are there scenarios exploring Sov 2nd or 3rd echelon attacks?

[Halmbarte]

All this talk about Sov tactics from the Brit training film thread* got me thinking:

Are there any scenarios where US is defending and you've got a battalion that's down around company strength as fresh(freshish) Sov 2nd echelon troops roll in? Most of the US scenarios I've played have the US at full strength and with full loads of main gun ammo & missiles. I'm suspecting those initial conditions wouldn't be tru after the first 72 hours of combat.  

H

 

[Combatintman]

Rumpenheim Rumpus has a depleted first echelon in position with a fresh echelon launching.  I wouldn't say it exactly fits your descriptor but it is close.  It's one of my scenarios for the title.

[MikeyD]

Between Two Fahrbahns is a small scale version of that, more-or-less. A US tank platoon versus a fresh Russian tank company that had been brought forward after the initial clash. The US platoon is the second line of defense, the first line of defense sits burning on the battlefield 2km to its east. In this scenario Russian infantry support had been largely stripped away in the initial encounter and Russian tube artillery has been reduced.

That's not quite what you're describing, though. In my imagination the first line of defense didn't survive so there are no reduced units to fold in to the defensive line. That scenario is rather apocalyptic. You either win or die. There's no retreating to fight another day.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Played that one from both sides now.....Total Victory for both sides too.  I actually quite like the M60A2 now. 

PS - I found the US reinforcements hellish difficult to kill.....They caused me more casualties than the intial force! 

Edited November 29, 2021 by Sgt.Squarehead

[BeondTheGrave]

IMO a lot of this really hinges on what you mean by a second echelon attack. By the design of CM it really hinges on what the scenario designer has in mind, as the second echelon in Soviet thought is more of an operational reserve. The first echelon cracks open the defensive line in a series of decisive tactical engagements, the Soviet campaign is a great example of that, Czechmate is another opening blow type operation, and then the second echelon floods into the gap and smashes up the rear areas. If things go by design, the second echelon should be able to pass through NATOs defensive zone untouched and wheel aggressively against targets of operational and strategic value. In WWII that wasn't exactly as it happened, and as I understand Soviet doctrine it was expected that the SE play some role in shattering through the rear crust of the defensive zone. But if those attacks were fair, balanced, or honestly playable by CM standards IMO the Soviets would have really messed up. The SE shouldn't be breaking through, it should be exploiting a defeated enemy. 

There is also the counter push from American doctrine of this period. CMCW sits squarely in the Active Defense era, before Air/Land Battle and all those cool toys. One of the big criticisms of AD at the time was that it didn't sufficiently consider Soviet SE forces. But I actually would disagree with those criticisms. By the time troops in the field got hold of AD, Depuy and Donn "the Donn" Starry were already working on improving it with long range fires and interdiction bombing. Starry takes command of TRADOC in '77, and we often think of his tenure as the ALB era, but really ALB arrives at the end of his career, not the beginning. Anyway, all that is to say that throughout CMCWs time frame NATO began developing strategies to get at the Soviet SE and strike it before it ever reached the battlefield. Much like with the Soviets, then, I think if US units were clashing with full strength Soviet SE units they would be in a lot of trouble. 

In that way I think a purely conventional WWIII scenario would end with both sides jabbing at each other like two exhausted boxers. A battered but victorious US force trading blows with a depleted Soviet SE. It could make for some interesting CM battles, but ultimately it would be like playing the end of a long campaign (because you are!) where your forces and the enemy forces are both clawing at each other with totally wasted units. But TBH I dont know how realistic of a scenario I think that would be. Either A) the Soviets would shift to a 'bite and hold' strategy. Take a big chunk of German territory, maybe some big cities like Fulda, Hamburg, and Bremen, and make the allies bargain that land back while fighting for more gains on the periphery. Or B ) the war goes nuclear. Soviet nuclear doctrine at the time, according to FM 100-2-1, was to hold off on nukes up until the point when the GSFG felt the offensive was stalling out (IE a scenario in which the US was winning) at which point they would use nukes to resume the breakthrough.

[sawomi]

3 hours ago, BeondTheGrave said:

IMO a lot of this really hinges on what you mean by a second echelon attack.

I think 1st echelon means 1. Central Front (GSSD/NVA) + South West Front (Soviets/Czechoslovakia) = 42 Divisions on first day

After 3-5 days introduction of three additional Fronts (army groups) from Poland, Belorussia as 2nd echolon = 100 Divisions of Warsaw Pact in total on West European Theather of War (1st + 2nd echelon)

These 100 Divisions = 5 Tank Armies + 20 common Armies = 35 Tank division + 65 mot.infantry divisions + over 350 launch systems for nuclear missiles with range between 30km and 200km = ca. 1.000.000 soldiers, 26.000 tanks, 30.000 APC, 8.000 guns

Airpower = 3 Soviet Air Armies + Air forces of GDR, Poland and Czechoslovakia = ca. 3.000 planes + 500 launch systems for SAMs = about 1.500 fighter aircrafts and 1.000 Bomber and Fighter-Bomber -> more than 100 capable to drop nukes

At least this was the Warsaw Pact planning in the 1960's as I understand this.

 

Edited November 29, 2021 by sawomi

[Combatintman]

The most common descriptors are Tactical Echelon and Operational Echelon and the employment of the terms can be a bit loose.  The term echelon would also be used in relation to formations.  So you could talk of a X Tank Regiment's first echelon battalions, or Y Motor Rifle Division's second echelon regiment.  A division generally is regarded as tactical so 47 Guards Tank Division might be described as the first tactical echelon if it is the lead element in 3 Shock Army's scheme of manoeuvre.  3 Shock Army would be classed as operational and; therefore, would be described as GSFG's/WGF's first operational echelon if it was the lead element in the scheme of manouevre with, say, 20 Guards Army as GSFG's/WGF's second operational echelon if it was the follow-on element in the scheme of manoeuvre.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

At what stage would the Soviets have needed to start feeding category two units with older gear into the line.....I've been messing with @benpark's Berlin map (nuking it basically) and I'm still trying to decide what (if anything) to do with it.

A Twilight 2000 type 'Cross The Rad-Zone' scenario was one option, another was battle hardened US veterans, with radiation sickness, battling second line Soviets in T-55s & older BTRs.

Edited November 29, 2021 by Sgt.Squarehead

[MikeyD]

One advantage to purpose-made scenarios is in the orders you can describe your backs against the Rhine and units to your left and right being over-run. That places your fight over a generic patch of ground into context. I'm reminded of the early 1970s Soviet strategic book 'the Offensive' (mentioned in the reading list thread). Its description of operations is on too big a scale to be applied directly to CM. On a CM battle map these grand operations mostly appear to be the same tank rush preceded by artillery and accompanied by armored infantry. You need some imagination (or a through description in the orders) to provide the context to place the battle within the larger strategic picture.