ncc1701e

They are fearsome and very difficult to destroy. Snifff. 😕

MINUTE 5
Well, I was wrong. Not a single shot was fired last turn. No new contacts were discovered. My squad in reserve is approaching the main line.

I will merge the two-man scout team with its squad next turn.

Now, given the sound contact I had, I am sure now that @JoMc67 has some troops inside objective number one. So, basically, I have no choice. I must attack. I have decided to use my reserve squad to try a flanking maneuver.

I see no reason to be so aggressive against @IanL. He has tried to replicate your issue directly in the "Passage at Wilcox" scenario. Having so many variables to consider, it is perfectly normal that one cannot see the same thing. That is why those pathfinding issues are hard to understand in order to solve them. Firing the editor, I was hoping to have less variable in the loop and going directly to the issue in the less amount of time possible. I think I was lucky, that's all.
I am not sure this is exactly the same but yes sometimes I see something weird. Hope this will guide the guys in the good direction for understanding the root cause.

I see no reason to be so aggressive against @IanL. He has tried to replicate your issue directly in the "Passage at Wilcox" scenario. Having so many variables to consider, it is perfectly normal that one cannot see the same thing. That is why those pathfinding issues are hard to understand in order to solve them. Firing the editor, I was hoping to have less variable in the loop and going directly to the issue in the less amount of time possible. I think I was lucky, that's all.
I am not sure this is exactly the same but yes sometimes I see something weird. Hope this will guide the guys in the good direction for understanding the root cause.

Thanks. Firing again "The Passage at Wilcox" scenario for trying to reproduce this problem, I have just realized how close the buildings are from "Going to Town" scenario of CMSF1. I have played so much this scenario that I can close my eyes and see the map... 😃

I see no reason to be so aggressive against @IanL. He has tried to replicate your issue directly in the "Passage at Wilcox" scenario. Having so many variables to consider, it is perfectly normal that one cannot see the same thing. That is why those pathfinding issues are hard to understand in order to solve them. Firing the editor, I was hoping to have less variable in the loop and going directly to the issue in the less amount of time possible. I think I was lucky, that's all.
I am not sure this is exactly the same but yes sometimes I see something weird. Hope this will guide the guys in the good direction for understanding the root cause.

Third attack using the houses with walls for a West-East attack axis. Usually, I am seen the soldiers going South.

But, on rare occasions, I also see the infantry trying to flank the houses / walls going North. I suppose this is what we see in the first above video. Please note the fleeing infantry is going South in the below images. There is one guy going North but I do not think this is someone fleeing more a courageous hero trying to reach the house.


Hope this helps. I can send you the CMBN scenario is needed. 

Second attack using the houses without walls for a West-East attack axis. Same, after several times trying, the soldiers are fleeing in the South direction.

First attack using the houses with walls for a North-South attack axis. I have tried several times and the pixeltruppen are still fleeing in the South direction. No problem here.

@IanL if I may help, I think the problem comes from the walls. I have created a small scenario in CMBN editor (game engine number 4.0) for reproduction. The problem is seen when the attack is perpendicular to the main axis of attack. In our case, the main axis of attack is North-South. And, in my example, like in the above videos, the attack is West-East.
Setup:
Allied Friendly Direction: South Axis Friendly Direction: North
Three times the same houses:
One with walls for a West-East attack. One without walls for the same West-East attack. One with walls for a North-South attack.
I am playing hotseat.

I see no reason to be so aggressive against @IanL. He has tried to replicate your issue directly in the "Passage at Wilcox" scenario. Having so many variables to consider, it is perfectly normal that one cannot see the same thing. That is why those pathfinding issues are hard to understand in order to solve them. Firing the editor, I was hoping to have less variable in the loop and going directly to the issue in the less amount of time possible. I think I was lucky, that's all.
I am not sure this is exactly the same but yes sometimes I see something weird. Hope this will guide the guys in the good direction for understanding the root cause.

MINUTE 5
Well, I was wrong. Not a single shot was fired last turn. No new contacts were discovered. My squad in reserve is approaching the main line.

I will merge the two-man scout team with its squad next turn.

Now, given the sound contact I had, I am sure now that @JoMc67 has some troops inside objective number one. So, basically, I have no choice. I must attack. I have decided to use my reserve squad to try a flanking maneuver.

At my age I forget half of what I write   
Obviously I am thinking "German" as our Trekkie is playing the Germans... splitting off a two-man scout team from a German Squad really leaves you with a far less flexible unit... also from my blog:
Of course the fewer men you have in a scout team, the less vulnerable they will be, harder for the enemy to spot, etc..  but when commanding Germans I almost always scout with a full split squad, the LMG team will be providing overwatch and support for the maneuver team.  The following image shows this in action (Team B is moving up in line with Team A, then Team A will bound forward again):

But but my mummy never told me about that. This is insane. 🤣

Of course, guerrilla-friendly terrain is in no way restricted to cities, even in the 'arid'  Middle East. Consider a few square kms patchwork of vehicle-unfriendly marshy fields, dikes, walls and irrigation ditches unchanged since Assyrian times, with LOS broken up by unkempt orchards and palm groves, walled farmsteads and dense clusters of reeds.
Look closely at the second map, or go to Google Earth. This is incredibly challenging ground to secure, even with overwhelming force available. Not quite bocage, but close.
And as I've preached umpteen times, terrain is the "third player" in the game; it can equalize or cripple pretty much any force.

Some maps from the above sources, describing the Active, Security and Support roles in different contexts:


This is more than doable with the mechanics in CMSF - obviously the crowd/riot would have to be abstracted (flavour object? burning cars?), but it would work.

As a scenario it wouldn't be all that interesting, obviously, but it's nice to know.



More of a formal Syrian army hunter-killer ambush, but one that would work just as well with irregular forces. Given the obstacles, this wouldn't work in CMSF, but should work fine in CMSF  (ignoring the basements).



"Exit" objectives will help this kind of thing with CMSF 2


The above is probably what a typical irregular scenario should look like - attack a target, and get out before the reaction force shows up. Again with the "exit" conditions making this kind of thing possible now.


One thing that is notable is how small these examples are - most insurgent-only scenarios should probably be really small - Blufor getting a squad or maybe a platoon at most. That's pushing the lower limit on scale for CM, but I think it's workable.

The importance of Infowar elements in the above makes me wonder if there's something clever you can do with Spotting objectives.

Have been thinking a lot about Opfor in general (sucker for an underdog), and how to approach this with CMSF 2, particularly from a PBEM standpoint, and trying to be somewhat competitive.

Doing some experimenting with CMSF 1:

The heaviest option for civilians in CMSF will allow Combatants (not Fighters (Mujahideen), but the guys in camo and jeans), and possibly VBIED (but not taxis) to remain invisible until very close indeed - it seems like if these are Move-ing along city tiles, these won't be spotted until around 2 action spots away. VBIED seem to have some degree of stealth, but nothing like as much as that. Usually that doesn't matter, since they cover a huge amount of ground pretty quickly.

They are not spotted directly, but the soldiers will still call out "SPOTTED AN ENEMY UNIT", etc. - so there's some contextual clues. Occasionally they might pop up with contact icons, but still nothing they'll directly fire at. Originally I thought this was a problem, but on further thought I think this might actually be okay - the manuals talk about spotting unusual behaviour in civilians, dogs etc., so this could be put down to that kind of observation. I was also originally of the opinion that this "stealth device" approach to modelling insurgents wasn't terribly great, but it does seem to match up to the tactical considerations quite well - hiding amongst civilians to get to point-blank range, etc.

Combatants do not have the firepower to go into a straight fight with any Blufor squad, at least with small arms, and they're mostly equipped with small arms alone. This means that I suspect the correct approach is to force them into something other that a straight fight.

E.g.:

The mission is to attack a US squad, inside a police station. The plan is to use spies to discover their location, infiltrate (whilst holding fire!) to locations surrounding the building, then give them a really good reason to leave the building - ideally a VBIED, but perhaps an ATGM, mortar fire, RPG volley, whatever.  The Combatants can then open up whist he US squad is fleeing the building, giving them the advantage that they need. Any technicals are ideal here as flankers - probably not engaging directly, but cutting off retreat routes.


The TC 7-100 series are the  recent OpFor guides for the US. 2 and 3 are of particular use:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/TC_7-100.2_-_Opposing_Force_Tactics_(December_2011).pdf
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/TC_7-100.3_-_Irregular_Opposing_Forces_(January_2014).pdf

The interesting things here are how generic these are (the same basic concepts work for Syrian Mechanised infantry battalion assaults, or a fighter group ambushing a few HMMWV's). This generally splits a plan into three sections:

Active Element - This is the element that will make the assault/carry out the ambush/manoeuvre onto the target.
Security Element - Early warning for the approach of reinforcements, possibly delaying or preventing this. Typically this might just be an RPG team, but could include spies, IED's, mines, ATGMs, etc.
Support Element - C2, Direct fires, Indirect fires and mobility.

Direct fires will be MG's, RPGs and maybe an ATGM. Mobility is obviously civilian transport.

The "C2" part of that is worth some thought. Irregular forces don't get much in terms of equipment, and I can't remember if there's much in the way of radios in CMSF. The Spy in Passage at Wilcox (CMSF 2 Demo) definitely has a radio, so there's that. I do wonder if it's worth using teams in taxis as messengers, sharing the spy spotting information horizontally? In any case, it's going to be important to pay attention to force (cell?) structure here, and a reasonable percentage of your force allocation should probably go on spies (or at least dedicated to spotting Combatants), since you'll need all the help you can get.


This does leave the Fighters in a slightly odd position. Without the stealth of the Combatants, they're mostly useful for having better equipment (including ATGMs), usually a little better training, and higher motivation. Whilst that means that they're a good choice for the actual attack, they don't have the same ability to get close without some thought - I wonder if they're best used from concealment as the assault element, after the support element suppresses the target? That would leave Combatants in the Security and Support roles mostly, I suppose.

E.g.:

The mission is to attack a US squad, inside a police station. The plan is to use spies to discover their location, infiltrate RPG teams (whilst holding fire!) to locations surrounding the building, then fix them in place -  unleashing a volley of RPGs and MG fire from multiple directions.  The Fighters can then debus from civilian transport and storm the building directly.

One idea I did read in the above manuals which I think could work well in CMSF is using taxis to form an impromptu roadblock - using them to block in either end of a street so that exits are impeded. The taxis will be destroyed, of course, but if it keeps the enemy in the kill zone longer, so much the better.
 

Upon reading a little closer, it appears like you are using one two-man scout team.  A bit of advice.. scouting is most effective using a split squad, each alternating movement, so you always have one team stopped and listening, also if they get into trouble, a full squad can get out of it easier than a two-man team.  I almost never use two-man scout teams... I'm pretty sure that I cover this on my blog. 
Otherwise I appreciate how thoughtful you are being with your tactics in this game, scouting, maintaining a reserve, I'm so proud  [sniff].  I won't give any advice while the game is ongoing., but I am watching and reading.
Bil

Yup, under "menus" there's a button for "conditions" - that'll give you wind direction, weather, ground state, electronic warfare, whatever is appropriate.

I consider another benefit to the orange axis compared to the green/red to be the existence of the road. You have not stated what the initial ground conditions are but from the images does at least seem to be raining. So that road could maybe be some use for the armoured car that he is going to be reinforced with. I am thinking about the possible risk of bogging that asset down when going via the red or green axis instead.
Does not appear as though you have any road routes for when you are reinforced with yours?

In general, my scouts in a german formation tend to be whole teams - if you split off a scout team, you end up with an unsplittable six man squad with one or two MG's, which severely limits your options - and your number one priority is maintaining as much freedom of movement (and available options) as possible. There are exceptions, but they're generally in a final push to contact - if I'm trying to get eyes-on to a known enemy, and want to maintain as stealthy an approach as possible, then I'll split off a German scout team.

Whether to rush is a common problem with meeting engagements, and is an issue with wargaming those scenarios in general - ME tend to be non-historical, and the "rush to the centre" mentality is one that's seen far more commonly in gaming than it ever was in reality. It's just one of those things. If your opponent has charged into the centre, you might have a bad time - this is partly an issue with the time limit, and partly with the objectives.

I'm (again, with full expectation of being badly wrong) expecting him to have taken the other objective by now, and for this to be mostly a stand-off over open ground. That means that the decisive point will be whose armoured car gets destroyed first - which is a fight you should be equipped to win. If so, then you should be able to mop up fairly safely from outside PIAT range and win a minor victory.

Would want more information, but allow me to blunder into an uninformed opinion. 

Those objectives look too widely spaced to contest with one platoon, and there's also no easy way to deny the enemy manoeuvre and therefore gain an advantage in mobility), since the map appears symmetrically split with that ridge line.

Therefore my basic scheme would be to move the platoon to take the more valuable objective (** usually indicate VP), expecting a close range firefight on that objective.

That will leave a few possible scenarios:

- Your opponent will do the same, and you'll slug it out at close range (you should have an advantage here)
- Your opponent will do the opposite, and you'll defend the more valuable objective.
- Your opponent will spread out, and you'll defeat them in detail.

You don't have the mobility or fires to do much that's more complex than that - advancing through the (possibly) covered approach on your right and taking that town seems as good a plan as any.

MINUTE 2
Applying what I have read on @Bil Hardenberger's blog (http://battledrill.blogspot.com/2015/03/rifle-platoon-leader-platoon-scouts.html), I am moving a scout team to contact with the rest of the squad behind.

The overall situation at the end of the turn. The progression is slowly on going. I am taking my time not rushing toward the houses. Perhaps it will be a mistake, will see. So far, I have no sign of the enemy.

MINUTE 4
My scout team is in position actively searching for the enemy.

A second squad is arriving at the edge of the woods. Its two men scout team opening the way. I am planning to merge them next turn to create two teams.

The last squad is still in reserve but I will move them a little forward to be ready for supporting the others.

Here is the overall situation of my troops.

Contact! The enemy has been spotted by my scout team just near the end of this turn. I expect the first shots next turn.

Thank you. In fact, I try to think as if it was real life and that I could lose it.
Only two - there is a specific scout team and a two-man team from one squad.
Yes it is cover in your blog. In fact, as you can read above in minute 3's report, the third squad has been splitted into two teams and I am using the bounding overwatch technique with them as described here: http://battledrill.blogspot.com/2013/08/bounding-overwatch-alternating-this.html
I am experimenting the two methods. 🙂