Close Assault

[bazooka10165]

When units assaulting a building succeed in entering are they then considered to be on equal footing with defending units already present in the building or do the defenders continue to enjoy some sort of advantage by reason of their being there first and having established defensive positions? In a current game I had 3 assaulting squads successfully enter a building (supported by heavy multiple MG fire). However once in the building they got wiped out by a nearly comparable defending force and caused only minimal casualties to the defending units. No low ammo. no broken units, just got wiped out. Did notice that one of the defending units was a veteran and all assaulting units were regualr. Does this factor make such a huge diffence.

BTW - is the proper way to conduct an assault to have the units run to the target area (with covering fire) or is it preferable to use the move command so that the units can more easily engage targets as they assault.

[Snark]

Bazooka

I try to "move" units to bldgs

or "run" if they are not getting or likly to get fired upon

Then I "crawl" into the bldg., it seems to improve thier chances once in/getting in.

But Im a rookie so dont take my word for it.

[Guest Charles]

I like to run and sneak. If they are ordered to move and they stop to fire as they go, it may mess up the coordination of the attack. Also, I don't like them wasting ammo when they are about to engage in a close assault.

------------------

Not THE Charles from BTS

[Lee]

The problem here is that I don't know exactly how CM models assaulting

a building. Does running in mean in the game that your guys are busting

in the front door and aggressively taking on the defenders or does

it mean a reckless entry? On the other hand, does sneaking in mean

skillfully entering the building so as to avoid unnecessary losses

or does it mean your men are entering the building too slowly

and thus losing any shock value as they assault? These are

important questions.

Steve, just how are building assaults modeled and what do the

different types of entry mean (crawling in, sneaking in,

running in, etc.)? How do they affect combat modifiers?

[Guest Charles]

From the CM demo help file:

Fast/Run - Move at unit's top speed, low interest in engaging enemy targets.

Move - Normal walking speed, moderate interest in engaging enemy targets.

Sneak - Move slowly in as quiet a manner as possible, high interest in engaging enemy targets.

Crawl - Slow and tiring move in order to avoid detection and/or casualties.

From this, it appears that running in and "bursting down the door" will result in high casualties to your units because they are not actively looking for targets. OTOH, since they have a high interest in engaging enemy targets with sneak, I would think they would be ready for action as soon as they "enter" the building. I don't know what crawling into a building might do; that's an interesting question.

In practice, I like to run up to just outside of the building, then sneak into the building.

Of course, these are only my opinions based on my experiences in the demo, so if Fionn wants to jump in here, I would be happy to hear his opinion.

------------------

Not THE Charles from BTS

[Bullethead]

I don't know how it really works, what I've seen makes me think it's all a matter of who gets off the 1st shot inside the building. I think it works like this:

1. Defending troops are near the rear wall of the building, opposite from where the assault troops will enter. This protects them from all the suppressive fire being laid on the building's front, so they are in good shape to shoot when the assault troops enter. IOW, unless it knocks down or ignites the building, all the suppressive fire is pretty much a waste of ammo.

2. The assault troops have no LOS to the defenders until they actually enter the building. Because the attackers are moving and the defenders are stationary, odds are the defenders will see the attackers first and very probably get off the first shot.

3. Getting off the 1st shot is the decisive advantage for the defenders. The range is much less than 50m so everybody's firepower is maximized. The 1st shot will therefore inflict numerous casualties, especially if the defenders are SMG squads. These casualties all at once (often from unspotted enemies) and the sheer volume of fire causing them usually freak out the surviving attackers. Their morale fails to some extent and they usually hit the deck. This means they "miss their turn" to shoot back and probably quit looking for the defenders temporarily as well. This in turn gives the defenders a free 2nd shot, which usually wipes out the remaining attackers. And this often happens before they have a chance to get a good spot on the defenders--from the attacking player's POV, his units just walk in the door and disintegrate from unknown causes.

Because it seems that moving troops, regardless of how they're moving, don't spot and fire at targets as quickly as stationary troops, it doesn't seem to matter much which method the attackers use to enter the building. Even if the defenders fire only 1/10 of a second before the attackers are able to, they still win hands down because the defensive shot gets resolved, and all the bad morale effects get applied to the attackers, before the attackers get to shoot back. So even if the attackers aren't totally freaked, they will have significantly less firepower due to casualties already inflicted.

Note that the same defensive advantages apply in all other situations where the attackers have to move right up next to the defenders before anybody has an LOS, with the LOS blocks also providing cover from suppressive fire. So the same sort of thing can happen if the defenders are back some distance from the front edge of a woodsline, for example.

The question aries, IMHO, as to whether this "back room" defense is a realistic tactic or gamesmanship. Parts of it are definitely realistic--there's nothing wrong with using available cover to protect your guys from suppressive fire and force the enemy to get right into your best killzone. And I have no problem with stationary troops being quicker on the draw than moving troops. But the question to me is whether or not this should be quite so decisive, and this seems to revolve around game mechanics, which raises the gamesmanship question.

It appears that when a squad fires, everybody in it fires at once, like a Napoleanic volley. And it also appears that all such volleys happening in a single time increment are resolved and their results applied before the game engine moves on to the next time increment. If the time increments used by the game engine are very small, say less than 1 second, this system could yield unrealistic results in situations where the defenders would normally fire just a few increments after the attackers. I say this because all the defenders' bullets, represented by the firepower rating, would arrive simultaneously and instantaneously, whereas realistically they might be spread over several seconds. Thus, the attackers would be hit unrealistically hard before they had a chance to shoot back.

Like I said, I don't know if this is how the CM engine works, but it does look that way to me. And in most cases, it doesn't make any difference. It's just in close assaults, where the firepower is so high, that the 1st shot is so absolutely decisive. But I've never done a real house close assault myself, so don't know really whether the attackers in real life would be better off than they are in CM.

Another potential disadvantage to the attackers is that the storm troops don't seem to be able to help themselves before they enter the building. Instead of charging across the street and into the building, it would be nice for them to run up against its walls, pause a few seconds to toss in some grenades, and THEN go into the building. But I can't make this happen the way I'd like it to with the CM orders system. Maybe I just don't know how to give such orders, but I always end up with my guys spending way too much time (like 2 turns) out in the open street.

Anyway, I don't like assaults against human players using this "back room" defense (the AI usually stays in the front room where you can suppress him). The only counters I've found are expensive in time and assets--either destroying the building or assaulting from several directions at once. Neither is satisfactory, especially because you don't know which buildings the defenders are in--having no LOS to the front, they don't give away their positions with fire.

------------------

-Bullethead

jtweller@delphi.com

WW2 AFV Photos: people.delphi.com/jtweller/tanks/tanks.htm

[Justin Hoerter]

Very good comments Bullethead. I get the same feel from the game as well. I'd like to see BTS's comments, it'd be interesting to see how they've worked this out.

Justin

[Lee]

Yeah, one does get the feeling that perhaps the game mechanics

do tend to exaggerate the advantage a defender might have

in this particular situation.

Perhaps Steve or Charles can comment on this important aspect of

CM and help make this clearer.

[Fionn]

Well, speaking as someone who just took 2 companies of Rifle 44 Germans ( FP in the 160 range) into a village fight and cleared out a sort Bn of Amis ( Rifle 45 squads with FP 200+) I've got to say that the whole key to city-fighting in CM is to be found in German doctrine (gees, can you all see that I like German doctrine now ? ).

Divide the town into 3 or 4 segments lengthwise. Station heavy weapons or tanks to fire down the "avenue" dividing each lengthwise segment (this prevents the enemy from moving laterally to shift troops left or right.

Attack one side of the village (either left or right.. I'll pick right for my example.)

Push your men the full length of the rightmost segment. Set them in position firing width-ways across the segments to their left.

Send Bring your reserves up to the right front of the village. Have them work their way along all the houses in the front of the remaining lengthways segments.

By undertaking the assault on 1 segment at a time it becomes possible to achieve MASSIVE local firepower and suppression superiority...

Once you have done this you should have faced roughly half the enemy troops but now have troops firing on their flanks and from their front as well as heavy weapons.

It becomes very easy to advance 1 building at a time, driving the enemy out of it and then mowing them down with MG and rifle fire from your troops on their flank (who are looking down a width-wise avenue).

Basically you make and L shape.. The small bit of the L (horizontal bit) is the front of the village... The long portion is on the SIDE of the village. Then you simply march the small bit of the L upwards and as the enemy troops retreat before it they are butchered by the guys forming the long bit of the L.

You will suffer heavy casualties during the first half of the op but once you have the L set up it is a massacre.

MOUT are about the worst and most casualty-intensive you can get and close-assaulting isn't for the ligh-hearted. Unless your troops are significantly better than the enemy troops you should take great to never assault a building until either:

a) the enemy has already retreated from it,

the enemy is down to only a couple of men,

c) the enemy is pinned by fire from their flanks (fire from the front does no good it MUST be from the enemy's flank or rear).

ALWAYS assault with maximum force. I generally try to send at LEAST an entire platoon against each house I assault. This will consist of two assault squads who charge in and lay waste to the enemy, 1 squad and the HQ section who stay behind in the nearest house and bring fire to bear on anyone who interferes with the assault squads and who stand by to reinforce the assault squads if they get gunned down.

I generally try to send 2 full squads against no more than half an enemy squad. If there's more than half a squad there then I just level the house with tank or arty fire.

Basically MOUT is ALL about sending 10 times as many guys into the house as the defender has and then setting up to cut down any enemy survivors who make a break for it.

Be ruthless, cautious in setting up your positions but then audacious when the time comes for the main assault but above all be CO-ORDINATED !

[Major Tom]

Like Fionn says, never attack a large building from just one side, you have to flank it, give fire from 2 or more sides (ideal would be 4 sides). In one of these large buildings you can only do one of these rear defenses if the attacker comes in only one direction. In my spectacularly bloody (and the only game, PBEM or AI that actually ran the entire 30 turns) game against Germanboy in Reisenburg there were many times where he sucessfully assaulted buildings, I held him off, my counterattacks failing, counterattacks suceeding. We must have each threw away a total of 6 squads each within the timespan of 2 minutes assaulting and counter assaulting eachothers large buildings with only Infantry. The best way to clear a building, however, is to knock it down.

[Bullethead]

Right, being able to come from 2+ directions greatly reduces the superiority of the "back room" defense. But this "blockbusting" method described is not without its own limits.

First, you need to obtain the necessary jump-off points on 2 sides of the objective building. This boils down to finding the enemy's flank and enveloping it. Finding the flank means dealing with advanced positions, and when you do find it, you have to overcome the flank defenses to gain your flanking LOD. All this takes time and blood. Then you have to leave somebody to cover the flank and rear of your flanking force during its assault. So it can be expensive in both time and assets before you are even in position to start the real nut-cutting of clearing houses. Still, blockbusting seems to be the best option available if you don't have the HE to just level the town

------------------

-Bullethead

jtweller@delphi.com

WW2 AFV Photos: people.delphi.com/jtweller/tanks/tanks.htm

[Fionn]

The BEST way to clear a village is to level the village.

Simply identify the houses you NEED to keep up to allow your advancing guys to find some cover and then target every house with enemy troops in it with either an on-map mortar or a tank. Select other sections of the town for arty and then simply move in.

A short battalion of arty is VERY effective hehe

[Ash]

Lets just say my friend was not happy when my 2 Stugs, Tiger, and all my spotters started leveling buildings in Last Defense. I found out later he had quickly ran almost his entire defensive force inside the buildings, just leaving enough firepower to tangle me up. He had a perfect ambush setup but I ended up leveling 3/4 of his assualt force before I knew he was even there. Recon by fire, you gotta love it.

------------------

The names Ash, Housewares

[Guest hunt52]

The trick to defending in buildings is be in the ones that wouldn't normally get preemptively shelled. I always take out the large wood building on the allied right in Riesburg just for good measure. The trick is to be in the buildings the other commander thinks are empty

The first time Eridani and I played LD against each other I hid all my men in the further back buildings and far back in the woods. He shelled the town to bits, and dropped a couple of turns of mortar and Tiger fire into the woods on the allied right, but he completely missed The game ended up a tough fought draw (neither one of us really knew what we were doing)

The trick is to get into the other guys head. I knew he would shell the town - so I was somewhere else. Now, if he had known I would know that he would shell the town he could have shelled the other buildings. But I could have known he would know I would know what he was going to do and done something else - oh the hell with it. Just mix it up. Stay away from predictability (in all things )

- Bill

[Bullethead]

OK, looks like we got clearing towns squared away, "back room" defense and all. Now, what about clearing a big section of forest?

This one gives me more trouble. The forest functions like 1 big building so you can't use blockbusting--no streets to shoot along. Nor can your tanks accompany the assault troops. So it seems about all the help you can give your grunts is a preparatory bombardment, attack from multiple or unexpected directions if possible, and hopefully have overwhelming numbers.

But once your grunts step into the forest, they're on their own. Any badguys they meet will be too close to call fire in on. And very likely all these badguys will have the advantage of the "back room" quickdraw thing going.

Then there are the LOS problems. Because you can't see any badguys until you walk into their point-blank killzones, it's very difficult to determine the extent and strength of the enemy position, and find its flanks. Also, the short LOS makes it difficult to take advantage of any attacking numerical superiority without having your guys shoulder-to-shoulder. OTOH, the short LOS also hinders defensive mutual support.

Anyway, just playing with the demo, it's always a bloody mess. The side with the 1st shot seems to have a decided advantage. But if for some reason that doesn't solve the problem, it seems to come down to troop quality and quantity of automatic weapons in a squad. I imagine in the full game, with mines, obstacles, and overhead cover for the defenders, it gets MUCH worse for the attackers. How are things working in Heurtgenwald?

------------------

-Bullethead

jtweller@delphi.com

WW2 AFV Photos: people.delphi.com/jtweller/tanks/tanks.htm