TeddyB

Excellent source of information, thanks very much for this enormous work you have done. Your CMBO charts have been the best information source for the troop selections! One question, do the prices for various units change during the time period? If not it would be very handy to have some price figures for regular units at same charts? Teddy

When comparing the attackers forces to the original companies and battalions most players have dropped out the slowest units i.e. the MG:s, Mortars and ATG:s. This enables them to try to cover the map in time. And as defenders there is no need for tranporting vehicles etc. The result is a bit different from "normal" battle, I have to adjust my mind to these "purpose" build attack/defence units. I have played the round 1 and 2 maps with the default forces given and with various success, when I adapt the above idea I get much better result! The key seems to be to see and analyze the map carefully before the selections. Also the initial setup looks to play key element at least in the maps where there is no time to make drastic changes in plans during the game anymore. Teddy

I just finished the battle, thanks again for all to make these possible! And the AARs are excellent views to the actions and thoughts on both sides! When comparing what happened in this battle it looks like defender has: - a lot more long range firepower in fotm og guns and mg:s - a lot less infantry, only 6 platoons - only 3 * 81 mm mortar artillery The MG:s and guns don't seem to be able to stop the advancing infantry. Broken! noted that MGs in CMBB would be better!? (I still don't have my copy yet, waiting it for thursday). Realistically I would have expected the mg:s to slow the attacker more so that the guns had time to shoot more. This seems not to be the case in CMBO. The number of infantry, only six platoons looks to form very thin line and most are then lost before the defense in town begins. Others took between 7 1/2 to 12 platoons. The 81mm mortars aren't that effective, most others selected also 4.2" mortars which created more destruction than smaller ones. Also it looks like later in the game the attackers troops were more concentrated but then most of the ammo had already been used. Bad luck with Sherman immobilizing in scattered trees. Attacker also went through various scattered trees without bogging. Somewhere in this forum I have got the feeling that to bog is much more likely in scattered trees than on open ground? Is this true? About the mines, the M8 HMC returned via the road at hing speed and ran between the two minefields. Was there a path between them or is it expected that own side minefield is passable to own vehicles? Teddy

Looking at the minutes 1 - 7... What a speed of attack only with infantry at first wave! I am wondering what made the difference between Hodo - Vandal struggle and this one? Is it the artillery which really hit Hodo much more than the guns and MGs to Pak40? This time it seems that the defensive fire doesn't stop the attack. The troops get mostly through it to the targets which don't have that much defensive infantry to protect them? Teddy

It would have been interesting to see how your defense would have worked. Propably the attacker would have been in serious trouble When studying the map before making the purchases did you also have the possibility to play against AI? When I see a new map and try to understand it I always miss some critical terrain features which come very apparent during my first battle on that map. Teddy

At least I do enjoy and also hopefully learn! I am sure that there are many other readers and learners also. It took me a year and a half to start writing onto this forum! I came to conclusion that to make progress as a player I need to "train" on a same map over and over again. If I just find one scenario after another and play them once I don't actually learn from my mistakes. I just enjoy. When trying to solve a puzzle, how to win the attack on this VERY good map I started really to think and analyze it. To be able to see what the players have done and how they handled the same situations really gives the base to start understanding this battlefield and the rules which govern it. And to have the possibility to read the analyses and discussions of the players is very important for understanding. And even to have the possibility to ask questions really makes the difference! I also started to play the other maps of earlier rounds with the same idea, replay, replay and try to handle it a bit better everytime. Thanks VERY much for this opportunity! Teddy [ September 25, 2002, 05:45 PM: Message edited by: TeddyB ]

The river crossing was real clockwork! The smoke, fire support and the platoons running over and organizing themselves into formations on the other side! To prevent such an efficient attack, should there be more wire and AP mines around fjords. The wire was slight displaced as Hodo noted in his AAR. Should there also be TRPs near fjords? If the smoke covers the area, is it so that the defensive artillery spotters can't get LOS to the spot and will have out-of-LOS time delay? Would it have been worthwhile to use area-fire from the tanks into the smoke? Is it possible to use tank area-fire while the target is covered smoke? How about machine gun fire into the smoke? If the buildings near the fjords wouldn't have been standing would it be a good idea to hide there some flamethrowers? Against the StuH42:s the buildings didn't last long. Some of them would have apparently wiped out like the infantry squads nearby the Flag. A lot of questions I am looking forward to see the final round and also the other german win at short75 this round! Teddy

Now I am at turn 20, still something to go for! North side: The attack is very effective. All the possible defenders observation positions have been cleared so it propably was very difficult to guess what was behind the first lines of attack? Did this "clearing" also disturb the artillery counter fire because lack of info about the attackers possible infantry concentrations? It looks like Broken! also kept the artillery spotters almost at line with the infantry so that they immediately had LOS to the targets. It looks like this and the AVFs providing direct HE support were essential to the speed of the attack? Also the 6 pdr AT Guns are succumbing to enemy infantry before they get the chance to shoot at AVF:s. And the infantry is advancing so fast that those guns don't have time to use their HE against infantry much either. River side: The troops got into the starting positions at the river side very early and the amount of smoke delivered is huge! It looks that the coverage of the smoke needs really to be large enough for the whole area, to prevent high casualties. When I have tried to cross the same river against AI, I have apprently used the smoke much too sparingly. Also to smoke coverage from 150mm is huge compared to 81mm. I haven't seen how far the smoke lasted (yet), did you feel that there were enough rounds to fire from 150mm to last long enough. Do you use pausing firing of smoke to get it last longer? It looks that it stays there about a round or two before clearing away! Also the support fire from the hills by AVFs has been very effective. How do you feel, were the British tanks too fragile to duel with Germans, two of them are already lost? Very interesting battle indeed. Teddy

Yes, that was really devastating fire! To understand the different defensive forces I have tried to analyze their content. It seems that there have been great variations between 6 players: Infantry: from 7 1/3 to 12 platoons AVFs: from 2 to 6 Guns: from 0 to 6 FO:s from 0 to 4 While looking at the defensive positions I get the feeling that to cover the whole area with under 10 platoons the defense gets too thin? And if concentrated to the city the defense could be flanked? It also looks like the FO:s and their usage is the key to stop the enemy infantry. If used too early they don't have the maximum effect. Dropped into concentrated infantry like Vandal onto Hodo or Broken! onto Vandal it really made its job well! Most of the guns were only able to kill one enemy AVF so were they enough effective? One is enough but the risk to be in a wrong place is still quite big? Most of the AVFs were used in the city itself. Were the hills behind the city too far from the propable enemy positions so that they weren't used as hull down shooting positions? Or was the ground too wet so it was safer to keep AVFs in city? Teddy

I have been wondering so long how this map could be conquered within such a short time! So it is very interesting to see how a lightning attack can be done! So far I have gone through 13 minutes so the river crossing is yet to come! Thanks to you ALL for these very informative and educational AARs, the more I look at them the more impressed I am! To Broken! You really pressed the attack very hard and had the fire support to overhelm the defensive positions very fast. Am I correct to assume that you pre-planned the artillery strikes to suspected enemy positions and if nothing happened you retargeted the strikes. At least the 150mm spotter on the right looked to work like that? I would like to ask why you decided not to have the AVF:s in overwatch positions while your infantry went in? In this case it wasn't necessary because Hodo didn't send his armor to make counter attack but he might have done that? Also I noted that you used Move command for AVFs and not Fast. Is it related to the Damp groud, do the AVFs bog down easier when driving fast? Also I wonder wether there might have been a reason to leave one or two higher commanders back. Just in case the infantry might have run into trouble and there would have been the need to rally them. To Hodo It looks like Allied forces were covering a too large area too thinly and so they hadn't the possibility to support each other. In the first half of the battle the armor has been kept back. Would it have been possible to use armor to support your left flank? There weren't that many enemy AVFs but a lot of infantry which might have been slowed down by some HE fire? Teddy PS. I think that the tactics lessons like these will be very useful also on the eastern front. There are also rivers ...

The selection of AVFs for the attack bothers be somewhat. Are the main points to make the selection: - Have enough HE fire the be able to destroy the forward defences ASAP to avoid the time delay they arer causing. Also to have enough HE ammunition to support the attack into town? - Be enough hard to destroy because they have to advance to ridges around the city to provide suppoort fire to the attack into town? The ridges are very open and so a bad place to stay because everyone is trying to hit them. - Have low Ground Pressure to get to the position over damp ground? It seems that StuH42 is the most favorate AVF for the attack? What about the Wespes, are they too fragile to survive. Tigers are heavy, Panthers expensive, STuGs blast value is not as good as Stuh42. So would it be a reasonable choice to have a group of Panzer IV:s, StuH42:s and Wespes? A full eight Tiger force looked very impressive but is it really so effective? Teddy

This battle was very different from the others. The defense against the tigers was very effective. I was astonished to see how four of them were destroyed, apparently 17 pounders are very good! I went through the defensive platoons and it seems that they were carefully selected by their commanders abilities. The ones with "?" bonuses were selected to ambushes! Two of the leaders with least abilities were sent to forward observation posts and their platoons were given to Company commanders. Is this a common practice among more experienced players? Almost all the other players used sharpshooters as observers, any comment on not using them in this battle? Is there something else to be noted about the ability selections when choosing the platoons for their tasks? The left most ambush platoon had a very good place for ambush and it did execute one very effectively. However from that position it appeared to be difficult to get back safely. Could you elaborate why did you choose that place and not the ridge behind the pond. If given a second chance would you change the position and how? I also noted that there was a 4.2 inch spotter at the same site as the 17 pounder. Would it be more safe to hide the spotters away from the guns which attract counter fire as soon as revealed. Teddy

Thanks for directing me to a great "River crossing"-thread. There are very useful ideas, a lot to think about! I am also really interested to see how smoke has been used efficiently in the next winning AARs. It is so hard to wait... I wonder wether the smoke is "high" enough if dropped AT the fjords because the hills from where the attacker has to come down to the river are quite high, so can the defender shoot over the smoke? Is the smoke from 81mm mortars "large" enough or is there a reason to use two or three 75mm spotters with about the same point cost? Visually the smoke looks a bit larger!? Teddy

Fjords - smoke - TRPs? Ok, no HT's too far ahead in danger, and the low ammo squads should cover the flanks out of the heat of the battle. Thanks for the tips Another question regarding crossing the fjords. I think that out of the four games we have seen so far, in three there was a major attempt to cross the fjords but only Barleyman used smoke! I would guess that liberal use of smoke would help quite a lot? My question is how much smoke and where to drop it? Barleyman apparently chose to drop onto the most dangerous enemy position in his left. What about dropping it over attckers own troops AT fjords starting just before they start descending from the hill and continuing until they have crossed? Barleyman also had to wait for a while (2 minutes) to get it down, while the enemy was beating his troops. Would it have been possible to use a TRP to get it down faster? The hills around the city don't offer many concealed places where to put a spotter hiding while waiting them to deliver. I would be afraid to loose some of them. So that's why I would prefer to have TRPs is place. Is the smoke from 81mm mortars "large" enough or is there a point to use two or three 75mm spotters with about the same point cost? Teddy PS. Thanks for excellent AARs and the possibility to learn. Now I have to download number five and start enjoying it!!

Quite often in the AARs we can see squads with "Low Ammo" still been used for the attack. How much does it reduce the efficiency of those squads? The manual says that they don't fire except defending themselves. Will they still use hand grenades? Is it useful to send them to attack? Do they loose some of their morale in that situation? Teddy