Jump to content

How to - Recon with AFV's?


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, RMM said:

What's that thread please, because I've been posting these 'Feature Request' strings, since I couldn't find one. I'll start posting such things there too, but yes, it's fun to debate them here too.

I don't know that pause and edit really would become laborious to be honest, certainly not as long as one were to also incorporate the automated reactions we've discussing herein. I don't play RTS either, least not since Total War games, but there a real, definite need for proper automated reactions in that for sure!

I agree that the current Hunt command doesn't seem to really spot or hunt all that well when it comes to vehicles. As I mentioned previously, vehicles move at the same speed in that as the Quick command, which is quite different from how infantry do it. I get the impression that vehicles don't really hunt any differently than normal, Quick movement.

Here ya go:

OK, pause and edit might be made to be quite easy, but it would break up the whole idea of a commander biting his nails during that WEGO minute where he's just an observer.  Plus, the devs would have to develop such an edit method, which I'd guess isn't trivial.

The idea of WEGO is to break up the battle into useful chunks to balance commanding and action playing out, to best simulate real life combat; mostly that works well. This is just one of those situations where it results in unrealistic behaviour - temporary paralysis when a reaction would happen IRL - so it would be good to come up with solutions that still fit within that WEGO time chunk approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Vergeltungswaffe said:

You always give the infantry a move order in that situation so that if the tank stops, they jump off and move away.

Indeed so, but usually you plan your dismounts to leap off at the end of the journey and go to a nearby advantageous position.  If the vehicle is halted some way before that then the dismounts have a long walk, quite likely over dangerous ground.

Whereas if you prepared them to react to an early halt, they could move to some contingency cover position or maybe just hit the dirt and fight back, rather than wander nicely in front of the enemies' gunsights to their original destination.

Edited by Jabble
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Jabble said:

Here ya go:

OK, pause and edit might be made to be quite easy, but it would break up the whole idea of a commander biting his nails during that WEGO minute where he's just an observer.  Plus, the devs would have to develop such an edit method, which I'd guess isn't trivial.

The idea of WEGO is to break up the battle into useful chunks to balance commanding and action playing out, to best simulate real life combat; mostly that works well. This is just one of those situations where it results in unrealistic behaviour - temporary paralysis when a reaction would happen IRL - so it would be good to come up with solutions that still fit within that WEGO time chunk approach.

Tks :)

Yeh, the details of it could get drowned in the weeds, but in general, I think a good case can be made for investing in the Hunt command that way while having a separate Advance to Fire order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, RMM said:

Tks :)

Yeh, the details of it could get drowned in the weeds, but in general, I think a good case can be made for investing in the Hunt command that way while having a separate Advance to Fire order.

Yep we'd definitely want that result facilitated, it's just establishing the best way to do it.  What would happen IRL if a unit encountered an enemy?  Why would they continue to the intended destination?  I reckon that would only happen if the encounter was worth ignoring, i.e. it's not a high threat.  In the game that reaction could potentially be configured, so it would just continue as intended with a new red icon now visible.  But a configurable reaction could also take into account a non-ignorable contact, similarly reflecting a real-life response of fight or flight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Vergeltungswaffe said:

You always give the infantry a move order in that situation so that if the tank stops, they jump off and move away

Did you test that? I did and it didn't. My default move was on the last way point of the T34. That waypoint was automatically canceled because of the hunt move of the T34. You must watch for the remainder of the turn how they get wiped out. It comes down to choice in this game. Play on RTS you can stop whenever on WeGo suffer the consequences of a silly move. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, RMM said:

On the other hand, maybe using Move or Slow are inherently more cautious and likely to spot and shoot? I don't know. insights?

Slow is hiding whilst moving cons it tires you out quickly. Hunt is to be more situational aware. Vehicles move actually faster than on slow or move, infantry is in cautious mode and go slowly. Move for infantry is typically moving in a secure area. It depends on the terrain example infantry on slow among tall grass. Slow for an AFV is Quick for an infantry unit. APC's or halftracks or any other vehicle should move fast it is the only defense they have. Tanks carrying passengers go on hunt and it comes down on tactics. If they get taken out we have to work out a different tactic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jabble said:

Indeed so, but usually you plan your dismounts to leap off at the end of the journey and go to a nearby advantageous position.  If the vehicle is halted some way before that then the dismounts have a long walk, quite likely over dangerous ground.

Whereas if you prepared them to react to an early halt, they could move to some contingency cover position or maybe just hit the dirt and fight back, rather than wander nicely in front of the enemies' gunsights to their original destination.

You always have to take into account where you want the passengers to go. But that's a smaller risk than watching them melt on a burning vehicle.

3 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

Did you test that? I did and it didn't. My default move was on the last way point of the T34. That waypoint was automatically canceled because of the hunt move of the T34. You must watch for the remainder of the turn how they get wiped out. It comes down to choice in this game. Play on RTS you can stop whenever on WeGo suffer the consequences of a silly move. 

Test it? No.

Use it all the time for years? Yes.

Give any vehicle a hunt command and it's passengers a move, quick, or whatever you decide to use command. When and if the vehicle stops, the passengers will dismount and head for whatever destination you gave them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vergeltungswaffe said:

You always have to take into account where you want the passengers to go. But that's a smaller risk than watching them melt on a burning vehicle.

Test it? No.

Use it all the time for years? Yes.

Give any vehicle a hunt command and it's passengers a move, quick, or whatever you decide to use command. When and if the vehicle stops, the passengers will dismount and head for whatever destination you gave them.

You will see if the hunting AFV stops because it is engaging its passengers won't dismount. They will dismount only at the planned waypoint. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Vergeltungswaffe said:

You always have to take into account where you want the passengers to go. But that's a smaller risk than watching them melt on a burning vehicle.

True.  But if they survive, I'd prefer them to act more like soldiers with a plan than tourists out for a sightseeing stroll ;)

1 hour ago, chuckdyke said:

You will see if the hunting AFV stops because it is engaging its passengers won't dismount. They will dismount only at the planned waypoint. 

I believe you're right that they won't dismount while the vehicle is engaging, but I've seen soldiers dismounting when the vehicle stops because it has signed an enemy it can't engage.  I'd suggest that the correct response would be to stay inside so that the journey can be continued next turn.  However there may be circumstances where the soldiers should dismount and engage, e.g. an AT team.  If the response is configurable, maybe that could be be achieved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jabble   It is not hard to understand. To dismount before the AFV moves you select the passenger unit and then click dismount, if you want to dismount after the AFV has moved you just plot a move order. The unit will then move after the AFV has completed the move order. However if the AFV moves under a 'Hunt' order and stops because it has sighted an enemy unit the hunt order is automatically canceled and hereby the dismount move of its passenger. As the dismount applies at the waypoint which has just been deleted. Long time since I have been caught like that, security, and recon. Before you commit an AFV with passengers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

@Jabble   It is not hard to understand. To dismount before the AFV moves you select the passenger unit and then click dismount, if you want to dismount after the AFV has moved you just plot a move order. The unit will then move after the AFV has completed the move order. However if the AFV moves under a 'Hunt' order and stops because it has sighted an enemy unit the hunt order is automatically canceled and hereby the dismount move of its passenger. As the dismount applies at the waypoint which has just been deleted. Long time since I have been caught like that, security, and recon. Before you commit an AFV with passengers. 

I've just tested this in CMBS on Elite, using the Training Campaign.  Sent two units down to meet the Bradleys, mounted up, and sent the wagons hunting to a point near the red team.  I ordered the troops to dismount to a point near the end of that path.

However the Bradleys stopped as soon as they saw some reds, far short of their destination, and the troops dismounted and walked the rest of the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Jabble said:

However the Bradleys stopped as soon as they saw some reds, far short of their destination, and the troops dismounted and walked the rest of the way.

The way to prove a point. I had it in RT Engine 3 at the time. Since then, I dismount a feature away from where my objective is. Apologies to @Vergeltungswaffe sometimes a little thing changes. It is like 2men scouting missions now they peek from two corners of a house. Thanks and happy gaming. 

Edited by chuckdyke
adding
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

The way to prove a point. I had it in RT Engine 3 at the time. Since then, I dismount a feature away from where my objective is. Apologies to @Vergeltungswaffe sometimes a little thing changes. It is like 2men scouting missions now they peek from two corners of a house. Thanks and happy gaming. 

Don't worry, we'll all get horribly confused when Engine 5 comes out! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

The way to prove a point. I had it in RT Engine 3 at the time. Since then, I dismount a feature away from where my objective is. Apologies to @Vergeltungswaffe sometimes a little thing changes. It is like 2men scouting missions now they peek from two corners of a house. Thanks and happy gaming. 

DevotedLazyArmyworm-max-1mb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you believe there are enemy nearby - and in CM you know they are nearby and roughly how many there are - you scout using stealth, which means someone on foot.

Scouting vehicles are still useful, because they can move your stealthy teams quickly to locations where they can see something, their radios tie you in the CC network, they can use their MGs to conduct recon by fire, and you can do very quick forward and reverse moves to see if you draw fire, although that is often hazardous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Freyberg depends on the mission. Huzzar in Battle for Normandy the mission is recon the Germans have the same mission. Is it meeting or recon? In meetings they are great be the first on location with the mostest. Attack I always dedicate a third of my forces of the capture of terrain two thirds of eliminating the enemy. Capture of terrain supported by fast mobile units obviously Armoured cars overwatch and communication. You will occur losses with scouting vehicles, the vehicles are expendable their crew is not. The same reason I don't indulge in the gamey practice by sending two men on a suicide mission a human player won't fall for it. Scout cars an 88mm controlled by the AI will shoot at it a human player is not that silly.  Two veterans on over watch to spot while two team do a movement to contact. Every player here has their own ideas how CM should be played and enjoyed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CM scenarios are usually a bit overpopulated to execute proper recce missions as designed unfortunately. It can be done, but the scenario designers don't usually seem to have a good picture of how recon works and what it's doing. So the player always gets asked to do insanely dangerous stuff like close probes and infiltration. Recon typically tried to avoid fighting as much possible except against targets they could obviously trounce, think a 232 vs a pair of guys in a fox hole. 

If you try to use armored cars like tanks you will be very disappointed. If you try to use them like a Kubelwagon but with armor and a 20mm gun you will turn up better results. The Americans and Germans had some of the most heavily armed and armored recon of any of the Allied/Axis armies-a fact which tended to compel German Generals to use and expend them as armored infantry which also wasted such a valuable asset. American commanders seem to have granted their armored recon a ton of latitude and independence-old cavalry traditions probably-and so they tended to end up surviving more often but also tended to end up driving out into the middle of nowhere, negatively impacting their HQ's situational awareness. These are big reasons why the Russians gave battlefield commanders just about none of it for their own use and withheld armored recon squadrons at higher levels. They didn't have many of them-so they had to be used somewhat more carefully than a Division commander might be inclined to. 

 

Edited by SimpleSimon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SimpleSimon in Battle for Normandy I encountered 2 Recon scenarios. In an Attack or Assault the recon is supposed to be finished. If you have ACs in your scenario do a recon by fire on places you suspect an enemy presence. In SF2 I had satisfactory results with my Scimitars they spot really good whilst driving on highspeed. In WW2 Jeeps with a .50 Cal also recon by fire. Be the first and last one to shoot during the 1 minute real time playing WeGo. If a vehicle gets hit at least get a contact icon of the SOB who did it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

The same reason I don't indulge in the gamey practice by sending two men on a suicide mission a human player won't fall for it.

I hate doing that - it's one thing to attack aggressively, but recon by suicide is so fake...

Another thing ACs are great for is pursuit - once you break the MLR and you want to hasten the enemy's surrender, light armour are fabulous at shooting down fleeing enemy :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Part of the problem is that there is no RECON order in which a team acts realistically as a recon element.  The player has to guess and issue waypoints and orders manually as best he can.  

A Recon vehicle should be able to move FAST while jinking violently to make a hard target.  If recon inf spots or even hears something, it should "know" to take cover and observe.  If shot shot at it should HIDE and then crawl back to safe cover.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of that is basically available in the HUNT command. Again, we're playing a game that is heavily focused around facilitating set-piece battles and sieges. The CM games can do maneuver well enough, but the designers don't seem to have a very good of picture of the sort of "day to day" routines military forces follow that don't match up to the "pitched battle for hill 235" picture they usually hold. 

German Armored Recon had a saying that went like "see much and be seen little". The motto was an overall abstraction of their training that emphasized avoidance all but the most helpless of enemies and even more importantly, that it was preferable to avoid danger entirely than to "fight it out" against enemy forces. You don't really know how strong the enemy force is, and fighting will be a distraction from the Panzer Aufklarung's job which was to find safe avenues for the rest of the division and potentially save the formation too if it turned out they were walking into a trap. That may sound like what all recon does, but tbh there's quite a bit more nuance in each Army's approach to battlefield intelligence gathering than we often picture and a given designer's inability to distinguish between kinds of recon that could be either "searching" and "screening" or something else kinda just highlight's my point about how much myopia there is about this lol. 

I think sources are sort of hard to parse too because while there's plenty of guys who wrote books on their experiences in recon or armored recon the overall context of what they were doing and what they were up to exactly is hard to place without some "high level" understanding of the local situation and the routines. Then of course there was a lot of overlap with main bodies and such like the infantry who were expected to be both searching and screening everywhere they went but what exactly that involved between Rifle Infantry and dedicated Recce Troop could be substantially different. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another word, the full title for German reconnaissance formations was Aufklarungsabteilung which was something of a translation complication in western circles for years because the term abteilung is used frequently in German documentation and has no direct English translation-but generally means office of  or administration. So the whole term could properly be thought of as "Office of Reconnaissance" but native German speakers are more than welcome to correct me on this.

In theory the Panzer Divisions would always have an armored recon attachment with attached infantry and anti-tank guns too, sort of functioning as a "mini division". Posting in the Aufklarung was considered both prestigious and risky and they had higher-than-average casualty rates even in good times. Many of a given Division's best Officers and staff would be assigned to it, and the combination of talent pooling and mechanization frequently and unfortunately meant that as the war went sour Panzer Aufklarungs would frequently be asked to serve as Armored Infantry-aggravating the casualty rates of such valuable troops. 

Aufklarung's were predisposed by training-and reality-to prioritize evasion and subtlety over direct fighting. Being armored meant that there were many kinds of threats the Aufklarung could in fact-ignore and bypass like outposts or suppressing artillery fire or enemy light recon-much of which for the era might well just be some guys on horseback or on bicycles. Otherwise, priority was on finding the path of least resistance through enemy lines that the rest of the Division could exploit later on. As is well known, the Panzer Divisions were ridiculously good at disappearing and seemingly reappearing out of nowhere, taking catlike advantage of the narrowest unobserved ground between enemy observers to appear abeam or even behind enemies before leaving them in the dust of a glorious Blitz. That ground-sometimes no wider than a single dirt track-had been inspected by the Aufklarung ages ago and the reason you can't get through to your Regimental HQ is because by the time you all realized this had happened the Panzer Division had already overrun your HQ. 

As the war went on it got harder and harder for the Panzer Divisions to gather reconnaissance. The Russians checked German recon formations by putting battle tanks in their recce groups when able-squadrons of Valentines and Shermans as much as possible, especially as the lend lease stuff wasn't as critical to compose Mechanized and Tank Corps anymore.  Which also had the effect of confusing German commanders as to where the main body of Red Armor actually was. Increasing head counts and frontline densities meant that the fighting became positional again-in many places resembling 1918-and there was little use for armored cars in such circumstances. Any road you pick is likely to be under observation...

Loss of air supremacy meant that the Aufklarungs were frequently restricted to moving at night and were more likely to stumble into bloody disasters without the Luftwaffe providing advance warning of local enemy Armored Divisions. Then of course they were favorite picks of all those Kampfgruppen commanders who needed them to serve in rearguard duty-another great way to get them all killed... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting discussion here, recon is not subject of CM scenarios often.

@SimpleSimon, you are right in principle, Abteilung means department. But here it is different, in the Wehrmacht it was used for battalions when applied on tank or armored recon forces, e.g. Aufklärungsabteilung 33 (in short AA33). The recon forces had and still have a strong relationship to the cavalry and their traditions. The 24. PzDiv (sign see above), which was converted from 1 . Kavalleriedivision in 1942, retained words like Rittmeister instead of captain and Schwadron instead of company.

I served with PzAufklBtl 1 of the German Bundeswehr from 1979 to '83 and as far as I know, in '79 (Heeresstruktur 3) it was organised and had the same doctrine like its counterparts at the Wehrmacht from 1944 on. In the late war, the PzAufkl grew heavier and heavier and the task shifted from scouting and road recon (Viel sehen, ohne gesehen zu werden - See much without being seen) to the ability to fight for information, flank security, and rearguard on delay operations. The AA and later PzAufklBtl was always a divisional force and did recon to some 40 km depth. There are always leichte Spähtrupps (light recon troop) of two eight-wheelers (SdKfz 234/1 (2,3,4), later Luchs) and hvy. recon troops (StuG III, later three Leopard1 - you fire into something, if it fires back, it is enemy occupied). The AA were often misused as line manoevre element, because it was a complete all-arms battalion (in '44 and '79).

The vehicles were precisely built for these tasks, the Luchs is so quiet, you hear nothing from 1 metre distance, except breaking twigs. Eight wheel drive to operate on soft ground, rear driver, powerful radios, and even able to swim (Luchs). So, nearly no problem to infiltrate enemy lines at night.

During the buildup of the Bundeswehr, there were two doctrine fractions, the russians and the africans. First the russians prevailed with the M-41 Walker Bulldog as recon vehicle, later doctrine changed to the african model, therefore, the Luchs.

For information on recon procedures, see 3 part video from 1957 below, narration is in German language, but there are a lot of informative drawings used, also.

The next two days it will rain here, so, I will try to set up a Quick Battle with CM:RT, for recon behind enemy lines. Objective is to reach opposite edge. Huge map, meeting engagement, low force concentration, two or three light recon troops.

Maybe later one for infiltration at night.

Might be interesting and thanks for all the tips and tricks.

Link to comment
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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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...