Jammersix

How do you train the little dudes to respond to their designations and what their jobs are? I have to do everything...

FOs with UAVs stay behind. The rest move with their HQs. I do everything I can to shorten the time; I prefer 30 seconds, anything more than 90 seconds or two minutes is useless.

No matter which side the poor bastard commanding the tank is fighting for, everyone, including his buddies, are shooting at him.

That's a terrible graphic, from a graphic point of view.

Why are you guys talking about Tunguskas? I want to know if mortars or airburts affect tanks.

I've heard this claim before, originally from Sublime. Has anyone confirmed that it actually happens? Immobilization is easy to confirm, however, how do you quantify (and thereby confirm) sensor degradation? If you're driving around in an M1A2, and you go through a mortar barrage, how do you know that you didn't see something that you would have seen without the mortars, since that isn't what happened? It seems to me that this claim is trying to prove a negative: that mortars deprived you of something you would have detected, and that is, by definition, impossible to prove. So how has it been demonstrated that this actually happens in the game?

I just drank beer until I felt the urge to post, then made **** up as I went along. Did you like it?

Every time I choose indirect fire. What other mechanisms are there in the game to compensate for artillery ammo?

I have no idea what the casualties are, I've never tracked them. Against the computer, the only way you could track them would be to take enemy casualties, track and subtract individual casualties inflicted by each friendly unit, and assume that indirect fire killed the remainder. Even then, you would have no breakdown between different kinds of artillery, or even between artillery and tac air. For that reason, I've never bothered. Although, now that I put it in words, it means adding two data cells and two simple calculations to my ammo spreadsheet... Yes, if I'm going indirect, I bring as many platoons of indirect fire as I can afford because of ammo. Units on the board can get crowded, there can even be genuine traffic jams at choke points, particularly once the first vehicle is hit. Putting an entire armored task force across one small bridge or driving them down two or three specific streets can create kill zones filled with burning vehicles. For that reason, I tend to limit forces on the board to a specific echelon, usually either a reinforced platoon, a team, or a team reinforced with HHC, and spend my remaining money on support for that maneuver element. Deciding what echelon my maneuver element will be is the first choice I make, and is dictated by the size of the engagement (money available.) Deciding the type of maneuver element is the second choice I make, and I decide based on terrain. I almost never pick pure infantry, because in all terrain, infantry backed up by some kind of vehicle is more gooder. I frequently run indirect fire platoons empty. I believe there is only one rate of fire, "heavy". For that reason, I try to use smoke first out of each platoon, but if I lose the smoke, I lose the smoke.

I use artillery for three main missions: obscuring vision (smoke), destruction of infantry who are too stupid to be in a building, (airburst) and destruction of specific buildings (155 point attack, general). I use any indirect fire for smoke or infantry, and 155s to destroy buildings. I almost never plan any artillery strikes before the game starts, and I never plan airstrikes before the game starts. Given contact from an enemy in anything but a building, I call in smoke and airburst from different tubes, given infantry in a building, I call in smoke from any tube and a general, point attack from a 155 on the building. If possible, I limit all indirect fire to either a point, a short line or a very small area, and I hit the same target with a mortar, a smoke mission and a 155 mission. The mortar hits first, and serves to make them re-evaluate their decision to fire at me, then the smoke hits and makes it hard for them to shoot at me, and finally the 155 comes in to kill them. A mortar that fires in 30 or 40 seconds changes everything, instantly. I call in indirect fire first, because when the clock is running, time is on my side. Artillery missions can always be cancelled. I bring all indirect fire in platoons. It's better to have two platoons of 155s rather than one battery, because they can target different places or types of missions at the same time. And you can still stack them up if you really need to. I buy mortars in platoons because a section always seems anemic to me. 81s and 120s don't kill AFVs very often, although it does happen. But not often enough for it to be a tactic. Generally speaking, I use all mortars either as smoke tubes or against infantry. 155s on general will kill anything up to and including T-72s. Everything except Javelins and M1A2s struggle against T-90s, not even smoke is very effective. I make a specific decision when buying forces: direct fire or indirect fire. It's on the checklist. If I go with direct fire, I cut all FOs and FIST vehicles out to spend the money other places. If I go indirect, I make sure my indirect fire is effective indirect fire. ("Effective" being defined as fast enough to matter, big enough and numerous enough to hurt and accurate enough to hit.) Elite FISTers, elite batteries, and plenty of TRPs after our discussion on TRPs. I've actually come to prefer TRPs over UAVs, something I never thought I'd say. I prefer arty and mortars to tac air, because of the cost. I only bring that stuck up airdale if I have an extra six thousand points to spend on air. Apaches are great on paper, but they get shot down too easily to bring unless you have an airtight plan to get the enemy AA before you bring in the Apaches. I will admit that if you have two or more Apaches and the enemy has lost all his AA, you will win. But that's not an easy condition to guarantee, and it's really easy to miss one or two tiny Iglas. Besides, if you can get all his AA, you're probably going to win anyway. I prefer howitzers to Paladins because of the ammo. I prefer 155s to any mortar, and I only bring 81s if it's all I can afford. And finally, if you might be my opponent someday, remember that I could be lying just to look good.

You're welcome. Here's the next game I played. Battle type: Probe Battle size: Medium Length of battle: 45 minutes Map selection: Automatic Map size: small Environment: city Year: 2017 Month: June Daylight: Random (Dawn) Weather: Random (Clear) Ground: Dry Rarity: Loose Attacker (Player): U.S. Army Defender: Random Red Map is “City-Damaged 096r” Intent is for a high density CQB, conducted by U.S. Infantry. The U.S. force is a mechanized rifle company (mixed), mounted in Bradleys. They have no supporting arms, scouts or engineers. The company F.O. has been stripped out along with the UAV. This is probably close to the worst case I would involve infantry in. The only thing that would be worse than this is the same battle without vehicles of any kind. The strategy is the move up the west block to a flanking position west of the main objective, set vehicles in an L on the north and west sides of the main objective, turn the infantry east and sweep through the main objective. The tactics are to set heavy weapon systems (both an M1A2 and M2A3) on the first and second north-south street on the western side of the objective, and move dismounted infantry through the blocks themselves. The turn to the east will begin when vehicles are set at the far corners of the flanking position facing east. Infantry will move in teams by squads. Platoon leaders will dismount, the Company Commander and XO will remain mounted. Vehicles will smoke streets before infantry crosses them for as long as the vehicles have smoke. The infantry are carrying M320s and M4A1s as squad marksman rifles. They will not take any extra ammo or any weapons from the vehicles. Enemy armor is to be engaged with armor, not infantry. Infantry will set up dismounted. The basic load for an infantry squad: 5.56: 3,470 40mm HEDP: 52 Grenades: 25 AT4: 2 Aftermath: The game ended in a U.S. Army Tactical Defeat. U.S. casualties were 9 KIA, 6 WIA, 2 armored vehicles lost. Enemy casualties were 83 KIA, 71 WIA, 1 MIA. The enemy turned out to be Russian infantry. There was one infantry team that could have used more 5.56 ammo. A team, 1st Squad, 2nd Platoon was down to 32 rounds of 5.56 between five men. When the battle ended, there were nearby vehicles that the team could have reached safely carrying literally tons of 5.56 ammo. Conclusion: in this, one of the worst cases for U.S. infantry, carrying a basic load, only one team ran virtually out of ammo. Running out of ammo is an extremely rare circumstance for American infantry. If extra ammo is needed by infantry, that infantry should rely on ammo carried in nearby vehicles rather than sacrificing any mobility to carry any extra ammo on foot. Ammo2.pdf

No, that's the ammo that was left at the end of the scenario. "Did Not Engage" is a note I made so I could look at the ammo they're carrying and know what a full load looks like.

First shot at collecting real ammo consumption data. This is the end state, I collected this data by hand and entered in a spreadsheet after playing the computer. I'm trying to determine how much ammo is enough. My first impression is that infantry never needs to carry anything extra, and that if it were possible, it would be good to drop a great deal of what they start with. This scenario does not do much to demonstrate anything, but it does show that vehicles don't need any extra ammo at all. This scenario ended in a U.S. Total Victory, a Russian Surrender. It was played on Iron, in Real Time. It was a huge scenario, played on a small map. Since I managed to forget to record which map, I've included a screen shot of the map. The U.S. force was an excellent quality Combined Arms Task Force, using one armored company, Delta Company, the Task Force HHC, two airstrikes which never got a chance to hit and an extra battery of 155s. Comments are invited. AAR Ammo.pdf

Why? Unless ammo is a victory condition, I submit that it's meaningless unless it causes casualties. The casualties themselves, whether enemy or friendly, are meaningless unless they're a victory condition. If I fire the last round to win, I win. (If ammo is a victory condition, I'll find another scenario. It's a completely unrealistic victory condition. If you ordered me to finish this battle with X% ammo, I'd tell you to kiss my ass after you drag your ass up here and fight the battle without touching the Golden Reserve Box Of Ammo. If it's my ass they're shooting at, be ready to hand me every last round.) Another view of this is that I'd love for my infantry to all run out of ammo every scenario. That would mean that they all fired all that basic load at the enemy. That's number one. Number two is that it meant that the enemy had to deal with 3 incoming Javelins per squad, and that's a wet dream for the U.S. player. And number three is that if I can ever get all that lead, fire and missiles to go downrange at once, then my armor can kill everything that's left. Trading infantry for enemy armor is a trade I'll make all day, every day. So no, I don't need my infantry to have AT weapons at all times, even when they're engaging tanks, because I think I need to kill the enemy tank, but I don't necessarily think that I need my infantry to do it. As far a MOUT goes, when you're facing enemy armor with nothing but infantry, run into a building and out the back door. It really, really annoys armor officers. The victory conditions are the victory conditions. To paraphrase Admiral Fisher, everything else is twaddle. (The actual quote, speaking of the 19th century English navy, is "gunnery, gunnery, gunnery. All else is twaddle.") No, I almost never play Red. I like to win. I play city maps a lot. I like to use Bradleys to level buildings, and Abrams to shoot anything that runs out of them. That is the proper use of infantry.

Okay. I have different objectives, I think. My objective is to win the scenario, not for everybody to have ammo at the end of the scenario. So. In most cases, my MGs never fire, let alone run low. I realized this after I started tabbing through my forces after every scenario. First I did it just to see what was inflicting the most casualties on the enemy (Abrams, across the board. The game is built on the premise that he who has the Abrams and the Bradleys wins. First place Abrams, second place Bradleys. Always.) and then I noticed that everyone still had 3 Javelins left, as well as all their AT-4s. That's when I started taking careful note of what ammo everyone had after combat. That led to another problem-- why do all these people still have full ammo loads? The answer was that only a small percentage (far less than ten percent) of my infantry ever engages. I average less than one enemy vehicle per scenario to all infantry AT weapons. Then I started to look at ammo consumption only on those units that had inflicted casualties. Those were the only units that I knew had engaged the enemy, and they're the only units that matter as far as ammo consumption goes. And that's when my personal epiphany occurred. (I never knew how to spell that word, but there's a sloop in our club named Epiphany.) If all a unit does is walk, (and such a unit can still make a significant contribution to a victory) then it doesn't need extra ammo. A unit doesn't need more ammo until it's running low. It only runs low when it engages the enemy, and when that happens it may well die, in which case it will do so before it runs out of ammo, and it still won't need to carry extra ammo. There is no need, therefore, to carry ammo for everyone, because they won't all engage the enemy, and of that tiny portion that does engage the enemy, most won't run out of ammo, and by then you're down to a small enough percentage of your force that it just doesn't matter. When a unit does runs low, it will take ammo from a vehicle if the vehicle is close enough. It still doesn't need to carry that ammo. And if a given team uses all it's ammo, it's usually easier to get a vehicle next to them than it is either for them to carry extra ammo or for them to get next to a vehicle. And finally, the grim truth. If you have a team that runs low on ammo, be it an infantry team or an MG team, the bottom line is that your victory better not depend on the survival of any single team. So my suggestion is that you start tabbing through your force after every fight. Every Javelin you have left on the back of some private, every thousand rounds of 5.56, every 40 mm grenade is a waste. It's nothing less than a waste of mobility and endurance that you could have used to win the fight. You traded that mobility and endurance for something your people didn't need-- dead weight.

They will, if you stay long enough.

I believe you.

The fast button doesn't disappear before loading up. It disappears as a result of loading up. Take a Stryker squad. Pick up everything in the Stryker. Jump out, hit fast. Then hit quick. Let us know what happened. The worst offenders are exactly what you'd think they'd be: three Javelin missiles and the AT4s. Then comes all that 7.62 ammo. 7.62 ammo is also the least useful-per-kilo. It's the last ammo to get used, so the squad carries it the longest, and the squad uses it at a maximum rate of one round per shot, and that's if the squad has a Marksman that uses it. Otherwise, the squad is acting as bearers for MG teams, and will never get rid of it unless they're standing next to an MG team when it runs low. And MG teams rarely run low. Because, well, you'd have to fire your machine gun to run low of ammo. Furthermore, if the MG team is next to both a vehicle and the bearer squad, it looks to me like it will take ammo from the vehicle before it will take ammo from the squad. Some sort of weird "respect" for the player's choices. So I never remove 7.62 from vehicles, and train my MG teams to set up near vehicles, any vehicle, and run towards a vehicle if they run low on ammo. If an MG team actually fires at the enemy, I award them all ARCOMs for doing so, and if they actually fire at the enemy enough to run out of their basic load, I upgrade it to a Bronze Star. A posthumous Bronze Star. There is one more side to this argument, something I noticed a while back, and have been turning over in my mind, without either a reasonable way to test or a method to measure the results: does ammo impact a decision to fire? Units (any unit) rarely if ever fire their last shot. (Except for missile teams. Javelin and Stinger teams will cheerfully fire everything available. Then they go face down in the mud, put their hands over their ears, and chant "nope, nope, nope, not me, not me, I got no ammo!" until the scenario ends. ) They want to hang on to the last of their ammo in case something worse happens. I've seen what I believe supports that premise, but I haven't figured out a way to determine whether or not there is a continuum between "I'm not firing my last ammo unless I have to" and "we have a ton of ammo! Fire!" If that's true, it would seem to me that it's an additional benefit of lots of ammo, although it's probably a small one relative to the penalties imposed by weight. I know that in Shock Force, before it was abandoned, there was very little penalty for extra weight, and I know they intended to do something about it. In Shock Force, if I could get it to load, I had a policy of taking everything that was shiny off of vehicles, because any weight penalty was so low. Now I have the opposite policy, I don't take anything except Javelin launchers and Stingers unless I already need them.

So far, a lot of what you call "improvement" isn't improvement in my opinion. There is another facet to this, and that is Battlefront's limits. Battlefront has shown that they are limited in very specific ways, and while whether or not your suggestions are improvements, merely changes or detrimental, every change requires resources. Battlefront has always operated at the limits of their resources, and they have many areas that need attention before changes to things that many of us view as acceptable are assigned resources.

Then this might not be the game for you.

That all said, I will confess that when the first piece of enemy armor is spotted, everyone who's not command and is still in a vehicle picks up the Javelin launcher.

Into what? I always split into teams, but I never split the teams. If you're talking about carrying ammo, study the math. If you study the math carefully, you will arrive at the inescapable conclusion that splitting squads does not produce more manpower or more carrying capacity. Carrying more ammo produces slow, tired squads. Splitting into teams and carrying more ammo produces slow, tired teams.

MGs within one or two squares of a vehicle will automatically take ammo from that vehicle. So no, I don't load extra ammo, I look for excuses not to load anything more than they're already carrying. As soon as you load missiles, you lose the ability to move fast. Load enough, and you lose the ability to move quick. I keep the mobility as high as possible for as long as possible. I've only had a unit run low on 5.56 once. If a unit runs low on ammo, MG, 5.56 or AT, it usually gets destroyed long before it runs out of ammo.

It's a good thought. I'd just need to re-label the zone on the map.

Situation NATO forces have deployed along the Dnieper River in a desperate attempt to stop the Russian forces that smashed Ukrainian forces in the area of the frontier twenty-three days ago. The Russian forces, consisting of the storied 8th Guards Tank Army reinforced with an additional tank regiment, are racing west on the E-50. Ukrainian resistance has evaporated. The U.S. 2nd Infantry Division has been thrown forward, with orders to stop the Russian advance. The 3rd Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division is located approximately twenty kilometers in front of you, directly on the E-50. The 2nd Infantry Division TOC is located with them. In the last 48 hours, Russian mechanized infantry has pushed out two salients around 3rd Brigade that threaten to surround it. The salients are very close to closing on the small town of Novohurivka, a tiny hamlet directly on E-50. The general lift battalion from the 101st Airborne (Airmobile) is currently supplying the 3rd Brigade by air. E-50 is one of two MSRs supplying 3rd Brigade, and therefore must be secured again as soon as possible. The E-50 runs directly through Novohurivka. In addition, there is a small, ancient smuggler’s route running east and west located just off the E-50 to the south that 8th Guards is using to funnel supplies and equipment into Novohurivka. There is also a ridgeline that crosses the E-50 running north and south that is being used by 8th Guards for firing positions. As the pinchers close on 3rd Brigade, the 8th Guards Tank Army is committing more and more units to the encirclement, including large numbers of aircraft. Units from three separate regiments have been identified. This leads to the conclusion that 3rd Brigade is under attack from at least a division sized element of 8th Guards Tank Army. In the last thirty minutes, 3rd Brigade has been attacked from several directions; two mechanized companies at separate positions on 3rd Brigade’s perimeter have been overrun and destroyed. Enemy armor was destroyed less than 500 meters from 2nd Division TOC. Under this enormous pressure, 3rd Brigade has turned west, and is fighting towards your position. Mission Your mission is to occupy and secure the MSR from any possible enemy interdiction, and allow it to be used to resupply and relieve 3rd Brigade. You are to hold the E-50 open and allow 1st Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division to pass through you one hour from now. In one hour, a battalion of the 101st will conduct an air assault into the area occupied by 2nd TOC and 3rd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division. At the same time, 1st Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, which is forming up behind you, will pass through you to join with and relieve 3rd Brigade. The E-50 must be clear of enemy forces by then, or we risk losing 2nd TOC, 3rd Brigade, and any airmobile forces lifted in to them. To meet this timetable and to relieve 3rd Brigade at the earliest possible time, you must clear the E-50, the smuggler’s route, the ridge and Novohurivka itself of enemy forces within 30 minutes. Friendly Forces You command Task Force Jammer, a balanced Task Force centered on the 2nd battalion of the 9th Infantry, 1st Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division. Task Force Jammer redeployed from Korea to this theatre 16 days ago, and has been re-equipping and training hard. Morale is high, all supplies are complete and all personnel are completely acclimated. Task Force Jammer is strung out along the E-50, and there appears to be questions about exactly where the maneuver elements of your command are. In theory, your Teams were traveling east on or near the E-50 about three minutes apart, with Task Force HHC traveling between Alpha and Bravo. It is possible that that is no longer the case. You will be allocated CAS and artillery as deemed necessary. Enemy Forces You face the 8th Guards Tank Army. They are equipped with the best the Russian army has to offer. They are allocating both artillery and CAS to the Novohurivka area as it becomes apparent that supply for our 3rd Brigade is in jeopardy and that the encirclement may succeed. Both enemy ground forces and support for those enemy forces are increasing by the minute. At least one company of mechanized infantry is dug in around Novohurivka, and more is arriving from the north, south and east. G-2 is not able to say how many forces are bound for the E-50, and how many are simply moving southwest through the area adjacent to the E-50 to attack the other hardball supplying 3rd Brigade. Plan Make the plan, Colonel. You do not have time to be delayed by anything. Design Notes Play as American vs. the computer only. There are no Blue plans, and a human Red player would have overwhelming strength. This is not a scenario for junior officers. If you are a company grade officer who prefers small numbers of subordinates, this scenario is not for you. This scenario is for Lieutenant Colonels and higher ranks. Various mechanisms have been used to make different reinforcement units appear to come from different places at different times. The vision was to create a scenario that would always play differently. Therefore, there are Red reinforcements that don’t always show up— their variable time takes them past the end of the scenario most of the time. In very rare instances, no Red reinforcements will show up. In a scenario that would be equally rare, they all might show up, and then you’re going to get your pecker stomped shut. In between the two extremes should be good, unpredictable games. It is also a very hard scenario to win. I’m waiting on directions on how to change my apostrophes back from illegible DOS goop to apostrophes. I also need to figure out how to create graphics for Strategic, Operational and Tactical maps. You may end up with Xs and Os.