Hapless

I feel like the Russian's biggest concern right now is cutting the internet connection to Crimea and getting a barrage battalion to the Kerch bridge to stop all those tourists disappearing into the Motherland with footage.

I feel like the Russian's biggest concern right now is cutting the internet connection to Crimea and getting a barrage battalion to the Kerch bridge to stop all those tourists disappearing into the Motherland with footage.

I feel like the Russian's biggest concern right now is cutting the internet connection to Crimea and getting a barrage battalion to the Kerch bridge to stop all those tourists disappearing into the Motherland with footage.

I feel like the Russian's biggest concern right now is cutting the internet connection to Crimea and getting a barrage battalion to the Kerch bridge to stop all those tourists disappearing into the Motherland with footage.

So this post got me thinking and raises a really good set of points.  Right now we have been handing out a lot of fish on this thread.  We pull in the data, filter it, assess and then pull out analysis, which leads to some level of prediction.  What we (I) have not done is provide enough fishing rods.  Of course you guys are swimming around the internet and being exposed to all sorts of narratives, some good and some bad.  It may be helpful to arm you with some ways to do your own analysis so that while you are out there you can come at it better.
Everyone has got their own system, western military teachings all tend to cover the same ground (e.g. PMESII, OPP, whatever that thing Bil does, which must work because he keeps beating me).  Eastern approaches are different and take into account different criteria, I am not an expert on these so I will let someone else weigh in on them.  I will give you my personal system and the one I teach, see if it helps and if it does not keep looking around.
My system is pretty simply to be honest and focuses on two main areas: what is seen, what is not seen, but should be.  That first one is much easier, the second requires a lot more depth but we can walk to that.
What is Seen
I think I posted this before and @sburke lost his mind a bit.  Let me try a less-powerpointy version (seriously guys it is the message, not the medium).

Ok so this is a representation of what is essentially the western operational system.  It starts on the left with what is basically "Command" and works its way to a desired Outcome.  Everyone is focused on the "Boom"...of course you are...it is exploding!  The reality, however, is that the Target is really only in the middle of this whole thing.  It is an indicator - one of many - but it is not the only indicator.  I think everyone here gets that but they often do not know what else to look for (although some clearly do).
So the big red system on the left is often referred to as the "kill chain" (thanks for nothing Brose).  It is really the center of what we call a "targeting enterprise" and frankly we in the west are very good at this.  This is "cause" space that translates human will, through capability, into energy (and here it can get quite complex), through mediums (also crazy complex) and onto a target and foresaid "boom" (yay!).   Be it an ammo dump, shopping mall, tank or goose (I hate geese) the process is pretty much the same, and volumes have been written as to how to do this faster/better than an opponent.
The point of the big red circle is that when we see a "boom" it is important to analyze the entire Cause chain all the way back to determine 1) if that was the actual intended target or was it simply happenstance, 2) how well the chain is doing in competitive terms and 3) what is this all signaling about Will?  All of this also has to take into account context and the situation on the ground.
Cool. We now have a bead on Cause.  Effect is much harder and more important.  The big blue area is where the pay dirt really sits.  A lot of big booms are impressive, but trust me if they do not translate into that big blue space you are going nowhere loudly - and I speak from experience here.  
So the first question is "what effect is this actually happening?"  Here an effect is a "consequence of action", so for example the effect of all those HIMARS booms - who are at the end of their own kill chain - was (allegedly) to have the Russian logistics system tie it self in knots to get away from them.  Great, outstanding...but was it decisive?
Second is Decision.  I have written about the three types of decisions available in warfare (at least) - positive, negative and null.  Let's leave off the last two and just focus on the first one.  A positive decision is a "death of alternate futures".  There was a future where Russia pounded Kyviv into submission for two months in Mar-Apr 22.  The Ukrainian government tapped out because western support was being cut off from the west and Russia occupied half of Ukraine and the capital, set up a puppet government and then enjoyed an insurgency-from-hell that would last 20 years.  That future died in March when the Russians were held off and pushed back from Kyviv: it was positively Decisive.  The Russians may actually have a future where they are back at Kyviv but it won't be in Mar-Apr of 22, the reality will be very different.  The HIMARS are having an effect, that much is clear.  What is not clear is how decisive the sum of those effects are as yet.  If the Russians lose the ability for operational offensive for a significant duration (e.g. this "pause" never ends) then we can say it has been decisive, because there are dead futures on the floor.
Last are Outcomes.  "What is the difference between a Decision and an Outcome Capt?"  My personal definitions is that an Outcome is a death of options, normally strategic options.  The sum of decisions in western doctrine is supposed to lead to "Objectives" which are the "Deal Done" points in western military planning.  Frankly these have let us down in the past, so I go with Options.  If Options die, they kill off entire fields of futures....a future-cide if you will.  Here something like the entire collapse of the northern Russian front was an Outcome to my mind because the Russian strategic options space collapsed.  Same thing happened after the first week of this war as the strategic options spaces that led to a quick war also died - it is why we got all excited about it back then.  The most significant Outcome is the end of the war of course, but that Outcome is the sum of a bunch of other ones, that all loop back to Will.
So whenever something blows up, look both left and right on that spectrum, and ask a lot of questions.  How is the Cause chain doing comparatively? What is happening with Will? What is the problem with Russian Capability translating into Energy and Targets?  Really keep a close eye on the Blue circle, the indicators of the important stuff are there:  what is the actual effect?  Is this decisive?  what was the Outcome?
Ok, so that was the easy part.
What is not Seen, but should be.
While books have been written on the first part above, the second is the land of experience.  Here a deep understanding of history comes in very useful as it provides a lot of context.  This space (which I do not have a snazzy picture for) is essentially "what should be happening but is not..."  It is very tricky and takes a lot of experience to "see the blank spaces", it is where the effects should be happening but are not based on whatever time and space we are in within a given scenario.
For example, let's take the Russian cruise missiles (and this is not a beat up of @panzermartin, he is asking some good questions).  We know the Russians have a lot of missiles (https://missilethreat.csis.org/country_tax/russia/) and they had launched roughly 1000 of them in about a month at the beginning of the war.
And another report that they were at 2125 total "68 days into the war" (https://www.csis.org/analysis/russias-ill-fated-invasion-ukraine-lessons-modern-warfare#:~:text=Russia launched more than 1%2C100,68 days of the war.).  Now if we take "What we see" as the only indication, well this is a clearly functioning Cause chain.  Will, Capability all landing on targets.  A little shaky on the dud rate and "missing" military targets by many reports, and the Medium of UA AD has been pretty effective (then we get into competitive system effects which is a whole other thing - there are red and blue circles in collision); however, that is a lot of "boom".  The Effects we saw were a lot of damage, some of it military and the UA definitely had to react to defend itself by moving AD and C2 around.  I am not sure they have been Decisive, but we will get to that.
So that is what we saw, and on the surface 2125 incoming missiles all over the Ukraine is not small and frankly looks scary...but I only see what is missing:
A Ukrainian strategic center of gravity is the inflow of support from the western world.  We are pushing a lot of money and boom-boom over the border from Poland.  High on Russia's list of high value targets has to be to cut off that incoming support anyway possible.  They have done strikes in Lviv on training bases, so they clearly have the capability to hit.  But what are we not seeing?  I am not seeing rail infrastructure being crippled in Western Ukraine.  I am not seeing road infrastructure being destroyed faster than Ukraine can repair.  I am not seeing 30 Ukrainian ammo depots in western Ukraine being hit to cut off the supply of 155mm shells - it is what I am not seeing that is the biggest indicator something is going very wrong on the Russian side.  The Russians have the capability - range is no excuse as they could park missiles in Belarus, so why are they not using all them there 2125 missiles on what really matters?  First answer is that they are "dumb" but that is too easy.  Split Will, missiles spread across disjointed commands all lobbing on their own priorities much more likely.  Lack of ISR to consistently hit things when they need to be hit like UA ammo dumps and logistics nodes, which tend to move around...also very likely.
This is the same thing very early on in the war - why was I still seeing Ukrainian social media feeds 72 hours into this war?  All them tanks getting lit up, old ladies with balls of steel etc.  Rule #1 of country invasion: make it go dark.  Russian failed in this, it was missing and should not have been.
Wargamers have an advantage here as they play these problem sets all the time.  We have seen it a lot on this thread.  A wargamer can ask..."why did they not do this?  I would have."  
And this has nothing to do with an echo chamber either, but we do need to be careful.  For example, we have not seen UA operational offence yet, and nothing that looks like all traditional arms manoeuvre.  This one has me particularly puzzled and we are getting more data in on why this may be happening.
I will sum up by saying that in order to really filter the "reality" from opinion and BS, take all this and apply it to what we can actually see and not see.  We can build assumptions but they have to remain on speaking terms with the facts.  Once an assumption becomes a fact [edit for @Combatintman. “without sufficient validation”]  we are in trouble.  Enough facts put through the lenses of the two frameworks I give here become a trend, and it is those trends that told us that Russia was losing the first part of the war while most of the mainstream were figuring out how to deal with a Russian victory.
Good luck and surf safe.
 
 

Just turning to this development now.  Taking a modern reinforced concrete bridge is tough at a distance.  Doing it by air is normally a job for big stuff like JDAMs.  I don’t think anyone has tried to do it with an MLRS system.
Bridges are pretty tough but gravity is a harsh mistress.  If you punch enough hole in the deck you can definitely erode the bridge and effect crossing weight and speed.  However, the enemy can quickly over-bridge in these sort of situations.  If UA gets the longer range HIMARS missiles, they could do better hitting the bridge laterally from Odessa.  Hitting a pier a few times will definitely do damage to the bridge that is not easily repaired.  But that is a long precise shot on a small target…one for the history books if they can pull it off.
I am looking at the Kherson problem in detail now, more later.

That is not how military operations work...even in the Russian military.  You never have enough of anything, no matter how much.  Russians have a lot of old ammo stockpiles - a lot of that ammunition is very questionable and I would love to see the dud rates for Russian arty right now.  However, that is not what is important, it is their ammo production capability in relation to the burn/output rate.  In a longer war, which everyone is concerning themselves over, we are really comparing an ammo production competition between Russia, and the entire Western World.  Russian stocks, no matter how big, cannot sustain middle-chain attrition such as we are seeing for very long.  And this middle-chain attrition makes the production competition much harder for the Russian side as the West has no such interdiction in its supply chains - beyond the "knee shaking" at the political level.
The military operations are highly complex but the equation is pretty simple: the West needs to keep out-producing, out-supplying and overmatching qualitatively compared to the Russian military until it breaks, the only thing standing in our way...is us. 
The Russians are employing old-school iron mountain logistics, and once again demonstrating a major weakness in concentrated mass on the modern battlefield (Sburke...no!).  Iron mountain logistics has enormous redundancy built in but it relies on being far enough back, hidden or shielded enough from deep strike (see: air superiority).  On a modern battlefield where tactical weapons have ranges we used to rely on aircraft for, and ISR to the point that it is impossible to hide anything...well you see the results: 1 missile = 1 ammo dump.  We, in the west, have been moving to "just in time" logistics to try and remove the iron mountain concept, but that is highly sensitive to disruption...which again is almost a guarantee on the modern battlefield.  In short our concepts of mass are in just as much trouble in a near-peer environment because - logistics.  
All that talk about tanks is just noise, it is the refuelers, ammo trucks, depot system and maintenance that makes mass of just about anything but light infantry particularly challenging.  "But we will have APS and C-UAV!"  Sure, but you now need it the entire length of the operational system (e.g. every fuel truck), and even then we are not close to re-establishing the conditions we have been training and operating in since the end of the Cold War.  Hell, this does not even look like the conditions we trained for during the Cold War.  We have just scratched the surface of unmanned (UGS anyone?) and modern ISR looks like it s choking out at least one principle of war.
This is going to be one crazy ride. 

I had a much longer rambling post, but gave up on it, so TLDR:

How many tactical decisions does a junior officer make in a year? Not a lot. Exercises are expensive and time consuming, training objectives must be met, freeplay is rare, scripting is prevalent.
vs
How many tactical decisions do you make in an average CM game? How many do you make in an average CM turn? All that micromanagement from battalion to fire team level? Endless tactical decision making.
Naturally, decision-making and execution are very, very different. And CM is by no means 100% realistic. But it's probably realistic enough, especially integrated into a full on professional military syllabus. If nothing else, it's a lot safer and cheaper to 'fail forward' in CM than it is on exercise or- God forbit- the real deal.

I had a much longer rambling post, but gave up on it, so TLDR:

How many tactical decisions does a junior officer make in a year? Not a lot. Exercises are expensive and time consuming, training objectives must be met, freeplay is rare, scripting is prevalent.
vs
How many tactical decisions do you make in an average CM game? How many do you make in an average CM turn? All that micromanagement from battalion to fire team level? Endless tactical decision making.
Naturally, decision-making and execution are very, very different. And CM is by no means 100% realistic. But it's probably realistic enough, especially integrated into a full on professional military syllabus. If nothing else, it's a lot safer and cheaper to 'fail forward' in CM than it is on exercise or- God forbit- the real deal.

Nikishyne / Nikishino
North-east of Donetsk and south-east of Debaltseve.
map size : 2100 X 1900 m
type : village
Nikishyne saw a lot of fighting in 2015 during the battle for Debaltseve. I might post more in depth background info later. But at the end of the battle, it was basically a field of rubble with barely any house intact.
Google Earth view :


View from the South West :

From the North East :


Notes :
Again the setup zones aren't that big. They're sufficient for a small force.
I added objectives and setup zones for a meeting engagement so people could give the map a go and have some fun either as a pbem or a hotseat game. Historically the setup zones don't make a lot of sense though. I am aware of that. As far as I understand, the Ukrainian forces were reinforcing the village from the North and North-West and the separatists were coming from the South or South East. I picked these setup zones because I think they offer the most interesting tactical options and are more or less fair for both sides but they're not historical at all.
Download link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/j5vfid5og72t0c7/cmbs map nikishyne.rar?dl=0
 

The videos they show are live. They come from drones but also from surveillance cameras mounted on electric pylons (videos with a black watermark). They say they see everything, show the starting position of the drones (the one at the beginning of the report where they take cover and which is later marked with an X on the map) but also the position of the Russian tank on the map. To sum up the video, they express their frustration because due to the lack of ammunition they cannot shoot everything they want.

Another short video about drones from French TV: https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/vlmgk0/a_french_television_channel_report_on_the_uaf/
Shows what's going on back in the CP, which I don't think we've seen before. It's not clear if they're watching the drone feed live or playing it back for the reporter-  (probably clearer to someone who understands French!).
Maps are visible and unblurred, which apparently resulted in casualties and at least one death. OPSEC matters.

Acceptable casualties are pixeltruppen expended to good effect

Another friendly reminder that 99% of the internet is not a reliable source and anyone can write a caption. In the words of Sergeant Hamlet from the CM Discord, this is Shroedinger's Hind.

Never seen two blatantly contradictingly titled clips of the same footage pop up next to each other in the feed before.

Javelin team gets a missile off, then comes under fire.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/v8qoiq/the_fgm148_javelin_operator_hits_an_enemy_target/
Few things I thought were interesting:

They get spotted real fast- looks like the missile might have a bit of a vapour trail (don't think Javelin usually has one, so could be the local conditions?)

There are at least two Javelin teams.

Hard to tell, but they don't look like they're bugging out as soon as the missile is fired. In theory they should be able to due to the fire and forget capability- so maybe they think it's safe enough to hang around, maybe they need to keep the AT capability up or maybe it's really hard to *not* watch your missile hit the target.

And from the strategic to the tactical- if anyone wanted to see how drones can supplement basic soldiering skills:



Apparently Russian SF vs a Ukrainian patrol. Short sharp ambush, followed by snatching a wounded prisoner. Footage is here- NSFW.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/v6yjpr/pov_of_russian_sso_ambush_against_ukrainian/

Obviously it's interesting to see a small scale tactical action from this perspective, but I think it's important to see that the impact of the drone here isn't revolutionary. It certainly might make certain elements easier (we don't know how long they've been waiting there- it could be a snap ambush thrown on at a moment's notice because they spotted the incoming patrol via the drone) but the drone isn't doing the basics for them, it's complementing existing skills.

This is sort of drones writ large: they don't exactly bring any new capabilities to the table as a whole (drones aren't doing any missions that didn't get done in WW1 by biplanes (except any EW stuff)), but they do extend existing capabilities- more people at the table get the ability to carry out and benefit from those missions.

For example, aerial reconaissance is a thing- but there's a world of difference between trying to get an aircraft to fly over, take some photos and then somehow get them to a rifle platoon in a timely manner vs the platoon drone operator chucking a Raven in the air and getting a live feed a couple of seconds later. How to operate in an environment where everyone has airpower at their fingertips is the hard part.

The Bulldog's Make Their Stand

Life has gotten in my way of making another update, but I finally have time to conclude this AAR. Contrary to what I said before, I will not be making a Battle for Normandy AAR next but another SF2 one (I'm pretty excited about it). After the conclusion of these two AARs, I will be gone for a period of 5+ months, so enjoy my writing while it's still here! Anyway, it's time to witness some very intense combat, probably the coolest CM experience I've had in my year and a half of playing. 

The situation as of last post. 2nd platoon with the help of a Stryker MGS is able to suppress a sniper in Ar Sariya. Luckily, the two men that are hit by the sniper are still alive and we were able to evacuate them. Meanwhile, 3rd platoon holds the decisive terrain on the map and starts engaging whatever they can see in the valley. The first target engaged is a BMP-2 which is promptly smacked by a javelin missile. I was feeling pretty confident at this point, but little did I realize how serious things were about to get.

3rd platoon spots a platoon of T-72 tanks entering the battlefield from LOA Tennessee. This is obviously the SLA battalion's CAR (combined arms reserve), and I waste no time engaging them. 
 
A Javelin gunner from 2nd squad, 3rd platoon flings a missile towards the lead T-72.

In a excellent display of timing and SLA incompetence I am able to nail both tanks with one missile. #1's wingman made the mistake of trying to pass him and they both paid the price.  

3rd platoon fires another missile, this time from 1st squad. The result is extremely disappointing. 

(How many times have you had a Javelin fail to penetrate?)
Despite the dangerous threat the appearance of the CAR presents, I still feel very confident. After all, where can they hide? I can see everywhere into the valley. As always though, my overconfidence is soon checked by the enemy. 

More armor begins to appear, and I suspect the SLA commander's CAR has at least a company sized element of T-72s at his disposal. 3rd platoon also has another issue - only a single Javelin missile remains with the dismounts, with 2 more in 3rd platoons Stryker's below the hill. With the possibility of a push onto OBJ Bear, it's time for me to activate my reserve - 1st platoon. 

3rd platoon is able to hit the remaining tank again from the first tank platoon we encountered and destroy it, but now they have no means of dealing with the other T-72s. Spotting rounds are also falling, but I keep my men hunkered down in defilade. We cannot abandon this hill.


With a somewhat safe route cleared, I move 1st platoon up the hill mounted in their Stryker's. They dismount on the reverse slope and begin moving to reinforce 3rd platoon. Feeling I had control over the battlefield, I was oblivious to the nightmare about to unfold.

Those previously mentioned spotting rounds turn into a FFE call, likely air-bursting heavy mortars. It's not the most accurate fire mission, and I have decent cover from it, but the shrapnel exploding overhead does cause casualties. The rounds incapacitate a team leader from 1st Pl, 3rd Sq and give light wounds to various joes. The casualties are not good, but the worst part is that 3rd platoon is suppressed and unable to observe the CAR's movement in the valley. This scenario has turned into a good example of why IDF doesn't have to always kill to be effective. At this point I can surmise the SLA commander is likely coordinating his fires with his armor's movement in order to give himself some freedom to maneuver. After a couple minutes, the barrage ends and I move the Javelin teams from 3rd and 1st platoon back into position to observe the CAR's movement. My jaw drops at what I find.

I find a friend waiting for me, and a sudden feeling of dread hits me like a train. I am realizing now how bad this situation is quickly getting. I am about to have to fight for my company's life.

Yeah... this is quickly developing into a nightmare situation. Two platoons of T-72s are barreling towards my dismounts, the men have no choice but to brace for impact. Loosing OBJ Bear to armor would probably result in the destruction of my company, there is no choice but to stem the tide. The next few minutes will consist of decisive action, and friendly casualties will be inevitable. 

I am shown a beautiful flank shot on one of the tank platoons, which is going around OBJ Bear on my left flank. The MGS platoon is deployed in BPs below the hill and 2nd platoon is watching the left flank as well.

(Scratch one)

(I was watching this with my jaw dropped)
A bad situation is soon turned worse... a platoon sized element of BMP-2s crest over the hill to the north and begin suppressing OBJ Bear with their 30mm auto cannons, blowing a javelin gunner to a few chunks. The anti tank gunners retreat to the rest of their respective platoons in defilade between them and the BMP-2s.

In a role they were not intended for, the MGS can be quite useful against armor in a pinch. Two SABOTs from the MGS platoon take out a T-72. I can only imagine the intercom chatter during this, the T-72AV TURMS-T is a scary threat in an M1A2 SEP, let alone a Stryker MGS. 2nd platoon takes IDF and their PL and a Javelin gunner become casualties, severely wounded. I have no choice but to pull them off the hill, leaving the MGS platoon alone to defend the flank. 

The situation develops more, and another SLA mechanized infantry platoon reinforces the effort to push me off OBJ Bear. I am extremely worried about these BMPs, they pose the biggest threat to the dismounts on OBJ Bear. However, I am quite confident in my company's ability to win a dismounted fight. Communist armies never seem to excel in training effective infantrymen (they are good at cooking them in the back of their personnel carriers though). 

Another T-72 destroyed by the MGS platoon.

A 1st platoon Javelin team gets an angle on a BMP-2 and smacks it with a Javelin missile.

The situation after less than two minutes of combat. This fight is happening very quickly, and it's far from over. Much to my annoyance, I have a platoon leader and his HQ stuck in front of 1st and 3rd platoon's positions. However it's safer to keep them put than to risk those BMP-2s shooting at them. To make matters worse, a T-72 on my left flank is in an area where the MGS platoon cannot see it.

(Oh ****)

The shell hits 1st platoon's positions, killing a grenadier in 2nd squad. Looks like there is another enemy tank platoon exploiting my weak flank. 

This presents a very big problem. My company is unable to engage this tank platoon breaking through my flank, let alone see them. My whole company is now in a very bad spot, especially my Stryker's that are no longer in cover from the enemy with their flanks exposed. On OBJ Bear, I take another javelin gunner KIA from BMP fire, and two radio operators are casualties from tank fire, one killed and one wounded.

The MGS platoon gets an angle on a T-72 cresting over the hill, but I am still mostly blind to their movement.

A BMP crests over the hill and is promptly destroyed

The first round is shot back at the MGS platoon, fortunately it is way short. Annoyingly, the two SABOTs that impact on the T-72 do not penetrate it and it reverses into cover.

Concurrently, the first BMP-2 moves into OBJ Bear, right into 1st and 3rd platoon. It's an awesome slaughter that's almost an homage to the halftrack scene from SPR.

An AT-4 eliminates a BMP, killing everyone inside. We're in business!

The situation has improved in many ways, but I still have the problem on the left flank. All but two T-72s have been eliminated, but even one is a massive threat to my men. The MGS platoon is punching well above their weight, I had only intended to use them for fortification busting and sniping the occasional BMP. At this point in the battle I am also wishing I had a platoon sized element of anti tank Strykers equipped with TOW missiles to help me out. 

Another BMP is destroyed by an AT-4. You never know when you might need these things, it's worth humping the extra weight. Remember the lessons from the Battle of Mogadishu!

The SLA mechanized infantry platoons are quickly disintegrating, thanks to poor tactical employment of their vehicles and dismounts in typical 3rd world army fashion. Great for me.

Another great little victory for me - a T-72 I couldn't previously see is engaged & destroyed by a Javelin gunner on OBJ Bear. You can see 2nd platoon in the distance moving to engage this guy, luckily they didn't end up needing to.

"BMP, Cover!"
Both 1st and 3rd platoon light these guys up. So many rounds were fired at these poor bastards the game couldn't process the audio. The CAR is almost completely eliminated now, only two tanks remain and the mechanized infantry elements have been rendered CI, only stragglers remain. However, those two tanks now have spots on 1st & 3rd platoon's Strykers. I have no choice to push the MGS platoon out of cover to engage them. I am prepared to lose them in order to save the rest of the company.

The last two tanks are destroyed, but an MGS is destroyed, killing everyone inside. Kudos to the infantry for saving the other MGS with a Javelin through the top of the turret. The loss of the MGS is rough, but it was necessary to prevent further damage. Lots of medals will be handed out after today. 

The intense report of small arms and tank shells flying through the air dies down, replaced by the screams of the wounded and the crackle and fire & secondary explosions. In the span of 6 minutes of combat, the entire SLA combined arms reserve is destroyed. 3 platoons of armor, and two platoons of infantry disappear in minutes. I finally have some time to compose myself after some of the most intense combat I've had in Combat Mission.

Wounded & dead men are removed from the battlefield, while my platoon leaders get ammo & headcounts from their squad leaders. Considering the circumstances, friendly casualties were not high. I'm still angry that I lost so many men KIA, but we made those bastards pay. 

While decisive action may be over, there is still work to do. 2nd platoon will take over as the company reserve and hold OBJ Bear while 1st & 3rd platoon clean up stragglers. 

While waiting for their Strykers to arrive, 2nd platoon gets sweet revenge when they hose down a fleeing tank crewman with their SAWs. No mercy.


The battlefield looks like something you'd see in a Fulda battlefield, destroyed eastern bloc armor litters the field like trash thrown from a window. It's an awe inspiring sight.

The mop up operations move smoothly, the broken tank crews & infantrymen scattered around the hill offer little resistance. 1st platoon starts doing ammo runs up the hill with their Strykers. 

 
The Bulldogs are good shots, best in the battalion.

No SLA soldier can hide from the men on this hill.

The company's FSO calls for fire on a group of stragglers, the 120mm airbursts rip them to shreds. 

Annoyingly, SLA in-direct continues to be an annoyance. Waiting for their Strykers to arrive, a soldier from 2nd platoon is killed and another wounded from it. The craters in this photo illustrate how much ordinance was dropped on 2nd platoon through the scenario. Repositioning every five minutes does get old after a while. 

Another key-holed BMP-2 is destroyed in Ar Sariya, contributing nothing toward the SLA effort. 2nd platoon mounts up and moves out towards OBJ Bear.

Mopping up the stragglers is an easy affair, everyone gets some.


Even a Stryker is able to have some target practice.

The battle is just about won at this point. 3rd platoon is bounded up to hill 92, covering the rest of the valley. I move them dismounted for fear of ATGM ambush, the last thing I want is to get men killed for the sake of convenience. Eventually, 1st platoon joins them while 2nd platoon holds OBJ Bear.
 
The rest of the scenario consists of movement with no more fighting. I will spare the boring details, but the forest on the eastern side of the map proved to be an excellent infiltration route for my dismounts. LOA Tennessee is reached, and I call for a cease fire. 
Conclusion

The battle is a tactical victory, I was able to achieve my objectives outlined at the beginning of the AAR. Unfortunately, the Bulldogs lost 8 men achieving this outcome. Enemy casualties were far greater, with 31 vehicles destroyed and 128 personnel killed or wounded. The combat power of the SLA battalion in the area is severely depleted. They certainly do not have the ability to conduct offensive operations in their state. Hours after this battle, the Bulldogs will be reinforced and the rest of the SLA battalion destroyed in place.

Lots of SLA dismounts remain on the map, unable to contribute to the battle. Unsurprisingly, most of them occupy the various villages.
 
The most surprising find after the battle concluded was this platoon of T-72s & platoon of BMP-2s on the western slope of OBJ Bear. Had the enemy commander chosen to commit this element on my weak left flank with the rest of the attack, I am sure my company would have been destroyed. 


Moving dismounted to LOA Tennessee was the right call, turns out three AT-3 Sagger teams had eyes on the decisive terrain the whole time. Even with fancy thermal optics, the infantryman's ability to conceal himself will always be a lethal ability. Moving those platoons mounted through the open would have likely been catastrophic.

The MGS platoon leader deserves a congressional Medal of Honor for his platoon's role in the battle. Without them, I am sure B/1-24 would have been destroyed in place by Sahrani armor. The MGS platoon is accredited with four T-72 kills & a BMP-2 kill. The infantrymen punched way above their weight as well, with 4-8 AFV kills per platoon. 

The 2 F-16CJs tasked with destroying targets of opportunity didn't hit anything except this recon team. Not much is left of them. Supporting fires weren't utilized as much as I wanted, mainly being used to deny terrain. I am curious how the BMP attack would have played out if I was able to get the battery of 155s dropped on them, after all I had sufficient cover to do that. I was at least happy I got some mileage out of the 120mm mortars though. Usage of supporting fires will be something I continue to work on.
My Thoughts

"Stryker's Attack" ended up probably being the greatest CM experience I've had. My fundamentals were tested, along with my ability to use a SBCT formation against a near peer enemy equipped with armor. As he does with his other scenarios, GeorgeMC provides challenging AI plans that keep you on your toes and surprised at moments, like I was. It is very easy to tell when a scenario is play-tested well, and "Armor Attacks!" is definitely one. I was seriously impressed by the AI's suppression of the decisive terrain and subsequent thrust to drive me off the hill. I was literally giddy with excitement while the big battle for OBJ Bear took place.
One of my favorite parts of this experience was demonstrating the ability of the SBCT in the offensive. The Stryker gets a bad rap from those ranging from morons or to people who don't understand it's capabilities & correct usage. Here it was utilized in it's correct application, an infantry carrier and ammo hauler. It's not a Bradley with ****ty armament, it's a way for the infantryman to be taken to point A to point B with protection from shrapnel & small arms with plenty of ammunition resupply. Stryker infantry in real life can dismount up to 10 km away from their objective. It's a vehicle best concealed from enemy fire, much like the American half-tracks of World War 2. Operationally, the Stryker is an excellent rapid reaction force, with the ability to deploy to areas much quicker than their heavy counterparts.
Similarly, the Stryker MGS is a very misunderstood vehicle. It isn't a very good vehicle by any means, with a small ammo complement & notorious mechanical problems. However, that doesn't mean you can't use it in the way it was intended pretty effectively. That means engaging buildings, fortifications, and the occasional light vehicle. If you've ever taken Stryker infantry into urban areas in CM, you've probably gotten good mileage out of the thing. The 105mm round makes short work of enemy strongpoints. That being said, the MGS does have the ability to engage armor, but it isn't a good idea unless you absolutely have to. As evidenced by this AAR, the 105mm round struggles to penetrate modern T-72 tanks at times, although older tanks like T-62s or T-55s and light vehicles will be cut through like a knife through butter. The MGS also obviously lacks the armor to be engaged by anything bigger than 12.7mm. When you stop treating the MGS as a bad Abrams, it does have a role that can fit into the modern battlefield.

This AAR also demonstrates the punching power of the modern US Army dismounted infantryman, the firepower a single platoon can dish out will never cease to be incredible to me. The Javelin missile gives incredible capabilities to the infantryman, from the ability to engage armor at 99% kill rates, to the ability to destroy enemy strongpoints and weapons teams. The AT-4 continues to be a reliable killer of light vehicles & armor at close range, much like the LAW that the Cold War infantryman humped. When it comes to killing enemy personnel, the SAW will remain the #1 killer. Accurate, a high rate of fire, reliability and ammo combability with the rest of the squad makes it the best tool for the job. The two M240Bs the platoon's weapon's squad compliment the SAW with their ability to kill the enemy and/or keep their heads down. At the end of the day though, "There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.” Even with the best infantry & armor in the world, CM commanders still managed to get their pixeltruppen killed in droves. I've personally rendered US Army heavy company teams combat ineffective as the Syrian/Red player. I've seen other red commanders to do the same on "Armor Attacks". It is insane to see the best of the best units in the world dominated by inferior enemies, but again, they aren't a magic win button. Poor employment of your assets will always result in good men dying, and embarrassing defeats.
In conclusion, I enjoyed the hell out of this scenario. Not only for the entertaining combat in provided, but also the excellent lessons it demonstrated. Your fundamentals are guaranteed to be tested. Play any of the versions of "Armor Attacks!", they are all great experiences, but "Stryker's Attack!" will test you in it's own cool way. Stay tuned for my next AAR, GeorgeMC's Passage At Wilcox with a light infantry company from 10th Mountain attacking the town.
 
 
 

The Battle Develops

It's go time! The men of Bravo company move out from their deployment area. 2nd platoon moves to the flank, while 3rd platoon begins their ascent up the hill towards OBJ Bear. In the distance, F16s drop bombs on targets I can't yet see while the artillery pounds OBJ Bear's reverse slope.

The enemy has rocket artillery they drop preplanned on my avenue of approach, slowing me down a bit. Luckily, no one is hit by the inaccurate fire. These rockets are also not very big either.
'
2nd platoon deploys on the flank and takes sniper fire from the town of Ar Sariya. They also immediately begin getting partial spots, armor and IFVs around the northern slope of OBJ Elk. The sniper fire is responded with suppressive fires from 2nd platoon's weapons squad. The return fire dies down and I resume 2nd platoons movement. 3rd platoon continues their ascent, nothing notable happening until they reach the top.

(The M240B in action)
The sniper fire dies down and the rest of the PL and the javelin teams move to engage the partial spots ahead. However, trouble arises when a key-holed BMP-2 surprises the platoon leader and his anti tank elements. 

(A bad situation)
The BMP-2 lays down horrifying amount of 30mm fire at 2nd platoon, but only one man is hit by it, severely wounded but alive. A moment later - the BMP-2 is silenced with a Javelin missile through the turret. My big mistake was underestimating the strength of the SLA picket forces in the town, that engagement could have ended a lot worse.

2nd platoon also develops the partial spot earlier on OBJ Elk into a BMP-2, and quickly destroys it with a Javelin missile. Finally, 3rd platoon gets some action in. The oasis develops into uh, a cluster ****. An extremely incompetent SLA commander has a bunch of tanks and IFVs bunched together in the oasis, stuck. 2 Javelins are enough to disable every vehicle in the cluster. Note that there are about 2-3 unspotted vehicles in this clump. 

(Yeah.... not the greatest employment of these assets)

The 3rd platoon reaches the top of OBJ Bear, with no resistance on the hill. So far, everything is going smoothly. A T-72 in the distance is also nailed by 3rd platoon. At this point, I begin to feel overconfident (a mistake not unnoticed by the enemy). During this action, 2nd platoon continues to engage targets of opportunity with the Javelins. Much to my annoyance, 2nd platoon is cut in half by SLA mortars and I am not able to maximize their strength where I want it. Luckily no one is hit by the mortar fire, but it serves it's purpose.


2nd platoon takes more sniper fire while taking cover from the SLA IDF. The sniper ends up severely wounding two men. Fire superiority is soon established and the fire begins to slacken. The platoon's medic is brought up to render aid to the casualties. To ensure to kill, the MGS platoon leader's vehicle is moved up and pours a couple of rounds into the sniper's building. The fire stops.  

The Calm Before the Storm
That concludes the end of this half of the battle, the next update will include lots of decisive action and conclude the combat in this scenario. Things might seem quiet now, but they really take off in the next few turns. I'll just say the SLA won't let me control the map without a fight....
In the meantime, enjoy some action shots



 

And from the strategic to the tactical- if anyone wanted to see how drones can supplement basic soldiering skills:



Apparently Russian SF vs a Ukrainian patrol. Short sharp ambush, followed by snatching a wounded prisoner. Footage is here- NSFW.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/v6yjpr/pov_of_russian_sso_ambush_against_ukrainian/

Obviously it's interesting to see a small scale tactical action from this perspective, but I think it's important to see that the impact of the drone here isn't revolutionary. It certainly might make certain elements easier (we don't know how long they've been waiting there- it could be a snap ambush thrown on at a moment's notice because they spotted the incoming patrol via the drone) but the drone isn't doing the basics for them, it's complementing existing skills.

This is sort of drones writ large: they don't exactly bring any new capabilities to the table as a whole (drones aren't doing any missions that didn't get done in WW1 by biplanes (except any EW stuff)), but they do extend existing capabilities- more people at the table get the ability to carry out and benefit from those missions.

For example, aerial reconaissance is a thing- but there's a world of difference between trying to get an aircraft to fly over, take some photos and then somehow get them to a rifle platoon in a timely manner vs the platoon drone operator chucking a Raven in the air and getting a live feed a couple of seconds later. How to operate in an environment where everyone has airpower at their fingertips is the hard part.

Javelin team gets a missile off, then comes under fire.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/v8qoiq/the_fgm148_javelin_operator_hits_an_enemy_target/
Few things I thought were interesting:

They get spotted real fast- looks like the missile might have a bit of a vapour trail (don't think Javelin usually has one, so could be the local conditions?)

There are at least two Javelin teams.

Hard to tell, but they don't look like they're bugging out as soon as the missile is fired. In theory they should be able to due to the fire and forget capability- so maybe they think it's safe enough to hang around, maybe they need to keep the AT capability up or maybe it's really hard to *not* watch your missile hit the target.

Thanks ) Just became some more of work, my wife turned back and often occupies PC because her work, also it's hard to live three months 24/7 as war news translator, so I took small vacations 

This is that first famous large column of Rosgvardia, destroyed in first or second day of war. All this did 6th company of 92nd mech.brigade near Kutuzivka village NE from Kharkiv. The company in Day 1 turned out itself in the rear of Russians, because they advanced forward too fast, trying to enter in Kharkiv. In first contacts the company lost 3 BTR-4E, but despite this company commander decided to break through back to Kharkiv. The company, heading toward the city, encountered with large columnn of Rosgvardia/OMON, which drove in the same direction. Commander immadiately ordered to attack them - as result almost whole column was destroyed, but from full elimination Russians were saved because two their tanks appeared on the road and engaged UKR company. Two more BTR-4E were knokced out by tanks, so rest of company broke contakt and on full speed reached Kharkiv.

Very interesting question but it needs some context:

So this graphic is interesting - it is built from some research done at Georgia tech, for the real nerds the excel sheets in detail are avail at https://brecke.inta.gatech.edu/research/conflict/.  We have had periods of "great peace" before as you can see.  What is missing from this graphic are the Mongol Conquests that occurred between 1200-1400 AD, which still ranks only second to the Three Kingdoms War (182-280 BC) as the most deadly in history as percentages of the overall human population at the time (and this does not give full credit to the Mongol Invasions contributions to the Black Death).  So before 1400 there was a major spike and then between 1400 and 1600 we basically had a lot of small wars between fiefdoms but overall deaths were kept low. (Also note that the deaths as a result of conquest of the New World are also not included, which by some estimates were obscene).
Then right about the time we had the "Peace of Westphalia" deaths by war went on a bit of a wild ride with spikes about every 50 years, right about the time the generations that fought the last major war died off.  This is pretty consistent, we get a big spike as the 3rd post-last-war generation tries to re-order things, then an exhausted peace, then another spike...and then the 20th century happened.  If we go with anything less than 10 deaths out of 100,000 globally as the "peace line", the 20th century was a Season of Mars, and this after one of the most peaceful stretches in the late 19th century, right after the US Civil War.  So for higher resolution of more recent history:

So we have the Chinese Civil war there, ending in '49.   Korea, and then things do start to drop as we enter into the time of intra-state wars and wars of intervention of the Cold War.  Still pretty active but below that 10 per 100,000 line...and then 1989 happened.  It is hard to believe, based on how busy our militaries have been but we definitely have been living a "great peace" between 1989 and about 2012 as the world enjoyed a single super power order and we basically only had small little savage wars to deal with, not unlike the much briefer period in the late 19th century.  Neither of these charts take into account the Russo-Ukraine War, which is vicious but still a smallish war by earlier standards.
So as to the original question...my guts says "yes" we are entering a new phase of something.  You can track all these charts directly to power competition, which has largely been dormant since the end of the Cold War.  We argued a lot but most of the nations who "won" the Cold War have not had a civil war, or engaged in a state-based one, we all got rich instead.  The dirty little wars on the margins continue but they were largely civil wars or nasty little regional affairs.  Russia has signaled that it is willing to pay a blood price to re-order things, and here we are today.  I am betting we will see more proxy wars and look more like the 60s and 70s and some state-on-state clashes.  Will we go back to the old model of great big wars every 50 years like we saw between 1650-1945?  Doubtful, as we will likely see the biggest spike in history in the form of an escalated thermonuclear exchange if we try that out.  My bet is some form of nasty power competition as East and West rebalance. 

Not wrong, but not entirely correct either.  Ukrainian defence was brilliant in the opening phase of this war.  We don't know much and likely will not get the full story for some time, however, the plan for the Phase I defence was decisive in itself.  If the UA had tried to fight the same way as the RA and sought decisive battle, it could have gone poorly.  Instead what we saw was a hybrid warfare campaign for the history books.
First Ukraine had (and still has) information superiority.  They are on their home ground and were also being fed western intel from before the war started.  This mean that in places like Hostemel, they could concentrate and defeat the RA initial moves in detail.  I think Hostomel is also a battle for the history books and was decisive in this war.  The RA tried to use SOF and Light in concentration and failed enormously, once again underlying that when misemployed SOF and Light are extremely vulnerable [aside: it is odd on all the talk of the "death of the tank" but we have not seen a lot on the "death of airborne/heliborne].  Russia made that airfield snap central to their main effort, it was their Plan A, and it collapsed in a couple days.
Second, Ukraine set up what I can only describe as an unconventional warfare defensive campaign.  This was hybrid in nature (a mix of conventional and unconventional forces) and looks a lot like what the Norwegians have set up in their Northern districts - for obvious reasons.  Basically, we had TD and irregular forces defending their local regions, backed up - and very importantly linked by UA SOF.  These forces were already in location along that very long initial front line and armed with next-gen smart-ATGMs, UAVs and comms.  Those comms linked them back to UA artillery creating an entirely distributed defence network - or at least that is my working theory.  The Russians sticking to road networks, lit up by ISR of all sorts were then hammered all along their own system - F ech, A ech, B ech and all the way back to SLOC nodes.  All that Russian armor/mech, the ready-force of the RA was cut to pieces in the first month of this war by that system; this wasn't "war amongst the people" this was war of the people. 
Third, Ukraine's political level, assisted by a massive social media effort allowed Ukraine to win the strategic narrative, even before the war crimes.  We all started to cheer for the little guy and realized that this war was an political and strategic opportunity.  All that money and aid, essentially the military industrial complex of Ukraine, was riding on getting this part right...and the Ukrainians did it very right.
I am not like Steve to be honest.  I had no idea how this war was going to go before it started.  It wasn't until about 72 hours in that it became very apparent that something was happening that no one in the business predicted.  That is when the sickness symptoms of the Russian system began to appear. 
Could Russia have won? Of course, no war is pre-determined.  Ukraine could have split or simply failed to resist - they could have ignored western intel, Zelenskyy could have run and/or capitulated.  Or the Russians could have had a much better plan - why they did not make the capture of Lyviv and disruption of all western support the main effort is beyond me.  But they did not, and now they really cannot.  No matter how this little dance in the Donbas goes, Russia has lost this war already.  There is no renormalization after this.  Sweden and Finland are not going to change their minds, those sanctions are going to stick as economies re-wire.  Ukraine is not going to "de-militarize" nor is it going to go quietly back into Russia's sphere with a friendly government.  Russian hard power is empty, to the point that I would not be surprised to see more disruptions in it near-abroad- Russia as a state might already be dead, it just does not know it yet.

Cheap and cheerful rocket artillery? How hard would it be to have 'mobilisation MRLS kits' to turn peacetime civilian pickups into an MLRS mosquito swarm?