Aurelius

This is great feedback, thank you for that. When the time comes for Qasabiyeh to be revised for campaign, we will take into account the length of calling time. Everyone who play these scenarios, feel free to post your experiences here or pm me or @Liveload. More feedback is good. It's an never ending conundrum of scenario design for Red forces whether to give the player 2S1 or D30 howitzers. Is the extra ammo (120) worth the extra time for calling in fire mission or vice versa, is faster calling time worth the reduced load out (70)...

For best results, focus your artillery assets on one target. There was once even a version where we had airplanes, but that got thrown out due to ZU-23-2 pick ups and their AA role.

Excerpt from an ongoing PBEM game. Rustam Khan takes a deep breath, composes himself and takes aim from his RPG 2 The grenade is launched! Close up of the grenade. The BMD detonates catastrophically! The view from the other side of the ambush. The BMD is thus sent back to Volgograd Tractor Factory, Volgograd, RSFSR. Rustam Khan is a happy man. His group took out two Shuravi BMD's.

@Erwin I realize now that I wasn't precise enough in my reply. What I tend to do is plan the movement of the atgm team a turn or two ahead (depends on distance and situation). The important point is that the atgm is set up by the turns end and preferably oriented towards the target. After that, it is just the matter of issuing a target, a pause order (10-15 seconds, dependent on the system and distances) and an movement order. It works for me. @slysniper can confirm, he was at the receiving end of atgm fire, mostly from a single atgm team.

I do something similar with my tanks, so as to increase their survival rates against various atgm's.

That's what I did wrong. Thanks for the advice.

Tried it, didn't work, most probably my mistake. Aware of that, but this situation warranted hit text in my opinion.

Everyone, make sure Abu Aurelius survives! Or else.... P.S. Make sure you rob the UAZ's of 7.62x54R. You will need it.

A snippet from the upcoming scenario: T 72 M leading an armored column.

Some images to serve as a preview to Al Hamamiyat scenario. 120 platoon working on HTS positions T 55 softening prepared positions and supporting an infantry push Infantry platoon approaching the outskirts of Al Hamamiyat (the assault started just as 82 mm mortars started falling on their assault line, no casualties sustained) PKM pining down an infiltration attempt HTS infiltration group was destroyed by combination of PKM fire and 125 mm ОФ shells (note the foreign fighters leading the group)

Excerpt from a PBEM game: 45 mm in action Three shots later and Pz IV is knocked out

Try with issuing the unit a 10-15 seconds pause (depends on the system and how much time is required to acquire the target, shoot and in case of guided missiles- guide) and then a movement order. I use it with RPG's and ATGM's, it usually works.

@MOS:96B2P I was referring to the document that DMS posted. I had Russian in high school, but alas the curriculum didn't encompass military terminology... @DMS Considering the ranks (junior sergeant and красноармеец=private?) that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying it! As for any RL discussions about this issue, I would have to refer to partisan tactics because they were the ones fighting in the war (much of it is actually a basis for our modern day tactics), though I doubt it would be of any use. For the Soviet side of the story, it is up to our ex-Soviet friends to dig up and share, if they are wiling.

@DMS Is there a difference between наводчиков- gunner and пулеметчиков- machinegunner? Both are listed as 6 per platoon.

I am testing the scenarios and I can barely keep up with his tempo!

Successful defense of the town Quasabiyah. Units that distinguished themselves in battle. Some images of destruction. Bonus images of couple of BMP's destroyed by HE-F shells.

By far the best single player scenario (the Qasabiyeh one) that I have played! I usually don't bother with single player scenarios and prefer multiplayer. I am glad that you took my advice and replaced Special Forces with Republican Guard, makes the logistic side slightly easier (rearming your RPG's and PKM's while repelling a jihadi wave truly is a unique challenge!). So far, the lack of digital fire control system on T 72 AV has not proven to be an issue, most engagement were point blank or artillery like engagement on a point target. This unit composition should be left as is, it presents you with some hard choices. I think everyone should try this out. To see a jihadi wave developing while technicals armed with ZU-23's and SPG 9's hang back in support, ready to snipe your units on one flank and a mechanized push through your lines on the other, truly is a sight to behold (and try to stop)!

Spec-group behind enemy lines (excerpt from a ongoing PBEM match): The enemy. My AT-7 platoon. Our positions relative to each other. AT-4 squad supporting the AT-7 platoon (located on my left flank) Turn ends (with smoke and without), 4 destroyed BMP 2's and one destroyed T64. Next turn, T64 joins the fray.

It is a very bad spot for tribal militia. Other units don't have the ammo or the necessary training to cover their withdrawal and the unit itself has limited fighting capabilities. All I did was take into account that you might send someone there and I was very lucky in the ensuing duel. The sniper fired 6 shots before hitting his first mark and in total fired some 15 rounds to take out 4 of your guys. Max distance of the shots was 25 meters. Who should stop giving vodka to the troops - I don't know!

Excerpt from an active PBEM game. Tribal sniper named Nur, armed with an SVD destroys one crack paratrooper squad. Fourth confirmed kill, byproduct of confirmation shots

I am sure I read recon platoon performing scouting mission. Nevertheless, thanks for clarification.

@Bil Hardenberger You asked for an example of battlefield leadership style. That's easy to answer: За мном!/Follow me! It is really not my business commenting on the state of Russian NCO's, considering that I served in the Serbian Army. We too have faced similar issues with "modernization" and "professionalization". As far as the rules and games are concerned, I would like to point out that Russian and Ukrainian formations all have hand held radios, so that even a common rifle squad with no visual or audio contacts with it's HQ, has a radio link to it's HQ. That link is gone with Medium Electronic Warfare settings, but that setting has no influence on manpack radio sets, so plt HQ have connection to Company HQ and Company to Battalion. Strong Electronic Warfare settings are needed to sever the link. Playing the game with Nation specific rules with no EW settings makes those rules redundant. Nobody plays CM A, so it's a non-issue. Syrians are the only one affected, though you could cheese it by adding FO's to platoons. For Red Thunder, I would argue that Recon Company (three recon platoon) and Support Company (two recon platoons and one sapper platoon) should be exempt from any restrictions. Candidates for recon platoons and companies have above average mental and physical capabilities and due to nature of their missions (goes beyond simple scouting) I suggest that they be exempt from movement rules.

@IanL Am aware of those rules and commend you both for codifying them. Been playing under similar rules for some time. The post was merely an allusion to how the system of fire is created and sustained under the "Russian way of war" and that company commanders don't really bother themselves with it. That and being thrown into the same place with Italians. That rustled my jimmies.

To complicate matters a little. I don't know whether the issue of fire control for Soviet and Soviet-like armies was mentioned here or in the other thread. It concerns the statement that company commanders decide in creation of fire systems, along with the platoon commander. That statement is not entirely true. To elaborate further. Creation of system of fire is a task for the squad leader. He is the one that says to the rifleman this is your main direction of fire, this is your supportive. He creates it in such a way that at least two riflemen are covering the same direction. He says to the machineguner this is your arc of fire. To the designated marksman he says this is your sector of fire (either a rectangle or sqaure). He assigns to the marksman an area of observation, usually to augment his own observation capacity. Furthermore, he also must know the basics of engineering, mostly minelaying. Squad leaders do this in realization of platoon leaders plan, who in turn is realizing company commanders plan and so on. Platoon leaders can make changes, of course, but in most cases it is not needed, the squad leader is usually far longer in the army and is experienced. Most commonly, platoon leaders will directly influence the placement of and fire arcs of support weapons that were given to them (think of AGS's and heavy machineguns and AT assets), and that is natural, they were given to him to augment his fighting capacities. As far as soldiers are concerned, most orders to fire will come from the squad leader. Platoon leaders can override the squad leaders, but it is not common. Again, this is in realization of common plan, a system of fire, whether it is in defensive actions, offensive actions or ambushes. This is not to say that squad leaders have complete autonomy, of course there are situations where you wait for a command to issue orders for fire, but there are situations where it is almost weapons free at any time. Those who have served know the value of sudden platoon sized fires and understand that what is written is not set in stone. As far as company commanders, they really have no concerns about individual fire systems. They are to busy coordinating three rifle platoons and a fourth support platoon, and along company nco, worry daily about unit sustainment. As far as unit movement and C2 is concerned, I have no real issues with what was said. Still, might be too rigid, but staying in C2 is far easier in modern titles. I realize this may be nitpicking on my part, but it was bugging me. This is all written from my experiences in Serbian army. It is a successor to the Yugoslav Peoples Army, influenced by wartime experiences in 90-ies and current developments in cooperation with NATO forces and Russian Army. Most of my handbooks had a red star on it. On the field, we were taught that the best way to assault a dug in position is (after a lenghtly fire preparations and move and fire manouvers) to storm it after an URA shout. Then it is standard procedure, split into threes (security, grenadier and rifleman to shoot those that continue fighting after the grenades go off) and cleanse it. I don't know if that makes me Red OpFor commander, or if it does whether the Soviet-like ones will accept me as their own.

Anyone interested to give this game a go, send me a pm.