CMSF 2 - Co-op AAR (Bil v IanL) Using Realism Rules

[A Canadian Cat]

14 hours ago, Bil Hardenberger said:

AREA FIRE

1. No Area Fire allowed on turn 1

Yikes, I already violated the rules. I am pretty sure I did not mention this to @Bil Hardenberger at the time because I honestly did not think about it - aka I forgot that rule. I realized what I had done when I read Bil's first post and then watched my first turn again.

So I am not off a great start and I need to say sorry Bil - it won't happen again, at least this game.

Edited May 8, 2019 by IanL

[domfluff]

Some thoughts:

That's a very different force to Bil's, will be interesting to see how it plays out. Much more mobility, but possibly more brittle.

Approve of the AT-7. In general, the AT-7/13 seem the best suited to embedding with motor rifle troops, since I find the extra flexibility (semi-deployed state and shorter minimum range) to be extremely useful on a manoeuvre element.

The AT-5 BRDM is potentially extremely powerful here, with the speed to reposition to a decently long LOS and it can rapid-fire those missiles - I've seen one fire most or all of them in under a minute before now, which can wreck things pretty quickly.

The AT-5 BRDM is also bugged in CMSF 2, since it has five readied missiles, and can fire six of them before reloading (the AT-3 version has six, which is probably where the slip up happened).

 

[domfluff]

I do like the idea of naming your leader after yourself. Obviously, in the name of "realism", if you died you should hand over control to someone else

[A Canadian Cat]

1 hour ago, domfluff said:

Obviously, in the name of "realism", if you died you should hand over control to someone else

LOL good point are you available?

[domfluff]

Engine limitations though - you can't name your successor. I think that means you've got to go outside and grab the first person you see.

"I'VE BEEN WOUNDED, YOU MUST SAVE FOX COMPANY"

I can't see any problems with that kind of exchange, I'm sure they'll be very understanding.

 

Edited May 8, 2019 by domfluff

[Bil Hardenberger]

7 hours ago, IanL said:

Yikes, I already violated the rules. I am pretty sure I did not mention this to @Bil Hardenberger at the time because I honestly did not think about it - aka I forgot that rule. I realized what I had done when I read Bil's first post and then watched my first turn again.

So I am not off a great start and I need to say sorry Bil - it won't happen again, at least this game.

Yeah that was funny, no harm no foul though.

[Bil Hardenberger]

NOTE:  from this point on I will post in blue text to better differentiate my posts from @IanL's as our forces, though different are similar enough to cause confusion.

NOTE 2:  I added a table of contents to the initial post in this thread that I will keep updated as we go along.

METT-T ANALYSIS

• MISSION - Move to Contact and destroy any enemy forces discovered in the Area of Operations (AO). 
  • Primary objective: seize the Bridge objective
  • Secondary objectives:
    • Maintain control over Objective Blue
    • If possible throw the enemy off Objective Red.
• ENEMY - Expect enemy force to be of similar makeup to yours, use care when engaging, the enemy commander is known to be a very capable leader.  Recover the enemy Order f Battle (OB) as the situation develops.
  • Enemy Avenues of Approach (AA):
    • AA1 - A strike directly toward the Farm House is possible
    • AA2 - This is the most obvious Avenue of Approach for the enemy to use as it provides the best cover
    • AA3 - Another possible approach, used in conjunction with AA2 this approach could allow the enemy to get boots on the Bridge objective before I can do much about it, though traveling through those woods should be slow and I should be able to spot movement along this path as it passes over the Bridge road and before it enters the woods

• TERRAIN -
  • The AO is fairly open, with a gully running from the blue side to the red, this will probably be the main thoroughfare to the Bridge Objective.  There are woods in front of Objective Blue and on the far side of the Bridge Objective, the latter could be a useful avenue of approach for the enemy.
  • In front of Objective Red are two low ridges, these could provide pretty good hull defilade positions from which to cover the Farm House and open area up to the woods in front of Objective Blue.

• • Key Terrain (KT):
    • KT 1 - Blue Ridge, this ridgeline should provide good hull defilade positions from which to cover any advance down the Red Gully and into the Gully Intersection where the Red Gully and Blue Gully intersect.  It also provides good fields of fire to cover the open area to the east of the Farm House.  Getting firepower on this ridge as quickly as possible will be very important.
    • KT 2 - Gully Intersection, I expect controlling this intersection will be the key to controlling the Bridge Objective.  Seizing it and maintaining control of it will be important to the accomplishment of the primary objective.
    • KT 3 - Farm House, the house provides the highest terrain between the two friendly objectives.  Controlling the house and the area around it could be the key to the secondary objectives.
• TROOPS - 
  • B Company, 1st Battalion Guards Mech Infantry
    • INITIAL ORDERS: Command BMP will move to KT1 and provide overwatch over the Blue Gully and KT2 until relieved.  The Command Squad will dismount and join the 2nd Platoon elements overwatching the Bridge Objective.  The ZSU will remain in reserve.
      • HQ
      • Command Squad
      • BMP-2
      • ZSU-23-4
  • 1st Platoon Mech Infantry
    • INITIAL ORDERS: Hold in reserve
      • HQ on BMP-2
      • 2nd Squad on BMP-2
      • 3rd Squad on BMP-2
  • 2nd Platoon Mech Infantry
    • INITIAL ORDERS: Move along Axis Alpha two squads will maneuver through the Blue Gully toward KT2 while the Plat HQ and the mortar will set up to overwatch the approaches to the Bridge Objective.
      • HQ on BTR-60PB
      • 2nd Squad on BTR-60PB
      • 3rd Squad on BTR-60PB
      • Heavy Mortar Squad on BTR-60PB
  • 3rd Platoon Mech Infantry (Dismounted)
    • INITIAL ORDERS: AT Team (RPG) and one squad will advance along Axis Bravo toward the Farm House to overwatch AA1.  The Recon Squads will follow and support.  The rest of the Platoon will remain in reserve for now.
      • HQ
      • 2nd Squad
      • 3rd Squad
      • Heavy Mortar Squad
      • x3 AT Team (x2 PG-7 and x1 AT-13)
      • x2 Recon Squads

• TIME - We gave ourselves one hour to complete this action.

Edited May 8, 2019 by Bil Hardenberger

[domfluff]

How wet were the ground conditions? The approach axis all seem sensible, but I think I'd be concerned about BTRs bogging in the gulley.

[Bil Hardenberger]

1 minute ago, domfluff said:

How wet were the ground conditions? The approach axis all seem sensible, but I think I'd be concerned about BTRs bogging in the gulley.

If I remember correctly the ground conditions were dry.

[AlexUK]

Really looking forward to this Bil, I'm pleased you are playing with the same side too, that takes Javelin out of the equation.

[Bud Backer]

11 hours ago, IanL said:

Edited to add: Oh man you guys really set me off. As you can guess I hate hearing about how this or that isn't fair in the game and how I have a whiz bang complicated set of house rules for force selection that fixes everything. It just smacks of whininess and I tend to rant a bit. Ignore me. @Bud Backer can attest - he has heard me rant from time to time

I am happy to pay free selection QB matches and I also enjoy restricted matches too. Obviously this one is - mech infantry only. I am happy to have an involved discussion about house rules around ways to increase realism. I will refrain from going off in this thread about those other kinds of house rules.

Haha yes you do rant at times...usually with me in agreement. And I don’t remember it ever being about house rules. 

[nathangun]

16 hours ago, IICptMillerII said:

battle if a friendly unit sees another unit but cannot identify it, so they engage it anyways and end up shooting up a friendly element.

 

I remember seeing that exact thing in CMBB  many moons ago, very rare occurrence.

[nathangun]

9 hours ago, IanL said:

I am just highlighting this. Something I try to remember when I play a QB is name the top commander with my name. That way I can see if I survive the battle.

 

I tend to do that as well, for added realism. 

[A Canadian Cat]

2 hours ago, Bud Backer said:

Haha yes you do rant at times...usually with me in agreement. And I don’t remember it ever being about house rules. 

LOL - next time we meet I'll have to fix that

[A Canadian Cat]

3 hours ago, Bil Hardenberger said:

NOTE:  from this point on I will post in blue text to better differentiate my posts from @IanL's as our forces, though different are similar enough to cause confusion.

Good idea. I was thinking that the fact that you are using movie mode and your pastel icons while I am using normal mode and my bright icons was a good thing but different text is a good idea too.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

23 hours ago, IICptMillerII said:

For example, during a night battle if a friendly unit sees another unit but cannot identify it, so they engage it anyways and end up shooting up a friendly element. I know that on Iron difficulty this is theoretically possible, but during the orders phase you regain complete battlefield awareness as the player, so it still rarely happens.

6 hours ago, nathangun said:

I remember seeing that exact thing in CMBB  many moons ago, very rare occurrence.

While testing 'Coup d'Etat' for @MOS:96B2P my Uncons opened up on my regulars & vice versa on a couple of occasions (Iron Mode).

FWIW

 

 

[BletchleyGeek]

Cheers @Bil Hardenberger for starting a new AAR - an actual AAR this time.

The map looks way smaller than previous episodes - what are the engagement ranges like? Well under 1,000 meters I would say. Was this map selection intentional or a QB thing?

[Bil Hardenberger]

13 hours ago, BletchleyGeek said:

Cheers @Bil Hardenberger for starting a new AAR - an actual AAR this time.

The map looks way smaller than previous episodes - what are the engagement ranges like? Well under 1,000 meters I would say. Was this map selection intentional or a QB thing?

Miguel, the map is one @IanL cut down from a scenario and we then added the objectives... we kept it small as the forces are on the small side and also we were testing the house rules, so didn't want to over-complicate it.  Meant to add.. yeah, the engagement ranges are very short.. so short I have trouble engaging with my 120mm mortars due to their very long minimum range.

Bil

Edited May 9, 2019 by Bil Hardenberger

[BletchleyGeek]

27 minutes ago, Bil Hardenberger said:

o short I have trouble engaging with my 120mm mortars due to their very long minimum range

Interesting, looking forward to see how this game played out. Giving up control on direct fires is a big thing imo... kind of playing CMx2 the way I did back in 2010-11 when I "hadn't a clue" 

Edited May 9, 2019 by BletchleyGeek

[Bil Hardenberger]

On 5/7/2019 at 11:15 PM, IanL said:

METT-T: Troops

Order of battle

• A Company, Syrian Regular Army Recon

  • HQ Team (named Leslie), BMP 2K

• 1^st Platoon

  • HQ Team, BMP 2

  • 1^st Squad, BMP 2

  • 2^nd Squad, dismounted

  • 3^rd Team AT-7, dismounted

• 2^nd Platoon

  • HQ Team, BMP 2

  • 1^st Squad, BMP 2

  • 2^nd Squad, dismounted

  • 3^rd Team AT-7, dismounted

• B Company, Syrian Regular Army Recon BRDM

  • HQ Team, BRDM-2

  • BRDM-2 AT5

• 1^st Platoon

  • HQ Team, BRDM-2

  • 1^st Squad, BRDM-2

  • 2^nd Squad, BRDM-2

  • RPG Team, BRDM-2

• 2^nd Platoon

  • HQ Team, BRDM-2

  • 1^st Squad, BRDM-2

  • 2^nd Squad, BRDM-2

  • RPG Team, cross loaded into 1^st Platoon's 4^th BRDM-2

While we wait for @IanL to finish his pre-battle analysis and planning post(s) and now that you have seen Ian's purchases I thought I would throw out the following...

...I always try to recover my opponent's Order of Battle (OB) when I play a CM game.  Information is king on the battlefield, and the more you know about the enemy the better prepared you will be.  A lot of what I do in a CM game is about gathering information.  I wanted to share the following post I sent via PM to Ian towards the end of the action, outlining my thoughts on what he brought to the table:

Quote

Ian, I haven't seen too many squad type weapons (LMGs, RPGs, etc.) so I suspect you mainly purchased recon troops, probably:

Enemy Order of Battle:

• Two BRDM Recon platoons (those come with 4 BRDMs or 3?  I know you had 8 BRDMs in total)
• Two 2-BMP Recon platoons, though this could be a rifle platoon with a Company CO BMP)
• Plus of course a few AT teams...
• BRDM-AT
• x2 ATGM Teams (unknown type)

...how close am I?

Note the highlighted portion above.. the lack of those weapons became obvious the further we went and helped to firm up my estimate of the opposing force.  It is little clues like that which can help solidify your Enemy Recovered OB chart.

Who else does something like this?  I bet at least @MOS:96B2P does, as it was his J.O.B. at one time.   

Bil

Edited May 9, 2019 by Bil Hardenberger

[MOS:96B2P]

3 minutes ago, Bil Hardenberger said:

...I always try to recover my opponent's Order of Battle (OB) when I play a CM game.  Information is king on the battlefield, and the more you know about the enemy the bettor prepared you will be, alot of what I do in a CM game is about gathering information.   

+1    Yes, it is one of the many games within a game that Combat Mission provides.  Excellent AAR.

[IICptMillerII]

10 hours ago, Bil Hardenberger said:

Who else does something like this?  I bet at least @MOS:96B2P does, as it was his J.O.B. at one time. 

This is something I am trying to get better at. I tend to only develop local OB's, such as "this position appears to be defended by a platoon/company" and then apply knowledge of a nations TO&E to template what I am immediately up against. If it's a Russian tank platoon in CMBS, I know that it is 3 tanks likely working directly with other platoons, or in CMBN if it's a US tank platoon I know it is 5 tanks likely working together in pairs, with the PL on overwatch, etc. The only time I'm able to fill out an OB more fully is when I'm playing a scenario and the briefing gives me some idea of what to expect. In my experience, the few QB PBEM's I've played tend to be a bit of a crapshoot. It's certainly a skill I need to improve on. 

[Bil Hardenberger]

11 hours ago, IICptMillerII said:

This is something I am trying to get better at. I tend to only develop local OB's, such as "this position appears to be defended by a platoon/company" and then apply knowledge of a nations TO&E to template what I am immediately up against. If it's a Russian tank platoon in CMBS, I know that it is 3 tanks likely working directly with other platoons, or in CMBN if it's a US tank platoon I know it is 5 tanks likely working together in pairs, with the PL on overwatch, etc. The only time I'm able to fill out an OB more fully is when I'm playing a scenario and the briefing gives me some idea of what to expect. In my experience, the few QB PBEM's I've played tend to be a bit of a crapshoot. It's certainly a skill I need to improve on. 

Sounds like you have a good grasp of it @IICptMillerII

For others, I do go through the basic process in my blog post on Reconnaissance 

It is a skill that is fairly easily acquired, but does require you to take notes as the scenario unfolds... making sense of it all that raw data I guess is the real art.

Bil

[A Canadian Cat]

METT-T: Mission

The mission is straight forward: keep my starting point secure, secure the bridge and if possible take Bil's starting point.

Objectives:

The bridge – This is a modified meeting engagement but this is the undefended objective that we both need to take.

Red setup – My starting point and the twist in this battle – we both have out own objective to hold while at the same time take the bridge.

Blue setup – Bil's starting point.

Tasks:

Use cover to get to the bridge first. I bought recon BRDMs specifically to get there fast. I have routes to move that are behind terrain cover most of the way.

Deny the approach. The Red setup objective appears to have a view (KT7) of the both AA2 and AA3 that Bil might use to get to the bridge.

Probe to see how well Blue setup is protected. I can advance towards the farm (KT3) with support from units on the high ground or hull down behind ridge at KT6

METT-T: Terrain

We took the map from “Tactical Vignette 99-2 The Passage at Wilcox” desighed by George McEwan <http://www.combatmission.lesliesoftware.com/ShockForce/Scenarios/Tactical%20Vignette%2099-2%20The%20Passage%20at%20Wilcox%20SF2.html>. We kept just the rural part for this meeting engagement. To make this more interesting than a race to the central objective like the typical ME we added objectives at each of out starting points too. The idea being it will create decisions and stop this from becoming nothing more than a mad rush.

Here is the map with the avenues of approach Bil could use. I labelled the same locations with the same KT numbers that Bil used – that should help keep things straight.

METT-T: Enemy

Enemy Intentions

Take the bridge and hold their own start point.

Possible Order of Battle

I looked back at our correspondence to find out how we set the conditions on forces:

Quote

Let's keep it simple:

1. No tanks

2. Infantry Platoon base (of any flavor, or flavour to you ) - no mods other than soft factors modifications.

3. No other limits

Further clarification that in this context “no mods” means taking the base as is – no deleting AT teams or XO / HQ support teams.

Enemy Course of Action

I expect that the enemy will likely move to protect the starting point objective and also move to take the bridge objective. I expect some movement on AA1 probably to take the farm. Between the farm and the trees near the Blue objective that will be a good start to protect the Blue Objective. Some other force will likely take AA2 or AA3 to take the bridge. It is more difficult for the Blue side to interdict my movement so I don't expect that. This is Bil so I know the leader ship will be good but you never know how aggressive or not he might be.

METT-T: Troops

See earlier post

METT-T: Time

We set a hour for this battle but both agreed we would negotiate an end at a reasonable time before that if needed. Neither one of use *needs* to fight to the last man.

 

[Bud Backer]

So rule 2 taking base platoons could mean that one or the other side could have very different force purchase costs?