Chibot Mk IX

From one of my PBEM game, scenario "Ambush" 
After several RPG sighting, the doomed Ukraine BTR driver put the gear to reverse. Unfortunately this action exposed his rear to a separatist LMG gunner. 
A long burst 7.62mmx54R teared into the BTR's engine, cut down two crew, ignite the fire. All three trapped in the BTR were killed

 
Separatist was watching the burning BTR. On his left another Ukraine BTR speed through the ambush site

From one of my PBEM game, scenario "Ambush" 
After several RPG sighting, the doomed Ukraine BTR driver put the gear to reverse. Unfortunately this action exposed his rear to a separatist LMG gunner. 
A long burst 7.62mmx54R teared into the BTR's engine, cut down two crew, ignite the fire. All three trapped in the BTR were killed

 
Separatist was watching the burning BTR. On his left another Ukraine BTR speed through the ambush site

USMC Loading up equipment for a predawn beach assault. 

Assault Ship USS Wasp off the cost of the fictional country of Abbudin. 




 

Thank you. 
Obviously the question of a specific solution, versus a generalised "correct" one is a different one.

My actual solution to the problem assumed that the correct way about this was to be bold, and to use the platoon to "attack" the left hill, and if there was anyone there, they'd make contact, find out what they could, then break.

Route in:

The "South Yard" is the only viable covered rally point, so that's where the "run" part of hit-and-run is going.

At the orchard, using the low walls as cover for the low BMPs. Started to pick up contacts,  which the BMPs opened fire on.


 
Progressing the attack across the orchard and finding some AT-14's.

The nice thing about the Russian smoke launchers is that the BMPs can cover the retreat of the recon platoon - their smoke will travel forward enough to give them cover.


Obviously, this is accepting a large amount of risk for that asset, but it does give a very good picture of what forces are actually present. I think this kind of thing might actually be the way the asset is intended to be used, but that was the question really - what's the intended purpose of the infantry battalion recon platoon.

Yes, 
FYI, BRDM Rec company should have some ATGM version BRDM in the units too
OK, I am speaking from my memory so I could be totally wrong on this
http://i257.photobucket.com/albums/hh240/andyrix/Soviets/Advanced Guard/Slide2_zpstxuv4qr2.jpg
IRL, the Recon Platoon boarding on IFV should come from the Rec Battalion (Bn.) assigned to Regiment (Regt.) . A regular Mech Inf Bn usually don't have a Recon Plt in its OOB, they can build their own recon plt by their own.  The dedicated Rec Plt is the backbone of combat recon patrol or forward attachment, these are important parts in Soviet doctrine.  Different units in Soviet military has different task based on doctrine, but Soviets is doing their best to mix individual units into a dual-task TF.   
In combat recon patrol you will need some boots on the ground ahead of the formation, some target to let the enemy to shoot at . The task force should be strong enough to drive away enemy recon, it can also be used to ID enemy main resistance position if other recon element failed to do so.  The recon plt on IFV should be able to carry out this task independently, but no surprise if it is reinforced with a tank plt.
In forward attachment task the rec plt will be part of the task force, built with tanks, Inf, AT, engineer, NBC and artillery observation units. They are going to assign some important task, like capture a bridge, strike enemy HQ position.
 
And Soviets believe due to the natural of maneuver warfare , the attacking and defensing could change rapidly. That is the reason why their recon element has ATGM in their organization since 1960's, at that time period American scouts were still riding on M113 and shooting with M16, we Chinese recon were still practicing shooting target 600m away with a type 56 SAR (SKS) . Since the recon element will be the first to contact with enemy counter attack force, Soviets believe its recon has the responsibility to slow down the enemy's counter attack. So that the main body have the time and space to transfer from a road marching formation into a defense formation.  Whether by Ambush or by head to head fight, the decision lays in the Recon force commanding officer's hands.
 
 
 
       s 
 
 
 

I think it is important to diffirentiate between the standard practice of using the units to generate BTGs (essentially splitting them apart in wartime into independent commands) vs generating temporary mission orientated task forces or detachments, such as forward detachment, flanking detachment, forward guard, etc, which operate within the overall mission and intent of their parent unit or formation.
p.s. the idea of forward detachment is not knew, it was used not only in WW2 but before then, as you always could use a force to secure key points or routes in advance of the main forces, to fix defending enemy forces until the main forces arrive (or bypass) etc.

After months in the making, I have finally completed my campaign Valleys of Death. It turned our to be quite an ambitious project, with 11 missions!
The campaign revolves around a US Army light infantry company, manning a remote combat outpost in an Afghanistan inspired terrain.
Unlike classic CMSF, which highly favors shock and awe and maneuver warfare, Valleys of Death deals with the issues of small units operating in a clearly defined AO. This means that, like in real life, you will conduct operations on the same map many times, with each mission focusing on different areas and objectives. By the end you will come to know the area very well, and this knowledge is key to defeat the enemy.
Features:
    11 missions     A large 2X2 km map and 2 additional maps     Modern counter-insurgency infantry combat     Heavily inspired by Afghanistan related media (Restrepo, Taking Fire, etc.)     Base game, no modules needed



 
Download from Dropbox
Please let me know ASAP if this link doesn't work! I'm not exactly a Dropbox wizz  

A quick guide to Cold War doctrine, much of which is still applicable in CMBS:

https://balagan.info/soviet-order-of-battle-and-doctrine-in-the-cold-war
In particular:

 
 

I was looking through my old screenshots folder and couldn't remember if I had posted these anywhere.
An advancing Soviet rifleman stopped to take a shot with his Mosin at a German AT gun across the street.

 
The view from the gun:

 
The gun fired and the shell flew through the wooden fence, between the guy's legs, then through the front door of the house behind him, and then finally exploded against the opposite wall. The shell was flying mere inches from the ground.



 
That was one lucky bastard! The gun crew was not so lucky considering what happened to them a few moments later. I thought that was one of the more unusual shots I've seen in these games.

Hmmmm ive seen this beach assault before!
 
 

Tunguskas are very deadly for Raven and Shadow UAVs.  The only UAV that is safe is the Gray Eagle.  The Gray Eagle is only safe if it does not use its Hellfire missiles.  If I think the OpFor has a Tunguska, I make the Tunguska a priority target and try not to use air support.  No UAVs (except Gray Eagle), no fixed wing & no choppers.  In an ideal situation if I had a Gray Eagle I would attempt to locate the Tunguska with the Gray Eagle and destroy it with precision rounds.  Then I would bring in my remaining air support.  But dealing with a Tunguska (or two or three) can be a real PITA. 
Below is some general information on UAVs that might give you some ideas.  Good luck.           
US UAVs:   Raven shot down by AAA, Shadow shot down by AAA & SAMs, Gray Eagle only shot down by AAA & SAMs during attack.  
General UAV Information:   
UAVs are equipped with high resolution cameras and thermal imagers, allowing them to be used night or day.
Experience of a UAV determines how long it takes to get on station (If UAV is deployed in setup it arrives on station 1st turn).
Experience affects the observation/detection ability of the UAV and for the US Gray Eagle the time to fire a Hellfire. 
If a spotter has a satellite link, via PDA or vehicle, the spotter can call for artillery fire on any area observed by any friendly UAV. 
UAVs have three types of targets: Point, Area & Linear. UAV missions don’t need LOS & can be placed anywhere on the map anytime.
Small UAVs (US Raven & Russian ZALA) have up to 400m area & linear observation.
All other UAVs have up to 700m area & linear observation.
UAV status: Receiving, Preparing, Observing.  UAVs can be adjusted but the status will read preparing not adjusting.
If the controller for a Raven or Zala UAV is KIA or incapacitated while the UAV is in the air, the UAV will crash. Larger UAVs auto cancel.
Units that are spot objectives can be spotted by UAVs.  

I won't surprise if it was shot down by Tunguska. 
RQ-7 is a small size UAV, but it is not a stealth UAV. 
My guess the RCS of RQ-7 should be in the range of 0.1m^2 ~ 1m^2 . So it could be hard to detect by radar at long distance or by old generation mobile SAM radar, but not invisible to the modern radar at short distance 
If the RQ-7 is circling over a Tunguska for couple minutes , I won't surprise at some time Tunguska's radar be able to catch enough radar reflection signal , then using either IR or optic to ID the target before firing a burst of 30mm 

Here comes version 1.2: I modded the Syrian fighters so that they wear at least some camouflage. The mod folder linked below also contains my previous work on the Syrian regular forces.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bwgu0k7bdjpblkr/AADo5tmmL0RTWPz8omGaS6twa?dl=0

This has come up before, even back in the old CMBO days when CM was closer to its hex wargame roots,  but in Elite and Iron modes it would be interesting to introduce a limit on the total number of units (% of total in play) the player could issue commands to each WeGo turn. Not sure of the RT equivalent, but it could mitigate the 'speed chess' clickfest issue that makes RT H2H a rarity for most of us.
1. The limit would be set based on: 
(a) formation quality (reflecting likelihood of units to take initiative);
(b) comms, using a 1-5 scale set by the designer to reflect radios/wire, visibility, terrain, atmospherics etc. (emplaced defenders would usually be a point higher?)
2. Units in command all the way up to the top HQ (the player) would be exempt from the limit. This could also tempt the top dog to go forward and get things moving.... at his own risk, which speaks to the thread topic.
3. Elite status units (exceptional self-reliance) and units not yet in contact (Rested, zero Alerted status) might also be exempt, so the entire formation can advance to contact before all hell breaks loose.
4. Emergency cancel/bugout commands, Hide/Unhide or Face would not count against the limit; units would always be allowed basic self preservation orders. Specialized orders like artillery direction could also be exempt.
5. Not everyone would dig these limits of course, as it would discourage excessive micro and squad splitting, and place greater reliance on the TacAI.
But it would arguably be more realistic, and the "in command" exemption would make CM much more of a Command game, as opposed to shoving orders at 300 'should be' Audie Murphies each turn. Men take fire, go to ground, defend themselves. They aren't necessarily keen to get up and going again all at once.
Thoughts?
EDIT: I have no expectation whatever of this being introduced, it's just for discussion.

doesn´t explain on the rather short range, but interesting to see some in (staged) action and visual reference:
 
 

While I'm in Photophuckit, here are some camo schemes I'm toying with for African Bush Wars.  I'm thinking I'll just put out a series of different uniforms schemes that can be used for all of the different Syrian unit types for mainly rebels and insurgents, but govt troops as well.  Then some from NATO types mainly to be govt troops, or at least govt spec ops.  Then y'all can pick and choose which camo to wear that day. 😉

In the game tracked vehicles will currently run over low rural walls without hesitation, and will most likely come away with a little  track damage because of it. Proper masonry and concrete walls would be even more problematic. People already complain about  vehicles getting stuck in muddy or boggy ground. I don't think they'd want even more stuff to get stuck on. Here's a pict of a Challenger 2 hung up on some concrete and rebar.

We really need these:
Presumbly they can be ported over from CM:SF2?  How about Uragan & Smerch while we're at it? 

*sigh*
Another thread, derailed by the same old clowns, spouting the same wrong opinions, beating the same dead horses. These forums can certainly be quite the test of patience sometimes. 
@Chibot Mk IX The good news is I think that there are some good nuggets of information here. Unfortunately you'll have to sift through all the refuse, but its better than nothing. My main takeaway would be to treat the javelin like any other effective anti-tank weapon. Maneuver in a way that does not expose yourself to fire, use direct and indirect fires, and make sure units that are moving are being covered/supported by other units.
Quick note on the word "tactics." Tactics are a set of rules that can be applied to any situation. For example, a tactic is 'find the enemy, fix him with fire, flank/close with the enemy, then kill him.' The nuance of accomplishing the find, fix, destroy is exactly that, nuance. Its very easy to get lost in the sauce (as this thread is a great example of) over small things like this. Remember that the entire point of tactics is that they are supposed to be extremely simple and applicable to all manner of situations. Don't let weapon systems or savants distract you from the basics. Don't want to get shot? Then don't be seen. And so on and so forth. 

I actually disagree with this. Yes, the javelin is a very effective anti-tank weapon. However, so was the Pak 40 in WWII, or an Abrams in hull down in the modern titles. I don't think your approach to operating in a javelin environment is much different than any other anti-tank weapons environment. The same principles apply. Cover and concealment are still your best bet, regardless of what you're up against. 
People tend to think that modern warfare requires a whole new set of tactics in order to be successful. This generally isn't the case. Weapon systems in the modern age tend to be more lethal due to their first shot accuracy, and spotting ability across the board has increased as well. The same basic rules still apply however. If the enemy javelins cannot see you, then they cannot kill you. Suppressing fire is just as effective against a modern javelin as it is against a WWII anti-tank gun. Its just now the javelin is harder to spot, and once it's fired you're likely out of luck. 
Others have touched on it, but I'll repeat because I think its worth stating again. A good fires plan goes a long way to mitigating all sorts of anti-tank threats, be it javelins, AT-14s, or guys with RPGs. As an example, I know a lot of people expressed frustrations with the "Passage to Wilcox" scenario in the SF2 demo, but from the American side. There is a battery of AT-14s that can cause some real havoc if you aren't careful. However, the briefing warns you of this threat, and even tells you roughly where they are on the map. So, as part of my overall fires plan, I made sure to dedicate a section (2 tubes) of 120mm mortars to put the suspected AT-14 position under a constant rain of fire during my initial movement phase. I did that by setting the fire mission to a long mission, but a light rate of fire. That way only 4-6 or so shells were landing a minute, thus preserving the mortar ammunition, but this was still more than enough to suppress the AT-14s and even knocked at least one of them out. The rest I was able to destroy with direct fires from my tanks and Bradleys, which didn't take any fire from the AT-14s as the gunners were too busy hugging the dirt from the mortars. 
For Red Forces, be it Russian or Syrian, a detailed and accurate fires plan is extremely important. You can suppress, destroy, or at the very least deny enemy javelin teams from setting up in advantageous positions. That can buy you time to maneuver into an advantageous position for your own forces, where you can start to bring direct fires to bear on suspected and known anti-tank positions. Easier said than done of course, but it is certainly doable. 
One last note I think is worth mentioning, using infantry as recon is very useful when facing javelins. Their handheld optics might not be as good as the ones mounted in vehicles, but they are also much easier to maneuver and conceal than vehicles are, and javelins will generally not engage them unless ordered to. Worst case scenario, you lose a recon team to a javelin, but now that's one less javelin missile you have to worry about. Best case, you are able to spot enemy anti-tank teams with your infantry and neutralize them without losing your armor. Again, easier said than done, but its quite possible. 

What Sburke said.
 
Always unload/load behind cover/concealment, and let the ground-pounders use their own legs to get onto the front line and into contact. Also try to ensure that the transport route is also out of LOS of potential enemy OPs, and consider smoke for areas they may be exposed. or even reconsider if it is really worth the risk of exposing your battle-taxi and passengers to enemy fire at these locations
 
For fire support, spend the time to look for keyhole positions , or set back inside woods with a narrow exposure. Also consider defilade positions.
 
Always have them behind a screen of infantry when providing fire support, but still ensuring their exposure is very restricted/limited.

I haven't update my SF1 to SF2. But I don't like the idea of remove Syrian Air Assets. Penny wise and pound-foolish. It is going to be a blow to people who love to play Syrian civil war scenarios.
Modern air battles happen in a very large area. Early warning to detect threat at 500km away. BVR Air to Air missiles and long range SAMs shoot at target 100km away, CAS aircraft drop JDAM 8000 ft above. This is way beyond CM Map's scale.  So why not make off map Air-Defense assets available?
I had this idea when I was playing CMBS. Maybe BFC can add an option called "CAP/Area denial" to both sides just like the EW Strength concept in  CMBS.  This is to simulate something like a F-22 shooting two AIM-120C at your poor Su-25, or a S-400 Battery released several SAM 100km away. When "CAP/Area denial" setting is at high level, there is high possibility the opposite side's Aircraft will get shoot down, or cancel their current task, or be driven off from their current station area  (become temporarily unavailable) 
 

Honestly REDFOR on-map anti-air assets shouldn't even be firing at BLUFOR helicopters or planes. MANPADS and AAA have a ceiling of about 14k feet at their longest range. BLUFOR aircraft can easily fly above those altitudes and employ their weapons effectively without having to worry about being shot down. Helicopters are the ones most at risk but they shouldn't be doing strafing runs recklessly when you call them in.
Is the game assuming that the Syrian IADS is robust enough that BLUFOR aircraft are being hindered by it enough that they need to fly low enough to be hit by shilkas? That makes sense in CMBS sometimes but I don't think it makes sense in the Syria of 2008. So if its unrealistic for Brits to not have stingers, BLUFOR aircraft shouldn't be getting shot down by AAA.
Just my two cents.

One tip is to assign other personal in the same group as ammo bearer 
Note: Make sure it is the guy from the same group!
like the pic below. From a infantry squad that is in the same platoon with the Javelin team, I split a two man scout team.
They grab a Javelin missile from the supply truck, then move to 1 or 2 grid (8-16m) away from the Javelin. Now they can share their ammo. Javelin team has only one missile in their inventory, but Ammo section tells you there are 2 available 

One tip is to assign other personal in the same group as ammo bearer 
Note: Make sure it is the guy from the same group!
like the pic below. From a infantry squad that is in the same platoon with the Javelin team, I split a two man scout team.
They grab a Javelin missile from the supply truck, then move to 1 or 2 grid (8-16m) away from the Javelin. Now they can share their ammo. Javelin team has only one missile in their inventory, but Ammo section tells you there are 2 available