

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.

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

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. Thanks, good to know.

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.

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.

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: 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 1st Platoon Will have one AT-13 team attached 2nd Platoon Will have one AT-13 team attached COMBAT SUPPORT 120mm Mortar Battery with FO Also purchased four TRPs 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 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 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 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.

I actually have a scenario I've been playing with for years based on a historic German attack on a Soviet strongpoint.. has trenches and mines galore. I have been toying with cleaning it up and releasing it, but am having an issue with the AI. Maybe an email to @George MC is in order. Bil

I understand the desire for this type of thing.. but to be honest, with these games that are so low level and require so much micro-management it would take a loong time to play out an entire Operation at the CM level. I never play Campaigns in game because they are not H2H, sadly, as I think that would be fun. But an Operational layer? I don't know.. I am very happy with having my digital sandbox to play out any scenario on any map against the best human opposition I can find... I love that aspect of the game. Just one man's opinion. Bil

I'll bet there are more than two of us reading this AAR.

I heard from Baneman, turns out he was in the hospital (or "in hospital" as they say over the pond)... he is back and will be continuing the game for a few more turns at least. So I will update this thread as I get turns, and also will be starting the new AAR with @IanL. I'm just glad he is alright... but I hope the drugs don't give him super-human tactical powers. Bil

Sure Canadians would be interesting.. we haven't showed them off yet. I took it as a given that I would take red based on the discussions we had about illustrating red abilities versus blue. Bil

In case anyone is wondering what he is talking about: @jpratt88, rest assured that I try to not take anyone lightly... and I know @IanL has some skills. I will be taking redfor in this action, so I'll probably lose.. but I promise to give him a tough fight (time to flex some of my NTC OPFOR muscles). We are still working through the preliminaries so it'll be a few days before we can kick it off. Bil

I am officially calling this game over. Sorry we couldn't finish it, or move it further along. Bil

Now that amphibious vehicles can swim in game, this is definitely doable in CMSF 2. We need LCUs and/or LCACs to deliver tanks and support units to the beach though, eh?

Interesting... neither would have been an insult. I do have a closer affinity to Rommel (the Rommel papers and Infantry Attacks are still two of my favorite books), so it makes sense my style would be compared to his, though I hope I have a touch of Patton's recklessness too. Both are commanders I admire. Playing the Marines is definitely an interesting variation... the lack of Javelins and Bradleys also makes them closer in capability to redfor, so that's a bonus as far as I'm concerned. I am very happy old vets like you are hanging around in these forums, you are going to love CMSF 2. Bil

Red is not "peer" for sure in CMSF, however they do have the tools available to give the US a close fight. Of course it would need to be balanced.. they should have a numerical advantage over any Western force, which is why at the NTC there are often OPFOR Regiment fights versus US Battalions (though that sort of disparity in forces isn't required in CMSF 2 to make the point). In the right hands Redfor can be effective. I do think that in neither game can redfor stand toe to toe with US forces. That is why they are "near peer"... Brits and Germans would be "peer".. unlike you I have no problems with blue on blue. In CMSF and CMBS though, red on red always gives satisfaction. If the current AAR dies Ian (which sadly, is very possible) perhaps you and I need to showcase a little Red v US action in the current BETA.

@sburke laid it out pretty well... CMBS has a much different feel than CMSF2, its more SCI-FI... and the opposing forces are no longer "near peer" in my opinion, as they are in CMSF2. The USMC and NATO equipment in CMSF2 makes it so rich in content... and the period aligns with what we had when I served so I am more comfortable with it. I just wish we had Russians in CMSF2 Maybe someday. By the way, I am rather "meh" on the COIN aspect. I am glad it is represented, as it does add a unique aspect and provides situations that no other game I'm aware of does, I'm also not a huge fan of MOUT combat, so my disinterest in COIN stems from that I think.

Who is who in your eyes I wonder?

Vin, no I mainly play WW2. I never enjoyed CMBS, but CMSF2 is right up my alley. i Suspect I’ll probably play CMSF2 and WW2 about 50-50 now that we are getting an updated CMSF.