Infantry Tactics.

[chuckdyke]

11 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Yes, this method of selecting large nos of units I have never understood or used in the 14 years of playing CM2.   Thank you for explaining...

You are very welcome, now I hope huge scenarios playing on large maps become more attractive for you. The reason I started this thread how to use infantry efficiently. 

[dbsapp]

Ok guys, you lit my fire and I decided to burn some bunkers...again.

This time I took the proven route and went left side. I throw smoke on the trench right in front of me and to my right, thus creating a smoking "box". The smoke was ordered 5 min from the mission start to get my troops ready. I concentrated them all on the narrow left side behind railroad, except for 2 tanks, 1 HMG and sniper on the far right. 

The engineers were essential to blast through barbered wire. The snipers were responsible for a large part of enemy casualties, ranging from 16 to 6 casualties per sniper (green guy made six). For comparison - tanks made about 2-4 casualties per vehicle, but they were pivotal in terms of fire suppression. I used them as HMG\artillery platforms and leave them far away from trenches, because I knew from the previous experience that they would be booged or killed by flak or stug fire. 

Almost all of my flame tower guys made to the end and spectacularly burnt bunkers!

This time my walkthrough was really positive and energetic. 

In the beginning on nomansland from the left side. The trick was to come as close as possible under the smoke cover: 

When my troops passed the first trench they stroke from the rear: 

 

This bunker was not burnt, but was exploded with dozens of hand grenades. The team from inside opened the door and tried to run only to be smashed by direct fire:

The smartest guy gave up:

The first flame:

The next one please:

Actually this bunker was bugged and didn't want to burn no matter what

Landscape in the end:

 

 

 

[Rinaldi]

Well done.

[Pelican Pal]

On 8/22/2021 at 10:01 AM, dbsapp said:

For me this kind of missions remind a trap: first they look like an interesting scenario, but then after many rage quits you understand that it was a trolling.

It's like a sophisticated riddle you was trying to solve for days just to realise that it was flawed frome the start and never had a beautiful solution. 

I do want to point out that if you had read the designer's notes either before or after the battle you would see that the historical outcome of this scenario was a Soviet failure.

[chuckdyke]

On 8/23/2021 at 11:27 PM, dbsapp said:

Ok guys, you lit my fire and I decided to burn some bunkers...again.

Glad to see you prove yourself wrong. This thread is about infantry tactics, and it comes down to macro management. Analysis the German MG42 can be dealt with by infantry alone. Your marksmen embedded and then from cover and concealment. Once that is in place your units can advance attrition will occur. I will post somethhing on CC for Soviet forces as they have little or no radios.  

[dbsapp]

45 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Glad to see you prove yourself wrong. This thread is about infantry tactics, and it comes down to macro management. Analysis the German MG42 can be dealt with by infantry alone. Your marksmen embedded and then from cover and concealment. Once that is in place your units can advance attrition will occur. I will post somethhing on CC for Soviet forces as they have little or no radios.  

I'm glad too, Chuk looking forward for your update on Soviet CC.

[dbsapp]

2 hours ago, Pelican Pal said:

I do want to point out that if you had read the designer's notes either before or after the battle you would see that the historical outcome of this scenario was a Soviet failure.

Well, I read it and even pointed this mission as an example of "planned failure".

 

[chuckdyke]

1 minute ago, dbsapp said:

I'm glad too, Chuk looking forward for your update on Soviet CC.

First I explain first the scouting my method in more detail. 

[dbsapp]

13 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

First I explain first the scouting my method in more detail. 

I don't know about the others, but I see the images attached in very low resolution, so the text is unreadable

[chuckdyke]

39 minutes ago, dbsapp said:

don't know about the others, but I see the images attached in very low resolution, so the text is unreadable

I read your reply fine just as good as the original. See or we get anymore replies. I won't type next time inside my images. You're already familiar with finding firing positions. 

Edited August 25, 2021 by chuckdyke

[chuckdyke]

42 minutes ago, dbsapp said:

I don't know about the others, but I see the images attached in very low resolution, so the text is unreadable

If you click on the image you will be directed to the 'Postimages Website'/ See or it is any better there.

[Erwin]

While this is probably the best way to judge LOS, note that due to the different heights of the scout unit when it is moving, stationary or hiding, just because the desired observation location can be seen from a particular waypoint, that does not 100% guarantee that when the spotting unit has been moved to that desired observation position, the unit will see the waypoint one has tested.  

Conversely, a unit may not have LOS to the ground at a particular spot or waypoint.  However, if and when another unit moves thru that waypoint, it is quite possible that the observing unit will see it - because the target unit is several feet above the ground (unless he target unit is moving SLOW, in which case it is possible that the spotter may not see the target unit).

This is why CM2 could be subtitled "The Game Of Determining LOS".

[chuckdyke]

1 hour ago, Erwin said:

The Game Of Determining LOS

We must watch the features in this case *spoiler* the pillbox is behind some scrub which is often *my opinion* the cause LOS pops up. Now I am going to explain in the next post how infantry could communicate their finding to other units. Soviet units compared with US units have no radios on platoon level. By the way, do you have problems viewing the graphics?

[Bufo]

5 hours ago, dbsapp said:

I don't know about the others, but I see the images attached in very low resolution, so the text is unreadable

For me is perfectly fine (viewing on a PC).

[dbsapp]

20 minutes ago, Bufo said:

For me is perfectly fine (viewing on a PC).

That's strange! I watched it on mobile and PC and they were blurred on both( I'll try to negotiate with my PC, but sometimes it's too stubborn.

[dbsapp]

5 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

First I explain first the scouting my method in more detail. 

Oh, now I see the story of little comrade Tolstoy! (Magic!)

So, basically, you suggest to measure lines of fire by plotting movement routes?

[domfluff]

Yes, but in reverse.

The technique that Chuck is talking about is placing a movement order on the enemy location, and drawing a target order from there, to find the friendly location you should occupy for LOS. That's potentially a little faster than plotting a movement order, then a target to the enemy location, finding it doesn't work, then plotting another one and re-testing. I don't really agree that it ruins the "integrity" of the game in any real sense.

Obviously, the LOS tool isn't a perfect match for your solider's eyeballs. The LOS tool uses the pre-built lookup table to generate its result, and so this will only be accurate to a limited extent. Individual weapon systems may still end up behind trees, walls, rises in the ground, whatever.

 

[chuckdyke]

1 hour ago, domfluff said:

I don't really agree that it ruins the "integrity" of the game in any real sense.

I will address it inside the Command-and-Control structure. One scouting unit can plot hundreds of likely OPs, put him on pause and paint the areas with the move paths. Which other units outside his C2 structure can utilize. Here we deal with the Soviet army in World War 2 which has a different C2 structure than say a US unit. We use the same game engine for all the armies in WW2. I post something else to address this. 

[chuckdyke]

It is the best approximation. Our squares we plot an LOF to are 64m² a unit can occupy only 1m² this accounts that we miss very often. That explains that area fire at a fresh sound contact is best. My opinion only. 

[chuckdyke]

Sharing Intel, first we wish to share with the other platoons of the company. The scenario is Red Dawn (*SPOILERS*) and task of the first Sapper company is to get the intel for follow up forces. They found prepared foxholes and mines in the areas suitable for spotting. First, they spotted two MG Pillboxes and share with the other platoon members. As everybody somehow can contact the 'Fire Direction Centre' I use this feature in the game as my channel. We can access the Mortars and use this for light and short fire missions. Any HQ in the game can access this and find a path to the spotter.

The most realistic way I can think of to establish communication for units with no radio. This party was part of a Leaders Recon (Regimental Radio) who has contact with only the first platoon. 

Edited August 27, 2021 by chuckdyke
spelling

[chuckdyke]

Soviet infantry has little or no radios up to company level. Therefore, Infantry through their HQ's can pass on intel to the fire direction center by calling a strike or notify nearby armor. Here they notified the armor. In this case a tank the vehicle must be unbuttoned and no further away than 32 metres (four action squares). The C2 on Soviet tanks is on par with other allied units. 

Mountains of the Moon Scenario was selected to illustrate this point. Some people use runners to pass on intel I think these methods have merit. Attacks must be led by armor or artillery. Infantry has no way to pass on intel independently as US or British Commonwealth units do. 

Edited August 29, 2021 by chuckdyke
Faulty reference.

[chuckdyke]

*SPOILER* You may recognize the scenario. The Pak75 gave its position away. Hilltops should be used for Observation Posts only. Sure, you can shoot at everybody advancing, while you can shoot at one target at a time all your targets can shoot back at you. No armor was lost as they stay at their firing position for 10 seconds only. Infantry spotted the AT-Gun from 1100 meters away. Mortar is called in by the Platoon HQ of the engineers. 

 

[chuckdyke]

Modern Era but the principle to seize a terrain objective. Scenario 'The Full Monty'. One thing about the US they formulate some good tactics. Here I used the acronym RISS. The compound was engaged by Recon By Fire (Warrior APC's), Isolated by Artillery and Apache Helicopters Secured and Seized by a squad of sappers. Crack Troops+1+1.

The lesson don't expose units if the area to be seized is not isolated. The Recoilless Cannon was captured on the Groundfloor.  The recon by fire paid off. Our APC was not engaged. 

 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Blasting your way into compounds occupied by Uncons got a lot more dangerous ever since Battlefront made it possible to put IEDs into buildings without requiring any mapping or scripting trickery:

Just saying. 

[Vergeltungswaffe]

Indeed.