Rubble in trenches. 88s in 41

[DavidFields]

Oh....spoiler...spoiler.

Again, to old scenarios:

Gefechtsaufklaerung. Eh...trenches under buildings? Is the cover/concealment totally from the trench? Or is there an additive effect? And if I "rubble" the church (which would be SOP for me in this situation) what are the effects?

(A tactical smart scenario. One takes a reasonably historical mix of german units, and with reasonably historical tactics obtains a good result. No tricks! What a concept!

Iron Roadblock:

Were 88's purposely used in June, 1941 against KVs? I have no criticism here. This is a training scenario. I just wish to understand what the reality of the time was.

[Mudhugger]

Iron Roadblock:

I just happened to be reading an account of this in a DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PAMPHLET. NO. 20-269.

First, the Germans moved up a battery of 50mm AT guns and started firing around 600 yards away with no luck. The KV found their location and KO'd the whole battery. They then brought up an 88, the KV let them come until they started maneuvering the gun into position and then fired killing many crew and knocking the 88 in a ditch. That night, engineers crawled to the KV and planted explosives, but only managed to break half of the track and dent the gun barrel. Plan 4 was to use dive bombers, but none was available. Plan 5 was to feign a frontal attack with Panzers and move another 88 up behind the KV. The 88 fired seven times and silenced the KV. When the infantry approached, they found only two shells had penetrated. When they climbed on board the gun began to move and grenades were tossed through the shell holes, blowing off the turret hatch and ending the roadblock which had lasted 48 hours.

I have never played the scenario, but the article was very interesting.

[rune]

Yes, the 88s were used against the tank as Mudhugger stated. I created the scenario from the AAR of the battle, and thought it was fun for a training scenario.

Rune

[DavidFields]

And it was a fun scenario.

Thanks, that question was clearly answered: 88s were intentionally used as offensive AT weapons in 1941.

spoiler spoiler

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

And, like the real AAR, my biggest puzzle was how to set up the 88s without getting them clobbered, and without the tractors reversing away from the KV each turn.

(Swung the platoon around the left. Didn't move any AFV forward until the KV was neutralized--which was usually in the late teen turns. Used the 37s if the KV moved--to try to get a track hit. Moved infantry in on the flag only when my infantry platoon was organized appropriately.)

Very nice scenario for both realistic tactics, ammo/armor match-ups, and deeper understanding of CM game mechanics.

[Tux]

I agree. I played this scenario over the last couple of days and found it very enjoyable.

SPOILER

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

As soon as they made contact with the KV all of my AFVs reversed into the trees out of LOS. I was pondering the situation when the 88s showed up. From then on I shoot 'n' scooted the odd Pz II into LOS with the KV to keep it buttoned, while I reversed the gun tractors through scattered trees to points near the edges. Once the 88s were deposited and set up they killed the KV in short order and I then launched a motorized assault on the flag directly down the main road, using mounted infantry and suppressing fire from the 88s, the SPW MGs and all twelve tanks.

It was brilliant: My men dismounted within 20m of the forest cover near the flag, right in amongst their own tanks, and cleared the area without taking a single casualty.

Final result = Zero casualties and a 100% victory.

[DavidFields]

Wow, Tux.

I had trouble getting the tractors to reverse to exactly the right place...but I can see how it is possible. At some point, the 88 is in LOS of the KV, while the tractor still is not. Unload.

As to the rest, it speaks to our difference in styles. I would be too nervous about launching that motorized assault, worried about (at least, in a blind game) that there is too much tree line to suppress completely. (That being said, after multiple run-throughs I should have at least considered that tactic.)

I like to maneuver my infantry, ahead of my AFVs. But then again, you already know that from my discussion in your AAR.

[Tux]

Heh, I do indeed. By keeping the KV buttoned I was able to move my 88s up to a point very close to the edges of the trees without him noticing. Both they and the tractors were undoubtedly within LOS of the KV, but that doesn't mean he'll spot them...

The assault was all about suppression. I assumed that twelve tanks would be able to outgun any AT assets that the reds had to go with their KV (which I expected to be very few, if any) and so gave them two minutes' head start towards the flag before rushing the SPWs down the road to join them. Everything apart from the Pz IIs was area firing at the treeline the whole time. I kept the Pz IIs' rapid-firing, highly accurate auto cannons free to specifically suppress any opponents that were spotted.

I was probably lucky that there were no AT guns about, and that the Soviet platoon was out of position, but hey, what can I do?

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Rankorian:

Gefechtsaufklaerung. Eh...trenches under buildings? Is the cover/concealment totally from the trench? Or is there an additive effect? And if I "rubble" the church (which would be SOP for me in this situation) what are the effects?

Honestly, I have no idea. It seemed like a good idea at the time when I designed it.

Originally posted by Rankorian:

(A tactical smart scenario. One takes a reasonably historical mix of german units, and with reasonably historical tactics obtains a good result. No tricks! What a concept!

Thanks. I think I still try to do this in my scenario design, since I find it most enjoyable. Some basic rules (which I try to follow, even though I may not always) for me are:

- Don't lie to the player (unless it is historically defensible - but even then it should be used sparingly). So better to give foggy or incomplete info than outright lies.

- Use historically accurate forces (the ones in Gefechtsaufklärung are - the force mix is on a picture taking by my grandfather in 1941).

- No tricks. It should be up to the competence of a player to win, or not.

I still think BFC should have used Gefechtsaufklärung as a demo scenario.

All the best

Andreas

[Silvio Manuel]

I agree with you Andreas, it is a very fun scenario - very tense... I like that about the smaller ones.

[Pascal DI FOLCO]

Yes, Gefechtsaufklärung is a great scen, and a classic, kudos Andreas ! (only problem is that it's impossible to write/spell properly by a non-German lol!).

Iron Roadblock is quite fun also, but I never managed to win and gave up in frustration after having my 88 just 2 m short of having a LOS !

BTW, those 2 scenarios are taken as training examples in the last part of the CMBB strategy guide.

[Andreas]

Here is the picture:

And the text on the back:

All the best

Andreas

[DavidFields]

Amazing picture.

The german soldier in the middle of the picture is rolling what forward? Looks like a push cart.

And are those horse drawn vehicles in the center?

I like German scenarios which are mostly infantry, with a few infantry support AFVs. It seems to me this is where the German army most excelled (HMGs, Stug/MkIV support, company discipline and tactics), rather than slashing armor thrusts.

[Andreas]

Try 'The Dirt Road'

It is a horse-drawn prime mover, and they are pushing a 75mm IG18, light infantry gun. I thought you had played the scenario.

All the best

Andreas

[DavidFields]

I had [now I can feel sheepish], but never really looked closely at the IG unit.

Eventhough I well know, intellectually, that the motorization of the German army was limited, even near the end of the war, my brain still, evidently, does not completely "get it". The idea that a guy, in a powerful army, was really pushing an artillery unit down the road like it was a hot-dog stand at Coney Island.........

spoiler....spoiler

*

*

*

*

*

BTW, I used the IG unit in the scenario mostly to bring down the church. I find a non-dug in IG in a close-range CM infantry environment does not last long, so this seemed like a low risk effective use for it. Not sure if that is the/a intended tactic for this scenario.

Didn't like the idea of an enemy unit on the second floor of that church as I was swinging my infantry around the wooods to the left.

Re: good tactics, I think this scenario shows the importance of scouting with your infantry before sending the armor in. In real life, if one scouted with the infantry and found, say, a platoon of T-34s in the village, one could retire from the area before anything got ugly.

Similarly, I think advancing around the right wing, or the center/left, are just tactically wrong? Granted, depending on the force and deployment in the village, one might be able to get away with it, or blast one's way through. But the risk of anhilation appear higher to me than (regardless of the force and disposition) sweeping with the infantry to the left, slightly moving up the Stug for overwatch if it appears safe, and saving the HMG for targets of opportunity/routers (in the building to the right of the start up zone.)

[ May 06, 2008, 02:28 PM: Message edited by: Rankorian ]

[Pascal DI FOLCO]

Aren't the guys setting up the IG after having dismounted it from the cart ?

Re IG usage, I also most often use them directly on buildings. But the 75 is pretty weak, the 150 is more fun and can really screw the enemy if you find a good spot 500m or so from enemy infantry!

[Vark]

Rankorian, was your game against the AI? I've just played the scenario last night and won a total victory by going for a AFV weighted right flank advance/assault.

Spoiler...spoiler

*

*

*

*

I commented, on another thread, that I'd used smoke from the FO to cover my move, but this time it fired a prep barrage centred on the church. Stug/251 combo dropped off the HMG, in the building to the right of the start line and the infantry moved down the slope using the scattered trees as cover. The IG was used to target the two buildings, to the right of the church, then switched to an interdiction/support role.

The Stug/251-10 dashed across the far right corn fields, turning to their left and faced the church. The reason the infantry were infiltrating down the hill was that I'd noticed a gap in fencing of the lower right corn field. The rest was similar to my previous AAR, as a two staged advance-assault with the IG, 50mm and HMG used to prevent counter attacks or reorientation of enemy forces. The AFV's shot the troops on to the objective and the infantry protected them.

The right flank assault seems to offer the best route for me, so I am genuinely interested in why you think it tactically wrong. Now I'm under no illusion that had I been up against squidgy grey matter then the AFV dash might have been punished and the troops forced to retreat. Though I tried not to deploy any gamey strategies.

Losses were heavier this time, with 18 casualties (4 dead) but so were the Russians, 84 casualties (23 dead)

[DavidFields]

Vark,

Congrats, but you have identified the issues correctly, as far as I am concerned.

Moving right, if there were AT weapons positioned, your Stug/251 would have taken side hits.

As the unit lie...and I would have to check this further...if the AT gun did not open up on your AFVs it might have been a "hide" issue---the AI hides its units initially, and does not always fire correctly.

My query/response is this: If the AT unit had fired at the flank of your AFVs when you went right--and I think there is LOS in front of the building to the right of the set-up zone--might the result have been....unfortunate.

But using smoke.....I could see how an assault to the right could be done....Kudos to the designer for allowing multiple...."practical" solutions.

Could still see this at a West Point simulation seminar.