Rambo Russians

[Doc844]

Now i am still very new to this game however i have started to notice some very annoying characteristics regarding infantry and assaulting enemy positions now i dont know if im just not doing it right or if the game is meant to be like this, but here is my problem.

I was contacted by a group of russians,  AT teams they were, in a copse of trees.  So i layed down my base of fire and then F & M towards with them i do believe my weight of fire killed most of them however the last russian HQ member then laid on the hurt wiping out about 5 of my men.

Now this was one guy who had just seen his whole AT platoon wiped out and yet he didnt panic or run, no he cooly lay there and just SMG'd my guys to death.  Now after this i got my section to area fire on him so they lobbed grenades and fired towards him for 30 secs i then had my flanking section hunt towards him and lo and behold he was still alive and he gunned down 2 of them as well.

 

I mean to me this seems ridiculous, especially when my guys leg it after seeing the rest of their platoon get hammered.  Thoughts and any help would be greatly appreciated because this is getting a little frustrating.

 

[A Canadian Cat]

Yeah, close range any SMG is nasty. It sounds like you did pretty much the right thing. The trick is to keep the suppressive fire going the whole time your men are approaching. If you can cordinate it right and not have your men effected by the supporting fire they will finish him off without additional casualties.

From the last enemy soldier's point of view your men just killed his mates and he is pissed. And trapped because running away from the cover would be disastrous. Sometimes they will surrender and sometimes they will extract payment in pixel blood.

[Lanzfeld]

Maybe he was "fanatic" and would never break?

[A Canadian Cat]

Yes, their motivation is important to that decision.

[Doc844]

Not sure what their motivation was, I play 9n elite at the moment however I will have a play around with the timing of my suppressive fire and my assaulting troops moving in.

 

Herr Loitnant your men have died needlessly for the Fatherland, reload the last turn and let's try again.

[Bulletpoint]

Part of the issue is that the game's limited graphics makes it seem like even panicked soldiers are cool as cucumbers, firing and reloading with complete calm no matter what the situation.

Also, remember the "secret assault command" - SLOW. When you know where the enemy is, don't use HUNT. 

Edited November 8, 2015 by Bulletpoint

[Doc844]

Roger that thanks for the help fellas.

[MOS:96B2P]

Also, remember the "secret assault command" - SLOW. When you know where the enemy is, don't use HUNT. 

Bullet, 

This is interesting.  Let us in on the secret.  What is your TACSOP for SLOW in the assault?     

[slysniper]

Bullet, 

This is interesting.  Let us in on the secret.  What is your TACSOP for SLOW in the assault?     

Not sure what he is referring to either.

I know for me, if I have some units firing to keep the enemy pinned. I use quick with my rushing units . Get them in there and get the job done. Kill them while they are pinned.

 

 

One remaining guy kills 7 of yours with a smg. He is on defense and you are moving. ( I see nothing wrong with that. ) I guess your biggest issue is you cant see one guy staying and fighting it out like that. Well, that is a opinion that has no merit,

There is studies out there that show about 1 in 10 solders are somewhat natural killers. Their mental make up makes them that way. You cannot train it, you cannot teach it. But they are the type that will generally fight at all cost and are willing to risk their lives while doing it.

So think of it as one of them types of people and then the event seems very realistic. Of course that is as long as you believe them types are out there. But I assure you , there are.

What I am not sure of is what percentage are naturally. I think many things impact that by a persons upbringing and the culture they grew up in.

[womble]

Anything (well, almost  )can happen. If it starts happening "all the frellin' time, dammit", you probably need to make sure you're saving your game so there's a file for BFC to look at. But what you saw certainly isn't outside the bounds of what you might expect from the simulation occasionally.

[Bulletpoint]

Bullet, 

This is interesting.  Let us in on the secret.  What is your TACSOP for SLOW in the assault?     

Well, it's just that SLOW is the best assault move order in forest, when you know pretty much where the enemy is. I played a long time before I realised that. Before that, I used to HUNT or QUICK, thinking I would heroically rush the enemy, but standing up is very dangerous in forest fighting.

My SOP: Break all squads into teams. Leapfrog them forward in a checkerboard pattern, using only SLOW movement, one (1) square at a time. Basically like pawns in a game of chess. I don't use too much suppression fire in this sitiation, it's simply too difficult to get it where you need it. Instead, I wait till one of the crawling teams either spots the enemy or gets spotted and fired upon. Then one or two of the other squads in overwatch will usually spot and take out the enemy using small arms or grenades.

 

Edited November 8, 2015 by Bulletpoint

[Baneman]

Note to self : mortar the hell out of forest when contacting Bulletpoint troops

[MOS:96B2P]

<Snip> in forest fighting.  My SOP: Break all squads into teams. Leapfrog them forward in a checkerboard pattern, using only SLOW movement, one (1) square at a time. Basically like pawns in a game of chess. I don't use too much suppression fire in this sitiation, it's simply too difficult to get it where you need it. Instead, I wait till one of the crawling teams either spots the enemy or gets spotted and fired upon. Then one or two of the other squads in overwatch will usually spot and take out the enemy using small arms or grenades.

Thanks for sharing.  Combat Mission woodland warfare game mechanics could be an entire topic thread here on the forum.  Moving at SLOW in the woods, after you get close to the OpFor, has its advantages.  I am paraphrasing but Peregrine once posted,when talking about woodland warfare, something to the effect:   Don’t get hung up on how far you can target. Your bullets travel much further than you can see and have an impact the whole way. Two squads targeting at range 40m in the general direction of a target 80m distant still has a big impact. 

This in combination with your SLOW movement (after close to OpFor) might be a deadly combination.  I stress after close since if you move very far at SLOW the fatigue factor comes in. 

[Bulletpoint]

Thanks for sharing.  Combat Mission woodland warfare game mechanics could be an entire topic thread here on the forum.  Moving at SLOW in the woods, after you get close to the OpFor, has its advantages.  I am paraphrasing but Peregrine once posted,when talking about woodland warfare, something to the effect:   Don’t get hung up on how far you can target. Your bullets travel much further than you can see and have an impact the whole way. Two squads targeting at range 40m in the general direction of a target 80m distant still has a big impact. 

I'm not sure I agree that it works like this in the game. Depending on how heavy the forest is, you'll often be lucky to target beyond one action square. If you can only target one square distant, that's about 12 metres (one square equals 8 metres, plus half of the square your guys currently sit in).

And while bullets can fly far in forest, the problem is that your troops don't shoot in the general direction, they target the surface. So most of your bullets just go straight into the ground. At longer ranges, this doesn't matter, since there's deviation to aiming, so many of the shots will go high or low, spreading the impacts more and less distant, because of the shallow angle. But extremely close by, I can't get it to work. Also, trees in this game are very effective at blocking bullets.

Anyway, your mileage may vary. The idea of my SOP is that you sneak so close to the enemy that once he detects you, he has very short time to shoot, as your overwatch comes down on him like a ton of bricks. Doesn't guarantee you won't take casualties, but it seems to minimise them, Takes patience and time though. Against a human opponent, you could be vulnerable to flanking, and/or mortars being dialed in while you sneak forward.

Edited November 8, 2015 by Bulletpoint

[Doc844]

We i tried the SLOW option and it worked, however bare inmind this was only a small copse of trees although i am involved in heavy fighting in forests elsewhere.

Suppression with SLOW order =

One dead Hero of the Soviet Union.

 

Not sure what he is referring to either.

I know for me, if I have some units firing to keep the enemy pinned. I use quick with my rushing units . Get them in there and get the job done. Kill them while they are pinned.

 

 

One remaining guy kills 7 of yours with a smg. He is on defense and you are moving. ( I see nothing wrong with that. ) I guess your biggest issue is you cant see one guy staying and fighting it out like that. Well, that is a opinion that has no merit,

There is studies out there that show about 1 in 10 solders are somewhat natural killers. Their mental make up makes them that way. You cannot train it, you cannot teach it. But they are the type that will generally fight at all cost and are willing to risk their lives while doing it.

So think of it as one of them types of people and then the event seems very realistic. Of course that is as long as you believe them types are out there. But I assure you , there are.

What I am not sure of is what percentage are naturally. I think many things impact that by a persons upbringing and the culture they grew up in.

I could understand that in my first instance if i hadnt just smashed him with suppressing fire and 3 grenades right on top of him.

 

Well, it's just that SLOW is the best assault move order in forest, when you know pretty much where the enemy is. I played a long time before I realised that. Before that, I used to HUNT or QUICK, thinking I would heroically rush the enemy, but standing up is very dangerous in forest fighting.

My SOP: Break all squads into teams. Leapfrog them forward in a checkerboard pattern, using only SLOW movement, one (1) square at a time. Basically like pawns in a game of chess. I don't use too much suppression fire in this sitiation, it's simply too difficult to get it where you need it. Instead, I wait till one of the crawling teams either spots the enemy or gets spotted and fired upon. Then one or two of the other squads in overwatch will usually spot and take out the enemy using small arms or grenades.

 

In the heavier forest fighting on my left flank i have been trying to emulate this but i find more often than not that my overwatch times are blind.  When the ruskies start firing they will either kill or suppress my crawling squad and my overwatch guys are have all seemingly gone on a smoke break and see nothing.  I think it is mostly about me refining my assault techniques but boy is forest fighting hell.

 

However thanks very much for all the posts very helpful.

[Bulletpoint]

 

In the heavier forest fighting on my left flank i have been trying to emulate this but i find more often than not that my overwatch times are blind.  When the ruskies start firing they will either kill or suppress my crawling squad and my overwatch guys are have all seemingly gone on a smoke break and see nothing.  I think it is mostly about me refining my assault techniques but boy is forest fighting hell.

 

Your overwatch needs to be very close to spot the enemy in forest. Just one square can make all the difference.

I think of it this way:

Enemy sitting still: you need to be in the square right next to him to spot him.

Enemy firing: you can spot him from 2-3 squares away.

Enemy running: You can spot him from 3-4 squares away.

 

Also, sometimes there's a small bump on the ground that you can hardly see, but it's just enough to hide the enemy when both he and you are prone.

Edited November 8, 2015 by Bulletpoint

[MOS:96B2P]

<Snip> And while bullets can fly far in forest, the problem is that your troops target the ground. So most of your bullets just go straight into the ground. <Snip>

Anyway, your mileage may vary. The idea of my SOP is that you sneak so close to the enemy that once he detects you, he has very short time to shoot, as your overwatch comes down on him like a ton of bricks. <Snip>

I will have to do some more hot seat testing when I get the chance but I used this area fire tactic in a recent PBEM / scenario (August Plague Boil or something like that) and I thought it was effective.  The problem I generally have with an overwatch in the woods is they can't see far enough to spot and return fire.  So when I think I have identified the OpFor defensive position I use the stationary fire teams to area fire in the direction of the OpFor while the assault teams move forward. I will try out the SLOW forward in combination with the area fire in my next woodland fight.      

Suppression with SLOW order = One dead Hero of the Soviet Union.

In the heavier forest fighting on my left flank i have been trying to emulate this but i find more often than not that my overwatch times are blind.  When the ruskies start firing they will either kill or suppress my crawling squad and my overwatch guys are have all seemingly gone on a smoke break and see nothing. <Snip>

Good job creating that hero! I try to area fire (with the stationary fire teams) at the suspected OpFor position with the target briefly command for 1:15.  The assault teams move forward in the lanes in between the suppressive fire.  The fire does not let up until the following turn when I cancel it or add another minute if necessary. I was using short QUICK moves for the assault teams.  I will try out SLOW.  

[slysniper]

well, my general tactic is a little different in woods anyway.

First I want some type of unit with smoke. When my leading scout units find the enemy location.

I move and place smoke as close as possible to the enemy location. I rush my infantry up and go prone in the areas with smoke and area fire into the enemy hex making sure my units are packing grenades so that is part of the area fire. As the smoke clears and units start to spot each other. At least I am on even ground and my units are not moving, plus I have the enemy generally in a worse morale state because of the area fire. Plus I have normally tried to have a couple of action squares with troops vs the one action square I am assaulting.

 

It works well, but even then at times I pay the price for attacking in woods, it is just a messy business and you better be willing to loose troops doing it.

[JasonC]

My normal method is different.  I shoot up the woods.  Then I ignore the survivors and go elsewhere.  

Very modest firepower into the open areas around any small copse of trees like that suffice to render any broken leftovers completely irrelevant to the rest of the battle.

There is very rarely any actual need to run up on top of the enemy.  If you see them take off running, fine.  

Movement doesn't take ground, fire takes ground.

[Bulletpoint]

My normal method is different.  I shoot up the woods.  Then I ignore the survivors and go elsewhere.  

Very modest firepower into the open areas around any small copse of trees like that suffice to render any broken leftovers completely irrelevant to the rest of the battle.

There is very rarely any actual need to run up on top of the enemy.  If you see them take off running, fine.  

Movement doesn't take ground, fire takes ground.

I agree with your reasoning, but I don't agree that it's few scenarios and QB maps that require you to either occupy or pass through forest.

[Doc844]

My normal method is different.  I shoot up the woods.  Then I ignore the survivors and go elsewhere.  

Very modest firepower into the open areas around any small copse of trees like that suffice to render any broken leftovers completely irrelevant to the rest of the battle.

There is very rarely any actual need to run up on top of the enemy.  If you see them take off running, fine.  

Movement doesn't take ground, fire takes ground.

Sorry but i 100% categorically disagree with this.  

The first line ok, if the position is not important and you just want to blast it a bit and cause casualties and disruption, fine.

Irrelevant, one fanatic russian with an SMG wiped out 5 of my guys after seeing his whole AT platoon wiped out, so if one of those guys had survived with his AT rifle and took potshots at my Panthers and damaged/immobilised it then not so irrelevant.

And the last sentence, well im afraid for me thats just nonsense.  If you want to dominate the ground and ACTUALLY control it then you need boots in there.  If fire took ground then Stalingrad would never have happened, Iraq would have never happened etc etc.  Yes they are large scale analogies but they downscale through all levels right down to section/fire team.

Sorry but thats my view on it.

[JasonC]

That's your view on it, and you've clearly got stacks of bodies to prove it.

Meanwhile, commanders who understand fire correctly and who lower their expectations of the role of movement, their men are still alive.

If you can't see the enemy from right here, or the enemy is winning the firefight from right here, movement is possibly called for, purely in order to create the conditions for successful fire.

If you are working hard to create conditions enabling 1 shattered enemy soldier to kill 7 of you in command and coordinated soldiers, you are doing something wrong.  That's the enemies job, which you should be making as hard as possible, not doing for him.

An imaginary ATR isn't going to immobilize a Panther.  One, it is imaginary.  Two, if it weren't, it is still just an ATR.  Three, it doesn't have LOS.  Four, if you are really worried you could leave one half squad at the edge of the trees, stationary, facing the renmant deeper in the woods.  If he moves to get LOS, you will kill him.  Five, you only need even that watch for the 2-5 minutes your Panther is supposedly nearby and supposedly vulnerable.  Six, it would only actually be vulnerable if it were a halftrack, not a Panther, and it still would be a heavy favorite to kill the holdout, rather than the reverse.  Seven, against the actual surviving tommy gunner, it would be so heavily favored the fight wouldn't happen.  Eight, what you enemy actually needs to make one tommy gunner effective is your infantry up close, and moving not firing back.  Oh yeah that's what you are giving him for free.

You just can't make that smart.  Pretzel away about imaginary circumstances, you are still doing the enemy's job and giving him the best combined arms match up he could ever dream up, free.

Edited November 10, 2015 by JasonC

[Sgt Joch]

well actually, from a tactical military point of view, JasonC is correct, movement does not take ground, fire takes ground. There is no need to physically occupy a position if you can cover it with firepower. The whole point of fire and maneuver tactics should be to actually place your moving troops/AFV in a better firing position to suppress/kill the enemy troops, preferably from multiple angles. That is the way I play the game anyhow.

The problem with physically occupying a position as you see is that one survivor with a SMG can do a lot of damage at close range. Now you may have no choice if the scenario requires you to capture a physical spot, but if I can, I will make sure that objective has been hosed down by all manner of firepower and from multiple angles before sending my troops in.

[womble]

Given it was a patch of woods approximately 25-30m in diameter, there was, indeed, absolutely no need to send anyone into it. Distant (200m, say, so not really all that distant) MG fire "as far into the woods as you can drag the target line" from a couple of angles would suppress the whole patch, or some medium mortars would have rendered any resistance there pretty mute (not moot, mute, as in silent).

Learning when you have to make a "hot" assault (not very often) and when the "lead broom" is more effective (90% plus of occasions) is an important tactical skill.

There's one condition where an assault might make sense, and that's when you can't spare the time to let suppression and attrition do their morale-sapping job. And even then, you can usually go around, or if you put enough suppression on to make the assault workable, while you're maneuvering to the best flank, the defenders often bug out anyway (and then your flanking troops just mow 'em down, rather than having to close to grenade range).

[Doc844]

Hmmm lots of food for thought.  Just to clarify the statement of fire takes ground, are we talking RL here, the game or both.  If its based towards real life then i dont agree, ive been there and done that and short of dropping a 500 pounder+, you will, generally speaking not be able to kill all the enemy from a position with small arms and machinegun fire alone, if you WANT  that position your gonna have to go in and mop up.

 

From a game point of view im still learning and its a steep old climb so all advice is taken gladly.  Just to set the scene a bit better the battle is the first scenario in relief of army group north, i am at the point of funnelling my troops through the woods and what i had decided to do was send a probing force to the left track and my main striking force to the right.  My plan was to attack the main village first and use the raised berm to screen my left flank, once the village was taken i would bounce the final objective from the right rear.  Now, that bloody copse is in the middle of the wheat field that I want to use as my rear area for my soft skinned vehicles and support assets so I needed to make sure all those damned ruskies were dead because I can guarantee that my battalion CO would be the one to get shot by a lonely straggler that's why I needed to send in my boys to mop up.  Initially my first thought was roll up my 20mm half track and blast it however the corn denied me any LOS.  I could have rolled it forward but i decided not to risk it.  So assault it was.  I moved my men forwards in bounds with a cut off group to their right however i couldnt get LOS into the copse until i was pretty much on top of it, 30m i think.  I then area fired with all groups for 1 min then i began pepper popping forward my assault groups, most of the AT gunners were dead already and a couple more went down when they tried to run.  Then the fanatic HQ on a slight reverse slope mowed down my forward element and none of my overwatch guys spotted him.  I suppressed again and had my assault group chuck grenades then I hunted forward and the bastard was still alive, mowing down another two men, thats the situation i was in when i brought my tactical problem to the forum.  I must say when i tried Bulletpoints tactic it worked a charm, especially when coupled with making my suppressive timings more accurate.

 

Hope that clarifies my little problem a bit better.

 

Wow all that just for a few Russians in a pesky copse.