SMG platoons-excellence for defense

[JasonC]

Wire is better than mines in city fights, because it doesn't let you put mines on pavement or in buildings. (It might represent booby traps, but they apparently thought that would be unrealistic).

On the bunker, I planned to go heavy right well before I saw the set up and noticed it. My plan all along was to rubble the center of the town, come in on my right, and then work right to left through the rubbled center. I hoped to keep the fire ranges longer that way.

I did intend to send serious HE at your right, however. I just lost the sIG meant for that to your gun, after only 1-2 shots and without getting any kills. I would have put 150mm smoke in front of the bunker to take it out of action late, when I needed to advance on that side, if this second sIG had lived.

Wire would have been stronger. I would also have taken 2 HMG teams in preference to the bunker. In stone buildings those are pretty strong against infantry. It is true big HE can still get them, but smoke can take out a bunker at a critical time, and if its firing slit is oriented forward an MG only bunker has to worry about firing slit pens from smaller caliber guns.

Also, I wouldn't have taken green recon C for the last platoon. The extra 3 SMGs per squad of recon A are quite strong in a city fight. A few AP mines for that change would be worth it.

When I did see the bunker I was a little worried you'd have another one, probably log, in the woods tiles on my right, where I was actually planning to attack. A bunker can actually avoid detection if not yet firing and inside woods. It would have been more effective, I'd think, to put a log one there, and an HMG team on a right side building.

If you did go with the concrete on the right I'd have put it farther forward, with LOS over the open field. That would have forced me to smoke it early, and not to spend too much time in the middle field (hard to do under sniper fire, mortar fire, IG fire etc).

Still you did fine with what you had. Well played.

[Michael Dorosh]

Well, thank you. Looking forward to our next match...

[David Chapuis]

Jason/Dorosh,

I wonder if you would mind sending me your initial setup files when you guys were defending (Jason for both maps)? I think I really need to learn how to setup defenses better, and I think that would help.

dkchapuis@yahoo.com

Thanks

[Michael Dorosh]

I'll see if I can find a save game file with that setup for you guys.

[Runyan99]

I just found this thread. A few comments.

Dorosh, I read your AAR site. Good job on it. Fun and interesting to read.

On the Dorosh vs. JasonC games:

I don't understand why you limited these games to 20 turns. As I understand it, in neither game did the attacker have time to make the final attack on the Large VP flag.

What's more, I get the impression that many casualties were caused when squads were caught running around in the open, or crossing streets. Infantry tactics within the town seem to have consisted of crazy dashes and mad assaults. I suspect that the time limit forced these rash moves, even though they were not safe or prudent by any stretch of the imagination.

Would the game have played out differently if it were 40 turns instead of 20? Why or why not?

[JasonC]

Yes the fights would have played out differently with 40 minutes. Even with 25, in the case of the second. On the other hand, ammo gets to be a serious problem in a 40 minute CM fight, between 600 point forces on a very small map - unrealistically so, IMnsHO. There is no resup, no prospect of it, no uncertainty about it. When the fight is too long compared to map size (thus with forces in contact from turn 5 on), unrealistic tactics based on outlasting known, finite ammo supplies become overly effective.

[Runyan99]

So, to clarify, you feel 40 minutes would have been too long?

Do you feel that twenty minutes is a reasonable amount of time to advance several hundered meters over open terrain, and then make an assault about 200 meters into heavy urban terrain?

[JasonC]

25 would have been easier, 30 would be ample. 20 was tough, no question. 40 would have been very hard the other way. As with every numerical parameter, it has balance effects if moved far enough one way or another. As the defenders typically won these fights, in hindsight it is easy enough to say 25 would have been closer to the balance point than 20.

[ November 13, 2003, 07:01 PM: Message edited by: JasonC ]

[Leeo]

Show me the way to The Queen!

[Tank Ace]

Damn I've created and thread monster that grew far beyond my expectations.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by TANK ACE:

Damn I've created and thread monster that grew far beyond my expectations.

Really? I should have thought that the major participants of this thread were the ones that created it; all we've seen from you is dimwitted interjections every page or so.

[Tank Ace]

Really?

Yes, really.

I should have thought that the major participants of this thread were the ones that created it;

Well you thought wrong, I started the thread, so it is mine, you wouldn't have had that match with jason unless i started this.

all we've seen from you is dimwitted interjections every page or so.

Gee thanks for being such a jackass. And to add to MY THREAD , SMGs can be used for offense too but only after a heavy bombardment or sneaking around to flank the enemy.

[ November 16, 2003, 10:58 PM: Message edited by: TANK ACE ]

[Michael Dorosh]

Bumped for the heck of it - was just referenced at http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=003745;p=2 and I am still in shock that a duffer like me would be able to do anything but die alot now.