Jump to content

U.S. Thread - CM Cold War - BETA AAR - Battle of Dolbach Heights 1980


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 406
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

“Here, across death’s other river, the Tartar horsemen shake their spears.” T.S. Eliot   This BETA game is being played against Warren (The_Capt), and we are very familiar with each ot

First Three Minutes!  “Perception is strong and sight weak. In strategy it is important to see distant things as if they were close and to take a distanced view of close things.” A Book of F

The Twenty-Third & Twenty-Fourth Minutes – Saga of Tank Section 1 “If the tanks succeed, then victory follows.” Heinz Guderian   Tank Section 1... quite an exciting turn to wat

Posted Images

3 minutes ago, RepsolCBR said:

Would there ever be any benefit in pairing the M150 with a tank section ? or should those be keept as far back as possible at all times and leave the tanks to advance on there own

Not really answering your question, but the issue with ATGMs in game is one of their flight time. Its not unusual to be seeing missile flight times of 10-15 seconds, which is a long time when every second counts. If the launcher can be brought under kinetic fire while the missile is in flight there is a good chance it can be killed before it's own round strikes. It seems much more noticeable in CW than previous titles.

It's an interesting dynamic and really ups the tension

P  

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Bil Hardenberger said:

Now to place this image in context... in case you ever wondered what a Hull Down M-150 Tank Hunter looks like from the Soviet perspective:

Hull_Down_M150.png

Did you use the game's Hull Down command to get the vehicle into its original position?

 

11 hours ago, MikeyD said:

When erected it looks like the worst idea in the world so we kept i folded.

A candidate for funniest comment in the thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pete Wenman said:

Not really answering your question, but the issue with ATGMs in game is one of their flight time. Its not unusual to be seeing missile flight times of 10-15 seconds, which is a long time when every second counts. If the launcher can be brought under kinetic fire while the missile is in flight there is a good chance it can be killed before it's own round strikes. It seems much more noticeable in CW than previous titles.

It's an interesting dynamic and really ups the tension

P  

yeah this one is  really going to be a game in itself.  The Russians are awash in AT missiles of various ranges.  The issue with using is

1 you want as much distance as you can to limit detection of launch. While this does increase flight time the enemy may never see it coming.

2. Fire when in view of as few enemy units as possible.  Keyhole locations are an absolute necessity and if possible be firing outside their frontal arc.

I have had far more luck playing the Russian side than US.  Those AT 7 teams of the Russians are deadly, 1000 meter reach and 2 guys parked behind a hedge... ouch   The BRDM 2 on the other hand is a small profile vehicle with multiple launchers and a range of 4 km.  They are quickly becoming a favorite toy.  I have also had success against M1s with the recoilless SPG. My first thought playing with Soviet BTRs was - WTF am I gonna do with a bunch of truck mounted dudes.  Playing on the offense is difficult but playing on defense in decent terrain and it is a hard nut to crack.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, IanL said:

Did you use the game's Hull Down command to get the vehicle into its original position?

Nope... I only go into Hull Down manually. 

Originally I didn't know where exactly Warren would pop up, so I setup in a "best case" hull down position to cover both NAI2 and NAI3.  Pulling back into full HD to this enemy contact pulls M150 (1/4) out of being able to place eyes on NAI2.

Bil

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bil Hardenberger said:

Negative.. but I believe the TOW mounted on the jeep will be able to be dismounted.  Though I need to confirm that.. it only just came in to the game and I haven't played with it yet.

Bil 

Thanks Bil.  Looking in manuals, it seems they should be dismountable, but not sure if the vehicle always had enough crew to make that practical.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bil Hardenberger said:

Negative.. but I believe the TOW mounted on the jeep will be able to be dismounted.  Though I need to confirm that.. it only just came in to the game and I haven't played with it yet.

Bil 

that is affirmative Bil

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read (and write) a lot of AARs, but Bil's are probably my favorites. The presentation (screens, maps, etc) and analysis is top-notch, The commentary of your reasoning, analysis and actions is always entertaining and enlightening.  Add to it the ability read the AAR of the opponent, while it is all going down, and it all adds up to the best AARs on the 'net. Turn-based WEGO Combat Mission is especially well suited to this. I know these AARs are a lot of work, and I would believe it if you told us you spend more time on these than the battle itself.  Just a post to say how much it is appreciated, and for those of us excited about Cold War, a must-read. Good luck, commander!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, landser said:

I read (and write) a lot of AARs, but Bil's are probably my favorites. The presentation (screens, maps, etc) and analysis is top-notch, The commentary of your reasoning, analysis and actions is always entertaining and enlightening.  Add to it the ability read the AAR of the opponent, while it is all going down, and it all adds up to the best AARs on the 'net. Turn-based WEGO Combat Mission is especially well suited to this. I know these AARs are a lot of work, and I would believe it if you told us you spend more time on these than the battle itself.  Just a post to say how much it is appreciated, and for those of us excited about Cold War, a must-read. Good luck, commander!

Check is in the mail. 

Bil

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fifth Minute – Return of the Blood Board!

“Onward we stagger, and if the tanks come, may God help the tanks.”

William Darby

 

Near NAI2 a Tank Section 1 tank (1/9)) spotted the BMP-1PK that M-150(1/4) had spotted in the previous minute and fired short on. 

T05_A.png

It took two rounds, but eventually the tank put one through the BMP, in the front and out the back.  This was the Company Commander BMP mentioned in my last post.  Hopefully the Company CO was on board when the round hit. 

Range:  1610m.

T-05_G1.gif

Another BMP-1PK (Company HQ vehicle) moved forward and was spotted on NAI2 by M150(1/5) .  It loosed a TOW, which after about 10 seconds in the air…

T05_B.png

…hit the damned trees.  This BMP is very well situated and close enough to the edge of the trees to still be able to see out, yet far enough back that the trees provide some protection.  Classic positioning.

Range: 1546m

T-05_G2.gif

One of the Scout Teams has reached it’s observation position (OP) and notices some infantry movement moving from NAI3 and it looks like it may be heading toward the town.  No... this does not appear to be related to the MP that was just destroyed.

Also spotted as an infantry or scout team moving from NAI2 towards the smoke screen.  Will keep an eye on these contacts, but I find it curious that Warren would order dismounted teams to move towards Dolbach.

T05_C.png

Reinforcements!  Received my first (of two) reinforcements this turn.  Including:

  • 2nd AC Platoon equipped with M113A1, M-60A1, and M150 Tank Hunters

T05_D.png

  • Mortar Section equipped with an HQ on an M-577 and x3 M106A1s
  • Armored Cavalry (AC) Troop HQ and Forward Observer team, both mounted on M-113A1s

T05_E.png

What are my plans for them?  It is way too early and I don’t have enough information to task them yet.

For now they will be the first component of my reserve, counter-attack force.  I plan on keeping 1st AC Platoon engaged and observing the enemy movements and positions.  Once I have enough information I will make a plan for my reserve.

I think I can put my M-106s to work pretty soon though, depending on what he sends down EAA1.

T05_BB.png

For Reference:

EAA_Analysis.png

NAIs.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, stikkypixie said:

Do tanks of tanks of this era have laser range finders? Just curious about their first hit probability.

Some do, like the T-72, the M60A3 TTS, etc. I'm not an expert tho

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rice said:

@Bil Hardenberger How concerned are you about the M60A1's performance against Soviet Armor? What kind of Armor (if any) do you expect to run into?

Considering that in 1980 USAREUR was just receiving M735 APFSDS rounds with most unit still using older M728 APDS rounds until 1981, I would be very concerned, regardless of the actual kind of enemy tanks I'd happen to run into.

BTW, I wonder how CMCW handles this, since, IIRC, ammo loads are type (not year) dependent.

I guess: 

M48A5, M60A1 w/M728

M60A1 RISE, RISE+, RISE PASSIVE w/M735

M60A3, M60A3 TTS, M1 w/M774

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Rice said:

@Bil Hardenberger How concerned are you about the M60A1's performance against Soviet Armor? What kind of Armor (if any) do you expect to run into?

It is what it is... I can only put them in the best positions possible and hope they do some damage.  You can't account for equipment disparities in any other way than to maximize your chances with position and maneuver.

Expecting to run into T-64s (either A or B model) and perhaps T-62s.  See my METT-T analysis (Enemy) for more details.. link is in the initial post.

Bil 

Link to post
Share on other sites

With the 115 mm the Soviets achieved parity with L7 105 mm NATO gun. But on the Golan Heights and in the Sinai the gunnery standards were found lacking. If my memory serves me right 1972 showed the new generation ATGM at work. Infantry like David outranged Goliath once more. 2 km was not good enough anymore. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

With the 115 mm the Soviets achieved parity with L7 105 mm NATO gun. But on the Golan Heights and in the Sinai the gunnery standards were found lacking. If my memory serves me right 1972 showed the new generation ATGM at work. Infantry like David outranged Goliath once more. 2 km was not good enough anymore. 

Not a fair comparison IMO.  The Syrians and Egyptians in the Arab Israeli Wars were not the Soviets.  They were minor league at best... and in this game the first team, the Soviets, can be deadly and more than  match for a US force of equivalent size.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...