Tactics That Might Not Work in CMBN

[Sabot6]

Hi, All--

I love CMBN and really enjoy reading WWII accounts and trying to understand and then apply the tactics described. With my very limited knowledge, CMBN seems to be a great simulation and for the most part gives us the opportunity to employ the tactics that were used, with the appropriate or likely results usually occurring (e.g., pinning a squad with fire and then maneuvering to outflank it; putting a TRP on your defensive position with a reserve nearby to immediately counterattack if the position is lost).

Anyway, I'm curious what real-world tactics have you found which don't work well in CMBN?

Thanks in advance!

[Sergei]

I haven't had the kind of success with my tank assaults as in this scene:

http://youtu.be/jfOx0PjQt34?t=34m30s

[A co]

Yes, one's opponent is always sending back rewrites of one's glorious scripts.

Generally, any real-world tactic that depends on the opposing commander not always knowing the status of all his units, won't apply so well in CMBN.

For example fast, deep, shock assaults- in real life the defending commander would never get the information needed to respond in instant coordinated detail, as we do in the game.

[Pete Wenman]

Tactics That Might Not Work in CMBN ?

Most of mine

[slysniper]

Lets see.

Poor tactics

Yes poor tactics do not work well in the game

Why, because they are poor.

Actually, some times players try to use good tactics, but they execute them poorly.

Same results, they then become poor tactics.

I think that about covers it.

I know, not much help was it.

[Sabot6]

I guess what I was thinking of were things like ambushes, which can be very difficult to execute without the cover armor arc and the fact that the "hide" command really constrains spotting--that sort of thing....

[Lt Belenko]

....

Actually, some times players try to use good tactics, but they execute them poorly.

Same results, they then become poor tactics.

......

This is how I play good intentions but poor execution.

The most difficult thing I've yet to execute is timing of an assault right with a barrage.

In real life the assault platoon is crunched down in a gully. They know the Company CO just ordered some arty in on that cluster of trees. Nobody moves till the rounds start to impact. In the game, sometimes my guys jump out too early and get mowed down.

In real life the platoon leader can issue a move order right as the arty starts falling. My platoon leader (me) waits until the Mickey's hand is pointing at twelve (next turn) to issue the order. By this time 3/4 of the rounds have already hit before moving out. This ensures there won't be enough rounds left when they are needed later.

In real life when the platoon starts getting too close falling mortars he issues a hit the deck command at any instance; again without waiting until Mickey's second hand is pointing to the 12 (next turn). My troops continue forward in to the barrage and suffer greatly not pausing until the turn is over, but promptly stop at the beginning of the next turn.

Then once the mortars have stopped, the real life platoon leader can issue the assault order, without waiting for Mickeys second hand to come around and allowing the enemy to recover and open up. My guys are either too far away from starting late or were cut to ribbons by their own arty. Or they are hidden at the right location but fail to move until the enemy has remanned the MGs and Mickey's hand has swept around again.

Timing is everything. Frustrating indeed.

[Echo]

That was a damn good movie. Tons of tank action. Never seen or heard of it before. Looks like real tanks to me. The whole movie is at the link, remember to enable captions (cc) unless you speak Finnish.

http://youtu.be/jfOx0PjQt34?t=34m30s

[womble]

I guess what I was thinking of were things like ambushes, which can be very difficult to execute without the cover armor arc...

I don't find ambushes hard to execute. Using AT assets to ambush armour that's accompanied/preceded by infantry is a bit more difficult, without ACA, but still doable at longer ranges. Normandy ranges are too short for many kinds of ambush anyway, hence the trouble people have using ATGs "effectively", and ambushing escorted armour ought to be difficult (though, admittedly, the inability to distinguish target types isn't a very good simulation, it does reward combined arms tactics...).

...and the fact that the "hide" command really constrains spotting--that sort of thing....

The biggest problem with the Hide command is that people don't seem to want to accept that it's different to what it meant in CMx1. You have to get your head out of old CMx1 conventions: Hide is largely unnecessary, since your pTruppen will seek good cover by default; being under trees doesn't necessarily give you any concealment; being "in" a terrain type isn't as good as being behind some of that terrain, most of the time; Hide means "Stay hidden above all other priorities".

Hide has no place in most ambush situations as it stands, and is almost always unnecessary (and counterproductive). That doesn't make it "wrong", it makes it situational (and different to how it was in that other Combat Mission series).

[poesel]

Hide is largely unnecessary, since your pTruppen will seek good cover by default; being under trees doesn't necessarily give you any concealment; being "in" a terrain type isn't as good as being behind some of that terrain, most of the time; Hide means "Stay hidden above all other priorities".

Hide may(!) be unnecessary for concealment but its definitely not for cover. Hiding troops have a much higher chance to survive artillery. When its too late to turn, hide has saved many a live of my pixeltruppen.

Hiding for concealment works too as enemies are sometimes unaware of the hiding troops until they literally step on them. Problem is that this is true for your own troops, too.

[JonS]

Overwatch is king. HIDE the troops who are in danger and who are going to be doing the shooting, but have them - and their engagement area - overwatched by someone in a safer spot. He will provide the signal when it's time to un-hide and unleash hell.

[womble]

Overwatch is king. HIDE the troops who are in danger and who are going to be doing the shooting, but have them - and their engagement area - overwatched by someone in a safer spot. He will provide the signal when it's time to un-hide and unleash hell.

Can be problematic for WeGo play, if unHiding at the start of the minute would be too early, and at the start of the next minute, too late. That's the nub of the problem with Hide. I guess it works lovely in RT.

[JonS]

I only ever play WEGO, and seldom have trouble with the timing ... probably because in general my tactics are pants, so the success of any given ambush hardly ever revolves around exact timing

[GreenAsJade]

This thread is about real life tactics, right? It strikes me that any uncertainty introduced by WeGo 1 minute quantum is just realistic.... get used to it. Plan for it. Move on...

GaJ

[Faelwolf]

Interlocking fields of fire with machine guns. I have set up MG's with ILFF, and mutual support, just to watch the enemy advance through the kill zone with few if any losses, even in areas where the overlap puts them in the field of fire of 3 MG's at once.

Quite a few times they didn't even go to ground. I have gotten to the point where I have to wonder why I even bother with MG's, a couple teams from a split squad is much more effective in the same role. It looks like MG's in the game are treated as just another single rifle and don't have much real impact.

[womble]

Interlocking fields of fire with machine guns. I have set up MG's with ILFF, and mutual support, just to watch the enemy advance through the kill zone with few if any losses, even in areas where the overlap puts them in the field of fire of 3 MG's at once.

Quite a few times they didn't even go to ground. I have gotten to the point where I have to wonder why I even bother with MG's, a couple teams from a split squad is much more effective in the same role. It looks like MG's in the game are treated as just another single rifle and don't have much real impact.

I have to wonder what you're doing different to me. I've had single LMG teams send squads to ground. They won't hold an attack off unsupported, because a squad's firepower is so much greater, but they're certainly effective.

[Baneman]

I'm with Faelwolf - time and again I've seen whole platoons advance towards an area I've got covered with a deployed HMG.

It excels at finding the subtle gaps between men and with no "spray" of bullets, finding a gap means a wasted burst.

Nowadays I'm just buying more HE chuckers because the points I spend on HMG's almost never pay for themselves.

[ss11955]

That was a damn good movie. Tons of tank action. Never seen or heard of it before. Looks like real tanks to me. The whole movie is at the link, remember to enable captions (cc) unless you speak Finnish.

http://youtu.be/jfOx0PjQt34?t=34m30s

Terrific movie !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[sburke]

Broad question, but a fun one.

As a couple others noted there is a lot involved in trying to employ different tactics. Ambush can be tough. In real life it was tough. As an example I am doing a lot of Market Garden reading. (September Hope at the moment). At one point the Americans spot a German truck column coming and deploy to ambush it. However before the convoy is in the kill sack, someone further to the rear who had not gotten word yet opens fire and kills the lead motorcyclist. You can imagine what happened to the rest of the plan.

Understanding what terrain conditions give what cover and concealment is key. Also give the enemy more to worry about than what is immediately ahead, keep their vehicles buttoned up (harassing mortar fire is great for this, also snipers and if you need to MGs.)

Hedgerows and wheatfields are the best I have found so far, they offer greater concealment while hedgerows offer excellent cover as well.

Hide to me is primarily to tell my guys to put their noses to the dirt, best position for protection from artillery and keeping them from being spotted. Have someone else as JonS said further back responsible for being your eyes. If the enemy is getting close I will usually give my ambushers a 360 degree covered arc enough to allow them to protect themselves but not too far as to give away their position early and I unhide them. Does it always work? Not on your life, but does it sometimes work? Yep and it is very satisfying when it does.

I also had a very harsh lesson taught me by another opponent. Buildings are great reverse slope deployment positions. Huh you say? Position your troops against the back wall of the building. They are almost impossible to spot. Your opponent can pound the heck out of the building all they want, but when they enter it they are pretty much dead meat. Took me quite a few bodies to realize I wasn't going to take the position by entering the building.

Last thing, know when to split. If you know the ambush is compromised or if you have already sprung an ambush from there, it is time to leave. Hopefully you have picked a position that has a retreat route for your troops. If done well the enemy is going to have to assume that position is occupied costing them additional time.

[sburke]

I haven't had the kind of success with my tank assaults as in this scene:

http://youtu.be/jfOx0PjQt34?t=34m30s

Hmm maybe our tanks crews aren't so uber after all. Hey BFC how come my TCs don't have demo charges to throw and fire smgs from the turret?!!

[Kanonier Reichmann]

I also had a very harsh lesson taught me by another opponent. Buildings are great reverse slope deployment positions. Huh you say? Position your troops against the back wall of the building. They are almost impossible to spot. Your opponent can pound the heck out of the building all they want, but when they enter it they are pretty much dead meat. Took me quite a few bodies to realize I wasn't going to take the position by entering the building.

Yes, but how does one position the troops against the back wall when the only command available to you when within the building is face? If you have your troops face in the direction of the known enemy presence they proceed to rearrange themselves against the front wall.

Regards

KR

[Pak40]

One tactic that wont work in CMBN is the one developed by GI's during the hedgerow fighting: Use of WP rounds to silence enemy MGs in the corners of the next hedgerow.

[JonS]

Yes, but how does one position the troops against the back wall when the only command available to you when within the building is face? If you have your troops face in the direction of the known enemy presence they proceed to rearrange themselves against the front wall.

Easy. Having them on the outside of the building, facing forward.

[akd]

One tactic that wont work in CMBN is the one developed by GI's during the hedgerow fighting: Use of WP rounds to silence enemy MGs in the corners of the next hedgerow.

I find that WP both instantly blinds and often wounds, so it can effectively silence MGs.

[Kanonier Reichmann]

Easy. Having them on the outside of the building, facing forward.

O.K. Do you consider regular use of that tactic accurately reflects what often occured in the ETO during WWII when defending a town, for instance? Do AAR's from the period reflect this practice? If not, could there perhaps be a problem with the modelling within the game?

Regards

KR