Defending Against the Assault, a CM Guide

[Arsenal]

Excellent post's Claymore,very informative.

[Txema]

Yes, excellent posts. Very useful.

Thank you !!!

[Claymore]

Sorry guys I didn't know I was loved so much.

I saw the thread drift off the board and assumed the worst. Ok then...I'll put fingers to keys and start back up.

Cheers

Murray

[Stalin's Organ]

nothing complicated about it at all - Artillery* solves anti-tank guns.

Except of course if it's my artillery and Kiwi-Joes AT guns!

Also ATG's are often posted way out on the wings without infantry cover - in which case infantry solves ATG's.

* = anything capable of throwing HE from 2" mortars upwards, on or off-table, and not self-propelled

[ 06-13-2001: Message edited by: Stalin's Organ ]

[Stalin's Organ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Adam Lloyd:

Once your opponent gets better at placement and learns to guard his guns with significant infantry, heavy weapons, artillery, and even AFV support this will no longer be a sound approach.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Jeez - if he's busy doing that then it should be a cake walk into he objectives!!

I'd haveno problem at all if my opponent is using all those resources to protect his AT guns instead of winning the game!!

BTW the REAL reason for not usnig massed Puppchen is not he range, or the lousey hit chances....it's the taunting....I mean how could you hold your head up in polite company??

"Here puppchen, puppchen, puppchen... Where aer you puppchen?? Here little puppchen....."

[darsalon]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Soddball:

One thing I have found useful when conducting defence against an assault is, where possible, to retain small groups of strike forces to allow you to harry the defender and force him down a corridor of your choosing.

In a 5000pt combined arms battle, this might be groups including TD, AC, a platoon of infantry in HT's - that kind of fast-moving mix.

Any input?

PS - On bigger battles - a dozen sharpshooters well forward of your defences, in foxholes in woods, can upset infantry and button tanks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Excellent stuff, I'll keep that in mind for our next battle.

I tend to prefer the defensive myself where I get my forces concentrated in and around key positions on the battlefield rather than a line defence. Yes it may allow for outflanking but it allows for a bit more flexibility with the numbers you have and perhaps allows for counterattacks or plugging of key points in the defence.

Perhaps there should be differences in terms of the defensive battles that you can have. Ones for when you are part of a rearguard in a hurried retreat or ones where you have fallen back on prepared defences. This could then determine on what obstacles can be prepared and perhaps whether the defender can view the battlefield before picking their units (of course if they picked that in the options).

[Stalin's Organ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Adam Lloyd:

LOL -- I'll give you a game sometime.

It's called "Combined Arms" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No - combined arms is using all your troops for their proper purposes!

Using your whole army to protect your AT guns is called sillyness!

But if you want to play that way then fine - send in a setup!!

[Stalin's Organ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Adam Lloyd:

The answer is not simply "Artillery solves AT Guns", I wish it did. You have to get through an infantry screen, backed by enemy DF and Indirect support without AFV support yourself. Then, and only then does "artillery solve AT guns". In the meantime, you must find them and hence deal with the combined arms element.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Er...well if your AT guns ain't shooting sure - I can't find them......but then they aren't protecting anythign either....so that's fine by me too!

And hte artillery does NOT have to go THROUGH anything at all - it goes over!!

. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Well I'll wait and see what Murray's take on it is. I know what mine is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're allowed to be wrong all on your own y'know!! lol

Anyway - if you like to prove it then send me a setup!! Either side, I presume you'll want to use AT guns to prove your point, so I'd suggest you either defend of we have a ME. No gamey ****

[Tero]

In a recent PBEM game I was able to divert my Allied opponent from taking the most vulnerable VL by a rather clever (well, I like to think it was clever ) ploy. The location was behind a speck of woods overlooking the perfect attack terrain with beautyfully open LOS and easily traversible terrain coupled with a ridge line which fouled my LOS to his approach. The only thing going for me was a conveniently placed stone wall which I reconed would act a tank obstacle. I placed a 81mm mortar FO, a Pzschreck team and a HMG team with a Lynx light tank (I had a Hetzer too but I did not want to risk that in such a vulnerable position). I placed my other assest to cover a more wooded route with restricted LOS. There was a village between these two positions and I placed an other FO to act as picked. The entrance to the village was an open slope down I reconed he would not take, being a prudent commander he is. I placed a 50mm ATG on a position further back to overlook that slope just in case

Sure enough my esteemed opponent directed a preliminary bombardment to that speck of woods (on man from the FO-team casualty) and later he pushed some infantry towards that area. I was able stop his infantry for some time with the Lynx but it was KO'd subsequently by a tank hiding behind the fence. That delay gave me time to call in 81mm off-board fire as directed fire to cause casualties to his infantry. Some of his troops reached the far end of the woods. He suffered enough casualties to prevent him from pushing further inside the woods, as he thought it would be filled with infantry.

Meanwhile my main force engaged his other attack coming in through the low-LOS area. I took out a Wasp and a AC with a 75mm IG and beat back some infantry which had been split into half squads. He was able to push a full squad between my two positions but he did not exploit that breach. For a moment it looked tense but he then widrew the squad from its position.

Some pointers based on that engagement:

Deception: sometimes expecting the expected can be utilized to mask your true disposition and how meager your resources really are.

Identifying avenues of advance: sometimes you can use the fact that your enemy may be ruling out the most obvious choice because it is the most obvious choice to your advantage when trying to make ends meet with few assets.

"Tank safe" terrain: rims of a route surrounded by (heavy) woods offer obvious AT ambush sites. And obvious targets for preliminary bombardments. Terrain impassable to tanks is not impassable to infantry. If you opt to set up ambuses remember to cover the flanks of the ambushes so that they do not get ambushed by simultaneous attacks from the front and the flank themselves.

Good LOS works both ways.

[patboivin]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gaffertape:

Looking forward to the article, although I seem to be in the minority: I prefer to defend.

For me, the key is to plan how YOU would attack your own positions if you had about double your force size.

GAFF<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe it's because my first language is French, but this statement is a bit confusing.

Which side would have double the number of troops again? Since you'll be playing both sides...

[patboivin]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The_Capt:

I think you hit on a very important point...What is realistic does not make a very fun game. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with this statement.

The game has a time scale that does not translate well with real life. This is probably inevitable with military gaming, however. We don't play games to replay history so much as to have the impression that we are re-experiencing history. If it's not fun, we won't play.

e.g. During Operation Market Garden, some units stayed put for hours, or rested during hours. Try to model that in a game. People don't want to go through turn after turn of doing nothing.

e.g. units not knowing what will happen next. A forward position lets a whole column pass by because they can't see them in the fog and they don't know what's happening. Yawn.

Also there is this business of the "balanced scenario" -- although I suppose one could argue that fronts stabilize when neither side has a significant advantage over the other, in reality I think fronts were as determined by availability of supplies as anything else.

ASL was better in this respect, in my opinion, because the scenario objectives were more varied. For example it was possible to have scenarios where if you escaped with 30% of your troops, it was considered a victory. Or if you prevented your opponent from overrunning you. Or if yo managed to capture this or that unit.

Games tend to underrepresent the important role that supplies and logistics play in war.

It's always like this though, moving trucks and trains around and protecting lines of supply isn't as captivating as throwing armour and infantry against each other. Pounding Sevastopol with 800mm mortars wouldn't be fun to play either. Neither would 1/2 hour artillery barrages. Thirty turns! What a bore.

Likewise, air support doesn't usually play as big a role in CM as it did historically, in my opinion -- air attacks are sporadic at best. ASL tried to spice things up a bit by introducing bombs and strifers, but they didn't include massive bombing runs or simulated air engagements.

Re. defending, usually 3:1 is the turning point, if I remember correctly. So try to attack with at least 3x as many units as the defender has, otherwise you will both end up exchanging equal casualties. Take into account terrain, experience in that 3:1 ratio.

[Sledge59]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Claymore:

Sorry guys I didn't know I was loved so much.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This particular lurker awaits your every installment with bated breath.

[Ron]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>How about something on Armored warfare -- perhaps your opinions on dealing with AT Guns (finding, killing).

There's no point sending infantry alone to kill the AT guns, you may as well not have tanks since the ATG's will be further back and you'll basically be making the assault with no tank support.

On the other hand, support your infantry with tanks and you'll more than likely end up with a bunch of dead tanks (assuming the opponent knows how to place an ATG well).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think a solution to dealing with AT guns in a well thought out combined arms defense is overly complicated or poses more of a problem than any other factor when attacking. Afterall the attacker is using combined arms as well.

The attacker has a couple advantages over the defender when attacking that can be decisive, namely a larger force at the point of contact and initiative in the form of when and where he will attack. Some things to consider:

A thorough analysis of the map upon setup will reveal many possibilities and options regarding likely enemy dispositions(including his AT gun placement) and likely avenues of approach for the attacker. Things to look for are covered approaches to the expected point of contact that can be covered by your support weapons, engaging the enemy in an area that is/can be isolated from the rest of his force and engaging at a point in time/space that will be decisive. Also consideration for what will happen after the breakthrough is required. A key here is to unhinge the enemy defenses which are generally focused in a certain direction.

Organizing your force into a mutually supporting combined arms one is not just important but vital, that probably goes without saying, oh well That means every element whether infantry, MGs, mortars, AFVs and FOs are all in positions to cover the other, always. They are positioned to be able to bring an overwhelming amount of firepower on the enemy upon contact. This is directly tied to your original terrain analysis. It definitely requires a lot of thought and coordination, needless to say I have never used the Group Move feature in CM.

Using deception and psychology, as tero pointed out in his example, these can't be ignored. Doing the unexpected like pushing armor through heavily forested terrain etc can payoff big time. Every gamer has a few tricks in his bag, but for the attacker an obvious one is the feint with sufficient force to put pressure on the defender.

Momentum and maintaining the initiative, probably the most difficult to grasp and 'see'. When to push forward aggressively? When to pause and regroup? When not to? Every situation here requires a different approach but the key thing is to keep pressure on the enemy, keep them off balance and reacting to you.

Anyways I am straying from the topic in hand here, finding and dealing with AT guns. As an aside, I find the threat of a hidden AT gun is more of a problem then an AT gun itself, for once revealed they are quite easy to destroy.

A typical force make-up(Allied) for the attacking forward element would have two platoons forward(with light mortars), one platoon back, supported by mortars and FOs with good LOS, 2-3 scout cars and/or MG vehicles and 1-3 tanks. Behind them is the rest of the main attacking force. Unless you are playing on a flat, featureless, open map (something I have never seen in any of my games ) then there will always be positions for your tanks/scout cars to cover your infantry in 'relative' safety. I say 'relative' because your opponent probably has some working grey matter to throw a monkey wrench or two into your well laid out plans.

Now there are many possible courses of action and no guarantees as the forward element moves to make contact, I won't go into all of them. Some options if lots of artillery is available is to prep fire likely AT gun positions that might hinder the route of the main attack and/or use smoke to screen them off. A 'trick' is to ready your FOs by continually adjusting their fire without actually calling down any until a target presents itself. 81mm FOs can call in fire quickly but lack enough punch to take out an AT gun reliably, the 3" FOs can I have found.

I try to keep the scout cars/MG vehicles well forward with the infantry so upon contact with the enemy they can provide support immediately. Now the defender probably won't reveal his AT assets initially to take out a scout car, prefering to wait for a juicier target but if he does so then mortars and/or FOs, positioned with a wide LOS, can neutralize it early. The attacking armor is positioned in 'keyholes' to support the forward infantry at select areas, limiting its exposure, always Fast moving to the next overwatch position. Generally(!) what happens is the defending infantry are overwhelmed by superior firepower and the forward element is breaking through before the AT guns ever get a decent armored target if they get one at all. It's usually the forward infantry element with accompanying scout cars that discover the AT guns, the hard way! . At that point the AT guns are acting alone in that area and aren't much of a threat anymore as they can be safely taken out or ignored. Though I have had enemy AT guns stay hidden until infantry are almost on top of them before opening up, a nuisance and may score a quick kill but not crippling. The attacker will take losses executing his plan but they can be minimized. The key is careful planning, coordination, using your forces as a 'whole' and only engaging a part of the defending force at any one time.

So while Stalin's Organ's answer of 'Artillery' is simplistic, it is the truth because I would guess roughly 80% of the time, in all the games I have played, it is artillery(including mortars) that take out AT guns. Easier done in practice than with words but for what it's worth.....

Ron

[jshandorf]

Okay.. I have played a few games and there are two reasons why a anyone will lose.

1) The terrain just sucks for any plan you can think of, OR the terrain fits perfectly into your plan.

2) You HAVE to setup an attack that PREDICTS your attackers advance. If you succeed in this you WILL succeed. If you fail at this you WILL fail. Likewise for the attacker.

It's really just that simple. Too bad we can't discuss this over beers since I could probably get my point across better that way but alas...

Jeff

[jshandorf]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ron:

I don't think a solution to dealing with AT guns in a well thought out combined arms defense is overly complicated or poses more of a problem than any other factor when attacking. Afterall the attacker is using combined arms as well.

The attacker has a couple advantages over the defender when attacking that can be decisive, namely a larger force at the point of contact and initiative in the form of when and where he will attack. Some things to consider:

A thorough analysis of the map upon setup will reveal many possibilities and options regarding likely enemy dispositions(including his AT gun placement) and likely avenues of approach for the attacker. Things to look for are covered approaches to the expected point of contact that can be covered by your support weapons, engaging the enemy in an area that is/can be isolated from the rest of his force and engaging at a point in time/space that will be decisive. Also consideration for what will happen after the breakthrough is required. A key here is to unhinge the enemy defenses which are generally focused in a certain direction.

Organizing your force into a mutually supporting combined arms one is not just important but vital, that probably goes without saying, oh well That means every element whether infantry, MGs, mortars, AFVs and FOs are all in positions to cover the other, always. They are positioned to be able to bring an overwhelming amount of firepower on the enemy upon contact. This is directly tied to your original terrain analysis. It definitely requires a lot of thought and coordination, needless to say I have never used the Group Move feature in CM.

Using deception and psychology, as tero pointed out in his example, these can't be ignored. Doing the unexpected like pushing armor through heavily forested terrain etc can payoff big time. Every gamer has a few tricks in his bag, but for the attacker an obvious one is the feint with sufficient force to put pressure on the defender.

Momentum and maintaining the initiative, probably the most difficult to grasp and 'see'. When to push forward aggressively? When to pause and regroup? When not to? Every situation here requires a different approach but the key thing is to keep pressure on the enemy, keep them off balance and reacting to you.

Anyways I am straying from the topic in hand here, finding and dealing with AT guns. As an aside, I find the threat of a hidden AT gun is more of a problem then an AT gun itself, for once revealed they are quite easy to destroy.

A typical force make-up(Allied) for the attacking forward element would have two platoons forward(with light mortars), one platoon back, supported by mortars and FOs with good LOS, 2-3 scout cars and/or MG vehicles and 1-3 tanks. Behind them is the rest of the main attacking force. Unless you are playing on a flat, featureless, open map (something I have never seen in any of my games ) then there will always be positions for your tanks/scout cars to cover your infantry in 'relative' safety. I say 'relative' because your opponent probably has some working grey matter to throw a monkey wrench or two into your well laid out plans.

Now there are many possible courses of action and no guarantees as the forward element moves to make contact, I won't go into all of them. Some options if lots of artillery is available is to prep fire likely AT gun positions that might hinder the route of the main attack and/or use smoke to screen them off. A 'trick' is to ready your FOs by continually adjusting their fire without actually calling down any until a target presents itself. 81mm FOs can call in fire quickly but lack enough punch to take out an AT gun reliably, the 3" FOs can I have found.

I try to keep the scout cars/MG vehicles well forward with the infantry so upon contact with the enemy they can provide support immediately. Now the defender probably won't reveal his AT assets initially to take out a scout car, prefering to wait for a juicier target but if he does so then mortars and/or FOs, positioned with a wide LOS, can neutralize it early. The attacking armor is positioned in 'keyholes' to support the forward infantry at select areas, limiting its exposure, always Fast moving to the next overwatch position. Generally(!) what happens is the defending infantry are overwhelmed by superior firepower and the forward element is breaking through before the AT guns ever get a decent armored target if they get one at all. It's usually the forward infantry element with accompanying scout cars that discover the AT guns, the hard way! . At that point the AT guns are acting alone in that area and aren't much of a threat anymore as they can be safely taken out or ignored. Though I have had enemy AT guns stay hidden until infantry are almost on top of them before opening up, a nuisance and may score a quick kill but not crippling. The attacker will take losses executing his plan but they can be minimized. The key is careful planning, coordination, using your forces as a 'whole' and only engaging a part of the defending force at any one time.

So while Stalin's Organ's answer of 'Artillery' is simplistic, it is the truth because I would guess roughly 80% of the time, in all the games I have played, it is artillery(including mortars) that take out AT guns. Easier done in practice than with words but for what it's worth.....

Ron<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ron, you are SPOT ON with what you just said. I couldn't agree more. The planning and strategy in planning a defense OR an attack is extremely complicated and if not proceeded with carefully it will lead to what a typical gamer calls "Bad Luck", or possible an "unfair" situation.

Good job,

Jeff

[Claymore]

Adam,

I'm not sure what exactly you mean since this was "how to defend" not "how to attack". However if the latter is what you are interested in the absolute spotting algorithms are what lend considerable help to ferreting out those pesky ATGs.

I'm sure we've all seen Fionn's AAR where he ran half squads hither and yon, through every copse of woods in his path searching. He was looking for far more than ATGs but that is obviously the low tech approach.

First let's assume that you are an attacker and have the following conditions met.

1. FO's in positions of v.good to excellent LOS to defender's MLR. This is a must since you'll need the FO's for support and they have excellent spotting abilities.

2. A couple of VET sharpshooters also out in front. They're not just for defenders you know. Again...they have excellent spotting abilities and intelligence gathering is paramount to succeed in an attack.

3. A light infantry screen out front of your main forces and in skirmishing forward in half squads. These are your tripwire for nasty ambushes and provide lots of Mk.Zero eyeballs to scope out the territory.

4. Lightly armoured recon vehicles. These could be 250/9's or equivalent for the Germans or even a vanilla 250/1. But you need something with a little firepower to assist the skirmishers. For the allies, every nationality has their scout vehicles. You want something that the enemy MUST react to with AT fire, something immune to small arms fire. This fellow should be rearward of the skirmishers and picking his way in short bursts to covered locations. The Germans liked to use PzIIIs to occupy the Soviets in a somewhat similar fashion. If the defender reacts with an ATG we've solved the problem of finding the bugger. If another track appears then you've gained intelligence. Reaction to the track is too varied for a simple strategy to encompass.

4. Remainder of assault forces. Two up, one back. Infantry in the lead, spread wide enough to blunt defender artillery. Armour to the rear...200-300m, but depending very strongly on the terrain.

Perhaps the most important thing for me is that I don't put my tanks in a "bounding overwatch" like conventional tactics suggest. I leave my tanks out of LOS of the skirmisher, light armoured recon, and especially the enemy MLR. Recon is not handled especially accurately in the CMBO timeframe. The exhaustive patrolling and intelligence gathering that goes on before an assault occurs is beyond the scope of its algorithms and architecture.

Most defenders will uncover and take a pop at the recon vehicle...which I know sounds like an ATTRITIONIST type tactic on my part. I temper that by saying that I don't just parade the asset around with the radio blaring and half squad with cheap wine riding on the fenders. The unit must behave like a real weapons platform. If the skirmishers step into an ambush its the light armour that will help them suppress it properly. I usually take the 20mm armed PSW Germans in this case...they are just too juicey for a defender to ignore. For the Americans the Greyhound is the obvious choice...again with the 37mm a defender MUST react.

As for neutralization of the ATG well....

First choice: avoid those avenues covered by the ATG with your armour and ignore it. Eventually you'll probably get close enough with your infantry to suppress/kill it. If the defender has something with a little infantry killing ability, like a Pak40, then you'll probably want to proceed to step two.

Second Choice: Ok...its not a Puppchen or Pack 38 and it's taking the starch out of your infantry as well as your armour. Time to kill it. Avoid the easy answer of applying liberal amounts of artillery to the problem. Let's do the math.

A 75mm/76mm ATG costs 70-80pts and in TREES or WOODS (where you'll most often find the fellows) it usually takes two FULL minutes of light mortar fire to kill an ATG. For the allies that's about half of a FO's total loadout, or about 60pts, while that costs the Germans about 45pts. That's a pretty acceptable trade. You'll miss the smoke rounds later in the midgame but its still acceptable. If all you have though is the

heavier 105's then for my money the Germans just don't have the loadout (limited rounds) to start pissing it away on a lousy ATG. The Americans and Brits with their heavier mortars/artillery and bigger loadouts (100 rounds for 105) might consider it still a fair trade. My advice...if its an real pain in the ass and tasks you then pop it with some light mortars. Adjust your spotting so that half-min salvos fall on the ATG and you'll probably get an economic kill. Otherwise proceed to step #3.

Third Option. Use combined arms. Pop the ATG with on-board mortars. Send dismounted infantry in assault. Put you MMGs on him. Drop some light artillery/mortars on him. Every little bit of FP will push him towards going to earth. Then when you've done this for at least a FULL MINUTE...bring up your tracks in position so that they have narrow LOS to the ATG an paste the fellow with DF HE. Rapid fire 37mm from the M8 can rapidly cause the crew to abandon the ATG, so that the light armoured recon with the skirmishers can provide the DF. For the Germans the light 20mms don't have the punch but they have a very rapid ROF and should do the trick nicely. If your light armoured recon is already hors de combat by this time then you'll have to risk you're higher priced assets to the rear.

Obviously the above depends VERY strongly on the terrain and weather you're attacking in. I just finished a snowy Panther 76 attack against a stubborn German defender and eeked out a 10pt win using very similar tactics. The map was open, choked with snow and offered little space for movement. I kept my high priced tanks in cover until his ATGs unmasked. Supressed the hell out of them with MG, on-board mortars, and small arms and then brought up the track for the kill. It did well but I was also lucky.

Cheers

Murray

[Phillies Phan]

This has got to be the most informative thread I've stumbled upon in a year. I love that you gentlemen are explaining the reasons why things are the way they are. I've used trial and error thus far with defending. There was more error than trial though.

Thanks for the effort and committment you all have put into this thread. Perhaps if I study your words diligently, I might win a PBEM.

[Chupacabra]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Claymore:

A wise German (for 2pts name him) once said "He who defends everything, defends nothing<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Frederick the Great. What do I win?

[Txema]

Murray, again excellent advise !!!

It would be great if you could continue with your "how to defend" posts.

What about the remaining support weapons like the PAW, FLAK and MGs ?

Thank you very much !!!

Txema

[Claymore]

When last we met I was trying to cover the support units. I've decided instead to jump a little ahead and try to delve into my thoughts on the proper use of infantry and combined arms. I am NOT professing to be God's gift to CMBO (witness my run of bad luck against TT lately...and that's all it is dammit!) but I have some small success.

First, some General rules for Defense using Infantry

#0 - Primary Golden Rule

ALWAYS FIGHT FROM POSITIONS WHICH HAVE BETTER COVER AND CONCEALMENT THAN THE ATTACKERS!

Don't setup positions and ambushes where you'll both be slugging it out in the heavy woods if it can be avoided. Don't count entirely on defender's foxholes to give you an additional advantage. If he is advancing through TREES, make sure you pop him from positions inside WOODS.

1. Never place your forces inside of buildings during the setup phase.

Buildings are always going to be there, whereas a foxhole in a vital location can only be created once. Place your infantry on the ground in the setup phase and then move them into the buildings (if that's what you want) during Turn 1.

2. Always have two foxhole complexes for each platoon to fight from, primary and backup.

Split your squads during the setup phase and place half of them in what you believe will be the primary main line of resistance (MLR). Then put the other half platoon in a fall-back position.

3. Always plan for the enemy to pound your MLR with artillery before his forces arrive.

That means don't put your men in their MLR foxholes, weather an prepratory artillery barrage, and then expect them to defend against dismounted enemy infantry. What I suggest is to group your platoons in their fall-back foxhole complex (see above) at first. Allow the enemy to pound your MLR and then rush forward to occupy the MLR when the prep fire ceases. Alternately you can allow your platoon to occupy HEAVY BUILDINGS at or near the MLR during the prep fire, especially if the incoming fire is 150mm and larger.

4. LIGHT BUILDINGS are horrible cover

I've never had any success putting my infantry inside LIGHT BUILDINGS unless surrounded by pristine grasslands. Usually its much better to find a dip or relief feature that you can incorporate into your MLR. Unfortunately since CMBO only has unimproved foxholes without any overhead cover, under artillery fire most infantry will break and run for TREES, WOODS, or BUILDINGS instead of their holes. That's why following rule #3 above is very important. If a LIGHT BUILDING occupies a position that is a cornerstone of your defense then consider reducing it to RUBBLE with some DF HE. Gamey? Perhaps...but I look upon this as an "improved" defensive position...SOP real world infantry tactics that can only be mimicked in CMBO thusly.

5a. REG infantry make good static defenders.

You can save a lot of money purchasing REG forces. They should be spending 80% of their time fighting from positions with better cover and concealment than the attackers, so they need not be ubermen. Note: I don't advocate using the term "static" interchangeably with "expendable" or "fight to the death". A reasonable SWAG (if there is such a thing!) is that a platoon of REG defenders will likely withstand about 3-4 turns of an assault before being suppressed beyond usefulness. An experienced opponent timing his preparatory artillery barrage and combining his forces into a schwerepunkt can combine small arms fire, DF HE, and support weapons to easily shrink this timescale down to just 1 turn!

5b. VET infantry make a good reaction force

It is likely that "mini breakthroughs" of your MLR will occur during the course of battle and you'll be called upon to plug that gap. Overlapping and mutually supporting fields of fire can slow the enemy breakthrough but someone may have to counterattack at some point. For this reason I like to have my reaction force being of greater experience than those manning the frontline foxholes. It is likely that the reaction force will have to experience enemy fire as they advance to the "hole" and it is important that they don't break and run before the battle is even joined.

5c. VET (or better) infantry are satisfactory (good) as an ambush force.

Depending upon the size of the game you may want to send out in front of your MLR a force to ambush the attackers before they ever reach your MLR. In larger games where you can withstand the loss of a platoon it is best used by the less experienced player. If planning this type of action then I'd suggest you overwatch the ambush zone with a light mortar FO. Have the FO spot HE rounds near the ambush location but within their "GREEN" range for respotting. Once the ambush is triggered hopefully you'll get a full turn of small-arms fire and mortar fire on the enemy. Then quickly use the WITHDRAW command and change the mortar over to smoke rounds. You see, after the ambush is triggered it is likely that your force can be quickly pinned, overwhelmed and destroyed by the enemy. You would prefer to cause more casualties than you receive so preserving the ambush force is of utmost importance. An ambush upsets your opponent's timetable and generally messes with his mind. Just one such event can ratchet up his/her stress levels. What you want is for them to "overplan" every movement from there on, consuming precious turns protecting themselves from another ambush that you have likely not even planned upon. Ask yourself, if it were available, how many points would you pay to shave a turn or two from the clock?

6. Plan to defend in depth.

Just like in rule #2 where your platoons have two defensive foxhole complexes you'll want to apply the rule to all other assets at your disposal. A sharp and seemingly inpenetrable MLR will fall to pieces fairly rapidly went breached in one location and then your opponent turns and begins to roll up your flank. You need to think of what will happen WHEN your MLR gets punched through and plan for it. A few support weapons or a backup platoon in good overwatching cover can blunt a breakthrough long enough to catch your breath and allow you to reorganize. Don't believe that this equates DEPTH with ATTRITION. Don't sacrificing your MLR troops to the last man and think a second line of defense then picks up the pieces...that unhistorical, inefficient, and lazy. I'll talk more about this later.

6. Learn to use the WITHDRAW command.

It's a great tool for getting REG forces that are suppressed the "hell out of Dodge" and back into command and control (C&C). Don't issue RUN commands and expect them to weather the next 30-45 seconds of incoming small arms and DF HE fire, because they'll probably die without ever getting to their feet. Take the morale hit and casualty losses and use the WITHDRAW instead!

7. Attacking back across your MLR is unwise.

If the enemy attack is repulsed at the MLR sometimes the unwary and overly aggressive can attempt to counterattack back into what was originally "no man's land" during the setup phase. It is a difficult thing to gauge how weakened an enemy really is. A careful assessment of the known casualties and likely initial force strength is required before any such action is taken. All of your thinking to date has been purely defensive and to switch over to the offense is not a simple task. For most I would advise that time spent consolidating defenses shows much better sense.

8. Even when on the defensive...always try and maintain the initiative during the battle.

Save little surprises for your opponent during the time when his forces begin to approach your MLR, don't try and spring everything at once. For example in a defense I'm running now (Me: British using Short-75s against Germans using Panther 76) we've followed the following sequence of actions through successive turns:

T0. Allowed his infantry/armour to approach within 200m of the MLR

T1. Dropped HE for one turn (killing infantry and HTs)

T2. Opened up with 2 x 6pdrs and 1 x 40mm from 500-600m killing 5 tanks in one turn and switched HE to smoke rounds. Smoke screen in place before end of turn.

T3. Put ATGs into HIDING and retargeted smoke on both the ambushed enemy and towards his rear (prevents overwatching Panthers from using DF HE on my ATGs)

T4. Brought up a platoon of infantry and a Crocodile Tank from the SLR to MLR. Engaged whatever enemy infantry had struggled forward to the MLR by this time.

T5. Withdrew infantry and Crocodile to SLR, continued to smoke MOST of his overwatching tanks. Brought another Crocodile up into a flanking position (@90 degrees) and took his tanks under fire from side.

In each case I did something on the next turn which was "orthogonal" to the previous turn's actions. My opponent reactions were then out of phase and ineffective against what I did the next turn.

Example: He ordered his overwatching Panthers to DF HE my ATGs (from about 800m) only to have LOS broken by my smoke which started arriving within 30sec.

I'm not out of the woods in this game yet but I've popped 2 platoons of infantry, 5 tanks and at least one HT at the cost of two 6pdrs. More than a fair trade.

9. Gamey Tactic #1: Use the fact that MGs don't abandon their weapons (fix in CM2 please!) and that they are DF HE magnets.

Emplacing MGs 100m (60m) to the rear of the German (Allied) infantry works extremely well and is good sound tactics in any army. However there is a slight quirk in CMBO which you can use if completely unsporting. Assume that once your opponent's forces uncover your defensive strongpoint he will attempt to bring DF HE on the your more lethal infantry opposing his forces (closer, more FP). Unfortunately for him/her when his forces see the MG the TacAI can't help but re-target his tank's DF from your infantry to the MG. Even a REG MG can withstand an incredible amount firepower before it is forced to break and run. Sometimes during the heat of battle this can be turned to your benefit.

Defensive Formations

Before emplacing your infantry spend some time looking at the map from View #3 or #4 from your opponent's side. After looking at the map for a good 5 min you'll probably start to notice two or three likely avenues that he might use to approach the VLs.

Important features like:

A. a hodge-podge of TREES, WOODS, and BUILDINGS leading up to the VLs that his infantry can leapfrog through under good cover.

B. a ravine or drift in "no man's land" through which forces of all types are masked from your view during their approach

Look for the wide open lanes that lead to your VLs. Just as routes which offer cover have a high probability of being employed, those routes without cover have a very low probability. It might be my scientific training but when I look at a map it becomes in my mind's eye a contour map of probabilities. Areas of high and low probability shaded and standing out from each other, giving strong clues as to my opponent's strategies. If you've done as I've suggested elsewhere and chosen a subset of VLs which you can defend giving mutual support and defensive depth it's likely that your opponent will not be able to surprise you.

1. Small arms fire from an extended arc is more effective than from bunched forces.

Try and experiment with the "shape" of your MLR and SLR such that the enemy will experience incoming fire from many different angles. A good rule of thumb is to emplace your infantry units at the limit of the command radius of the platoon leader.

2. Optimal ambush range for all forces is about 45-60m. Plan accordingly.

3. Don't put your foxhole complex in and around the VL. You're just begging to have an artillery barrage dumped on you. Instead put a platoon or two on the VL's flanks such that enemy artillery on the VL will be ineffective and you'll be able to ambush his infantry as they rush the VL.

4. The Two-Up-One-Back (TUOB) formation is not as useful as emplacing your infantry such that all squads can provide fire equally to the ambush. You'll want to achieve maximum casualties during the engagement time and then disengage if the enemy is not repulsed. Support units to the rear (MGs, Guns, etc...) can provide the covering fire for this movement.

5. Infantry should be emplaced on the reverse slope whenever tactically possible. Benefits as per previous postings.

6. It's not likely that AT infantry units (zooks, PIATs, or Pshreks) will survive in the front lines with the infantry. Since most enemy tanks will lag 200-300m rearward of the infantry it is unlikely that the AT infantry unit would even get a tank in range before being overrun by enemy infantry. I suggest then putting zooks etc... on the flanks of the main action only to uncover when the enemy armour comes into range.

Well....that's not a complete listing but enough for now. I'll continue very shortly with the infantry and other overlooked support units.

I'm also chewing on Adam's question and trying to put it into something legible.

Cheers

Murray

[ 06-18-2001: Message edited by: Claymore ]

[The_Capt]

A quick question while we are on the topic,

Has anybody out there tried a "mobile defence"?

I am talking about a smaller force mounted in HTs with armour in support. You would put out a coy or so dismounted forward to feel out the enemy and then hit him in a localized area hard and fast either in a hasty defence or outright c-attack. You could team this force up with arty to stage your "hits".

It has the advantage of being able to rapidly hit the en in an area of your choosing and force the local force ratio to 1:1 or better. Once the hit is over you remount and pull back for a second hit.

I guess the fundemantal problem I have with the classic method is that you do not have enough resources to do it. Engineer works are too expensive and one cannot mass armour for a c-attack for the same reason. It may be better to fight a traditional "Covering Force Battle" rather than a slugfest when on simply cannot apply the required force to the frontage given.

Just a thought.

[argie]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The_Capt:

A quick question while we are on the topic,

Has anybody out there tried a "mobile defence"?

I am talking about a smaller force mounted in HTs with armour in support. You would put out a coy or so dismounted forward to feel out the enemy and then hit him in a localized area hard and fast either in a hasty defence or outright c-attack. You could team this force up with arty to stage your "hits".

It has the advantage of being able to rapidly hit the en in an area of your choosing and force the local force ratio to 1:1 or better. Once the hit is over you remount and pull back for a second hit.

I guess the fundemantal problem I have with the classic method is that you do not have enough resources to do it. Engineer works are too expensive and one cannot mass armour for a c-attack for the same reason. It may be better to fight a traditional "Covering Force Battle" rather than a slugfest when on simply cannot apply the required force to the frontage given.

Just a thought.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have do something in the lines of that in a PBEM... I purchased British troops and set 2 Strongpoints with 1 Bofors, 1 6" and 1 Infantry Plt as skirmish line with a double foxhole line in front of it. My MLR was covered by 4 or 6 (I don't remember exactly) Vickers, and I have another Plt with all the 2" in the farest flank. The mobile force was that Plt plus 5 Sherman V and a Daimler and 2 Humbers. I tried to use the Shermans in pairs to plug holes by firepower and to get local superiority... Was really fun

Was a QB, but I did my force purchase thinking as if I was the spearhead of a British Tank Brigade (1 Infantry Coy + 1 Tank Plt + 1 Scout Unit + Support + Arty) being counterattacked in positions ahead from his Div. For that, I didn't purchase any fortification.

I lost the strongpoints around the 2 turns I used them, and from there was all a battle of maneouvre: Infantry Plts falling back, FOs runnung from side to side, exposed, to get LOS and tanks running like crazies to keep all together

[Lars]

Claymore said:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>As for neutralization of the ATG well....

First choice: avoid those avenues covered by the ATG with your armour and ignore it. Eventually you'll probably get close enough with your infantry to suppress/kill it. If the defender has something with a little infantry killing ability, like a Pak40, then you'll probably want to proceed to step two.

Second Choice: Ok...its not a Puppchen or Pack 38 and it's taking the starch out of your infantry as well as your armour. Time to kill it. Avoid the easy answer of applying liberal amounts of artillery to the problem.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wouldn’t masking the firing arc of the ATG with the cheapest smoke available, rushing your attacking force through its covered zone while masked, and then leaving it behind alive but useless work just as well? Essentially what you would do to a bunker.

What are your thoughts on the heavier fortifications?

I have found the MG bunker too fragile, a Sherman will usually take it out quickly once found. A MG in a building or woods is cheaper and can be relocated. The 88mm bunker is overkill, and although it can certainly ruin an attackers day, I would rather take a Tiger and have a mobile pillbox instead. The 75mm bunker seems to be the best all around choice.

If buying a 75mm bunker, I buy a few of the 50mm ATG and spread them out at a oblique angle but covering the same field of fire as the bunker. Site the bunker on a area the attacking armor must pass through on the way to the flags. When the attacking armor comes into the kill sack, the Tac AI will concentrate on the bunker and ignore the ATGs. This gives the ATGs multiple side shots and keeps them alive and unsupressed longer. What you really want to do as a defender is put your opponent on the horns of a dilemma. Give him two choices, both equally bad.

[ 06-22-2001: Message edited by: Lars ]

[Panzer Leader]

Lars that's an interesting theory, but in over half the games I've played as a defender, the Attacker usually has MULTIPLE routes towards the victory locations. To my mind, it is a waste of a good amount of points to buy a bunker AT ALL since the risk of being handed territory where it cannot overlook ALL potential routes of advance.

Much better to spend the money on 3-5 guns with a much wider potential for defense.

Not to mention the fact that the attacker ALWAYs has abundant arty for smoke, and I think it would be a surprise if the bunker ever scored its worth in points, much less 1.75 its worth.

Simply put, bunkers are too much a risk factor, in my opinion in a Quick battle.

In a canned defense, they have all sorts of wonderful possibilities, but I think their biggest advantage is the time factor. A bunker causes the assault to stall while the attacker focuses all his energy on destroying it. IMO a bunker will ALWAYS be a prime target for the attacker, and while it may not take its tally in cost/destroyed it can more than make up for it in lost time for the atacker.

[Lars]

There are always multiple routes to the flags but usually a open space in front of them that the attacker must cross. It is a risk to buy a bunker since you might get a map that is unsuited for it, but it’s actually less of a risk than for any other large gun.

What you are buying with a bunker is a large gun that is damn near impossible to suppress and protected. Placed in a good location, one bunker can completely stall an Allied attack. If the Allies bring some arty to smoke or destroy it, all the better. That’s arty that’s not falling on your infantry. The attacker will run out of arty eventually and that bunker will still be there. Compare the cost, it is a trade a defender will take anyday. If you can get a tank or two with the bunker, that’s the icing on the cake.

Here’s a tip for you, site the bunker so it also covers the flags. Now it can influence the end game and must be dealt with. In addition, do not site it so that it covers everything. LOS works both ways. Place it behind something, a building, hill or trees. A bunker that pops up in a unsuspected location can really give an attacker fits. For real fun, buy two, and interlace the fields of fire. If the attacker cannot neutralize them and the bunker covers where he must go, he’s screwed.

What you are playing for on defense is time. Time wasted can never be regained. Anything that throws the attacker off balance is to your advantage. There is always somewhere you can put a bunker to good use. If bunkers were totally worthless, nobody would build the things at all.

[ 06-22-2001: Message edited by: Lars ]