Bil Hardenberger

Thanks Chris... there is no way I can win this one, my goal now is to cause him as much pain as possible before I fall, at least make his victory a Pyrrhic victory.  

Awesome. I could use some magic right about now.

Miquel, nope not over yet. I'm waiting for Scott again.

Thanks Chris... there is no way I can win this one, my goal now is to cause him as much pain as possible before I fall, at least make his victory a Pyrrhic victory.  

Thanks Chris... there is no way I can win this one, my goal now is to cause him as much pain as possible before I fall, at least make his victory a Pyrrhic victory.  

Bil,
I think you are simply the victim of a scenario that has a serious force imbalance.  You are not fighting at just a disadvantage, you are facing overwhelming opposition.
 
Personally as someone who has loved your many beta battles, it would have been far more enjoyable to watch you from a position similar to C3K after you wiped out his tanks in Market Garden.  Watching the interplay between you two as he engaged in nearly wreaklous heroics which actually succeeded in thwarting you which was reminescent of the 1st Airborne amazing resistance to the German counterattack.
 
See saw battles are so much more enjoyable.
 
I truly appreciate all the effort that you put into making these battles so enjoyable to follow (and make us all want to buy the game).  Whatever the outcome, there is no shame in losing against a stacked deck.
 
Chris

That is a fair point Dan. Keep in mind that I did not have a good idea about what was in front of me when I made that move so wanted to ensure I could easily over power him. And I expected tanks in the Ukrainian company... I think the prebattle brief kind of misled me there.

I also expected 1st MRC to be the company with the initial fight as with that equipment disparity it's where I would have put most of the Ukrainian MRC.

Yes it's easy in hindsight to say what should have been done, but in the heat of the moment you have make a decision and deal with the consequences. Like I am doing now.

It's not often you see a Silmarrillion reference, well done Miquel!!  

That is a fair point Dan. Keep in mind that I did not have a good idea about what was in front of me when I made that move so wanted to ensure I could easily over power him. And I expected tanks in the Ukrainian company... I think the prebattle brief kind of misled me there.

I also expected 1st MRC to be the company with the initial fight as with that equipment disparity it's where I would have put most of the Ukrainian MRC.

Yes it's easy in hindsight to say what should have been done, but in the heat of the moment you have make a decision and deal with the consequences. Like I am doing now.

Let me second Ian. Your move was the right one. Assaulting the town would have taken more than 15 mins, you'd probably have a more degraded force due to losses and still would the fricking Host of the Valar be coming right on your backside.

The Sixteenth Minute
 
US reinforcements.. I guess I am lucky I had enough eyes on the reinforcements to pretty much fully identify almost every formation.
 
US Company Team North (Infantry Heavy)

 
US Center Element (suspected Battalion Command Element)

 
US Company Team South (Tank Heavy) - note direction of movement

 
If you are keeping track, that is:
14 M1A2 SEP 15 Bradley This is nuts.
 
My losses in this turn:
note 1: this is labeled as 2nd MRC losses, but the two Khrizanthema were my ATGM section and the BMP in the North was from the GL Platoon)  note 2: all of these vehicles were killed without spotting their killer, none could fire in return note 3: the 2nd MRC T90 and the BMP 3 in the center were killed by the suspected US BN command element M1 and Bradley note 4: the North is completely defenseless at this point
 
All Scott has to do now is drive forward with all vehicles in line and I won't be able to do a thing about it.  Sure I can pop out and take a few under fire now and then, but this is not looking pretty.  I suspect 2nd MRC will be fully eliminated next turn (maybe in two).  1st MRC might be getting bypassed which would be an advantage to me.. but I suspect that Scott is concentrating on the 2nd MRC and then will turn on 1st MRC.. so their time will come.

John,
 
I agree that the professionalism in the american army is superb and i'm not saying the contrary. It reinforces what I'm saying. What i'm saying here is whichever army you are, fighting an intact and numerically superior US army unit is a losing proposition and in a big way, Whether you are syrian, russian, chinese, german. You need to work it up first and strip it of its fighting power before engaging it with your main units. It has a tech edge and very often a  profiency edge. However little that edge is, it will be multiplied if it outnumbers you and is at 100% combat power.
 
In this scenario, maybe the russians have been given an equal experience rating, but you need at least a 2-1 numerical superiority to have any chance of succeeding considering the equipment involved. The Russian stuff is good, but not good enough to fight on equal terms against a HUMAN US army opponent. As an example, the russian infantry has a low chance of destroying no more than 2-3 abrams out of the 14 involved. The american infantry, on its own, with the javelin could devastate that russian force almost entirely. The T-90, as Bill said, cannot fight the M1s on equal terms and have problems even with perfect ambush. You need to engage them from multiple directions. You cannot do that when you are fighting to avoid numerous Javelin fire and M1A2s that outnumbers you, even more so on a small map.
 
Now, if you put all the US force at conscript level and the Russians at crack or elite, they would have a chance. Shows what you were saying, training is everything. But like I said, in real life, there are many things the Russians could do that could seriously erode that serious US edge before the two armies meet in the field, at least in the first week of any war. They do have some powerful and numerous long range stuff and the ability to use it effectively, especially so close to their backward. Who would have thought they could pull such an operation in Crimea under the nose of the West, quick and effective. They are supposed to be slow and lumbering. Dont underestimate them. They are much less corrupt than they were in the nineties, the huge money spent on modernizing mostly goes where it should and they learned from the Georgian war a lot and applied those lessons. They train way more regularly and in a realistic way. Things have changed. Even Breedlove (SACEUR) admitted so. There is a lot of waste of money in the US department of defense too and the US military budget represents the budget for a global force with the money needed to maintain such a huge infrastructure around the world.
 
The US could mop the floor with the Iraqis because it was a perfect situation for the US, everything was in favor of the US. WAY superior training, maintenance and equipment. Total air supremacy and a big flat pool table (desert) where all our fancy stuff could be used with utmost effectiveness. It was like pitting an NFL team against a high school team (an I'm sorry for offending all high school teams out there). Even the Russian army of the nineties would not have had much trouble soundly defeating them. Their ammo was crap, their tanks and equipment were old monkey models and were abysmally maintained. They couldnt hit the side of a barn even at close range. They were demoralized and their commanders in most cases amazingly inept. It was so lopsided you have trouble believing the reports. Even when they took the US by surprise tactically (Fright night), they couldnt do much with it but disable one of two M1s.

You're in an excellent position: any shot you take should be guaranteed to hit your enemy! Lucky you.
 
Find his command tank, swarm it, and lop off the head of the beast.

The Sixteenth Minute
 
US reinforcements.. I guess I am lucky I had enough eyes on the reinforcements to pretty much fully identify almost every formation.
 
US Company Team North (Infantry Heavy)

 
US Center Element (suspected Battalion Command Element)

 
US Company Team South (Tank Heavy) - note direction of movement

 
If you are keeping track, that is:
14 M1A2 SEP 15 Bradley This is nuts.
 
My losses in this turn:
note 1: this is labeled as 2nd MRC losses, but the two Khrizanthema were my ATGM section and the BMP in the North was from the GL Platoon)  note 2: all of these vehicles were killed without spotting their killer, none could fire in return note 3: the 2nd MRC T90 and the BMP 3 in the center were killed by the suspected US BN command element M1 and Bradley note 4: the North is completely defenseless at this point
 
All Scott has to do now is drive forward with all vehicles in line and I won't be able to do a thing about it.  Sure I can pop out and take a few under fire now and then, but this is not looking pretty.  I suspect 2nd MRC will be fully eliminated next turn (maybe in two).  1st MRC might be getting bypassed which would be an advantage to me.. but I suspect that Scott is concentrating on the 2nd MRC and then will turn on 1st MRC.. so their time will come.

Flank shots are effective against the Abrams.. however in my tests even when getting a beautiful flank position often the M1 will spot, be able to rotate its turret, and fire before T90 ever gets a firm spot.  I did get quite a few kills in my tests, and those were only against stationary M1s with no AI orders, and most of the time they were dearly purchased.  These M1s will be commanded by Scott who knows his business, he would not be a Lt. Colonel if he did not.  
 
The M1A2 SEP spots faster, shoots more accurately, and is far better protected than the T-90AM.  
 
I know my limitations, and yes it is that bad of a matchup.

To the world's horror... sometimes US procurement policy gets things right.
 
REALLY right

If you can get that kill ratio with a T-90AM versus an M1A2 SEP v2 in CMBS against a human player then you will indeed be a formidable player.

antaress73 I can't wait to read an AAR from you... seems you have all the answers.

If you can get that kill ratio with a T-90AM versus an M1A2 SEP v2 in CMBS against a human player then you will indeed be a formidable player.

Flank shots are effective against the Abrams.. however in my tests even when getting a beautiful flank position often the M1 will spot, be able to rotate its turret, and fire before T90 ever gets a firm spot.  I did get quite a few kills in my tests, and those were only against stationary M1s with no AI orders, and most of the time they were dearly purchased.  These M1s will be commanded by Scott who knows his business, he would not be a Lt. Colonel if he did not.  
 
The M1A2 SEP spots faster, shoots more accurately, and is far better protected than the T-90AM.  
 
I know my limitations, and yes it is that bad of a matchup.

How close to the edge do you guys think I am?  Most of what I suspect will be where Scott's reinforcements will arrive I have no visibility on at all.  I could have ran all the way to the edge of the map with 1st MRC, and with elements of 2nd MRC but that would have been less than sporting, and even if I had my units would not have lasted long at all.  No, I want to engage Scott's US forces in close terrain to nullify his range advantage, and to hopefully force him to piecemeal his units through this terrain as he hunts me down.  
 
The only unit I have that has some visibility on a portion of the edge is the Khrizantema section of two vehicles.  But I would have been a fool to not overwatch this area... if Scott comes in on the northern edge in strength then I doubt that little bit of force on my part will matter much.

Zing!  Enjoying your AAR Bill.

LOL! Yeah, it can get tough having all the 20/20 hindsight critiques. Perfect is the enemy of good enough.
 
The sign of a good commander is his ability to pick the least worst option in a situation characterized by chaos, confusion, and an uncooperative opponent.
 
Antaress73 does make a valid point...which doesn't matter in this battle. I'm reminded of the '30's Sandhurst officer tests vs. those of the Wehrmacht. The British (and everyone else but the Germans) focused on the "Perfect" book answer and graded their officers accordingly. The Germans took them out in the field, gave them 5 minutes, and then had them walk through what they'd just ordered. I'll leave it to you to determine which type of decision making led to better tactical results.
 
What antaress73 probably meant was, "Bil, you shouldn't fight in an area with rolling hills, built up zones, and dense foliage. Only battle the US/UKR in this fight when you have more advantages."  (Okay, that was tongue in cheek.)
 
FWIW, I think Bil's done a fantastic job in this battle. I don't mean that lightly: his aggressiveness against the US/UKR screening force was as unanticipated as it was effective.
 
It'll be interesting to see how the next part of the battle shapes up.
 
Ken out.

antaress73 I can't wait to read an AAR from you... seems you have all the answers.

antaress73 I can't wait to read an AAR from you... seems you have all the answers.