Coyote

Excellent AAR. You did a nice job of capturing the evolution of the battle. I also noticed that you are learning to disperse your units more widely. Amazing what a few volleys of 122mm MRL can teach you. Enjoy! Coyote

In any scenario with an OPFOR Motor Rifle Regiment, I try to use all my Tac Air on the first battalion size target I see. Every OPFOR platoon has an SA-16 team and after a while the field is just littered with them from your previous kills. I recommend hiding your attack helos behind a hill and using the delayed unit commands to bring them out after 15 - 30 seconds of air attack, that way most of the OPFOR Air Defense weapons will have fired and be reloading. Set the priority target for the helos to air defense systems early in the game. If you have observers in the area, plan artillery on all known or suspected Air Defense units 1-2 turns before the jets and helicopters attack so you will have good fire for effect to suppress OPFOR's defense. Darn! Now I feel like starting another game! Enjoy! Gary Chilcote [ May 01, 2002, 10:34 PM: Message edited by: Coyote ]

As far as realism goes, your choices in the "Preferences" menu make at least as much difference as the balance of forces. The main things I'd consider are: Thermal Sights - These are the rule for major western style armies (i.e. NATO) and the exception in the rest of the world. The reason is fairly simple, +20% of the cost of an M1 series tank is the electronics which is mainly the fire control system. In the M1A2 I expect the cost to go higher. If your presumed enemy can't realistically afford T-80s or better, you can take away their thermals. Advanced ATGMs - These are quite a bit more common as they are cheaper and require less training. The TacOps database also knows which of these have integral thermal sights. Smoke vs Thermal Sights - Most artillery smoke can be penetrated although both NATO and the former Warsaw Pact developed smoke rounds that could degrade thermal effectiveness. US Vehicle smoke grenades are specifically designed to interfere with known Russian thermal optics. I'd assume that something as cheap as a smoke grenade would be pretty widely distributed. Change Air Support - Aircraft are very, very expense and the US is very, very fussy about always having total Air Supreamacy. If you have a particular OPFOR in mind, check out FAS.org. They have a number of references to various world armies and extensive material on US forces. That should help you decide how bad to make a particular "bad guy". TacOps: It's not just a game, it's a simulation! Enjoy

After five years of TacOps, my wife just shakes her head at my bloodshot eyes the following day and smirks. DeGoey is one of my favorites and also one of the most "customizable" scenarios. I've played it with the entire force changed to Army units, as an all mech operation, as an airborne assault and as an attack to penetrate the east map edge. Tons of fun in 'easy' modes and devilishly challenging with the preferences set 'against' you. And when v4 comes out I'll probably play it again with new weapons. Welcome to the game and Enjoy! Coyote

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Associator111: It would be very nice to make a Mixed Infantry and Armor Company Team would make it easier to manuever. Does anyone know of a way to do this? I currently use the method of "Get Orders" from another unit to have go the same way, but this gets confusing and prone to missed units if you have several at the same start location. You gotta make sure you get all the unit hidden underneath.<hr></blockquote> Associator (Interesting handle) 1. Select the first unit in your "team" and give it all of the delayed orders that you will want the entire "stack" to follow. With this unit still open, select "copy orders" from the orders menu (on a Windows PC you can also press control-c). 2. Close the unit. 3. Select as many co-located or nearby units as you like by clicking and holding the right mouse button on an empty part of the screen and dragging diagonally to highlight multiple units. With these units selected, select "paste orders" from the orders menu (on a Windows PC you can also press control-v). Each unit now has only the orders you gave to the first unit. 4. Now go back and add any additional orders to specific units if needed. 5. The "copy SOP" and "paste SOP" menu items work the same way but the control-c and control-v key combinations only work on delayed orders. 6. Engagement ranges can also be set by first highlighting multiple units and using the "Weapons On/Off" command from the orders menu. 7. Immediate orders must be done separately unit by unit. Hope this helps. Enjoy the game. Gary Chilcote [ 12-29-2001: Message edited by: Coyote ] [ 12-29-2001: Message edited by: Coyote ]</p>

In a large defensive scenario I conduct a deliberate counter-reconnaisance. Take away the opponents eyes early in the game. He now has to move forward with less information than I have. If the defender has sufficient depth, the entire battle becomes a series of ambushes that do constant damage without ever letting the attacker mass against a lucrative target. This also minimizes my exposure to artillery. If you don't have a lot of depth or a lot of troops or a lot of either it gets much harder. I look for reverse slope positions for my dismounted units and stay-behind positions for my scouts. Scouts are only allowed to attack Air Defense and Artillery units and only after I know the enemy's axis of advance. I try to use all available artillery, Tac Air, Attack Helicopters and MLRS in a concentrated opening strike that coincides with my scout screen/cavalry shooting up the enemy's air defenses (anyone remember JAAT?) Doing this exposes air defense units early, causes them target overload, and hits the most lucrative concentrations of enemy before they break up. It also gives me a good look at the survivors so I can plan my next move. Still my favorite game. Gary Chilcote

My wife got this from one of the reservists she trains every month. I don't know the original source. Given the current situation it seems appropriate. "It's the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press. It's the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech. It's the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us freedom to demonstrate. It's the soldier, not the lawyer,who has given us the right to a fair trial. And it's the soldier who salutes the flag, who serves under the flag and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who gives the protester the right to burn the flag." Happy Thanksgiving to All. Gary Chilcote

Marks and Fenwick are two of my favorites. I finished my last run-through with 8% casualties. 1) Use your scout and recon units to take out the SA-16s (set them as a high-priority target type). 2) Attack from at least two sides. You have the firepower to suppress your targets and you can cover all of the objectives more quickly that way. 3) Use your mortars to suppress and smoke MGs. 4) Once you have taken out the original BTR-80s, redploy your Javelins to cover the highspeed approaches the relief force will be using. These scenarios are easy to modify and let you explore the heliborne raid in many ways. Enjoy. Coyote

Excellent summary by Carter. I would have to point out that the orginal question wasn't specific enough to warrant the excruciating detail in some of the posts above. Most of the disagreements I see are a result of equating the terminal ballistic performance of each round as synonymous with military effectiveness. As Carter has pointed out above, terminal ballistics is the last factor that comes into play. The distribution of small arms calibers that we currently see in western military inventories is proof enough that few armies think either round is one-size-fits-all solution for modern combat. The only thing I can add to Carter's post is that "tumbling" is not an intentional design characteristic of any of these rounds. Prior to impact, tumbling results from either a mis-match between bullet weight, velocity, and rate-of-spin (or poor manufacturing quality control). This results in a loss of accuracy and fewer hits. When we traded in our M16-A1s for A2s, the documentation summarized the changes in the weapon. The 62 grain bullet was introduced to take along with the faster barrel twist of the M16-A2. This produced better accuracy and more penetration for only a small increase in weight. Coyote See you at Fiddler's Green.

Terry, Don't appologize for the length. This thread has produced some of the best posts I've even read on the net. The founders realization that collective responsibility was the key to ensuring collective rights predates the Constitution. "We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." And they agreed with you on the need for a state (plural at the time) in order to make this a reality. Great discussion guys. Gary Chilcote

The 25% figure was from me. I seem to remember that from a fire planning class at Fort Knox as a level at which casualties will disrupt a small unit enough to make it stop and reorganize. At any rate it gives me a yard-stick by which to measure my efforts. As to settings, it depends on whether I want to play a game or simulate a tactical situation. I a game mood I load the "good guys" up with everything. For a sim I try to match equipment levels and tactics as closely to the real world as I can without classified access. For example, thermal fire contols are still not common outside of NATO, $$$. Passive night vision systems are more common but not as effective. Older types of artillery smoke were not effective against thermal sights while some newer ($$$) types are. US vehicle smoke grenades (Rubberized Red Phosphorus) will interfere with thermal sights. So taken all together I usuall select "Vehicle smoke blocks thermal sights" and "No OPFOR OOB" and leave the rest of the options off. I also tend to give the OPFOR more of its optional units than I do the Blue side. That helps to make up for the AI's lower IQ (no offense MajorH). I also play most of the ancillary equipment in a US force (Command, supply, medical, and recovery vehicles) which gives me more things to juggle without much more firepower and makes the game more challenging. As far as the Gallager scenarios go, a battalion task force (the US Army J-series TOE more or less) was designed to defeat an attacking Warsaw Pact regiment. So you should be able to meet the specified victory conditions but the interesting question becomes, "how much are you willing to pay for it Commander?" Gary Chilcote See you at Fiddler's Green

A way to simulate high level intel might be to "tint" or otherwise designate grid squares where OPFOR activity has been detected. It wouldn't need to be specific enough to plot fires on. Just enough to give an idea of the current general location of OPFOR formations. You would then have to commit your own recon assests to futher develop the situation. Gary Chilcote See you at Fiddler's Green

Two things: One: The third way to avoid artillery damage, KEEP MOVING! Everytime I forget that I take casualties (as I did around 0130 hrs this morning!) Two: I've begun to wonder, does TacOps (or any other sim for that matter) reflect the right mix firepower vs. mobility kills for current equipment? Most modern tanks are not just better armored but actually heavier than their historical counterparts. That means heavier running gear that is less suceptible to blast or fragment damage. At the same time, fire control systems have become much more complex and, I would suspect, vulnerable to shock damage. In particular, ICM should produce a mobility kill only if the engine compartment is penetrated. Any comments on this idea? Gary Chilcote See you at Fiddler's Green

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> These types of brushfire wars - witness Somalia and Panama - are the only real shooting wars the US is likely to get into for the forseeable future. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> "Forseeable" being the operative word here. If we plan to remain active in shaping the course of world events in our favor we need a fairly wide mix of forces to choose from. As discussed above public opinion/policy do run in cycles and the weapons/forces we build normally have as much to do with getting votes as with winning wars. Those are just facts of life and they are not confined to the US. It only makes sense in a world as fragmented as this one, to keep the widest practical array of forces on-hand. When I was in the 25ID (Light) I would have been glad (make that ecstatic) to have a couple of medium brigades as ready reinforcements. Getting reinforcements in days rather than weeks could make a big impact on how the next conflict turns out. Not every adversary will be gracious (stupid) enough to let us ship in a couple of heavy corps before the big battle. Gary Chilcote Coyote

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Phil Squair: [QB]I'm a lobbyist so I deal with my share of acronyms, but I'm having some trouble with those in this thread.QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Phil, Check out the TacOps Library folder in your TacOps directory. FM 6-20 series is the Field Artillery specific stuff, but each FM on manuver (Armor, Infantry, etc.) usually includes a section on fire support and planning. enjoy, Gary

"nullThe 7.62mm offers a psychological weapon that the 5.56 does not -- sound and feel. Anyone who's experienced firing an M60 vs. a SAW will know what I'm talking about." I don't think the psychological effect is equal on both "ends" of the firefight. Shooting at someone with a bigger weapon might give the user more confidence, granted. The guy on the recieving end doesn't necessarily know the caliber of the incoming rounds. He is mostly impressed by the volume and accuracy of the fire he's taking. A soldier's concern about what he gets shot with is secondary to avoiding being shot in the first place, hence "supression". Rommel's opinion after WWI was that there should be eight men providing suppressive fire for each one moving forward. "I don't have a copy of "Infantry Attacks" so I can't give an exact quote. See you at Fiddler's Green Coyote

1. This might be too hard to do but I hate watching my tanks waste main gun rounds on dismounted infantry. Especially when they have plenty of machinegun ammo left. :mad: I'd like to be able to stop that as an option during play. I might still want to use HEAT-MP against entrenchments or buildings but at my option. 2. I'd like to be able to put direct fire on a TRP even if I can't see an enemy unit but suspect one is there. This would promote more effective suppressive fire from supporting units and allow recon-by-fire against likely enemy positions. :eek: Enough for tonight! Coyote

"Does the increased digitization and transmission of data over the battlefield give the enemy an increased opertunity for direction finding and hence locating your forces?" Against a US style force with litterally thousands of emmitters (radios, radars, datalinks, repeaters, etc.,etc.) direction finding is only somewhat useful. By the time you make sense of the data everyone has moved around. It gets better, read on. "Also how about increased risks of interseption and decode of information?" US SINCGARS family of radios change frequencies originally were intended to change frequencies (hop) 300 times per second. That was 15 years ago. I don't know how fast the newest systems hop but what your opponent hears is mostly electronic "white noise". Encryption is applied during transmission and changed either daily or as needed. A transmission may eventually be pieced together and decoded but it will be long after it's tactical significance has vanished. "Just what are the increased oppertunities for enemy Sig Int?" Basically just ELINT, classifying each emitter by type and trying to get a picture of a force's disposition by looking at the distribution of it's electronic systems. 90% of this activity takes place well above the level of TacOps. Good questions though. Very few civilians appreciate how complex war has become. See you at 'Fiddler's Green' Gary Chilcote

You'll notice in TacOps that careful movement and use of smoke allow you to put your infantry nearly on top of your opposition. That makes a high cyclic-rate-of-fire 5.56mm weapon preferable as range isn't really an issue and at close range you must maintain fire superiority or get your bronze star posthumously. In dismounted ops I'd probably still go with the smaller round to maximize my basic load. You can overcome the shorter range of the 5.56 with training and tactics. You can only overcome running out of ammo by getting more ammo and that is where round-weight becomes a factor. A grunt can only carry just so much. The weight of the weapon is also important. The last time I carried an M-14 I thought my arms were going to fall off. The only problems I ever had with an M-16 were the front site catching in the brush and a cook-off during a long live-fire exercise. BTW I (and it looks like all of the other respondents as well) assumed you meant 7.62x54mm NATO. How do you feel about 7.62x39mm Warsaw Pact ammo? Coyote Old tankers never die, they rust!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by minmax: ...what I wanted was for the AI to drop the troops in based on weather and Air Defense factors. Say I designate the drop zone I want and the game factor in drift, air defense, and other things that mess up airborne ops.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That does sound interesting. You could plot a airdrop much the same way that you currently plot an airstrike. I was also thinking of some less complex add-ins like C-130/141 Aircraft as a new unit. Troop units would need an additional rating in the software, "air-droppable".

Here is the link to data on the STAFF round at the Military Analysis Network page. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m943.htm Tons of other interesting data also available at FAS.org. Enjoy. Coyote

There is another reason that longer range direct fire weapons aren't high priority. There are a lot of places in the world where you can see 1000 meters much less 5000. While I was in Europe in the '80s, someone determined that the average intervisiblity in the 7th Army area was a bit over 500 meters. We were more concerned with maximum rate of fire and ammo stowage than with maximum range.

I have played DeGoey and Nankervis as asimulated airborne drops. I used the existing mounted force the link-up force and converted all of the heliborne Marines to Airborne units. I just picked likely drop zones and used the CPX function put my units in those starting positions. I thought both scenarios were interesting to play this way. You have to compensate for the loss of mobility that the choppers provide when you plan your raid. I think it would also be an interesting exercise to actually plan and play the drop including defense suppression and related problems. Gary "Coyote" Chilcote

More request items from my fevered brain: 0. Handgrenades; increase in close combat firepower under ~30 meters range. This will also speed up close assaults. 1. Engineer/breaching equipment; mineplows, line charges, AVLBs. 2. Obstacles; wire, tank ditches, road craters? 3. Non-combatants; Friendly Civilians, Neutral Civilians, Hostile Civilians. 4. New units; Downed Pilots with sidearms, Friendly Wounded, Enemy POWs, bunkers, Patriot missile units (good high value unit to defend). 5. Off map 105mm and 8 inch Arty for historical play. 5. Chemical Agents; Variable unit protection levels, lethal agents (artillery rounds), non-lethal agents (riot control).

1. Try playing the full TOE with all of the non-combat troops included: Medics, mechanics, Supply trucks, recovery vehicles. They count against your loss percentages without adding significant firepower (and in the real world you have to take care of these people too!) 2. Collect and tow your disabled vehicles back from the line of contact. That requires coordination and often supporting fire. 3. Don't let a unit resupply unless a supply truck can get to it or vice-versa. 4. Make aircraft fly back to a rearm/refuel point (FARRP) before they can resupply. 5. Downgrade your equipment to older models. Find yourself an H-series TOE for an M-60A1 tank battalion. Even T-72's get challenging then! 6. Replace a mech/armored task force with light infantry unit. Now you will really have to watch out for your casualty percentages. 7. And definitely play to manage your casuslties. Anytime my losses exceed 25% I figure I need more practice. I prefer to see them in the 'teens'. Hope this helps and . . . ENJOY Gary Chilcote, "Coyote"