Amedeo

The main thing is that the Soviets only planned to dismount when they were forced to, or when there was no other option. That really means the answer to your question is that if they're only dismounting when they have to, then having the additional man is important where you need it. Otherwise, they stay mounted, and the question is moot.

You can see some of the logic behind this in Cold War - US call in times are typically in the 2-5 minute range, and dismounting will mean that you're going to slow down - if you're dismounting into a kill-zone (and that's far from unlikely), then this can be disastrous. There's also NBC concerns, but even without those then it's a good idea to not dismount, if you can get away with it.

Dismounting is necessary in complex terrain, or when terrain has to be cleared or held defensively. Ideally this kind of area would be bypassed - typically your objectives should be pushing you ever-onwards.

When dismounting is appropriate, correct BMP usage looks something like this:



The HQ element is in contact will all parts of their platoon. The squads are within four actions spots of their transport, and the IFV and dismounts will use whatever cover is available. The BMPs attack with area-fire as their primary purpose, and the dismounts are their eyes. Staying within four action spots means that the squads will share spotting contacts with their transport.

The horizontal separation is mostly just a good idea, but clearly should adapt to terrain and circumstance. The platoon does not want to lose sight of itself at any time.

To complete the circle on this one, the Soviet squad:



This is the central squad in the above, so it's the one where one of the riflemen is now the platoon's SVD marksman. Aside from that, this is identical to the other two squads. The squad splits into two fireteams - the four man team is the squad's base of fire, and the three man rifle team is the squad's manoeuvre element. The platoon attacks on line as a single unit, with the emphasis being on prioritising fires.

I'm hopeful that one of the general staff will vote for option 9, 7.62, or 5.45 if Vlad even thinks about doing something the world would regret.

I'm sure that guy knows what he's talking about, but I always think it's a bit odd when somebody dedicates years of his life to study WW2, but somehow never learns to pronounce even basic German words. It's not "Totenkop" division - there's an f at the end.
Also: "wolksgrenadeer division". It's one of the first things you learn in basic German lessons that an initial v is pronounced as an f.
"wolkenschau"... haha... cloud watching
 

I mean, other than losing probably a third of their modernized tank force already, yeah, no big deal.

Hi all, I have a new video AAR out today. Since the battle plan kind of flows from the doctrine of the time one on one, it's a bit lighter on the "explaining my plan, showing how that works out, what goes wrong and how to I improvised" content than my last videos. But I hope it's a fun report of this very enjoyable scenario non the less.
 

SF2 is the weakest title for me because of the accuracy of the modelling of the forces.  The Syrian military is just not up to fighting most of the Blue forces so I end up fighting red on red most of the time.

All I knew was that there was 'a' vehicle in the forest and that it could be an M60, that would not have been taken out by the arty. I saw no choice but to clear to forest with infantry before letting my tanks pass by it, exposing their flanks and rear, but figured it was no big deal because it would take three minutes (and it did). That's why I stopped in the first place.
Then, when the 2nd M60 appeared, my tanks were standing still. I figured that this was a good thing because their chance to hit the M60 would increase, opposed to when they would have been on the move. But then, after the 2nd M60 killed two of my T62's, still none of my (by this point remaining 4 or 5) T62's had spotted it yet, while they did have line of sight. What was I going to do? Risk yet another turn of the M60 shooting at my tanks and MAYBE that my tanks would spot it? Nerves got the better of me, I suppose, and I steered them out of harms way. I knew that it wasn't very 'doctrine' but I had fully expected the AT inf to clear the way in a clean, neat way in a matter of minutes.
Thanks, I like that. Sounds like, after a few video's, I could do a "lessons learned" summary with the info from this thread 🙂. My main army experience was as a FO attached to a recon platoon of a tank batallion (Netherlands) - so kind of what we're talking about here. But unlike Soviet tactics, all of our SOP's were centered around seeing without beeing seen, so that's what I went with in this battle (even it wasn't really featured in the video). Now that you mention it; I do remember an instructor telling me that the Soviets did (or would do) recon with tanks. Seemed incredibly impractical to me at the time, but since CMCW came out and I became a bit more versed in Soviet doctrine, it makes more sense to me😉.
That's another suggestion that I quite like... I do wonder if it would work in Combat Mission, tough. In real life, it'll be pretty hard to tell someone "see that road with all the arty falling on it? Go through there". But in CM, your troops will do it without question (until hit) and specificly tanks will likely come out unharmed. Moral is a factor in CM, but only as a response to current and immediate threats - not in the sense of fear of what MIGHT happen if I do this or that. The only sense of that is the fear that your opponent might have of sending his pixeltruppen into a situation, and I'm using that word to expres that your opponent might not be as afraid of giving that order as he would in real life 🙂. But then, I do enjoy a realistic fire plan in Combat Mission, even if it's more because of the 'authenticity' and realism of a plan than because of the effectiveness in game. In that sense, I'll add it to my lessons learned 😉.
 
It's a QB so I could not be sure what Megalon brought. If he had brought M60A3's, then he would have had thermal optics and smoke would have been a bad idea for me. He brought M60A1's, but I didn't know that until I made contact. I did consider to smoke some area's, but then, I was shelling every location where the enemy could have been with HE, so why bother also putting down a smoke screen? That was my thinking at the time, anyways.

Well for all those that moan about moving large numbers of vehicles down roads in CM as being a tedious and drawn out exercise at least now know that CMBS delivers hard core realism.

Disagree entirely - as we're seeing in the current Ukraine unpleasantness, analysts who focus on quantitative data come up short.  The NVA would have brought a better ability to command and coordinate high tempo manoeuvre operations to the party.  The Iraqis certainly never did much of that in the mainly positional conflict with Iran or in any other conflict since then.

The issue is operational, not tactical. CM doesn't focus on operational level (with exception to some binary choices in campaign). For CM player it looks stupid, when that probe units just rushed forward. When you have 2x2 km map and you know that here are enemy main forces, you can push slowly, dismount infantry, move by leaps. But what if you have to pass dozen of such 2x2 "maps" in a day? You will "stupidly" rush at full speed.

For those, who watched Russia's army actions in the past, here is nothing new. March to South Osetia caused roadsides, filled by broken vehicles. And Soviet vehicles didn't become newer since this. Difference is that in this campaign broken vehicles stay in hostile territory and commanders made false assumptions about level of resistance, not leaving enough forces for roadblock duties. Or they don't have enough troops, because attacking force is rather small. Considering "psyops multiplier" nothing stunning happened.

Why aren't the Russians doing thunder runs?  This video from Modern War Institute explains why from 25.00 ...
 

It is kinda like listening to William Shatner cover an Elton John song (I…am….a…Rocket, man).  I mean the words kinda match up but what the hell….?

I still cant get my mind straight to get a reason why Putin began the war now.
Nordstream2 was built and ready to transfer in short notice natural gas to Germany and the EU. Europe ignored for too long the consequences a possible cessation of all Russian natural gas transit through Ukraine to the EU would cause. Both in social as well as technical terms it would have heavily affected Ukraine. The upkeep for the pipeline in Ukraine is high and could have become financially unviable to operate once Russia would have ceased all gas transit. The pipeline is vital to Ukraine's chemical and heavy industry. And for Russia the geo-economic leverage the Ukraine had over them through its control of a share of Russian gas exports would have been gone. A subversion of the economic and social life of the  brother nation may, in fact, be a main function of the entire logistically and economically, in fact, unnecessary Nordstream2 project.
So why by all means did Putin rush to the war? And with a bad start too? Why did he not wait a bit longer for the economic downfall of Ukraine. Why didn't he use the normal way of subterfuge and propaganda to get a more cheap victory?

I am ashamed of my government. 

I am ashamed of the actions of my government, I hoped to the last that there would be no war and this is just a bluff. Now anti-war rallies are taking place all over Russia, no one supports this war, there are a bunch of idiots who support it, but I assure you that the majority of the population is AGAINST THIS WAR. 
I honestly empathize with Ukrainians, but in no case will I rejoice at the death of our Russian soldiers! Young guys who could live a long life and do so much good in life, and not die for the sake of crazy ideas. 
 


 

 

 


 

Guess the BTG--Army organization structure has a huge problem for any operation deeper than 50km.  in old Bn-Regt-Div-Army structure, Bn draw supply from Regt/Div, who in turn get their supply from Army. The Army HQ only has to take care of a couple request. Now you have 15-20 BTG commander request re-supply at different location simultaneously. That is a nightmare from Administration point of view. To make the situation worse is who is RESPONSIBLE to protect the 15-20 supply conveys?  Traffic jam could easily happen with so many conveys moving on road. Should the supply has the higher priority or move the troops forward has the higher priority?
 
I feel bad for those Russian staff officers in Army HQ .  

This looks like it may have been a SAM that failed to guide. The smoke trail does not make sense for a terminal cruise missile. (To be clear Ukrainian accidents are Putin’s responsibility for starting an unnecessary war.)

Most of the open source analysts seem to agree that the capital would fall this weekend and the whole conventional thing would end shortly after that.  I am not sure, and could not say even if I did what the J2 guys are seeing.
I am still wondering if Russian has a card (that does not involve WMDs) left to play but sluggish and messy is what I put on what I have seen so far.  If the Russians are still slugging it out on the outskirts of Kyiv by say Mon then I do not think this has gone to plan.

No. It means that the Russian soldiery, right now, aren't instructed to suppress civilian resistance in a brutal manner, but to remain civil. There is no working with Russia-in-the-person-of-Putin. Or, at least, there's no way anyone can see to work with him, as he's being steadfastly unreasonable (and has painted himself into a corner, I think, with some assistance from the US intelligence publicity, in the shape of removing any fig leaf he might have wanted to hide behind).
Of course, that attitude of the soldiery will probably change, once they start hurting, and they won't take it out on the criminals that sent them to do their dirty work, will they?
There might be a difference between occupation and the installation of a puppet government supported by Russian "security assistance", using the model so ruthlessly applied by Lukashenko to the north, but there might not, too. And that assessment is for the Ukrainians to make, not us. And the fact remains that at the moment, for all the restraint being shown by the Russian forces in country, there isn't even a "negotiating position" set out by the Russians for the Ukrainians to surrender under, let alone something to dicker against.
 
Aye, that's not something I'm unaware of. And things change as years pass. The Russians were party to the occupation of Poland in the beginning, and came back a few years later.
 
I'd have to ask a Pole who lived through it all, but I get the impression that, while being in the Soviet sphere of influence for half a century or so might not have been ideal, it left more of Poland to find its liberty than being under the Third Reich for that long would've.
 

Some words about tactic of Russians. They use a tactic of "small raid groups" somewhat similar to Mongols in Mediaeval times. Their BTGs are moving to own goals initially in composition of company groups , but after they approach to own objectives, they disperse on small combat groups - usually 1-2 platoons with reinforcement and make probes on own front in own sector. In this way they search weak points in our defense. If they find a hole or they can overrun our defense - other part of combat group join itself again and continue own advance.  
During seizing of towns and cities they use in mass small diversion groups, which sneak to settlements as civilians or on the captured Ukrainian vehicles, wearing in Ukranian uniform. Among diversion groups not only militaries, but also police, SOBR and local pro-Russian elements, but the role of latter is mostly to paint special markers, leading to primary objectives with special UV-paint. 

Hi all, I uploaded a video AAR of Combat Mission Cold War to Youtube. I thought I'd post it here so you can all tell me what it was you believe led to my demise 😉
 
https://youtu.be/qxLCkSFYq2c

I doubt we can access to all information, which these planes are gathering. US, of course shares some information, but didn't give all picture.
Maybe like that

I'm in Kyiv and here enough quet. No panic, no assaults of supermarkets, no hordes of people in airports. Though oligarchs and many large businessmen flew away by private jets several days ago.
Many western journalists came to Ukraine, especially to OOS zone on eve of "doomsday", but they are dissappointed and bored. They had to film reportages about scary, panic, empty stores, troops movement and pathos patriotic speeches of UKR troopers, which wiould go soon to their last stand. But... nothing of that. 7 years of war... People acustomed to such situation, especially close to frontine.   

LOL the conversation goes something like this:
Product owner: "We are releasing the product in April"
What the Marketing Department and Customers hear: "We are releasing the product April 1st"
What Developers hear: "We are releasing at the end of April"

As you can see in the video here, what we see in game is not representative of reality: