If exposed infantry come under indirect fire, doctrine is to get the hell away from there as fast as possible.
Infantry in prepared positions (foxholes, trenches), can stay in place. The Hide command will get them to keep their heads down and increase survivability. They will still take some losses, but you'll have dug in for a reason, and you'll want to stay there.
Soviet HE in particular is not good at taking out vehicles (nor is it designed to). That means that you can mostly button up and ride out the attack. Open topped vehicles should relocate, as above. You might still suffer subsystem damage or immobilisations, but again, you're presumably sitting there for a reason (or else you'd leave).
It's worth considering what the purpose of the bombardment is. Any kills an artillery attack gets are secondary to the main point, which is suppression of your AT assets. That allows the Soviet armour to move into position to start puttig down effective fire.
If it's possible to hold a secondary position that would still control this ground, then sure, but the chances are that this wont be possible, or else the attack would be on a broader front.
That means that withdrawing from your defensive position is exactly what they want you to do.
This is where the principle of Active Defence really came from. This is the doctrine that the pre-1982 kit was designed for, and it's something of a reality with how disadvantaged the US are in 1979.
Similar to how you'd play the Syrians in CMSF, the basic plan would be a defence in depth - multiple pockets of resistance, which can support each other, and slowly bleed the attacker, inch by inch.
Active Defence was an attempt to take that concept, but apply it to a mechanised battlefield - rather than having fixed defences, instead having fluid positions that you fight and withdraw from, under cover from supporting positions. Fight, withdraw, fight. Part of the point of this was that it avoids the set-piece Soviet attack, since large set pieces are inherently inflexible.
This doctrine is also necessarily defensive in tone. When the US closed the technological gap and started to surpass the Soviets, the doctrine was able to change, and there was increased focus on proactive counterattack and disruption.
This is basically the narrative arc of CM:CW, and it really informs what you're doing throughout.
I've been lurking for years, i think 7 years ago i posted asking if a cold war mod could be made from black sea. You guys have made my decade, thank you!
I've been lurking for years, i think 7 years ago i posted asking if a cold war mod could be made from black sea. You guys have made my decade, thank you!
I've been lurking for years, i think 7 years ago i posted asking if a cold war mod could be made from black sea. You guys have made my decade, thank you!
I've been lurking for years, i think 7 years ago i posted asking if a cold war mod could be made from black sea. You guys have made my decade, thank you!
I've been lurking for years, i think 7 years ago i posted asking if a cold war mod could be made from black sea. You guys have made my decade, thank you!
Jiggathebauce got a reaction from Dogukan in Combat Mission Cold War is now available
Jiggathebauce got a reaction from RescueToaster in Combat Mission Cold War is now available
Jiggathebauce got a reaction from CaptainTheDark in Combat Mission Cold War is now available
Jiggathebauce got a reaction from Flibby in Combat Mission Cold War is now available
Jiggathebauce got a reaction from MOS:96B2P in Combat Mission Cold War is now available
Jiggathebauce got a reaction from Kinophile in Is Fulda Gap most likely never in the cards?
