snake_eye

It will look somehow similat to that map. Since it is a tactical scenario, the upmost details won't be necessary, as long as the principal things are being taken care of. Here are the trenches modified and the fortified houses as promised. Cheers

I hope it will be up to your standard. By the way, as someone pointed it out rightly, I have reinforced the houses and the defense with sand bags and small stone walls. looks better. Cheers

No I did not. I haven't seen the map before, but a picture of the village. Wanat looks like many villages in the Afghan's valleys. You put a village in a deep valley which is winding, a narrow road following it and a river somewhere. You have all you need to set either a tactical attack, ambush and or defense sites. I shall have a better close look at your links tomorrow. All available information makes a better understanding of what happened; Thanks for these. Cheers

Mines were not allowed, from what I read and they did not have time anyway. The claymores were used to cover the most likely approach. The Taliban's had some parties turning them toward the US and ANA forces. Thanks again for the fortification suggestion. I shall post pictures tomorrow. It looks fine. Cheers

You got it, I shall put low walls and or sand sacks on the rim of the trenches. If I can get some rooftop fortified I shall do it. I don't think it will change mostly the defense ability of the US and ANA forces. Anyway, it is a good idea and it will look better. But there won't be any mines. The Russian had covered huge areas at the time with what was called Butterflies mines. They were designed to maimed a foot. That they did pretty well and casualties among civilians elderlies as well as kids were high. Because of the fact that they were dropped by chopters, they were not buried (neither were they designed to be) and sometimes, the areas were not well charted. The Russians had quite a few casualties themselves. If you want to move around, As I said you don't use mines, but listening devices to warn you of the movement of the enemies. You can then use Air assets and or artillery with particular rounds. They do better than the mines, if I can say. Cheers

There are no mines fields, since they will be a threat to the villagers and they will impair movement of the ANA and US platoons in the village. Besides it seems that orders are not to use them. In a real fight they would have had claymores (trip and or triggered directional mine) and trip flares devices for early and or short warning. Cheers

Wanat is a village, where US and ANA troops were severely assaulted the 13th of July 2008 (only disclosed lately). The defense of that village was not the best it could have been for different reasons. You will find in the numerous links about it and in the Forum. Anyway, following that battle there have been AAR and advices on what should have been done and what should be done from now on. Try the battle when it comes out in the next 48 hours and find for yourself a way out or at least to stay alive till the end. Cheers

Well, they are in the village or at its perimeter trenches. You'll be able to set the troops, humvee and BTR-60 (not the bunkers, only the crews) as you fit best suited in the scenario. Cheers

I shall upload a tactical scenario "WANAT" style in a day or two at the most. All details and pictures, besides the one shown below, can be seen on the Forum Tactical threads under the post named A "WANAT" Tacticals scenario to be uploaded" Cheers

Here are the last pictures of the scenario map Cheers

Nearly ready to upload, in a day or two, a new scenario fought on a 770 X 1650 meters map (Blue against the Red A.I - Marines V 1.20), I designed following the numerous press reports and forum posts about the « WANAT » attack. That scenario setting, while not following exactly what happened there, retains the main tactical issues that were pointed out. The village is located up north in a deep and narrow valley surrounded by high summits, with a winding road running through it, South bound to a large river, flowing West to East, 500 meters away. There, a bridge is the only way to reach the village through the river and the valley road. Needless to say the US Army C Company platoon, the scout team with a 50 cal Humvee, the ANA auxiliaries platoon two squads strong and their Recon team in a BTR-60 are beleaguered in the village houses and trenches. Two MG bunkers have been built on opposite steep slopes of the village to over watch the approach avenues, the best it could be done. Better said, than done. At the game opening, the Taliban’s are closing in and about to start their attack. The only outside support asset are 2 X 120mm mortars. The average, first “on the way” round is about 6 to 8 minutes. The only choice is to stay in defence, tighten the perimeter, and sight wisely the Humvee M2 and the BTR. Their only hope is to slow down the assailants and not to be overrun. A QRF made of an ANA, 3 squads strong platoon mounted on BMP’s, is on its way and should be view of the bridge in the next 15 minutes. They will be reinforced 15 minutes later by a US Army QRF platoon from C company made of 5 Bradley’s, 3 squads and an FO team in a BFIST (they will lower the “on the way” first round, average time, to 2 to 3 minutes). 2 Apaches will be able to rally over 15 minutes after the US Army QRF arrival. Tactically speaking with these 2 QRF forces, counter attacking should be easy, even without the Apaches. You should be able to reach the beleaguered force in the village quite quickly, that is if you are not taking in account, what is being learned in tactical courses. Well, I hope you will enjoy it as much as I had in the numerous tries I made before being satisfied with the setting. It was, however, difficult not to have the Taliban’s surrender too early, till I found a way to prevent it, by pure accident. Here are some shots of the area Cheers

I think Elmar is right, weapon reliablity was not a major contributor to what happened at Wanat, as well as the lack of water at certain time. I think that these facts are the ones to retain : 1/ There are no early warning of the Taliban closing in - No UAV around at the time - 2/ The mortar pit was out of commision in the first minutes of the attack (if I do not make a mistake) No more mortar support. 3/ They did not have sufficient high grounds position and good fields of fire with mutual support. The topography of the place was the worst to stand a defense, with no manned high ground covering them. The place was well known of the attackers, with locals among them. 4/ They came in close fight very quickly (Talibans threw stone at them to make them think it was grenades - just to show how close they were). the Talibans opened the irrigation water taps to cover their approach and crept among the village without being seen and heard. 5/ They did not have any back up prepared defensive position to fall back in. Assuming they could have fallen back, they should have had a certain amount of covering fire and that is not certain. 6/ They did not controllled their volume of fire or could not, due to the numbers of attackers. Some weapons jammed, overcooked or run out of ammo (that doesn't mean that the weapons are not reliable) and then some emplacement could not support neighbouring ones 7/ No Air Assets for the first hour.It is assumed from the AAR that the Talibans knew about the shift of the Apaches crews and of the earliest hour at which they could come to the rescue. It seems that the attackers started to fall back just before the Air assets came. Some however, were still in contact for a longer time. 8/ The fact that no so many bodies were found is normal in these areas. usaully a Taliban fighter is carrying its AK and just a few reloads. A younger one and or less experienced one is usually following behind with the ammo, the food and water for them. That way the fighter is travelling light and can better assault. The load bearer is the one replacing him if he is downed and or taking the wounded or the body away at the end of a rope , while near the defender. To bury the corpses is an upmost important thing for them. they do the upmost to get away with them. Cheers

You can't consolidate a base on higher peaks which is bigger than an OP. Why ?. Simply because that makes no sense. You must be able to limitate and or control the movement of the people leaving in or around the place you are securing. They move mostly in the valleys where the roads are being built. Since you must also be able to move quickly, you must use the roads and be able to secure them That is why from place to place a "Khe Sanh" consolidate defense post is being built. From there you radiate around through the roads and from them you go up the mountains path. The OP on higher peaks are very good for observation, but difficult to defend, since the weather is not always the best., Air assets can't be called quite a few times. Chopters are at great risk while resupplying these OP. What is preferred nowadays is to have light SF forces of 3 to 5 guys at the most being inserted at a convenient place, from which they radiate and try to find the Talibans in order to call an air strike on them. They should avoid any engagement. That unfortunatelly is not always feasible and they are to be extracted if possible or make a run for a safer place specially if they can't get Air asset to permit their break away. Coming back to the OP, it is unfortunate to see, that there is a tendency to rely on listening and radar assets while avoiding to have a team on higher grounds. Not many are happy at the idea of getting entrenched and not being able to see a thing in the morning mist. With the perpetual thought of being cutoff from the closest friendly troops and overrun, that doesn't make them very good at their observation job. It is too bad for us, that where, we move with difficulties, the Talibans are moving easily, despite the weather. Some even move barefooted in the snow at a good space ! All these things might explain partly the difficulties. We rely too much on technologies, which can't give every time, the best result in some of the adverse condition being found over there. The grunt asset (The infantry) has been described since the beginning of wars as the "Queen of the battle". You just can't do without him. Cheers

A big THANKS to you guys, such an easy thing to do and yet a pain in the A.., these late hours being unable to figure out how to do it. I guess that without your help, I will be still stuck. Good news the scenario is under testing and goes fine. it will be better with the ANA. will post a shot of the village ASAP. Thanks again to you Cheers

Well, I have no idea of the way to proceed to purchase in the Blue available units of the editor Red units, since I only get them in the Red purchase units. However, I have seen that It has been done by some designer, but I am unable to figure out how they did it. In one scenario, in the editor, the Red and the Blue purchase available units were showing the Unconventional and the Syrian Army. Yet there were some US Army units bought on the right cell. How did they got there ? More precisely, I am doing a scenario "Wanat style attack". I have set the Blue US Army Units as well as the Red unconventional, but I am stuck not knowing how to choose Syrian Army to depict the ANA and putting them in the Blue Units. I will be upset to have them look like US soldiers in the scenario. Thanks for your help. Cheers

You are right Steve, that was no accidental, if they bugged off. It seems in the AAR investigation that the Talibans knew about the change between the Apaches crews shifting from night to day duties. That change induced a necessary briefing and Apaches mechanical controls that had to be done before being able to respond to a call. The Talibans knew that they had around 45 minutes from the start of the attack (set at a time taking in account the shift of the crews) before Air asset might come. They seemed to know about the UAV being sent elsewhere (The question about UAV had been asked by an Afghan at the village, the day before the attack to a troop leader. Rather a strange question to be asked) Cheers

Other reports stating the failure to set OP on higher grounds, being quoted from the previous listed link : "By this point, we've seen that the company commander, the platoon leader, and the platoon sergeant all had misgivings about the deadly Wanat mission in eastern Afghanistan last summer. They feared that the enemy had been tipped off, that the mission was inconsistent with counterinsurgency doctrine, that they didn't have enough people to execute it properly, that it was coming too near the end of their unit's deployment, and the commanders and staff above them were distracted by the turnover to the replacement unit. This is from the sworn statement that the officer who was the best friend of Lt. Jonathan Brostrom, the platoon leader at Wanat, gave to an Army investigator: He told me he did not like it. . . 1st Lt. Brostrom told me he wasn't sure why they were trying to do this mission so close to the end of the deployment . . . . [He] was surprised and disappointed at the same time that they were trying to push this mission. I asked who ‘they' was and he couldn't tell me if it was coming down from BDE [brigade], BN [battalion], or just his company commander, but he knew he wasn't fond of the idea and nor were his men. 1st LT Brostrom expressed concerns to me about the number of men he was taking with him for the mission. . . . and that he was also concerned about the terrain surrounding the area. When I asked him about the terrain he said it was like Bella [another outpost], but he would have no OPs [observation posts] up above him. The lack of those higher observation posts would allow the enemy to creep to the edge of the new American outpost at Wanat during the night of July 12-13."

If that link has not yet been given, it is worth to be read to comprehend what went wrong at WANAT. http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/01/28/inside_an_afghan_battle_what_happened_at_wanat_last_july_i Some details quoted from that links about the attack : "The enemy had a battle plan ready before the Americans came on the scene. According to the military's internal investigation that I reviewed, the company commander was asked at dinner the night before the attack if there were UAVs operating in the area -- an interesting question to hear from an Afghan local. As the Taliban began the attack, they turned on an irrigation ditch, so the sound of rushing water would cover the noise of their footsteps and whispers. Their attack was well-coordinated, "a lot of fire all at one time," according to the company commander's statement. They got close enough to locate in the dark Claymore mines meant to defend the American position, and gutsy enough to turn around the mines. When they attacked, they first concentrated on the heavy weapons -- a big mortar, a .50 caliber machine gun and an anti-tank rocket launcher -- that could do them the most damage. And they fought close, so that it was difficult for fixed-wing aircraft to fire at them. They seemed to know they had at least 30 to 45 minutes before attack helicopters would be on the scene. The obvious lesson: Keep in mind that the enemy is also learning and adapting, especially in Afghanistan, where guerrilla warfare is the national sport. This takes us back to the previous lesson: you probably need more soldiers than you think. A second lesson: Get surveillance assets overhead before moving in, especially if you've been warned of an impending attack. If the weather is too bad for those aircraft to fly, consider delaying the mission."

Just watched the video about "WANAT". The Apaches FLIR recording are incredible. From what was shown on the video, Wanat was in a narrow and winding valley surrounded by high peaks. The defense was on the edge of the village near the bottom. If my representation of the battle is good. If that is the case, I don't understand why they have decided to defend such a place (yet, they move a bit away and didn't consolidate enough the new site). They should have had early warning post on the high peaks surrounding the place and set there HMG and FO for mortars (set in the new site) to control the avenue of approach to the village. They were denied the drone early warning. It had been diverted away. The Apaches came an hour after being called and the worst had been already done, they were in contact. If they had been able to be warned about the incoming Talibans and keep them away from the defensive post, even being pinned down, the mortars and the air assets will have done a lot of damage. What happen could have been anticipated and then avoided. No matter what you have in term of superiority, when the enemy is on your door, it is a man to man struggle. Unfortunatelly for us the Talibans are good at it and luckily for us unable to use military tactics at higher level than a squad and in the better case platoon size. If that had been the case, there would have been no survivors. The poor grunts did the upmost and even if they would have been superhuman, that would not have changed a thing. The place stunk for its unwise tactical location. It's too bad it happen.

Don't under estimate the LECLERC Tank. If you think that the M1A1 Abram's is at the top of the list of the tanks, it is surely at the top. but that doesn't make it absolutely the best. 2 of them have been set on fire, being hit at the rear during the 1st and the 2nd Thunder Run in Irak. One of them (1st Thunder Run)we are sure by a RPG 7 (the fuel leaking kept igniting again and again, leading to the lost of the tank) the other one (2nd thunder run) was shot still at the rear by an unknow round (the size of a pen) which set, the fuel leaking, once again on fire. The fire was extinguished and the tank was towed away. If French troops and materials could be available we could do pretty good scenario about Afghanistan Kapisa valley. Just to pull your leg a bit. If Battlefront doesn't do, it thinking that the French do not deserve it since it is not worth it commercially speaking, I think that France should reconsider its troops deployment overthere and let the English speaking deal with the Talibans. Oh, just a final thought, since Talibans do not play at CMSF and by that way are not worth to be put into the game, I think that the war overthere is over, since no one is interested in the belligerent other than the Marines and the S.F. They won't have anyone to fight anymore ! Cheers

Some Taliban leaders have been trained by the british SAS when they were fighting the Russian. If these leaders, are still around, they had time to teach others on how to attack and vanish as well as how to set mortars and HMG to best effect. They were not slowed in their attack at the time by the Russsians chopters. When the weather is not so good, for air assets, the Talibans are out. They choose a target and will move on it coming by different paths, strike and leave by others paths. Usually these paths are more suited to goats than men and they use multiple caves layouts during the nights. They know that thermals and night vision are at the best at night. They move during the days and look more like goats keepers than soldiers. They don't do as said too much damage. They are better at triggering IED along a road, shooting a bit the convoy and vanish again. They shoot, get rid of their AK in a hide place and return to their work in the fields. The kids are giving a hand, signaling a coming convoy for the trigger man and waving hands to the fututre targets. I think that, I will try to set such an ambush in CMSF. The difficulty is to set the timing. If I decide to have them shooting 5 to 10 minutes and leave, I will have to set the convoy right away in the ambush.It would have been better for play to move it around the narrow roads and think that the ambush might be at the other bend of the road. Well, I give it a try anyway in the next days and let you know. Cheers

I think that it will be too bad not to have the French 2nd DB (they disembarked at Utah beach the 1st of August '44) in CM Normandy. That should not too difficult to be done, since they were entirely equipped with US clothing, guns and vehicles. We could make multiples scenarios of the breakthrough toward Paris from Avranches, Mortain, passing by the Falaise pocket and so on, till the Kufra pledge of Gal LECLERC had been fullfilled with the take over of Strasbourg. Let's hope

Looks like the Red have had quite a few tracks and or tanks smoked in the background. Am I right ?

When you are considering 30% loss as a possible outcome, you should not attack. However , I think that the player will have difficulties using wisely (that is at the good spot and at the right time) the artillery, mortars, and air asset. However, if the player is doing it rightly, the casualties might be even less than 5%. But for that, the enemy has to be pinned down and pretty much shaked down. If you are really, intending to deny the crossing to the Blue, by choosing Red, good field of fire, that won't happen and the attacker will have to fight hard for succeeding in crossing, establish themselves on the high ground, secure the crossing and prevent an eventual counter attack, feasible in a 3 hours game. I won't move the truck, till the crossing site is secure and then only to a safe place in order to replenish eventually the platoons thet were in point. Can't wait either to give it a try Cheers