THH149

Give this man a medal and a promotion! 

Give this man a medal and a promotion! 

The other star of Factory Outlet ...

Star of Factory Outlet - see the AAR ...

Howdy
I played Factory Outlet H2H the other day and wanted to give  a rundown of the action and learning from the encounter.
I was the Syrian Red Force and my opponent's turn to take US Army Blue Force. US attack with a first wave of three Abrams, accompanied by Strykers with the Abrams old gun and a selection of Bradleys with TOW launchers, and second wave as reinforcements were a company of infantry and engineers in Strykers, plus OBA and Apache helicopters.  Their mission is to control four buildings spread across a factory complex (one however was outside the complex walls - the "Offices") with largely open ground either side of the complex (long fields of fire) and a wadi along the rear left of the complex. The buildings are arranged factory/warehouse/admin building in a front to rear format with the Office building on the center left. In front of the Factory there is a unmanned trench protected by scatter minefields (neither the mines or trenches can be moved at set-up), and there are trenches and a bunker or two on each flank.
Red force was a mixed bag of special forces infantry with a large number of green/conscript infantry, plus a AT company armed with two AT-3 Saggers, 2 RCLs and 2 HMGs plus some squads with RPGs. At around turn 25, Red force receives a company of T-62MVs (these are an upgraded model with ERA blocks) supported by three BRDMs with AT-5s.
Red Force set-up is broken into three set-up zones - the AT company is forced to be on the syrian left of the complex, a platoon plus of green infantry is forced to set-up on the right, with the rest spread across the four buildings. As my friend and were playing live via network play I didn't feel I had time to adjust the provided set-up to much (more on that later), but I did move a sniper team out of the Offices and put them into the Warehouse, and fiddled a bit with the saggers so they had a chance of a side shots on US vehicles. The Offices were already isolated and didnt feel like throwing a sniper team away. I didn't man the bunkers as they stand out like sore thumbs and are immediately targetted. In the read Admin Building there was a command squad, a sniper team and an observation team which spotted for batteries of 152mm.  The observer let his first barrage go at minute one as pre-registered as airburst (a mistake) over the zone forward of the factory. As much as possible I hid everyone for as long as possible (too long perhaps, another mistake).
Broadly, the Abrams advanced with Bradleys behind, followed by the Strykers with the big guns shooting up the left and right flanks. Mostly the green Syrians cowered or ran as soon as they heard firing. A highpoint was one Sagger team destroying an Abrams (IIRC), but they quickly retreated from supporting vehicles return fire. The left bunker was first thing targetted along with the two bunkers on the right. The right flank was more misery as the Syrians were shot up by Bradleys and Abrams and friends who all stayed well out of RPG range. No more right and left flanks.
Once the flanks were cleared the factory assault began, but one Abrams was immobilised by the minefield. By then the US second wave had arrived and Strykers began to pour fire into the factory.  The Strykers advanced to far into the complex and two went down to RPG fire, and several US squads were shatted by heavy infantry fire. A trade-off was the Syrian special forces squad (rated Crack) all died in the firefight.  However, the Syrians kept holding on moving about the rear of the building, attempting to force the US to move adjacent and take point blank fire as they did so.  Unfortunately, the US was on the roof and was using that advantage to interdict my own movement upstairs. The Syrian's knew all this was coming and planned their all batteries barrage onto the complex itself.
While that was happening, other Strykers were streaming past the Factory and moving infantry to assault the Warehouse and Admin buildings, (they'd taken the Offices and were using the roof to spot for OBA). I didn't have many units to defend those buidlings  - a few squads and the threat of RPGs. All the buidlings are awkwardly constructed with several windowless walls and limited internal doorways so we both had to be super careful about orders in case our fellas ran into the streets and firelanes.
Anyway, while all this was happening, the cavalry arrived! yeeha! The ten T-62s will save the day right?
As soon as the T-62s appeared (in a very close clump of vehicles which is unlikely to be a realistic tactical employment) they started firing and knocked out three US vehicles. In the first orders phase after they appeared, I decided the best thing to do with them was to move Fast/Quick forward so they could move and shoot (a mistake) more out of position US vehicles, for the BRDMs to  get hull down and seek out targets. In response, the Abram, strykers, TOWs and Bradleys plus Apaches had a field day with all reinforcements knocked out in 2-3 minutes. Nope, the cavalry didn't save us. The ERA blocks weren't enough to save the vehicles from repeated hits.
Anyhow, the US returned to the grind of clearing out the complex, and once my last OBA ended and due to the hour of the night, I called for a ceasefire.
Here's the result (sad face): 
 
All credit to my opponent Andrew who played a very careful game. The US ground objective wasn't realised at the ceasefire as some objectives weren't solely controlled, but with a lot of time on the clock, the US would have captured all the buildings.
Some things I liked/didn't like about the scenario:
 - I've got to do better playing old soviet armor. Researching the T-62 tells me they have poor move and shoot abilities, so a better play would be to move and then shoot from a halt, rather than shooting while moving. Syrians can only hope that Apaches aren't around when they enter.
- Set-up and reinforcements entry is to restrictive and probably not according to doctine. Why would Syrians put Saggers in front line when they have a 500 meter minimum range? reinforcements cant be entered as the player prefers but arrive as one tight group - only 2-3 spaces between vehicles which is weird. Se-up should allow the human player to put the Syrians anywhere behind the current most forward Red set-up zone, and let the player use their judgement on the spread of forces. There's no possibility of moving mines or trenches in front of the Factory, making for boring repeated play as H2H.
- The victory conditions are unbalanced. Despite the designer notes saying that both sides get the chance for equal points, the Blue Force can score 1500 points and the Red force 1200. The specific allocations are unbalanced as well - for instance if the Syrians keep their own casualties below 50% then they get 200 points which is completely unrealistic (it should be 90-95% casualties), and Red force gets 200 pts if they score 35% casualties against Blue (the % is way to high). There is also a pts allocation of 400 pts for elimating the US force or share there-off - the only points Red force scored (184 of 400, or 46%). The VC are complicated (they need a monte carlo simulation to work out if both sides have a chance of winning the game) and as usual not shown to the players before they start.
- Red force should have some anti-air capabilities.
- There are some entrenchments near the Factory, why would Syrians occupy those? My only idea is to use them in some reverse slope/ambush/enfilade position and man them with RPGs (or RCLs if they can be moved from the left flank) and avoid the backblast, but they'd be exposed with few retreat options (depends on access to buildings' door ways). Though that's something to explore.
Overall, I did like the contest and there were some dramatic moments (a cheap as chips Sagger defying the odds to take out an Abrams), but overall the balance as a game (where both players have an equal chance of winning the game even though Red force will get hammered) is probably 75-80% in Blue's favour.  I'd reduce the length of the scenario, allow Red set-up across one deployment zone, change the deployment of Red reinforcements to be more tactically aware, and change the VC to have the US only score points for the ground captured, while Red only score points for US casualties.  Another change I'd make is to bump the Conscripts to Green and Green units to Regular.
Have you played this scenario? What do you think?
THH
 

Yes, buildings are a great way to increase the survival rate of ATGM teams. It is exactly what I used and exactly how that one AT 4C team has 4 vehicle kills. That and move, pause, target, move again. Essential if you want your ATGM to survive.
At speeds of 800 km/h (that means that it covers 2 km in 9 seconds!), the Kornet is just too good to be left out. Instead, it should be used in tandem with AT 4C or Metis variants, if the distances allow it. That way you have a force that can engage any Blue Force armored unit and actually do something. 
The mobility of Kornet is not really an issue. If you have several firing positions for it and a little patience, even one Kornet can render an M1 platoon useless. After it fires its first missile, the team can move on Quick orders. Set up time is small price to pay for an 800 km/h missile that can knock out Blue Force tanks and then, because there is no packing up time, it can vanish, and pop up somewhere else.

The AI plan is more like stand at the windows and get shot, until all the conscript and green units get rattled. 
As the human Blue, shoot at anyone you see for most of the game (call it getting fire superiority), then remove the Red in the flanking outbuildings, then advance on main building, then advance on deep flanking buildings.

They most certainly do! I'd say the reverse, the H2H labelled scenarios are very lopsided (in the sense that both sides dont have an even chance at achieving the scenario victory conditions, even if one side gets smashed in units killed).
See UK H2H British Armour Mix vs Syrian Armour mix, for instance which is heavily biased in favour of the Brits vis the victory conditions.

Not bragging but scored this against a very experienced H2H opponent ... but i think the scenario favours the Amies about 70/30 (in terms of Victory Conditions being able to be met), so the Syrians should be tougher (eg able to set up anywhere in the hospital complex).
 

A decent H2H wouldn't do that, they know they're going to get annihilated if they churn the Red force to stand by the windows and get their heads blown off. 

Nope, the only victory condition is the control of the objective zone, nothing else matters, so its a knock down drag 'em out fight! Fantastic!
Especially as the Brits mainly sit and defend, but having said that one Challenger actually moved from its position and drove down a hill amongst the Syrian's which promptly RPG'ed it, scratch one Challenger. Something in the AI plan or the unit AI may have triggered it, maybe some red forces a bit further away and didnt see the closer Red squads Hiding nearby.

I did it, but I'm disappointed that I couldn't destroy the third Challenger!!!
The three T72s were closing in on it, but the Brits gave up with ten minutes to go.
 

Played this as H2H and had a lot of fun, and won as the Syrians.
The basic situation is the US Blue force and in two parts, one coming from corners of the western side of the map, converging on a small town split by a river crossed by two bridges. The Syrians had a mechanised force with 8 x BMP-2s, plus several RPG/MG teams and a AT-4a team on the hill overlooking the town.
The 'Mission Objectives' for the Syrian are to hold two objectives - one each side of the river - and impose casualties on Blue Force, worth a total of 70 points.  For the US, they were to take three objectives - one on the closer side of the river and two on the far side, one quite a way from the town, for 70 points.
But we know the 'Mission Objectives' only mention some of the objectives for victory (the usual bull from the CM system), with many more points on offer for destroying Strykers/BMPs and each others specfic units like HQs and infantry, so I felt safe to ignore the Mission objectives pretty much.
I set up nearly all Syrians on the far side of the river, leaving only a squad and half on the near side. I used some trucks to block the bridges (but it turned out that they dont, though they block LOS especially when burning), adopting a reverse slope position and Hide everyone. I had to carefully manage the Target orders to make sure no one gave their position away before a point blank shot (though the AT4 shot early and destroyed the 105 on one the strykers).  Later I realised the AT5s on the BMPs couldve been put to better effect, as the US maneuvered onto the village (though that would've meant certain destruction for them if in LOS, but something to consider next time)
The Syrians had two art modules - one 81mm MTR and one 107mm rocket barrage. The rocket barrage was interesting as it either fired in the first turn or 21 minutes after the request - I time both to smash the village on the US side just as he was entering the area (lucky!).
In the buildup, the Javelin team destroyed 3 BMPs but I hid the rest, and took close range RPG shots against strykers when I could that seemed half the time to hit but not knock them out, otherwise holding fire.  I was able to destroy three more as they crossed the bridge, as they brushed aside the burning trucks. By this stage, the Us was I think 5 strykers down and the most of the rest were damaged, but he did have some infantry cross the bridges pusing into the second part of the village, but facing 5 BMPs and the bulk of the Syrian veterans.
At that point, at the 25 minute mark,  the US surrendered as he felt he didn't have sufficient vehicle support to hold what he had. I wished he'd had ceasefired as that would have given a more accurate calculation of the game situation.
The US scored some 160-170 points and the Syrians scored 460-70 (IIRC), for a Major Victory (though impacted by the surrender decision).
A couple of things we noticed after the game: a Syrian squad is setup outside the setup zone and cant be moved into one, the US has artie but only a handful of shells, we wondered if the US can cross the river rather than go over the bridges (something to check) and the US player was very agressive with the game called at the 25 minute mark (of the 50 minutes allowed) so that the result could've been very different if he was more cautious (possibly using Javelins to destroy Syrian strong points for 20 minutes), the Syrians can't set up to defend one of the US objectives (the Madrassa).
The VP count was the usual unknown (why are they hidden? doesnt senior command tell the mission leader what the f*** they need to do to be victorious?) I must say I don't like hidden VP when playing H2H.
How have others found this battle?
THH

This little fellow swam the river on his way to counterattacking Blue Force from the rear ....

This little fellow swam the river on his way to counterattacking Blue Force from the rear ....

Yeah well, somtimes you just gotta punch a fella in the face to win the H2H scenario!
THH

Give the Syrians a go in this Challenge against Brit AI, your wont be disappointed by the tension! And dont forget to screen shot and post your result.
Best
THH

With modern optics on tanks  and APCs, is there an advantage in opening up? Does spotting improve in practice? 
How good are optics in CMSF2 anyway, are they 'equivalent' to 10x zoom on vehicles? 3x on infantry guns (10x on binos , night vision, javelin)?
THH

Ah OK yep that's dead easy, thanks
What about Unit Objectives, can I delete them too?
thx
THH

This is the crux of the issue isnt it, BF are using data that's acceptable to their military customers and making it available to gamers, that evidence based approach will beat anyones imagination anyday of the week. I wholly endorse the BF approach. Of course strange things happen in battle, and weapon et al performance will always be placed on a bell curve of variation - thats built into the model too.

This is the crux of the issue isnt it, BF are using data that's acceptable to their military customers and making it available to gamers, that evidence based approach will beat anyones imagination anyday of the week. I wholly endorse the BF approach. Of course strange things happen in battle, and weapon et al performance will always be placed on a bell curve of variation - thats built into the model too.

8x8 meters 

I got properly slapped by the AI at my first attempt (as the Syrians)! 

Played this scenario for the NATO pack H2H format with me attacking as the Brits. The premise is that the Brits need to rescue 6 hostages that may or may not be spread across two  compounds (one in the desert and another in a small village) in 30 minutes. The Brits have 8 Jackals and some utes to bring up engineers  and friends including 2 Tornados, while the Uncons have 2 Kornets, assorted RPG29s and squads with MGs and RPG7s as well as snipers and mines on the roads. The 6 Hostages appear as Blue reinforcements in the two hostage locations in the last five minutes, and if the Uncons eliminate them then they recieve 1000 VPs.  The Brits need to control the hostage locations and preserve two buildings in each hostage compound, and prevent hostage deaths to ensure Uncons dont get more VPs.
This scenario is pretty good actually, the Brits are fragile but have some great firepower (inc planes) and the Uncons can pull some pretty sweet ambushes to knock down the Jackals. In my H2H playing, I was the Brits and pulled some Dirty Dozen moves to drive straight into the compounds (while doing some drive by shooting of the kornet teams) coming straight up the middle road between the two compounds as well as a long detour up the escarpment. I suffered terribly in losing 5 Jackals (3 on the main road and 2 in the Village compound itself) but recovered to bring infantry up eventually overcome resistance in the Village compound and rescue two hostages (the Uncons killed one). In the desert compound, in the last 5 minutes, I  rushed my three remaining jackals forward and take it by storm figuring the Uncons had put most everything into the village defence. It was not to be and another jackal was lost and crew dead/wounded in the others, so saving any hostages there. I didn't use the planes at all as the action was just moving to fast. The hostages in the desert compound weren't shot for some reason, so the score just handed the Uncons just 127 VP for the single hostage death. The game end was a draw (400 vs 427 VP) but my oponent and I figured it was very replayable as there were many options for both sides, and a short time limit to keep the action moving crisply. There seems to be a quirk around the hostagse though. The briefing says 1000 VP are awarded for all hostage deaths so one dead should be worth 167 (FRU) but the score awarded 127. The other quirk was hy opponent didnt see on screen the hostages appear in the desert compound and he had enough troops unchallenged to be able to eliminate them easily. So we figured the Uncons should've earned VP for eliminating those as well (but how much its not clear - 150 each for 900 in total (vs the 1000 in the briefing) or 127 each or 167 each, or some other amount? maybe the VP ramp up if more are killed?). Anyway, we gave the Uncons a major victory with the extra VP for killing 4 hostages: a rare Uncon win. Why did the Brits lose....to many Dirty Dozen moves leading to the initial repulse (time wasted too) and not using the planes...but most of the engineers survived to take the village.  The Brits had engineers but I couldn't get them to use their 'blast' order in game.  So that's my homework, learning how to blast walls so as to enter from unexpected directions of walled hostage prisons. Have you played this? What did you think? 
THH
 

I'm fond of them too.....But mine (almost) always go off:

The secret to almost guaranteed detonation is to stack your IEDs in pairs.....Then ensure that two or more triggermen have LOS to each pair.  This minimises the small chance of trigger failure and as one charge will always set off the other, both would have to be a dud for it to fail.  Test it out and see, it enhances their lethality significantly.