Take your seats, the virtual classroom is in session!

[ScottDT]

Greetings,

I thought it might be fun to discuss tactics and other stuff while following a CMBB game as it unfolds, sort of like a class on wargaming. So, with that in mind, I created a 1250 point CMBB QB. I command the Germans attacking a larger (+10%) Soviet force in Finland. It is mid-day, clear, freezing, no breeze. It is an Axis probe on a small town. The set-up with my initial orders can be seen in the following screenshot:

When I play against the AI, I always go for a wide set-up. Usually, the computer likes to put all its eggs in one basket. As a result, while one of my thrusts may hit a brick wall, one of the other attacks usually makes progress and then can flank the enemy strongpoint. Comments? Suggestions? Opinions? (For example, how does this strategy of mine compare with actual Axis battle doctrine?)

After we discuss this question for a bit, I will submit another phase of the game, etc. Hopefully we should get some good discussions going!

[GRUMLIN]

Nice screenie. However, I do feel that in CMBB the increased effect of defending weapons means that if you advance across the whole front against any human player, you will get chewed up. I tend to favour a refused flank attack...overwhelm the defenders by 3 or 4 to one in one area - hopefully one that is out of LOS of other areas of the map - and then wheel to roll the line up.

Anyone else?

Grum

[JasonC]

Why don't you describe your force to us, and explain how you "tasked" its elements into your 3 KGs and reserve? Also, where are the objectives, and what analysis did you do of the terrain and routes into the village?

There is nothing wrong with trying a broad front to probe for weakness. You then hold up or pull back, rather than pressing, in the places where you encounter serious opposition, until a flanking group is in place to help.

It sometimes helps to have a "second line" behind each advancing group, though, so that part of each force can still maneuver after contact. The foremost guys tend to pin rapidly. You can do that even with a single probing platoon by putting 1-2 half squads out in front of the main body.

The idea of walking through a QB right here is a fine one, by the way.

[GRUMLIN]

Looking at this again I think that Kampfgruppe 2 in the middle is going to get its arse chewed off in all that open ground. I would have thrown it up the left flank as a follow on to the first kampf.

$0.002

G

[narren2002]

I think this will get nasty...

BTW...just what paint program are you useing in this...and where can i get a copy of it?????

[ScottDT]

Originally posted by GRUMLIN:

Nice screenie. However, I do feel that in CMBB the increased effect of defending weapons means that if you advance across the whole front against any human player, you will get chewed up. I tend to favour a refused flank attack...overwhelm the defenders by 3 or 4 to one in one area - hopefully one that is out of LOS of other areas of the map - and then wheel to roll the line up.

Anyone else?

Grum

Interesting point. Against the AI, my wide deployment tactic seems to work 9 out of 10 times. Against humans, it has generated 1 win, 2 losses, and 1 tie (CMBO) and 1 probable win in CMBB (to date). I like the flexibility it offers. When you stack up units on one flank, you can get trapped rather quickly if you hit the enemies strong point. I usually keep a reserve group as a swing unit to reinforce the area with greatest chance of success.

[ScottDT]

Originally posted by JasonC:

Why don't you describe your force to us, and explain how you "tasked" its elements into your 3 KGs and reserve? Also, where are the objectives, and what analysis did you do of the terrain and routes into the village?

There is nothing wrong with trying a broad front to probe for weakness. You then hold up or pull back, rather than pressing, in the places where you encounter serious opposition, until a flanking group is in place to help.

It sometimes helps to have a "second line" behind each advancing group, though, so that part of each force can still maneuver after contact. The foremost guys tend to pin rapidly. You can do that even with a single probing platoon by putting 1-2 half squads out in front of the main body.

The idea of walking through a QB right here is a fine one, by the way.

First, my forces are:

1 StuH42 (center)

1PSW 221 (center)

1 H-39 Hotchkiss (center)

1 105mm spotter(left flank)

1 sharpshooter (center)

2 81mm mortar teams (one on each flank)

1 panzerchreck (center)

1 flamethrower (center)

3 platoons of Gebirgjager 43 (one left, right, center)

3 platoons Recon 43 (I believe left, right, center)

1 Pioneer Platoon (veterans--in reserve)

assorted MG42 teams (at least one left, right, center)

The objectives are where each of the arrows point.

I don't do too much studying of the terrain from ground level prior to deployment, I pretty much use the above ground view as seen in the above picture. I only zoom in to resolve specific LOS issues.

No special tasking of the units were involved other than the Pioneers in reserve as I figure Vet units would be best to act as the decisive blow once the most promising attack was determined. I also placed all the vehicles in the back center as the middle terrain seemed the best open terrain for armor. Finally, I put the 105mm spotter on the left flank as that part of the terrain offered the highest hill for best possible spotting of the town.

Thanks for the compliment on this wargaming classroom idea of mine! I always thought it was a shame that wargamers never invest as much study time into their hobby as chess players often do. That is something that needs to be rectified.

[ScottDT]

Originally posted by GRUMLIN:

Looking at this again I think that Kampfgruppe 2 in the middle is going to get its arse chewed off in all that open ground. I would have thrown it up the left flank as a follow on to the first kampf.

$0.002

G

I thought once we crossed that open patch, there would be sufficient cover to reach the town via all those buildings.

[ScottDT]

Originally posted by ladie_from_hell:

I think this will get nasty...

BTW...just what paint program are you useing in this...and where can i get a copy of it?????

I am using JASC Paint Shop Pro, a free trial version that came with my Dell. Nifty program.

[ScottDT]

Turn 2:

Okay I went ahead and generated one more turn. One thing happened: my KampfGruppe 2 took fire from some sort of AT-gun located between the center and right victory flags. There is a tall building there next to a road, and behind the building is a patch of woods on a hill. The gun is there. It only wounded one MG42 team, while causing the rest of the KG to go to ground. We are still making forward progress.

Question: how to handle this? I have ordered my StuH42 to back up further out of sight (a precaution, he didn't come under fire), while ordering my Hotchkiss to make a (suicide?) run to the left (towards the fence). I have also ordered my 105mm spotter to call fire on the gun's position but that is going to take 5 minutes. What else can I do? If the hotchkiss makes it, I made order my StuH to follow the same path. Otherwise I will need to keep in back until that gun is knocked out of action.

Oh, my PSW is bogged for the moment behind a house.

Okay, looking forward to some thoughts. I'll try to have a new picture later this week.

[Sidewinder]

try and get an 81mm into los (or commanding hq to spot) and call fire in on the gun with that, if possible.

[Eden Smallwood]

Great idea!!

I've prodded the forum a number of times for more voyeuristic social events...

How about posting your cme files? Not much I can really get from the pic:

Three Red Lines: Well, those lines look good, but what do they really mean? IE, although you've labelled three separate Kampfgruppen (is that the plural?), in reality you still have a uniform distribution of troops across the front... Is it more than a symbolic distinction? I don't see three separate tactical approaches being taken, as you're latest post seems to verify. Which is fine, really, as the map could be said to have a wide approach, but why the terminology?

Compared to me, (and I admit to not being a grog- shoot me down if this is ignorant, but you asked), I see that you are confident in your motion across the field, whereas I always consider myself, (or I try to pretend to consider myself), in hostile territory at the beginning. Or more accurately, "at any time" territory, and I would already be using overwatch leap & bounds by the second half of your paths there. Probably just anal retentive of me, but it seems more realistic that way.

Another difference I notice is that I would probably have sent that SS (I would have bought a few) a little bit ahead of the pack as recon, with Move To Contact/Hide through woods. They're usually pretty safe that way, and the only way to catch a TC with an SS is before they're buttoned up, so...

Similar reasoning for Pioneers; they make me think short range, especially those satchels- how nice it would be to have them at the front, with some greater chance of using their stuff. In the case of playing SP, the defending AI often has the tendency to send it's armor out from good defensive positions, right past your waiting pios, but then that's really a gamey tactic, so let's not go there. Still, better a Rifle platoon as Reserve- bring to contact sooner/farther.

For a force of that size I would have traded some men for more arty.

Notice that the map is possibly a bit unfair to the AI- you have rich cover on the whole front until you are standing right in front of the flag! It will take eons, but you can jump from house to house...

Two or three HTs with the infinite HE capacity would have been ideal for a couple of cases: one, you find enemy in buildings- area fire & forget two, you need the cover of a downed building smoke cloud to advance.

If enemy is rich in armor, say a bazillion light tanks, the buildings may be tough for you. If rich in ATGs, you will hopefully suck them out of hiding when he sees your many eyes taking cover in many buildings, IFF you have not already teased him with your own light armor first.

My vote, (rhetorically, I mean), is the same as always- armor is not called until the infantry run into something they cannot surpasse on their own. Might be especially suitable here, since you have such a good chance of discovering all ATG assets on foot.

It's getting late- am I making any sense? Or just two cents?

Eden

[Fionn]

Wide front deployments CAN work. They need a bit of finesse at times but they certainly can work.

I regularly do things this way against humans ( although I'd put FAR less up front in the first echelon and have very strong 2nd and 3rd echelons following up some distance from the 1st wave ( IOW a classic Soviet "wave" attack) with a great deal of success. Don't bother playing against the AI much... I think it teaches you bad habits.

[Cogust]

Intereseting thread and concept. Would anyone be interested in hotseat variant of this concept. I can start up a hotseat battle and start two threads for discussion, one discussing the German side and one discussing the Russian side before each turn. The orders could then be issued through some kind of vote (e-mails to me) and I could process each turn once a week or so and post the results for discussion again and so on.

This would be a kind of interactive AAR where everyone could participate in the discussion and it could be very valuable to newbies to see decisions and reasonings by veteran players and jump in to give their own thoughts on the matter as well. Well, would anyone be interested in this?

[jjelinek]

Can you email me a copy of the saved game file so I can get a closer look at that map?

[Eden Smallwood]

Originally posted by Cogust:

The orders could then be issued through some kind of vote (e-mails to me) and I could process each turn once a week or so and post the results for discussion again and so on.

A great concept, but I think it has a fatal flaw in the 'two threads' area. This is internet, ergo, we have dweebs- scout's honor doesn't quite suffice, I'm afraid.

But this is a rich vein of thought. How about something similar: how about an SP game, either against the AI or against some anonymous Vet whom we *can* trust not to peek. Then, perhaps we would "vote" for the next move, or perhaps this: we ( we quasi players ), we each download the cme file, we each make *our own* move, then send it back to the moderator. Moderator executes each, decides which has the greatest integrity, then runs that move (must be run again, to be fair), and posts the result, repeat & rinse.

Well, would anyone be interested in this?

Whatever they may say now, I think this forum is loath to miss a good argument- they will come.

Eden

[Cogust]

Eden,

Yeah I know that you can't trust the average internet user any farther than you can throw him, but my point was that you could participate in the discussion on BOTH sides and follow the action from both sides of the game.

It might be pointed out that this is flawed from the intelligence aspect as both sides would know where each side is and so on, but the aim is getting new players to see what other players are thinking.

Your idea of battling a veteran player that won't peek is very interesting though, any volunteers? I will try to get hold of a veteran player willing to do this and I will start my own thread later on when I'm ready to go.

Sorry for hijacking the thread somewhat, please continue with the lesson.

[HarryInk]

Nice pic and a cool idea. Looking forward to more discussion and the progress of the game.

I'd be going with Kelly, etc.. I'd probably throw a single platoon over the entire front in 1/2 squads to test the waters and approach the serious work in waves, having deployed them in rally points along my expected routes of attack.

But then again, I haven't played BB seriously yet and don't know the new power of HMGs. maybe a strung out platoon would be ratsh@# as recon and just end up suppressed? Still, if they picked the position of the HMGs, you could then use the tank HE to open up the can o' worms.

[HarryInk]

PS. Why rush tanks about so early on? The comment that armor waits to handle what the resilient infantry can't overcome is a good maxim. See how the s'kicker's go for a while before starting a derby and giving away clues to your enemy.

[sengyo]

I'd like to get my two cents in on the double thread suggestion. As a relative newbie -just have a dozen battles in CMBO under my belt- I would greatly benefit from reading the veterans' line of thought when they "really" don't know what is coming their way. I think the FOW and the technique to deal with it constitute the core of the game and it would be ashamed to lose it to some less than honest posts.

OTOH I strongly support the idea of a "trusworthy" vet taking the other side and sticking to a single thread.

Great idea anyway! I'll sure follow this one closely.

sengyo

[Cpl Carrot]

Well I'm not sure if I'm a veteran, but I humbly put my name forward as the poor sod you guys can gang up on.

I would ask that we (if I'm accepted) fight on a premade map so to make it a little fairer.

Cpl Carrot

[ January 25, 2003, 12:22 AM: Message edited by: Cpl Carrot ]

[JasonC]

OK, a whole bunch of stuff to comment on here. Keep it slow, or the game will run away from the analysis.

First off, on the proposal to send a half dozen half squads each on their lonesome trapsing through hill and dale, poking under every bush, until somebody shoots at them - it was a gamey way to do recon in CMBO but it won't work very well in CMBB. It is better to have a half squad step out a modest distance ahead of a whole platoon.

Yes, the half squads can easily get pinned by whoever shoots at them. But that isn't the half of it. In addition, if the fire is at any appreciable range, you won't locate the shooter with a pinned half squad. You will just get a "sound contact" in some general area. Also, when you give an out-of-command half squad a whole bunch of waypoints to go through, the command delay will rise to 2 minutes or more, even when not under fire - because each added waypoint now adds to the command delay.

The idea of sending eyes before you send the main body is sound. You just do it differently - and more realistically. Have a lead platoon on each line of advance you expect to move along. It "steps off" first. Break one squad into teams, and send one or both ahead of the rest of the platoon, using "move to contact" as their movement order. The rest of the platoon follows a half minute behind or so (by using pause e.g.), using "move".

That way you have a platoon's worth of eyes and ears nearby. When the point men are fired at, they will halt and go to ground. The rest of the platoon will continue to advance, and like a not will draw abreast of the point by the end of the minute of contact. Presto, a fire base to ID and then engage whatever the "point" discovered.

If you follow a full minute behind, the point is more vunerable, but the rest of the platoon will still be a ways back from the point of contact the next time you get to give them orders. The foremost men draw most of the fire, so the main body should still be able to maneuver.

This should be the ordinary way you "travel" with infantry, before contact has been made. Platoons following behind others can just use "move" and keep in the wake of the leading ones. Note that "medium" speed teams will keep up with infantry using "move", and the men will not tire. Slow teams will lag behind, however.

Even a half squad scout will see enemy vehicles and bunkers at long range, as soon as a clean LOS line between them is reached. And if the defenders are holding their fire until you are close (hide or short covered arcs), then naturally the half squad will locate them when it walks into them.

Ranged weapons like MGs are, however, much harder to pin down as to exact location. If you have a sizable body of infantry within about 200 yards and they are firing, you will generally locate them. At 400m or so, you can only count on a "sound contact", even with many eyes. Bigger caliber guns can be spotted much farther away once they fire. But the "if shooting, then seen" behavior of CMBO is history.

I have many more comments on the opening, which I will discuss in a seperate post after this one. I just wanted to address scouting methods first.

[CharonJr]

Hello,

I really like both of the ideas here (virtual classroom and the 2nd virtual classroom with a vet playing OPFOR).

I don't really like the plan/setup for this current engagement, since I think some closer inspection of the terrain might have led to a somewhat different approach. But considering that this is supposed to provide some valueable lessons this is fine anyway

Since I am still only getting started in the "art" of mapreading I would have appreciated a closer look at this topic.

Considering this what I would really appreciate for this kind of lessons would be a possibility to have the map available for download somewhere in order to take a closer look at the terrain and some comments about this. This would be even more important for the lesson vs. the vet IMO.

Great idea...

[Eden Smallwood]

Originally posted by JasonC:

The rest of the platoon follows a half minute behind or so (by using pause e.g.), using "move".

Why not Move To Contact for (pretty much) everybody? Assuming they are in cover of some kind, with MtC the whole platoon naturally arrives where they 'should'. Also, Move has a (minor?) morale penalty when contact is made, and of course the unit will continue "trying" to Move to it's endpoint even after contact is made, and is (probably) taking fire.

Unless crossing open ground, what advantage does Move have over MtC for the remainder of the platoon?

Eden

[JasonC]

The advantage of "move" for the rest of the platoon is precisely that they will catch up with the "point", or nearly so, by the end of the first minute of the ambush. Often the point is ambushed by somebody with a limited LOS, because he has just stepped into their field of view (crossed a crest, came around a bend, etc). The rest of the platoon often can't see the shooter at the time of the first trigger pull. And the rest of the platoon is the "overwatch" that has to shoot you out of the ambush, by suppressing the enemy.

If everyone just uses "move to contact", your main body will go to ground unambushed, it is true. If you are defensive, it is a tenative advance, you are expecting to lose any firefight that occurs, you may want that behavior. But it is a bad habit to get into, advancing when you expect to lose the firefight on contact. You want to murder the guys you run across, not flinch. You are advancing to get LOS and kill the enemy, not avoid him. If you want to avoid him you sit still.