Jump to content

STURM-FAKTION

Members
  • Posts

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

STURM-FAKTION's Achievements

Member

Member (2/3)

6

Reputation

  1. Well Artkin...I said they were "elite" to Russians standards. Which is the case. Elite too get wiped and reformed. Especially by Russians standards. I though it was clear enough when calling it sh**. But sad truth is: No western armies could have done better than what Russia did. What I mean is; in a similar conflict, same ground, same ennemies. I'm pretty sure that every countries would have failed the same. Russia was just too dumb to try it.
  2. @Sgt Joch "I also do not think it is relevant to focus on squad size. A squad is not supposed to fight in isolation. If a point unit runs into a superior enemy force, SOP should be to retreat and bring up other forces to deal with the threat. For example in Vietnam, you had several situations where a U.S. infantry platoon on point ran into a NVA company/battalion. Typically, the platoon would retreat/go defensive, call in artillery/air strikes and bring up the rest of the company/battalion/other battalions, as required to deal with the threat." - what a strange example you are serving here...At first I thought you were about to talk about how a squad of under-equipped Viet Cong ambushed and dealt with an entire US company. You know...talking about terrain and all. But no. Well; in that case, why not talking about how a single forward observer can rout an entire regiment ?
  3. @Artkin-" VDV units have an extremely limited mission. They are not "elite" troops either. They are pretty much the only contracted professional soldiers in the entire Russian military. So they're "regulars". If I recall correctly Spetsnaz follows as second but is still nowhere near the VDV " -I am talking about what's on the ground. So yes, VDV are "elite" to Russian standards. And "Spetsnaz" is a generic term. You have "Spetsnaz" everywhere. They are just ****. -" I highly doubt BMD's are more armored than contemporary BMP's, considering they're supposed to be air deployable. " I wasn't clear enough; my fault. But yes they are. What is really issue on the ground to a division or brigade is generally BMP-2 and BTR80. By now, it's even BMP-1 and BTR-D. Contemporary BMP-3 are rare. But BMD-2 was widely issued to dedicated troops. Just as the BMD-4 for airborne. -"The ak12's aren't desirable weapons either. They've already been revised since the invasion with the 2 round burst being recalled. The internet is full of ak12 reliability issues." Ukrainians fights with the same Kalashnikov as Russians. Both sides have a lot of model and era. That's why I said I wasn't talking about "fancy". -"A report just came out on The Thread(R) saying that >75% of Ukrainian casualties were caused by artillery or mrls. So yeah, the support assets are still king of the battlefield and light infantry retain the mission of taking and holding territory." Artillery casualties were counted for 50 or 60% of the total losses in WW2. I'm sure 75% is a bit too much; even for a drone-era war. But yes artillery rules. -"The real failure of the VDV during the 2022 Hostomel airport attack was because the Russian ground forces didn't have adequate time to link up at Hostomel, which meant the first wave of airborne troops were wiped out. Despite the size of their squads light infantry without a logistics trail (airborne troops) are not going to stand up to a mechanized attack being supported by high power (203mm) artillery. VDV toe is very lacking in support assets" I wasn't specific about Hostomel airport battle. And VDV were also deployed in the south. Anyway, you are right about it. And the 72nd mech.brigade is "elite" to this war standards. Everything was wrong about Russian plan. But your picture of Russian TOE is not that great. I've seen it already. It doesn't show any of the sub-units attached to a battalion for example. Could be mortars, could be PKP machine-gun. BTW, Ukraine TOE is not that much different everywhere you look at it. Truth is: despite the 2008 reform in Russian ground forces, they still are organized as soviet era. Just as Ukrainians. And just as Ukrainians are riding BMP-1 and T-64. Overall, what really worked at the beginning was this "panzerfaust" tactic. With Javelin and NLAW. Still; Russia is missing manpower.
  4. @Sgt Joch can't agree with your phrase here: "That said, there is not much of a difference in the combat effectiveness of a Battalion at 85-90% strength. A Battalion will derive most of its firepower from its heavy weapons, MMGs, HMGs, AFVs, mortars, artillery, air power. Having squads with 6-7 rather than 8 soldiers will limit some missions, but won’t have much of a material impact." -This is exactly why Russian VDV (Airborne) been wiped out at the beginning of Ukraine's invasion. They were elite soldiers compared to others Russian ground forces standards; but still got horribly surprised and almost annihilated in first weeks...if not days. Although equipped with better IFVs and AFVs than regular infantry (a BMD of any type got more firepower, mechanics, armor than every BTR, as well as BMP). VDV forces were also better supplied, and being thrown from Belarus is way shorter than deep in Russian territory. All those airborne forces had the best equipment. From weapon, uniforms, logistics to radar...I'm not talking about fancy things only issued in ridiculously small amount. I'm talking about day to day man equipment. Like having a squad equipped with AK12 instead of AK74. Or simply PKP instead of RPK74. -But still go wiped out for a simple fact: They didn't had the necessary manpower from lowest echelon in infantry. When dismounted; a VDV squad is 5 men (7 if taking in account both driver and gunner). 15 dismounted men for a platoon at full strength is pretty damn few. Even for today's standards. -A mechanized Ukrainian squad is 9 men. On a pre-set up defensive positions, you are more likely to have just the gunner inside the vehicle. And the rest dismounted. Just take down a russian at first fire exchanges and you outnumbered your enemy by being twice as him. But yes airborne VDV, had everything from heavy weapons to AA or AT. Same MG or Grenadier in squad. Even a greater number of RPO-A Shmel. With almost one for every dismounted soldier. From Brigade, to Division. Just not enough infantry to manned it. So I guess it matters a bit :-))
  5. @Dynaman216 I didn't made myself clear about these figures. I mean; yes you're right. I read few places that the average Russian BTG were ranging from 62 to 78% the day before the invasion. Considering 2 BTG's are made of a brigade that should have 3 battalions; it means 78% of an already downed 66% brigade. Meaning 51,48% for a full brigade in this example. https://defence24.com/armed-forces/land-forces/russia-losing-22-battalion-tactical-groups-is-btg-a-myth-or-is-it-truly-effective-in-combat-analysis https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Estimation-of-Weapons-and-Vehicles-in-a-Battalion-Tactical-Group-circa-2014-2015-5_fig1_369920711 https://www.ausa.org/publications/reflections-russias-2022-invasion-ukraine-combined-arms-warfare-battalion-tactical
  6. mmmh... reminds me of this pirate: "One-eyed Joe" because he had one eye.
  7. aj, Imagine you have 3 battalions: all fully manned and equipped. After a few days, there is casualties. What you have is: I.Battalion is at 85% strength; II.Battalion is 82% strength; III.Battalion is 90% strength. IRL even 10% casualties could results in dramatic operational dilemma. Does battalions tends to merging like this ? I.Battalion 100% ; II.Battalion 100% ; III.Battalion 57% With the third acting as a reserve ? And a reservoir to feed the two others ? I mean, it's pretty bad to mix units... I just wanted to have your opinions. I'm not even talking about Ukraine. Because in that case, Russians for example; never been at full strength even at start. All the things we saw about Battalion Tactical Group (BTG) is partially because of this. Like divisions or brigades organizing around 2 BTS's. i know all of it depends on many things; and top of that is probably how much you can or not stretch you positions depending on how much terrain you must hold. thanks
  8. aj, I think i'm done with WW2 for now... and I realize how ignorant I am concerning a lot of vehicles and material from the the cold war to mid/late-90's. RUSSIANS I MEAN Does anyone have in mind any ressources where to find any informations about uniforms; like who wear what...Spetsnaz, pilote... + organization of a Motorized Rifle Regiment (BTR)... (...) thanks a lot (any good source of informations about first and second chechen war is highly appreciated !)
  9. Aj, Simple question, but I fear the response already. Is there any one still playing CMBB on a regular basis ?
  10. I COULD HAVE BET THAT I WAS GOING TO INSPIRE PEOPLE HERE ! It's crazy that no one did that or something similar in the past 20 years. I admit, I was also a bit confuse that clearly no veterans players or grognards encouraged me after I post my 18 x 12 KM map. Especially as a first contribution to this community. Definitely, this is not about the whole campaign issue...This is about using 400 Km2 of playable area that makes one big.
  11. ok so i can't post more.why restrictions I do not understand. Registration time limit ? Day ? Can't attach anything more...
  12. Aj, I just designed 9 maps (each of 6x4 Km), making one continuous map of 18x12 Km. Making the whole area, a total of 216 Km2 playable. Each one of these, linked to the others to the very tiles. They form one single map designed for an operation(a series of op.)I will challenge, and then report in detailed AAR. I already have the Corps and divisional briefings. The narrative purpose, and precise OOB for all units involved. (Experience, fitness, even portraits...). For both camps. I have also created a full-set of rules to make it readable from the outside if anyone have interest on it. But I will create another dedicated thread in a few days when the operation starts. Of course the maps are topographic, and the result is realistic. For comparison; the real Operation Südwind was fought over 200Km2. The real Operation Frühlingserwachen was fought over more like 400Km2. But in reality, most of it concerned the different Panzer Korps engaged. Reducing the area to the actual size of my map if you focus on the SS, and not in the rear. Elements of 1 & 12 SS managed a brief breakthrough 24Km in depth, but the very most of the operation hold in a 18x12 area. Picture 1: THE MAP. I will post others infos right now, but first...I'm requesting help from the CM Community. WILL SOMEONE ? LIKE A VETERAN ? EXPERIENCED-SUPERIOR THINKER ? WILL SOMEONE STEP UP AND AGREE TO BUILD ME A REALISTIC SOVIET PAKFRONT ? SOMEONE WHO UNDERSTAND WELL THE MECHANISM OF DEFENSE IN DEPTH AND ECHELONED LINE OF DEFENSE ? I will manage the Axis forces. What I need is someone I could send my maps. I will join the AT Guns, trenches, and set of AT / AP mines allowed to cover the area. If this someone is ready to do so, then, he'll have to organize a coherent networks of nest and fortifications with the idea to hold an armored operation. To handle the AI on defense, this I can. To handle a 3, 4 times superior AI counter-attacking, this I can. To let the AI set-up their own defenses...I can't. By doing it myself, it will spoil the conclusion on battlefield. well, now the pictures. thanks a lot
  13. aj, Supposing; in editor when creating an operation: I only attribute one and only one small square for each side as their set-up zone. Like one ridiculous green corner in the rear. And instead, every units are set-up by me AND PADLOCKED FOR START. ---> Then at battle 2, and especially if the scenario is an Assault. Every units on both side will be considered advanced behind enemy zone ? And padlocked in their own deployment area ? Even if it results in no resupply and so...? Am I clear ? In others words...Can a solo play cheat the AI, and force the AI to "Play as they lay" with him ? thanks
×
×
  • Create New...