Courage Conquers Scenario 2

[WriterJWA]

So.... Can anyone offer perspective on how to take Bigonville in scenario 2 of the Courage Conquers campaign? It's impossible to spot troops in any of the building and they don't fire unless their are exposed troops. Am I supposed to run my two companies in there to get hammered, or blow away each building with arty and tank fire?

I ask because German FJs apparently have such great fire discipline they literally shoot at nothing else but human targets.... No tracks, tanks, anything.

Edited December 16, 2018 by WriterJWA

[Bulletpoint]

Like most of the battles in this campaign, it's basically an exercise in overwatch and reaction fire.

Try putting your tanks as close as possible to suspected enemy positions (but stay out of the 200m PzSchreck range). Then advance small scout teams closer, baiting the enemy to open up.

If the enemy opens fire, your tanks should have a good chance of getting a spot and fire off 1-2 rounds. Reaction fire against spotted contacts in buildings is much more effective than regular area fire.

After your tank fires at an enemy on, say, 2nd floor, the next turn you can do a 'target briefly' against the ground floor. Usually the enemy team will retreat down to the ground floor immediately after taking tank fire. If they are very shaken, they might run out the back door though.

Edited December 16, 2018 by Bulletpoint

[Warts 'n' all]

7 hours ago, WriterJWA said:

 Am I supposed to run my two companies in there to get hammered, or blow away each building with arty and tank fire?

The first option isn't going to work. And being a slow typist Bulletpoint beat me to telling you how to approach this mission.

[Bulletpoint]

Also, note that the mission starts before sunrise, and it's pretty dark for around the first half hour, impairing spotting. CM graphics don't really do a good job of showing the actual visibility conditions.

[Warts 'n' all]

7 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Also, note that the mission starts before sunrise, and it's pretty dark for around the first half hour, impairing spotting. CM graphics don't really do a good job of showing the actual visibility conditions.

Agreed. But, during the Set-up Phase you can order Arty anywhere on the map, which then allows you time to advance to a Base of Fire whilst Jerry keeps his head down.

[Ts4EVER]

This is how I did it.

 

 

[Sulman]

Old thread I know but I just went through this one.

I'm on the fourth mission of this campaign and this one (#2) is the only one I gave up trying to win. I settled for a minor defeat in the end. Unfortunately this scenario is emblematic of the frustrating nature of this campaign so far: Endless building assaults, multiple capture zones and iffy balance. The maps are great, that's about the most positive I can be. There's clearly been considerable historical research but I had laugh at Mission #3 (Occupy & exit map) which noted the real event took two hours. But you get 55 minutes...again these contradictions seem characteristic of some curious design decisions.

There is an obvious bit of key terrain on the left hand far side of the map. It overlooks most of the town. Get some tanks up there and you can hit pretty much anything. The problem is getting your infantry close enough to spot without them getting shredded by the numerous defenders. Crossfire is the biggest danger on these maps, because the defenders are everywhere.

 

One strategy I did not try was simply leveling the objectives with artillery. You've enough shells to give it a try.

Theres something unusual with the way the forces are allocated. You're usually facing - at the minimum - 1:1 force ratios, and you're weak with infantry but have loads of armour. This is like having lots of currency in a country you can't spend it in. Artillery and armour are at their weakest (in game) in building fights. With Arty the only option is to level buildings as merely shelling them doesn't do much to the occupants but make them mad, and in this scenario the buildings are stuffed with infantry.

[Erwin]

I found a saved game for Mission 4 and checked the last save (10 minutes from the end) - a CF at that time gave me a Draw.  (Can't recall if I played on to get a win.)  

IIRC it's basically a MOUT challenge and one has to be very systematic in the way one attacks.  Need lots of prep fire from the tanks and inf before assaulting with inf.  And yes, use that artillery.  Leveling buildings is the best way to fight MOUT.  But I can't recall if ammo conservation is important in this campaign.

[Sulman]

@Erwin They're all basically the same thing. I made it to the last mission, and it would not be out of place in Courage and Fortitude. Once again, the briefing and scenario appear to have been made by different people....It's a constant in the campaign. A nice historical story that bears no resemblance to the disposition on the maps.

I did not find HE conservation an issue, and I'm fairly liberal with it (I use target briefly for 30s a lot to limit fire. There's plenty for the last mission, and again you have abundant artillery.

@Ts4EVERI found your video very useful, particulary the rolling artillery > assault phasing.

[Ts4EVER]

14 hours ago, Sulman said:

@Erwin They're all basically the same thing. I made it to the last mission, and it would not be out of place in Courage and Fortitude. Once again, the briefing and scenario appear to have been made by different people....It's a constant in the campaign. A nice historical story that bears no resemblance to the disposition on the maps.

Indeed! If you continue watching my videos, you will see that I actually never finished the campaign for that very reason. I had spent a lot of time setting up everything for the historical tactic of just rushing through the town, only to see my force wiped out immediately.

Generally the campaign is not one of the better ones, the Peiper campaign in FB is superior to it in many ways. The main problems I saw with the Courage Conquers campaign (From memory):

- Repetetive and samey scenarios with little variation or creativity. You have the same kind of forces and objectives almost every time.

- Weird map design that is clearly based on real terrain, but uses big city block type buildings and cathedrals instead of the appropriate rural buildings.

- Misleading briefing in what is supposed to be the big finale.

- Unwieldy and "impersonal" core force with a big tank overhang (this might be historical though)

[Sulman]

2 hours ago, Ts4EVER said:

Unwieldy and "impersonal" core force with a big tank overhang (this might be historical though)

I think they are correct and the way you played them is exactly how they're supposed to be used, but it's a very 'blunt instrument' style that's a bit tiresome mission after mission.  A lot of the campaign issues are down to the artificial factors you mentioned, including the style of buildings and the insistence on giving the defenders a numerical advantage irrespective of whether this is correct or realistic. I was also disappointed that there's no German armour whatsoever after the first scenario. It's difficult to read about the Ardennes Offensive without seeing pictures of tanks in the snow.

The recent engine changes also make this style of operation much harder, as units will not move from buildings until they're destroyed. I saw a number of squads continuing to have combat power after the buildings they're in completely collapse. This is a realistic abstraction (people will fight in rubble) but maybe the scenario designers should revisit and redesign it, particularly the number of defenders they use. I think if the player has to rely almost totally on artillery, it's not much of a campaign.

The last mission is inexcusable. I understand why they did it, they wanted a suitably challenging finale but it's like Courage & Fortitude's 'puzzle' scenario style (terrain reminded me of 'School of Hard Knocks', the force disposition & fields of fire reminded me of 'Razorback Ridge') in that you have to replay it a few of times to work out how to do it. Unlike C&F It doesn't teach you much though, you just learn how to beat the scenario, not develop your tactical tools or knowledge of unit capability. The only thing I really took away from it is some knowledge of how to approach MOUT with these units, also thanks to your videos.

I'll try the Peiper campaign, I keep reading good things about it. I've stuck with the US forces so far because that's where my experience is, plus the setting is very interesting.

[Erwin]

Peiper Campaign is fun.  But one can do really well and still be faced with an impossible final mission.  After a few restarts I CF'd and checked the map.  After seeing what Peiper is up against I never even tried to complete it.  Yes, Peiper failed in RL.  But, it would be good to have a reasonable chance of winning if one has done well in the previous missions.  

[Sulman]

1 hour ago, Erwin said:

Peiper Campaign is fun.  But one can do really well and still be faced with an impossible final mission.  After a few restarts I CF'd and checked the map.  After seeing what Peiper is up against I never even tried to complete it.  Yes, Peiper failed in RL.  But, it would be good to have a reasonable chance of winning if one has done well in the previous missions.  

I understand this, but it's a peril of historic missions. The better way round it is to allow the player to win by the criteria of the campaign, which can easily reflect history. You can always state that "nevertheless despite these successes the offensive subsequently stalled" and so on. Having an ostensibly impossible final mission just leaves a sour taste.

One thing that makes this hard in combat mission are the lack of strategic soft factors. YouTube CM2 gamer Usually Hapless refers to this effect as the 'Paper Panther'. Your units are always perfectly battle ready and reliable. There's no tanks stopped waiting for a transmission that will never arrive, that sort of thing. All your units are always ready at the start line in perfect fighting order.

[Erwin]

21 hours ago, Sulman said:

it's a peril of historic missions.

Understood.  But, if one has done better than historical in the previous missions (Ie: one might have captured those supply dumps) and arrived with more power/units intact, one should have a better chance of winning the historical situation.  My sense was that the designer intended to have the German player lose the final mission no matter what (as the Allied units were overpowering imo).  But, perhaps another player might have persevered and won(?)

[jonPhillips]

On 12/16/2018 at 8:08 PM, Ts4EVER said:

This is how I did it.

 

 

I absolutely love this video. Some really funny dry-sense-of-humour remarks in the commentary too. Great work chap.

[Warts 'n' all]

Ah, a video where he doesn't call Steve and Charles "MotherF***ers".

[Vacillator]

5 minutes ago, Warts 'n' all said:

Ah, a video where he doesn't call Steve and Charles "MotherF***ers".

He seems to like the game (going by this video only) so perhaps when he does use the expression it is meant as a backhanded term of endearment?  Or not?

[Warts 'n' all]

2 hours ago, Vacilllator said:

He seems to like the game (going by this video only) so perhaps when he does use the expression it is meant as a backhanded term of endearment?  Or not?

No, it wasn't. 

[Bulletpoint]

On 12/5/2020 at 7:22 PM, Sulman said:

On 12/5/2020 at 5:21 PM, Erwin said:

Peiper Campaign is fun.  But one can do really well and still be faced with an impossible final mission.  After a few restarts I CF'd and checked the map.  After seeing what Peiper is up against I never even tried to complete it.  Yes, Peiper failed in RL.  But, it would be good to have a reasonable chance of winning if one has done well in the previous missions.  

I understand this, but it's a peril of historic missions. The better way round it is to allow the player to win by the criteria of the campaign, which can easily reflect history. You can always state that "nevertheless despite these successes the offensive subsequently stalled" and so on. Having an ostensibly impossible final mission just leaves a sour taste.

I don't think there is any impossible final mission in the Peiper campaign. I played through it two times now, winning the final mission too.

You might be thinking of the German campaign in CMBN where the final mission ends up in a valley where you're attacked from all sides without a chance to win?