Smoke, used in an attack

[DavidFields]

I have played this simulation for awhile, and am struck by how using smoke, on the attack, is something that I have never done.

1. Usually I prefer to suppress the enemy units directly--run a scout team out there, have it fired upon, and then deal directly with those threats. If I have the HE on a mortar, or some MGs and tanks, I seem to pick those to use, given the time constraints

2. I don't trust smoke. Running a platoon, let's say, across open ground, depending on smoke to keep them safe--gives me chest pain to think about. And if I become suddenly close to the enemy by using the smoke as cover, with it likely having me spotted, and I not spotting it, bad things are going to occur. Sure, if I have more powerful unit--but I have to be incredibly confident that I know about all the enemy units in the area.

But maybe I am missing something (and, always playing against the AI, that may affect my experience). Is there a scenario where smoke is vital, and do you use it often on the attack?

[unrelated question, is there a scenario which has planes?]

[sburke]

I don't use smoke near enough and I think about it a lot. heh heh Usually I am thinking about it afterwards and saying to myself - you idiot why didn't you use smoke.

The primary function for me is to hide movement. Not that the enemy doesn't know I am moving, but at least they aren't shooting at me. I don't necessarily use it to attack, that is to iffy a proposition. Running into smoke is just a coin toss as to who will see who first. It is a great way to get past a killer defensive position so now the enemy starts feeling that maybe staying put isn't such a great idea. Assuming you aren't playing the AI.

[Fenris]

Use it rarely too.

I have used direct fire smoke from Shermans and on table mortars to block LOS of powerful enemy AT assets and bunkers. Basically blinding what would be difficult or time consuming to kill. But I can't remember using a full barrage any time recently.

Have to try it sometime!

-F

[A Canadian Cat]

On the attack I no longer use it to cover that mass move across open ground - as you said chest pains. But I do use it to blind the enemy. For example, consider your scenario of sending out scouts and responding to the threats they uncover. You might decide that there is too much in that hedge row. Call in smoke to blind half the enemy and suppress and kill the other half. Once the smoke clears you deal with the other half. Divide an conquer.

[Bil Hardenberger]

When I have it, I use it. You have to use a lot of it for it to be really effective, layering smoke barrages in depth is really effective. Use it as an additional way to mask movement and block the enemy's ability to fire and break up your movement.

Note I said "mask movement".. don't drive through the smoke, but around it as you would use a terrain feature.

[Pak40]

Smoke can be very effective if you know which way the wind blows and how hard it's blowing. However, you have be realistic about it's limits. If you are trying to move many units across a broad front, a few smoke grenades or a tank with only 3 or 4 rounds of smoke is not likely to make an effective screen(use a mortar or 105 smoke barrage instead). However, if you want to cross a unit or two across an urban or village street then you should be able to use a single grenade effectively. Timing is key in WEGO play. Make sure you consult the weather info to see wind direction and strength.

[Paper Tiger]

Is there a scenario where smoke is vital, and do you use it often on the attack?

Do you remember back in the days of the original Squad Leader? The manual came with a nice detailed overview of platoon tactics and the tactical use of SMOKE was covered in the discussion about how to assault a strong defensive position. Ever since reading that I have used smoke in any mission in any game when I'm given it and on the offence. It's so useful when the weather conditions are favourable for its use that I can't imagine why people wouldn't use it.

[Tempestzzzz]

+2 what Paper Tiger says.

[Broadsword56]

As a player who's always taken the Allied side and had to attack against German MG34s and MG42s game after game, I'm a huge fan of smoke on the attack. The only problem is there never seems to be enough of it when and where I need it. If you go smokeless you're definitely leaving a critical asset out of your toolkit.

[Nelson 1812]

Is there a scenario where smoke is vital, and do you use it often on the attack? Quote

Kwiw Soldiers, on CMFI:GL is a tease with the AI, where smoke is needed. Small scenario on base game. Cannot think of a CMBN game off hand.

Find I using more infantry smoke grenades now... and winning more.

[agusto]

Yeah infantry smoke grenades come in really handy sometimes. The smoke dischargers on some vehicles also work great to cover infantry movement. For example in CMSF the smoke screen deployed by a BMP-1 can become up to 100 meters in diameter if the wind comes from the right direction and unlike mortar smoke, it can be deployed instantaniously.

[womble]

School of Hard Knocks in the Courage and Fortitude campaign pretty much requires the use of smoke if you're trying to push your dogfaces forward. Smoke is most useful against the AI, since it's not able to speculatively fire arty at TRPs beyond the smoke, nor is it able to extrapolate where your troops have moved to and drop a killing barrage on the area you now occupy, assuming you stay hidden.

On the other hand, it could unnerve a human opponent if you cross his carefully-constructed kill sack by putting smoke on it.

[agusto]

On the other hand, it could unnerve a human opponent if you cross his carefully-constructed kill sack by putting smoke on it.

What do you think of using a fake smoke screen in a H2H match? They idea is that if you put a smokescreen near a (credible) avenue of approach on the, lets say, souther edge of the map, the enemy might be tricked relocating his units into a position to defeat that attack. But in the mean time your real attack is coming from the western edge of the map, where it hits the now weakened defenses of your enemy.

[womble]

What do you think of using a fake smoke screen in a H2H match?

Very difficult to pull off. You'd have to have ideal conditions and locations, and you'd have to use at least some force in that area to make it convincing (because of sound contacts, and any visibility that there actually is, either during the maneuver or at its terminus). You'd have to have good eyes on his units anyway to see if he takes the bait, and enough other smoke for your non-diversionary needs.

From reading AARs, it seems to me that a fake smokescreen would probably just heighten the defender's doubt about the axis of attack, rather than actually provoking a realignment. I'm judging this from evinced reactions to smoke missions that have gone in off target, since I've not read an AAR where a fake smoke mission was deliberately called.

All in all, the (deliberate) fake smokecreen is a tool that probably rightly lies in the box unused the vast majority of the time, but there's no harm in thinking about using it.

[sypox]

I prefer to use smoke as a defensive tool. In a situation when its better to move out of LOS rather then return fire, smoke is often very useful.

In a recent battle an infantry platoon was under fire from a AT-gun. Range was about 700 m so returning fire was not an option. Instead I deployed a smokescreen, moved a HMG team in position to suppress the gun and had time to request artillery.

[Baneman]

In an attack, I generally use smoke to isolate a section of the enemy line that I'm about to attack, preventing other units from cross-firing into the area and allowing me to gain local superiority of fire/men etc.

[Michael Emrys]

Usually I prefer to suppress the enemy units directly--run a scout team out there, have it fired upon, and then deal directly with those threats. If I have the HE on a mortar, or some MGs and tanks, I seem to pick those to use, given the time constraints

That's pretty much what historical commanders did most of the time. Probably the reason why smoke munitions were not regularly supplied in much greater quantity. Most soldiers preferred to kill the enemy and be done with it than to mask him.

Lots of good advice in this thread; I'll kick in an idea or two.

I find that smoke can be incredibly useful with the right circumstances. If your troops have to cover open ground in sight of the enemy, it's better not to have them fired on. So smoke the bad guys until the good guys can reach some kind of cover from which they can achieve firepower superiority. A favorite trick of mine, but one sadly I can't often use in CM because of the small size of the engagements, is to smoke one part of the enemy position while shooting up another part. This cancels any mutually supporting benefits the enemy might otherwise enjoy. Again, it's all about achieving firepower superiority. A general rule of thumb with me is that if I haven't used up all my smoke by the end of a battle, I wasn't trying very hard. Either the enemy was easily overcome or I wasn't thinking as clearly as I should have been or making full use of my resources.

Michael

[A Canadian Cat]

Yeah infantry smoke grenades come in really handy sometimes.

I keep forgetting about those. I should look for opportunities to use them more.

The smoke dischargers on some vehicles also work great to cover infantry movement.

Yes, very good advice. They can be really useful for getting your guys across a road or other small area and the smoke is really fast to arrive too.

[womble]

I keep forgetting about those. I should look for opportunities to use them more.

They take some using... You have to either be very specific (and patient, in WeGo) or lucky to get the smoke bombs to go anywhere useful...

[Vinnart]

I use it often when applicable. The most important factor is wind direction in being effective. Here are a few good uses where it has made all the difference. If it is blowing in the direction you want to go down a flank pop smoke, and have the men run beside it as it moves creating a moving wall effect. Another tactic I have used for infantry to cross-large open areas with no cover is the “rolling smoke screen”. Have tank 1 pop smoke, then have tank 2 move to where tank 1 smoke is in front of tank 1, and have tank 2 pop smoke. Then repeat with tank 3 ect… All the while have the infantry moving behind the rolling smoke screen that is produced.

[Broadsword56]

Clever tactic, Vinnart.

Tank-infantry coordination was one of the hardest tactical challenges that armies -- particularly on the Allied side -- faced in WWII. Tankers had trouble enough just seeing and staying with the infantry they were supporting, let alone coordinating each of their bounds in a smoke shot perfectly timed to cover them.

So I think this is one of those areas where realism suffers in CM because we as the all-seeing, all-controlling players are able to do too much.

I'm not saying you shouldn't do it, or that something is wrong with CM -- just that this is one of those aspects where it's just a game and bears little relation to what really was feasible on WWII battlefields.

[slysniper]

I like using smoke at times on offence to get a area concealed so I can move my troops into it without any enemy fire, so this is happens when I cannot get firepower presently to pin the enemy. So moving them up under smoke so that when the smoke clears they are located where they can then pin the enemy with firepower from the new location.

Learned this one from suggestions when trying to learn the best way to clear large thick woods with enemy infantry. It is almost impossible to take less losses than the enemy unless you use smoke to close in tight with them and then try to overwhelm them.

[A Canadian Cat]

They take some using... You have to either be very specific (and patient, in WeGo) or lucky to get the smoke bombs to go anywhere useful...

OK, sounds like I should experiment first then. With tank smoke launchers I just give it a face command in the direction I want the smoke to go and watch it fall right on target. Is if different with infantry?

[womble]

Clever tactic, Vinnart.

Tank-infantry coordination was one of the hardest tactical challenges that armies -- particularly on the Allied side -- faced in WWII. Tankers had trouble enough just seeing and staying with the infantry they were supporting, let alone coordinating each of their bounds in a smoke shot perfectly timed to cover them.

So I think this is one of those areas where realism suffers in CM because we as the all-seeing, all-controlling players are able to do too much.

I'm not saying you shouldn't do it, or that something is wrong with CM -- just that this is one of those aspects where it's just a game and bears little relation to what really was feasible on WWII battlefields.

It doesn't seem so unfeasible if you simply imagine the infantry taking advantage of the tanks' "travelling smokewatch"...

OK, sounds like I should experiment first then. With tank smoke launchers I just give it a face command in the direction I want the smoke to go and watch it fall right on target. Is if different with infantry?

It shouldn't be, but it often ends up being. You do have to issue a Face command before you hit "Pop Smoke", but if you give both in the same order phase, you'll often find that the "Pop Smoke" direction changes because the team leader with the grenades has to wriggle into a new position when the Face takes effect. Assuming the team was static when you decided they needed to Pop Smoke; I haven't used it "on the run" as it were, as a command at a waypoint the team isn't at. To be "totally" reliable (as totally as there is in this game, at least), you need to give the Face command in one order phase and pop smoke in the next.

[DavidFields]

Nice discussion, thanks.

I had forgotten (PTSD style) about the Hard Knocks scenarios--nothing could save me in School, and I don't remember whether I used much smoke in University, or just HE/MG pounded positions.

So, I am on the third battle of Road to Montebourg. I had to decide whether to use my 105s in the initial bombardment as HE (usually behind hedgerows, or guessing where an FO might be), or smoke-- I will try smoke. The call in time for this asset is so long that, tactically, it is a real decision which needs to be made.

Theoretically, I can see how infantry smoke could be good in close, urban combat. But I did not remember using it in the later C and F scenarios--I will have to reflect on that more. Just the mechanics of moving around infantry companies has been daunting enough for me up to now (I am learning to pick just what I need on an attack, leave the rest behind, and to widen the spacing between units, so as to minimize casualties from all the bullets/fragments flying around)

And PT, since I am mostly playing your stuff, I should probably to your advice with regard to smoke.

I think WEGO makes the smoke issue more complicated. If it turns out that the smoke is not entirely effective, you don't want a unit trying to carry out a vulnerable movement order for a minute. On the other hand, if you just use a scout team to see about the smokes effectiveness--even if effective, the smoke might not be the next turn, when you send out the larger force.