A tactical doctrine for dealing with HMGs?

[Zardoz01]

I'm looking for some advice on tackling German MG42s. There's lots of references to this in the forum but most discussion seem to revolve around whether the game implementation matches the reality from the war.  Whatever...    they're effective enough for me!!   What to do about them is the difficult question.

I'm interested in the "worst-case" situation - where the MG is in cover, eg a building, and where the Allied player has no access to HE for whatever reason. A rifle squad assault is the only option. But what should my expectations be and what is the minimum force size that is likely to work?

These are my observations so far:
* An MG42 firing from ambush is quite capable of destroying a 4 or 5 man team in the 1 minute Wego period. So I need to have the two man scout team up front as the sacrifical canary in the coal mine to force the MG to fire and reveal its position.
* The idea as I understand it is to have multiple, separated, teams firing so that they can pin the HMG before they themselves are pinned or destroyed. At least two BAR teams seems to be the minimum necessary? Maybe 3 or even 4 for good measure? It takes a while to get suppression on the MG and it can do a lot of damage in the meantime.
* The German MG must be suppressed before attempting to deploy the US HMG teams otherwise they get destroyed during their setup period. Also the US HMGs must be set up in the open as I find that when set up behind bocage they inevitably end up not having a LOF through the berm of the bocage. Once in place, presumably, a US MG can free up a BAR team.
* Finally a squad for the close assault. Smoke may come into play from a close distance?

So, as a rough rule of thumb, I need to budget one platoon per expected HMG it seems? Thoughts?

This reminds me of the old CMBB days where there was a Russian Training Exercises scenario with green Russian troops assaulting a dug in HMG. The Russians could pull it off ,if managed correctly, but suppression of the Russians was more modelled as loss of morale rather than the outright kills that I seem to get in this game. Is there a similar scenario in this game somehwhere?

[domfluff]

A rifle squad should, in theory, be able to take down a single HMG. Obviously circumstances may make this more difficult.

How it would work in theory:

The squad is on patrol to whatever location when contact is made. You've been following correct movement procedures, so the squad is split into three sections, travelling in line. The forward elements are scouting, possibly as a literal two-man scout team, but equally perhaps just the 3/4 man team you get with a basic "Split Squad".

This scout element will be moving from cover to cover (and possibly using Move, to allow them to sprint whenever they need to), so contact will either be made in cover, or on the way to cover. How this happens depends on how cautious you need to be, and how fast you need to be - trade-offs are speed and risk.

The trailing elements have line of sight to this scout team (this is why Iron mode is useful) at all times - this determines your possible spacing, since you'll be closer in close terrain.


MG fire rings out, and your scout team goes to ground (or dashes to cover). You'll be unlucky to lose anyone on the first burst, but obviously that's the risk you take. your scout team may not be in a position to see where the enemy is firing from, but your trailing teams are close enough that they have a good chance to do so.

Priority number one is to go to ground, move into nearby cover (very nearby - you don't want to be moving a lot here), and returning fire. Your goal in the first minute or so is to work out what just happened - what's firing at you, where they are, and how many of them are there. The second goal in this time is for the squad leader to start calling down indirect fire from any platoon assets available - this mission can be cancelled, but if the firefight goes long then you'll need the extra firepower.

Situation now is that you have a cowering and possibly injured scout team, and two trail elements in covered positions, firing at the source of the incoming fire.

You now need to work out if you need to break contact. If you are overmatched in firepower, and the HMG is in a well sited position, covering open ground, then you're screwed (and you've probably made a mistake to get into that situation) - your priority then is to withdraw. You use smoke grenades and possibly call on any platoon mortars to provide some cover as you extricate yourself from a bad situation.

If not, then you have to determine whether you can manoeuvre onto the target. If there's a covered route towards the target, then you can plan for an assault.

The rest of the squad divides itself into a base of fire and an assault element. The base of fire will contain the squad automatic weapons and rifle grenades, and the assault element will contain any SMG and most of the grenades. Splitting by "Assault team" can do this, but the basic "Split Squads" command will do a good enough job here.

The base of fire Targets the enemy contact marker by area fire - this allows them to open up and they will pour as much fire as they can onto the target. The lead element will also target the enemy, and should recover from their suppression fairly quickly, assuming they're still in contact with their friends. 

If this element or two can suppress the enemy - i.e., the fire is mostly going one way - then the assault element can move along the covered route and attack the target (move to within 30m, hunt in the last few spots, throw grenades speculatively or at known targets). Smoke grenades (or smoke mortar rounds) may help the move onto the target, since you're unlikely to have a perfectly covered approach all the way in.

If this element cannot suppress the enemy, then the whole squad sits in their covered positions and fires. It's then the responsibility of the Platoon leader to engage the target with another squad or two to try to remove the threat.

***

So the whole thing is a series of escalating if-then decisions, where you're preparing to minimise the risk and you're engaging with the smallest amount of force that you can afford. You're trying to manage the engagement the whole time, and stay in control.

[domfluff]

Your platoon or company MGs aren't going to be much use deploying under fire. You can do it, but it's not ideal.
 

MGs serve a number of purposes (and there's a lot of subtlety in their use), but one obvious one is that they can move to hold ground that a rifle squad has recently taken, freeing up the squad for a future task. Rifle platoons are designed for manoeuvre.

Bil used to have a good tactical exercise here, with a Squad Attack:
http://battledrill.blogspot.com/2013/09/infantry-tactical-problem-001-squad.html

This file (and the armour one) is no longer available - if anyone has a copy, I'd appreciate it - but it involves a squad on the march and allows you to practice all of this quite effectively.

[domfluff]

The inevitable comment will be about truly worst-case scenarios - what to do when your squad is under fire from multiple HMGs, pinned down in the open and generally having a miserable day.

To quote Prachett's General Tacticus - 

"How to Ensure against Defeat when Out-numbered, Out-weaponed and Out-positioned"
"Don't have a battle"

You need to put a lot of work into avoiding these situations before you get into them, and have a plan for extricating yourself once you are. Sometimes, it all just goes wrong. Some combination of smoke and running away might help, but if you're in a no-win situation, by definition you'll have limited available options.

[Bil Hardenberger]

4 hours ago, domfluff said:

Bil used to have a good tactical exercise here, with a Squad Attack:
http://battledrill.blogspot.com/2013/09/infantry-tactical-problem-001-squad.html

This file (and the armour one) is no longer available - if anyone has a copy, I'd appreciate it - but it involves a squad on the march and allows you to practice all of this quite effectively.

I would appreciate them also.. I lost them in a HD crash and accidentally deleted the folder containing those scenario files from Dropbox a while back during a reorg.

Bil

[Bil Hardenberger]

4 hours ago, domfluff said:

The inevitable comment will be about truly worst-case scenarios - what to do when your squad is under fire from multiple HMGs, pinned down in the open and generally having a miserable day.

To quote Prachett's General Tacticus - 

"How to Ensure against Defeat when Out-numbered, Out-weaponed and Out-positioned"
"Don't have a battle"

You need to put a lot of work into avoiding these situations before you get into them, and have a plan for extricating yourself once you are. Sometimes, it all just goes wrong. Some combination of smoke and running away might help, but if you're in a no-win situation, by definition you'll have limited available options.

Love that quote!  Battlefield survival is mostly about information... if you can discover the organization of your enemy, his intent, and where he is strong and where he is weak, then you will be able to maneuver against his weak points and avoid surprises.

Not every fight is survivable... as @domfluff  says, try to avoid situations where you do not have a chance: whether you are outnumbered, outclassed by equipment (i.e. M1A2 versus T-62), or outgeneraled... doesn't matter.  We all have bad days, learn what you can and move on to the next challenge.

@Zardoz01, for your situation, use Fire and Movement or, the Squad Attack Drill 

Bil

[domfluff]

29 minutes ago, Bil Hardenberger said:

I would appreciate them also.. I lost them in a HD crash and accidentally deleted the folder containing those scenario files from Dropbox a while back during a reorg.

Bil

@Erwin ? I know you organised collections of everything - is it possible you have:

CMTP-INF001-Infantry Squad Attack.btt
CMTP-ARM001-Tank Section Attack.btt 

Knocking around for CMBN?

Edited April 29, 2019 by domfluff

[A Canadian Cat]

Temporarily available here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/vmlb0ij1a5g3rcd/BilHTacticalProblems.zip?dl=0

I'll send the link to Bil directly too so he can get back up and running.

[domfluff]

Fantastic! Thank you.

[DerKommissar]

My answer to Hun HMGs, in one of the US campaigns in CM:BN, was light mortars. I had platoon level light mortars that proved invaluable. As soon, as I saw that stream of yellow tracer -- I set TARGET in the approximate area with one of the mortars. The 60mm is a good mortar, lobbing shells over the hedgerows and into Jerry's living room.

If you pit BARs against HMGs, you're gonna have a bad time. Apparently, there's a bug that makes BARs shoot semi-auto at long distances. Even in a perfect world, using a 20-round WW1 relic to suppress a modern GPMG is a hard sell. Either way you cut it, an infantry assault against an HMG is a bad time.

This situation is best left to your supports: AFVs, artillery and, as previously mentioned, mortars. Combined arms is the name of the game. I often forget to make good use of smoke. A smoke screen in front of the HMG, is a good way to move up. Even then, I would recommend to flank/bypass/outmaneuver the HMG's kill zone.

[Bil Hardenberger]

11 hours ago, IanL said:

Temporarily available here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/vmlb0ij1a5g3rcd/BilHTacticalProblems.zip?dl=0

I'll send the link to Bil directly too so he can get back up and running.

Thanks to @IanL , the links to these scenarios on my blog have been updated.  For convenience the links are also below:

Briefing:  Infantry Squad Attack & Scenario File

Briefing:  Tank Section Attack & Scenario File

Edited April 30, 2019 by Bil Hardenberger

[Bil Hardenberger]

@Zardoz01, I also have another blog post that might be of help to you... it actually demonstrates a squad attack on an HMG

Let us know how you get on.

[RockinHarry]

haven´t read through all of this thread, but here´s my quick 2 euro cents.

All depends on general setup and location of HMG´s. If employed correctly on a map that offers it, have them more rearward so they can exploit there maximum ranges. Have them covered frontally for desirable cross fire opportunities (kyeholed). Have them supported by other friendlies that step in for support if they receive enemy fire. Move to switch position if necessary (enemy brings heavy support fire to bear on position). Protect flanks and approaches to them with other freindlies. And so on. Question is how to deal with this properly setupped HMG, not a single haphazadly placed singe one. This is parts of german WW2 tactical doctrine. Other nations may differ, but i rather think not so much.

[Zardoz01]

Thanks everybody. I'm glad Bil's practice scenarios have turned up again! I've searched cyberspace a couple of times in the past looking for them. I'll go off and play them through and see what's what. There's enough guidance from @domfluff's post  and @Bil Hardenberger 's blog post to practice with.

This all arose from me jumping back into CM without having the basics right. As we all know this is a game where only correct tactics are likely to work.

 

 

 

[domfluff]

Bil is (obviously) accurate that the correct attack procedure for a US Rifle squad in this scenario would be Fire and Movement.

The reasoning behind that is that the US squad lacks an effective LMG, so the burden of suppression falls to the rifles instead. Fortunately, those rifles are M1 Garands...

That means that the situation will be that the lead squad will be cowering or panicking, without spotting markers or other information. The other two teams will be area-firing on the known HMG position, giving the lead team the chance to recover, and join in the suppression.

Then, a team will dash forwards a few action spots, ideally into cover, with a Fast order, whilst the other two teams are keeping up the volume of fire. This Fast order should have a Target order on the end of it, so that the advancing team can add to the fire when they finish moving. When this team is sited, another team will move forwards. Small arms are more effective the closer you get, so the end result is a mounting volume of fire on the target, ending when a team is about 30m away, and can start throwing grenades to clear out the target.

Once you've cleared the target, you usually want to attack *through* the location, which will allow you to provide some security, or to pick up any stragglers that have retreated from the spot, and might have something nasty like grenades or an smg.

If this were a Commonwealth squad, you'd divide instead into a base of fire, and a manoeuvre element. The base of fire would be a three man Bren team, usually supplemented by the platoon leader's two inch mortar. This LMG team would keep up the fire continuously until the assault element arrives at the target.

Symmetric fireteams (Panzergrenadiers, Stg.44 or SMG squads) can do either, situation depending. Each move involves risk, so a frontal "fire and movement" assault can accept more risk than the "fire and manoeuvre" of a static firing element and a flanking team.

[BletchleyGeek]

That was a pretty good walkthrough @domfluff. One aspect to complement it would be to mention that German HMG sections can use the MG while semi-deployed (using the bipod). That is a MASSIVE boost to the flexibility of German infantry companies in the attack. Russian HMGs deploy quite fast too.

For the Western Allies you need those light mortars very badly. Taking on an HMG with just rifles can be done but it will probably trash the rifle squad, unless they are marksmen. 

Edited April 30, 2019 by BletchleyGeek

[domfluff]

That's actually not what I've found in general. Indirect fire is definitely the better option, but it's not actually mandatory.

Out of curiosity last night, I made up a version of Bil's scenario, replacing the HQ team with a proper MG42 HMG, on a tripod mount, with decent siting, in cover and in foxholes.

Clearly that scenario was just made significantly harder, but it was far from impossible - I'd typically take a total of two casualties, but the same principle of suppression and fire and movement worked fine. There was a little more variance - there was one run where the squad had no idea where incoming fire was coming from, so they milled around in a blind panic instead - but the most common result was one or sometimes two losses. This is a lot more than the zero or sometimes one that the base scenario typically offered.

Now, that position is not 100% in the HMGs favour. They're out of C2, have no flank security, and they're at much closer ranges than the HMG could operate (i.e., they are within decent rifle distance), but I think the point holds that a single rifle squad is more than capable of dealing with a lone HMG position, and maintaining combat effectiveness to continue with the mission (there's a fair amount of time pressure in that scenario, since you need to get on with the main task). Tempted to make a video of this.

*

You're quite right about the German squads being more flexible though - they do suffer for the extra ammunition the pixeltruppen carry, but a GPMG is a powerful thing. Whether volume of fire or accuracy is more important for suppression is an open question though - certainly a Commonwealth rifle squad have the tools to put out more accurate fire than a German one, who blow them away on volume. Honestly I think it might be something of a wash - if the MG gunner is cowering, that's the vast majority of the squad's firepower suppressed in one go, which is certainly not the case for a US squad.

[BletchleyGeek]

I was totally thinking in terms of the behavior you can expect from average 1944-45 US Rifle squads as modeled in most scenarios and by the MTOEs - Regular or Green, with not very high motivation and with mediocre command ratings. I have been playing quite a few games recently with that kind of troops, so it is quite fresh for me.

What I mean for "trashed" is that they suffer enough casualties/stress to go into Rattled state. That propagates -quite quickly throughout a platoon or a company, not unlike a bad cold, and the whole unit gets "Nervous" or "Cautious". That is bad, more so if mortars or other indirect fires hit the unit. Rattled are also quite unsteady troops, far from optimal for offensive operations and need to be kept in the close vicinity of their platoon leader. Whenever I can afford to - which is rarely tbh - I send them to the rear to chill out.

Edited April 30, 2019 by BletchleyGeek

[domfluff]

Oh, quite so. The soft factors in the above scenario are set to Regular (there's nothing unusual about them), and although the first team goes to ground pretty quickly, the squad as a whole can recover the situation and gain control. Part of the reason for splitting squads is that the immediate effect of suppression is worse than the effect that spreads between units, so having your lead element panicking or cowering doesn't mean that the majority of your squad is, and if they are properly deployed then they can give the lead element the protection and time it needs to recover from the initial shock and start controlling the fight.

Green troops would require more hand-holding, of course - there are limits to how much you can expect from them, and I typically (especially with CMSF Uncons or reservists) assume that a green or conscript unit can deal with one goal, maximum, rather than setting goals and follow-on targets.

 

[Zardoz01]

On 4/29/2019 at 5:51 PM, domfluff said:

and possibly using Move, to allow them to sprint whenever they need to

Hmmm? Is there a special property of "Move"? I generally use "Quick" and then go to Hunt, Slow etc as needed.

While we're on the subject of MGs, I find myself generally disappointed by the US HMGs especially. Just an impression without any data. There are various suggestions on the forum - deploying them in pairs is an interesting one as often there is no shortage of them. Can somebody definitely confirm the query I made earlier as to why it is often impossible to get LOF from US MGs set up behind bocage even though the riflemen standing around the same action square are shooting fine? Is that a bug or a feature? Is it due to the MG team sitting/squatting to operate the gun?

[Sgt.Squarehead]

9 minutes ago, Zardoz01 said:

Hmmm? Is there a special property of "Move"?

Your troops generate no fatigue and may actually even recover energy very slightly if kept at this pace.....Useful for troops approaching along cleared routes, but a death-trap if they are on point. 

Edited May 1, 2019 by Sgt.Squarehead

[BletchleyGeek]

30 minutes ago, Zardoz01 said:

Hmmm? Is there a special property of "Move"? I generally use "Quick" and then go to Hunt, Slow etc as needed.

One technique I learnt from a very crafty opponent is to issue "Move" in very short bounds (like 32 or 24 meters), if the team has no definite contact markers. If it has, then my SOP is to fire at the contact, until it is dead or gone.  Otherwise, when executing a move order, the hardcoded SOP in the TacAI is that if the team/squad gets fired upon, they will switch to "Quick" and move at speed onto the destination.

Besides the "if fired upon quick trot to destination" and what Sgt. Squarehead mention, units with Move orders will generally spot better and also will also, sometimes, engage the enemy with their small arms before starting to execute "quick" to their destination. I find that very useful.

Also SOPs are made for breaking them - maybe you don't get definite contacts but you can area fire on them, or you are just smelling a rat.

Last Edit: the above works best if you also bother giving your units a sensible Face command at the end of the short bound.

Edited May 1, 2019 by BletchleyGeek

[domfluff]

5 hours ago, Zardoz01 said:

Hmmm? Is there a special property of "Move"? I generally use "Quick" and then go to Hunt, Slow etc as needed

Yeah, it's just about fatigue. Fatigue doesn't seem to have much or any game effect aside from moving (counter-intuitively), but it definitely limits how fast you can move, which in practice means "how fast you can get away from the thing killing you", so I often find it more useful to "Move".

Not in all situations, of course - "Quick" or "Fast" is useful for covering short periods of open ground, like streets. "Slow" is great for sneaking up, or for cresting hills. "Hunt" is mandatory for expected contact in close terrain, e.g., in woods.

5 hours ago, Zardoz01 said:

While we're on the subject of MGs, I find myself generally disappointed by the US HMGs especially. Just an impression without any data. There are various suggestions on the forum - deploying them in pairs is an interesting one as often there is no shortage of them. Can somebody definitely confirm the query I made earlier as to why it is often impossible to get LOF from US MGs set up behind bocage even though the riflemen standing around the same action square are shooting fine? Is that a bug or a feature? Is it due to the MG team sitting/squatting to operate the gun?

They are lower to the ground, that will cause  issues. CM works on pre-calculated elevation levels to determine LOS with the Target tool (which is why it works instantaneously - there's a pre-calculated LOS grid that's drawn when the map is created), and "crawling" is one level below standing. US HMGs are probably considered "prone". That won't necessarily mean that the gunners can't see - Line of Fire calculation are done from the actual model. That's why a squad might sometimes have no Target line available, but some or all of the squad might still be firing at the target.

5 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Useful for troops approaching along cleared routes, but a death-trap if they are on point. 

True, but I think it's a little more subtle than that - Moving troops will Quick or Fast move to the next spot if they come under fire, and don't have any contact markers - i.e., "something shot at us, but we don't know who, where or what". Default behaviour then is to follow previous orders, which seems pretty plausible to me.

If the Move commands are short, and especially into cover, then it's not normally a death trap. Obviously, as above, there are scenarios were Hunt, Quick or whatever are more appropriate, but I do think it's a useful default, even along routes which are not cleared.

[domfluff]

The other advantage to "Move" in general is that all of the movement options exchange speed for spotting ability - "Move" is useful if you want to keep an eye on things, but also need to make progress (again, rifle platoons are designed for manoeuvre).

[domfluff]

Another couple of points on US MGs - US Armoured infantry, would typically have a pair of them, as "one squad", but designed to operate in two teams, alongside a 60mm mortars. This is pushing down assets to the platoon level that would be on the Company level for mainline rifle platoons (although perhaps assigned to them in practice), since presumably armoured infantry need a degree of independence.

With the way C2 and information sharing works, assuming that there's a game effect to sharing spotting markers (which is not actually clear, but is a reasonable assumption), then a pair of MGs from the same platoon as the infantry will work better with each other, and the platoon in general.

Further, static, tripod-mounted MMGs and HMGs are never going to work terribly well in bocage, even if they were standing up. The GPMG concept that the MG 34/42 pioneered has massive advantages in flexibility (although compromises in weight of weapon system, and weight of ammunition that the rest of the squad can carry). US troops can have a rough time in bocage because of this - the BAR isn't really an LMG, and although the Garands can put out a lot more firepower than bolt action rifles at close ranges, it's often not as much as an MG42 or two in practice.