Tactics for CM

[Guest John Maragoudakis]

The KLA is in Grozny? I thought they were in Kosovo, but I wouldn't be surprised.

[Guest PeterNZ]

nono, KLA is in Kosovo, i was just providing an example of a similar conflict and the tactics used.

Not sure what would be happenign in Grozny, if the Ruskies are smart they won't enter it at all, just cut it off till whatever demands they feel need to be justified are met.

PeterNZ

[Los]

PeterNZ says...

"As for Grozny, i read an article somewhere saying the inexperience of the KLA showed in making the kind of mistake fionn advises

against, in deploying at the edge of town. Worse, the source i read said they should of been digging into foxholes instead of hidding in large blds easily brought down on the heads of the KLA by arty fire."

There are a number of excellent resources on the battle of Grozny, some on the net and many written by the Russians. The Checnyan defense of Grozny in the first war was well executed by all accounts while the Russian tactics were criminallly negligent.

Contrary to the post above the Chechnyans did not forward deploy their defenses on the outskirts of the city (In any appreciable manner) but waited until the Russains were all the way "downtown" before hitting them from all sides. The famous new Year's battle cost them nearly a complete regiment!

You can go here and follow one of the operations links to the Checnya home page. This contains links to the FSMO and CALL which have a number of excellent resources on the battle and Russian MOUT experiences in the war in general.

Also regarding artillery in general it has proven to be of limited effectiveness in MOUT operations. Tehre are issues around the weihgt of shell and more importantly calling in and spotting fire in cities. What your really end up doing with large artillery concentrations is creating for free and rapidly large fields of the most excellent defensive terrain a defender can hope for. However it has been learned (over and over) that good SP artillery in the direct fire mode, in direct support of storm groups can be used effectively to reduce individual enemy positions.

Enjoy!

The MOUT homepage:

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6453/

Battle for Grozny:

http://call.army.mil/call/fmso/fmsopubs/issues/battle.htm

AN infantyman's guide to combat in built up areas:

http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/90-10-1/default.htm

Military operations in Urbanized terrain:

http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/90-10/toc.htm

Los

[Fionn]

1. I'm quite sure quite a few people who fought in Kosovo are now in Grozny. There's quite an active "volunteer" group of Moslems who have fought in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Chechnya.

of course due to time and geographical location few will have fought in all or even most of these but Kosovo and Chechnya are quite doable by a determined bunch...

2. I think the defence of Grozny (and the holing up in buildings) was highly effective. From what I have read the rebels utilised multi-elevation ambushes whereby units would fire from the basements, ground floor, 1st floor and ceilings on both sides of the street as the buttoned up Soviet forces drove past in tanks and APCs.

Of course it is criminally negligent to commit troops into an urban area while buttoned up (anyone who mentions my forgetfulness with Wiesenhofer in the AAR will be killed BTW ).

Anyways the main thing about that fight in my mind is that a majority of Soviet soldiers in the initial invasion (including New Year's Eve) were conscripts in their first 6 months of service in which, IIRC, the emphasis in the Soviet Army is in personal weapons training and physical fitness and not the complicated training and small unit actions necessary for survival in an urban warfare environment.

BTW The links LOS gives are EXCELLENT !

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[Guest John Maragoudakis]

Wouldn't napalm be a good munition to throw at the rebels? The buildings will burn and become unstable.Plus it would do wonders for thier moral.Cut a sector's power first to ensure that the civilians left, then burn it.

[Los]

BTW a few quick notes about city fighting with regards to using overwhelming firepower etc.

First off as a primer...

From the US ARMY Infantryman's Guide to MOUT:

"b. Engagement ranges are close. Studies and historical analyses have shown that only 5 percent of all targets are more than 100 meters away. About 90 percent of all targets are located 50 meters or less from the identifying soldier. Few personnel targets will be visible beyond 50 meters and usually occur at 35 meters or less. Minimum arming ranges and troop safety from backblast or fragmentation effects must be considered."

This is very significant since danger close ( a term denoting the minimu distance your own troops can be from the impact area) to most artillery falls well within this minimum detection range that you see in MOUT. Accurate airstrikes (particulalry naplam) and artillery is very difficult in these situations and also exposes your own troops to high risk. Sure you can pull back to naplam parts of the city but then you have a few problems. First you are not spotting where the stuff is going. Second....

"Modern engineering and design improvements mean that most large buildings constructed since World War II are resilient to the blast effects of bomb and artillery attack. Even though modern buildings may burn easily, they often retain their structual integrity and remain standing. Once high-rise buildings burn out, they are still useful to the military and are almost impossible to damage further. A large structure can take 24 to 48 hours to burn out and get cool enough for soldiers to enter."

Third by trashing the city, (And who has this much napalm laying around?) you are only adding to the defenders capability of creating obstacles, obscuration, and slow go terrain that you will have a difficulty in traversing to get at the enemy.

Also any kind of skilled defense has the enemy moving as much as the attacker thus cutting down even further the effectiveness of heavy strikes againts fixed positions. Grozny was a perfect example of this. The Chechnyans organized themselves into small hunter groups consisting of an RPG, and LMG, a sniper and several ammo bearers and security men. Several teams would engage the same vehicle at once from opposite sides, then move to new firing positions. (often through internal "mouseholes" where you can move from building to building without getting out into the street.) Eventually as the Russians (later in the war) restructured themsleves into storm groups, (rifle company, tank platoon, engineer platoon, ZSU23 section, some SPGs. mortars and AGLs) the Chechnyans leaned that fixed defenses would normally get knocked off, all other things being equal. So the answer was to inflitrate and hit rear areas and MSR (main SUpply ROutes) to the storm detatchments until they were isolated and could be dealt with in detail.

In CM terms you should be able to simulate most of this. The German 44 squads with inherent pzf and LMG make a perfect counterpart to the Chechnyan hunter groups, using hide and ambush tactics. And the scenario editor would allow you to task organize your attackers . While you are not going to get the in-game rubble and smoke creation for various attacks against buildings, the scenario designer can create these "terrain effects" on the front end.

Los

[This message has been edited by Los (edited 10-25-99).]

[MOS was 71331]

Jonah Goldberg's column in National Review magazine had a comment on Paris city planning that always cracks me up: "The French planted trees on both sides of the streets so the Germans could always march in the shade."

Mr Goldberg has a low opinion of French 20th century -- particularly WWII -- prowess.

[Guest John Maragoudakis]

Sure, walzting through the streets is pretty much asking for it. Thanks for the links, I didn't realize that the Chechens used cell phones for combat purposes. The rebels mingle in with thier population and then when they lose civilians, they cry foul. They won't call themselves cowards but they will accuse the attacker of war crimes.

Why go rushing in to the center of the city? Aren't industries on the outskirts? Power stations, farms, water purification plants. the military should go directly to these spots and control the economy. Let the rebels come to them. What commander, , would send heavy vehicles downtown? They should have know that the cannons can't elevate to hit higher levels or the basements.

The Russians should screw the chechen economy. I don't know what currency they use but why not flood it with fake money?

Lastly from what I read, the Russian force was not fit to fight a one legged man in an ass kicking contest.

[Los]

"The Russians should screw the chechen economy. I don't know what currency they use but why not flood it with fake money?"

Actually judging by what the Russians are attempting to do visa vis their already crippled economy I'd say it's the other way around.

"Why go rushing in to the center of the city?"

Well you move on cities usually for two reasons, either because they are in your way to get to somewhere else and they cannot be bypassed (often seen in areas of mountains or rough terrain, such as Ortona or Cassino, for example), or they hold some sort of actual or perceived value for capturing them (Moscow, Stalingrad, Grozny). I suspect Grozny fell in the latter. Give the erroneous assumption that resistance would be light and that the Russian army was some sort of juggernaught, it would not "do" to simple peck away at the outskirts of the city when the world internally and externally is watching to see you take care of business against a few rabble. Or so probably went the Russian thinking.

As to the answer to your other questions, most of the time throughout history no commander operates in the perfect world and moves when everything is perfect for him. When the politicians meddle in military affairs, the commander is forced to lay his "perfect world" doctrinal template over the "real world" situational template (forced upon him by political direction or other concerns), and come up with some kind of contingency plan to marry the two together to meet some sort of reasonable successful outcome. This is difficult enough to do with highly competent, lavishly supplies and equipped, and well led forces. Profficiency in military matters, at the individual level, corps level or national level is a highly perishable skill, let that slide as the Russians did (due to a number of reasons) and you move from organized jug**** to unmittgated disaster very quickly. Note the caution being used in this go around.

Cheers...

Los

[Guest Mikeman]

The Lazy Man's Guide to Tactics

Basic familiarity with weapons capabilities.

Common sense.

Get your ass kicked 6-8 times.

Analyze each game to determine reasons for sore butt.

Mikeman out.

[Fionn]

Ah Chechens and satellite phones

IIRC the Soviets got Dudayev with ahoming missile designed to home in on the frequency his mobile phone used ... I'm sure there was lots of other technical stuff involved but you've got to like the idea

Strangely enough mobile phones are quite perfect for the sort of cityfighting which went on there. They're cheap and easy to import. They aren't banned or monitored by any international agencies (tactical radios might be). They're simple to utilise and won't get as fouled in bad terrain as simple line of sight only tactical radios.

Cityfighting is notorious for screwed commos.

Anyways, as for sitting in amongst the civilians.. Well, war nowadays is both military and PR. If you lose the military battles but win the PR battles you have a good chance of having the international community steam in and meddle in internal affairs of the aggressor country.

LOL. Just look at Bosnia. That infamous market square mortar blast which killed 20+ people IIRC has pretty conclusively been proved to have been fired by the city defenders themselves purely to provoke an outrage.

The PR wars are nasty and often involve the intentional slaughter of friendly civilians (or the tacit acceptance of their slaughter) in order to win some PR points.

Fortunately none of that will be modelled in CM.

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[Johan Brittz]

Off topic, but I'm wondering: How does military computer (MF?) wargames compare to PC wargames (CM in particular) - see that HPS was asked to design one for some-one. If you can't talk about your own countries state of affairs - what do you know about others eg. Russians. Is there a big diff.?

BTW Ken - thanx for the plum higher up, but after reading some of the excellent comments and especially the references casually thrown about (USMCMFM 1034.5tx etc - is that US Marine Corp Mother f manual?) - I've quietly downgraded myself to a SLAG (****ty learner appy grog)

[This message has been edited by Johan Brittz (edited 10-25-99).]

[Moon]

Johan, if you liked that, you might want to take a look at the Military Reference Library offered here at BF.C by Major H. On one CD you will find tons of Field Manuals like this with very detailed tactics. I bought it, and it's amazing - tons of hours to read and learn.

[Guest Ssnake]

The German Army basically has three different levels of simulators.

1) There is a basic simulator for Leopard crews to learn how to handle all the switches. There are similar simulators for other waepons systems.

2) You can link together several units of these (boosted up by some nifty features), so you get to train a platoon fighting.

3) Then there is a big hole where company scale simulators would be expected. It's not a bug, but a feature. Since even officer candidates are being trained to think in terms of battalion level (and understand the basics of brigade operations), while serving a lot of time at platoon level, the general assumption is that if you understand how to handle a battalion, and have a lot of practical experience with platoons, you can probably figure out for yourself how to deploy a company.

4) The next step is one of rather high abstaction. The army call it SIRA (SImulation für RAhmenübungen), where you have a LAN of about ten to fifteen operators, each of which either commanding a company or being the artillery/airtforce liasion offier for both Blue and Opfor. Now these operators will only have a map display with perfect FOW, and will report what they can see, and follow the orders given by battalion hq. The trick is, Bn HQ has nothing but radio contact with the operators, and a map plus some markers. They're completely remote from the others, so they have to make decision based on the incoming reports. If the operators forget to report, there's even more fog around for the poor guy at the top.

The model for calculating losses is both detailed and highly abstracted at the same time. For example, tanks will have the same armor value all around, but on the other hand you'll have to deal with wounded (e.g. organize Medevac operations) and other logistics stuff (like, getting your ammo).

This ensures that everyone is occupied, and it's a pretty close sim for battalion commanders (and that's what it's supposed to model, after all).

5) Several of those SIRA sites shall be linked together to handle brigade level operations. beyond that, it's plain paperwork, I guess.

------------------

PGP key ID: 0xBCD59BA1

I strongly recommend the use of encryption software for e-Mail contacts. Ensuring privacy makes people feel better

[Guest John Maragoudakis]

Los said:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Note the caution being used in this go around.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well out of todays news,

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"Taking Grozny is not the point," Viktor Kazantsev, head of the federal forces in Chechnya, said in televised remarks. "The aim is to free Chechen territory of the terrorist bands.

"They must realize they have just two options -- to lay down their arms or to be destroyed," he added.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They might have the winning solution this time.

[Guest Lokesa]

Los, thx for the links, good reading.

[Foobar]

HOW TO WIN A COMBAT ENGAGMENT:

Mikeman, thank you for the sore butt maxim! It helps me validate my own approaches hear because, well, I'm not a military historian, and definitely not at grognard level ability. I understand the tactics involved on a theoretical level, and I can rack up kills in a game of paintball, but the transfer of textbook tactics to REAL execution on the field gets fuzzy for me. That's probably why I enjoy this stuff so much.

I am enjoying this thread guys, so keep up the input. What is the secret to winning an engagement? Expound on the art of composing this death symphony!

[Fionn]

Predictability is your enemy...

In much the same way that Soviet forces operate by the book most players have a mental book which they always use. After a little time their tactics become obvious and they lose.

E.g. Some people always go for reverse slope defences, others always look for attritional warfare. Others always lead with tanks while others always lead with infantry.

Not only does this become predictable but you can bet there are some situations where it is better to lead with tanks and others where it is better to lead with infantry. A gamer who is wed to one or the other will choose sub-optimal routes and methods due to his/her bias.

So, evaluate each and every decision constantly. Make sure you're not doing what you're doing because it is SOP but rather because it is the RIGHT thing to do.

There are no specific rules but there are maxims... Oh BTW CM REALLY rewards the proper usage of reserves. many, many times I've had a reserve platoon move forward and be enough to break through an enemy company's line after my advance company and the enemy company bled eachother white.

If I'd simply committed 4 platoons to the initial attack instead of 3 to the attack and 1 in reserve I wouldn't have been as succesfull.

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[guachi]

Speaking of reserves. Is there any good place to keep them so as to be most useful when finally committed?

Should I hide them from the enemy? Should I keep them close to the lines? What amount should I keep in reserve?

Jason

[Fionn]

Guachi,

There is no set answer for your questions. Being able to determine the right mix is what will separate good from great players.

Generally most armies operate either a 2 up 1 back or a 3 up 1 back system whereby between 25 and 33% of their forces are kept in reserve.

The reserve is a reserve simply because it isn't in combat SO the key is to keep it out of combat. If you can keep it hidden from the enemy then so much the better since whenever you commit it you will then have surprise on your side and it will be a decisive weapon.

How close to the front? Close enough that it can be brought forward quickly but not too close that it cannot laterally displace in peace to either exploit a breakthrough elsewhere on your front or seal off a breakthrough.

Again, no absolutes just some maxims the exact calibration of which will separate the good from the very good.

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[guachi]

Thanks.

I'm guessing that reserves are one of the many things that will take some playing to figure out what works best for each of us.

Keeping reserves isn't something I have had to do much in other games.

Jason

[DightB]

Is there any advantage in attempting to cut your opponent's supply lines in a campaign game.

i.e. if a scenario ends up with 1 side cut off from their edge of the map will those forces start the next battle with depleted ammo.

[Los]

Re: Reserves and other tidbits here's some realworld advice:

When moving to contact or in a meeting engagement type situation, (aka moving forward into the unknown), always make contact with the smallest possible element. So if a Company is moving forward you have a platoon up from which has a squad up front, which has a fire team up front.

Once contact is established the element in contact has the first and formost duty to determine the nature and location of the threat ad report back. The lead element will then usually serve as a base of fire from which the free elements not in contact will pivot this way of that in an attempt to manuever to a flank or some position of advantage where fires can be placed upon the enmey. (Assuming the commander does not decide to break contact in which case elements not in contact will become the base of fire from which to recover the lead elements withdrawl.)

It is generaly a good idea to have most of your units covering/overwatching and only the mininmum-sized element necessary actually manuevering since that is when they are at risk and you want to minimize losses. Once they manuever and get in place, then you manuever another one.

Of course there are times when "Speed is security" and it's safer to bum rush everyone at once.

RE: Reserve placement. They should be out of harms way, and concentrated enough that they can be controlled by the commander. They should not be too far away that they cannnot have an immediate impact on the action since usually you deploy your reserves cause you really NEED them now.

Judging by a number of the questions asked here it looks like some may be seeking the "magic pill" or "silver bullet" to tactics. Guess what, there is none (At least for real or in any realisticlly modelled sim). Everything is situation dependent. Like we say "tactics is like assholes and everyone has one."

All that being said I would recommend that you keep PRCS in mind at all time. As long as you follow these principles then your tactics will generally be sound:

P=Planning. You should have a plan at all times. Plans mean organization and less confusion during moments of chaos. Note that this doesn't have to be Operation Overlord, it can be as simple as an SOP, (like crossing a linear danger area, for example)or a battle drill, (Platoon wire breaching drill etc.) The point is everyone should understand what the unit is trying to accomplish and what their individual role is. Note that contingency planning is vital also.

R=Reconnasaince: You should always strive to have the greatest amount of knowledge about an given situation before you unzip your pants, pull your winky out, and lay it on the table. You should strive not to go into situations blind. You see one squad out there so you deploy your entire force into line and go for it not thinking to scout out more and see if there isn't an ambush. In CM, units caught in the open by multiple fires die fast. Reconnasaince is a never ending process, even if it's just looking at a map and matching things up with your doctrinal template of enemy capabilities and intentions.

C=Control (some times called communications) You must be able to control your people at all times. In CM this translates directly to whether that line from the squad to the leader is red or black! If your units are too far away, it takes longer to get them to move and do stuff which can be disasterous when seconds count. Control is aslo facillitated by SOPs and IADs(Immediate Action Drills) and battle drills where people know what they're supposed to do. If your guys are scattered all to hell becasue you are trying to do too much at once (often as a result of flawed scenario design) then they will be out of your control when you need them most.

S=Security. Does your operation or plan take the security of your force into account? If your whole compnay is enagged to the front, who's wathcing that road to the side? (Even as an early warning measure). It's important to have reserves to deal with what comes up but it's vital to porvide 360 degree security at all times since that's the whole point of flanking etc etc. ALways make arrangements to screen your flanks and rear.

Anyway if whatever you are doing takes into account those four principles you will normally be OK but if you forget one of them, god help those little guys!

Cheers...

Los

[Johan Brittz]

Excellent posts here - thanx guys keep it up - constructive waiting

Much appreciated

[Rick]

Los,

Very educational posts.

The areas that seem to give me problems in games are the recon and security issues. I've always been able to do the other two fairly well. So what do you think paying attention to want my opponents do in PBEM might be a good way to improve? Or do you think reading would be a good help? I actually noticed that after reading Into the Storm by Clancy and Fred Franks, my performance improved at TOAW. The whole attack in depth concept was revolutionary for me.