Vark

Russian IL-2's on CAS tended to fly the 'circle of death', so perhaps its just biding its time, circling, waiting to unleash a scything torrent of 23mm API. We can only hope. Talking of CAS, wouldn't there realistically be the best part of a regiment attacking this target?

c3k's message to his troops

What is interesting is the Tiger was able to be hit eight times, by low velocity HE rounds, which suggest the first couple of hits really disabled the crews ability to fight the tank.

I like the way the flame rod sometimes curls in flight, but perhaps smoke at the point of impact?

Interesting, because Battlefronts own 'Soviet Infantry tactics' states that if engaged by previously unsuppressed units the Russian SL should give a fire order to the gun group when at 800m. The riflemen then close and open fire at ranges dependent on their proficiency. The German tactic and to some extent the later British tactic was the LMG leads and either with or without the SL, shoots the rifle group onto the objective, again both teams have mutually supportive but exclusive tasks. The US BAR and semi-auto rifle muddies the water, but training films suggests it was used also as a base of fire. A modern fire team, as I'm sure you are aware, is a self contained element designed for fire and movement, advancing in tactical pairs it allows far greater flexibility and can, with PIR's, operate a considerable distance away from the SL. I do seem to remember though, a large number of posts in a CMBB thread about the likelihood that any soldiers stuck to the manual, especially the Germans.

One would have thought armour in a forest would be harder to spot than armour out in the open. The Soviets lost tons of armour quite simply because they could and they were unwilling and unable to change a winning strategy this late on, however wasteful it was to a Western perspectives. if this were a realistic AAR and not a showcase for improvements to the admirable games system, Bil would have a battalion of infantry, a platoon of ISU-122's a company of T-34's with company of SMG troops and a significant pre-bombardment of various calibres. The current set up forces Bil to be far more cautious than a Soviet commander, still it's fun to watch.

Not off topic at all, there is an AAR going on between Bil and Elvis where there is a debate about the correct use of Soviet troops. Bottom line, don't get to close to them, use them like ammunition, they are there to achieve a goal, not be grieved over, that's for their pixel families, that's if they are alive after three years of Nazi occupation.

YankeeDog, sorry that was my whole point about the independence afforded the 'fire teams'. The Germans supposedly would make a gun team and a rifle team, not neatly divide a squad in half, similarly the US and UK practiced this method of sub-division, though as you have pointed out they were not autonomous units. Jason, yes that would be a good compromise, perhaps being unable to change the last orders, which might make the Soviet player reticent to micro-manage his units.

There's a reason T-34's had 60+ rounds of HE ammo and IS-2's had twice as many HE to AP! You advance, get engaged, sprint forward to the nearest cover, then hold on to any ground gained and wait as direct fire HE and the MMG's and HMG's supress the enemy, as a second wave hopefully move past the initial gains. Rinse and repeat until you have succeeded or failed. Attrition is the name of the game, not fancy fire and movement, or sophisticated fire support plans, that allow you to loose less men, but take more TIME. The main enemy for the Soviets, in 44, was not the Germans, but time, CMRT players have to be relentless and not fixate on their fallen pixel troopers. Who cares if Sgt Lemenko has only three soldiers left, if he is fulfilling his mission. He knows that, his soldiers know that and you as their commander should. Read c3k's posts and AAR's, for the right attitude to the Soviet method of war, trouble is his British Paras fought like Soviet Guardsman, but what a fight!

Wish an AFV crew could split, in real life the commander and possibly the gunner would have dismounted, and crawled forward to the forest edge to scope things out. They would have more than likely spotted the German armour, returned and then planned their attack. Steve, agree, the Soviet player should not worry too much about the butchers bill, if he is in a priority sector there will be plenty of bodies and AFV's to take over. Bil should only be worried that he is not seen to do his upmost to complete his allotted mission. I wonder if in future LMG teams could be separated as I've seen Russian DP gunners supporting their squad. Breaking modern soldiers down to fire teams, is contrary to most WWII tactics, even the Germans. Still, cannot wait to get my hands on TR and start some serious shock action.

You also have a roving plane you heard circling, so moving would be a wise precaution.

But if the solution is ahistorical and unrealistic, what then? Playing the Russians will only be frustrating because their legendary 'exploits' cannot be reproduced. Then again perhaps Bil is being punished because he is using them to execute a Western model, that values force preservation over constant momentum and it's attendant effects of rapid dislocation and shock.

Were Soviet troops historically fragile, when it came to morale? My impression was their C&C limitations made them less flexible, not less motivated, hence their historically high casualty rate. Inflexibility placed them into disadvantageous situations, and a lack of initiative kept them there too long, especially if command elements were absent. Mimicking the notoriously fragile Italians is not, IMHO accurate and although whilst presenting the player with frustrating C&C dilemmas, they are the wrong ones.

The ISU had the same gun and IIRC sighting system as the IS-2, and the Germans accorded that a great deal of respect, out to 1000m it has a decent chance of a first round hit and a high PK, if it does. The Panther crews were trained to put their tanks at a 30 degree angle when facing the 122mm. The ISU can also start chucking area fire HE to cause buttoning or crew casualties, and as Steve said the real tank killers are Bil's T-34 85's. If both ISU's are burning hulks, but Bil has the objectives, they did their job, though ISU-152's would have been better building busters.

Where is your Frontal Aviation when you need it? A good burst of 23mm would rattle those fascist tin cans, that's for sure. I think ISU-122's would be fine, as long as they have good hull down positions, the variable spotting gives them the vital seconds they need to fire and relocate. Caught in the open, they'd suffer badly though. Then again that 122mm is going to mess up buildings fast, nerfed or not.

True, Soviet tactics were often about forcing a conclusion rapidly so they could determine where the points of resistance were and rapidly pin or bypass them. Then again, Bil is more than aware of this, given his initial post. Excellent AAR, waiting for the final chapter, Gotterdammerung! Soviet style, given their atheistic leanings!

Another reason why the Soviet losses were so heavy was the tactic of making multiple passes over a target, until all air to ground ordnance had been expended. A relative interviewed a female IL-2 pilot, who was shot down in the Summer of 44, on her third pass over the target, which she said was quite usual.

You don't wear chain mail gauntlets at all, only mail ones (archaic armour pedant, sorry). As for the ISU-122's effectiveness, surely it depends on the pre-battle/engagement preparation? A platoon in turret (superstructure?) down positions, fully utilising the ability to attach delays to all waypoints and sequentially moving to hull down positions, before dropping back to reload, will be far more effective than the same vehicles caught in an ambush. I used to use the SU-152's to hunt in pairs, with the first often area firing to shock a target, and it's partner moving up to fire direct, shortly afterwards. Again, being able to issue fire commands, via waypoints, will increase the effectiveness of these tag-teaming tactics, especially with variable spotting, so an entire platoon of Panthers does not fire on you within the first three seconds, because a hidden sharpshooter unit has eyes-on, on your position!

Is the HE nerfed to simulate the greater spacing troops would normally take up? I only ask because that 122mm would, in real life, have surely injured that scout, even if it just deafened him!

Didn't some people claim the Panther in question had been a target before, so it's armour had been pre-fractured so to speak? Still a 122 or 152 AP round will cause massive levels of shock and I expect we will see a lot of crosses next to components and crew casualties, even for non-penetrating hits.

Just hope the trees are not shell proof though, it will be a bit silly to see a 152mm AP round absorbed by a sapling, which is still then standing!

Especially the over engineered German vehicles, wonder how accurate the optics of a Tiger were, after a non-penetrating hit on the turret?

It didn't help that the German counter attacks, against, bridgeheads or spearheads, were unimaginative replicas of tactics used before and burned up armour in needlessly aggressive actions. The Germans seem to have bought into their, Slavic studies bull and not cottoned on to the fact the Russians had learned their costly lessons well. Spearhead flanks were heavily reinforced by anti-armour assets as they had a good idea where the blow would fall. Secondly, the German production of unreliable uber-tanks played a role, unable to conduct long road marches they had to be transported by train and often debussed in such haste they could not establish a proper radio net. If they broke down, such was the paucity of assets to recover them and the speed of Soviet advances they were abandoned. The decision to go for small high quality units of armour, and investing heavily in their crews training, cost them dearly. So yes, Grofaz's endless dictates did not help, but neither did hind-bound armoured doctrine, and a fatal underestimation of Soviet capabilities. NATO publically bought into the German 'military miracle' myth and lopsided casualty rates from the AIW's, as proof, they could counter the Soviet Threat conventionally. Western Germany's understandable insistence on forward defence and no first use doctrine, would have left the NATO units vulnerable to a similar Bagration style hammering. Though if certain accounts are to be believed, the first wave of Soviet invaders, would have been tactical nukes.

If we are equating tiredness to mental, as well as physical degredation, perhaps FIBUA should be more draining. There are plenty of accounts of how utterly exhausting it is to maintain constant awareness, note most WWII units had not trained with specific sectors/arc boundaries for a modern squad. Most photos of German troops, in Stalingrad, have all the troops facing in a 180 arc and looking very strained. Perhaps, in future versions mental and physical states could be separated, though that would lead to quite a few subjective algorithms I think.

Given their lethality, perhaps this is the model of Papasha Bil's troops are using.