SMG platoons-excellence for defense

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by JasonC:

But it also makes it harder to miss outright with planned arty fire..

Oh?

emm....you may collapse some buildings, but one would rather hope the enemy was actually occupying them first...

[JasonC]

No doubt, no doubt. Nobody at home, I'm sure. Probably hit all of 2 people, and pinned one half squad. But the geographic rearrangement is satisfying in itself lol. Recall, incidentally, that 2x81mm last time hit all of 1 man - and he was a German...

[ October 27, 2003, 11:21 PM: Message edited by: JasonC ]

[JasonC]

At the end of the first half, things have become mighty hot in the Stalingrad fight. Mike is putting up a heck of a fight this time.

I've run into his infantry in two forward buildings, losing one half squad in the street outside one of them to point blank SMGs. 16 more 120mm rounds clobbered the German center-right. The distinctive rip of the burp guns is heard with distressing frequency.

In one small German success, the gun duel ends with a German shell hitting the second story of the building across the street from the Russian gun, while the direct LOS is blocked by collapsed building smoke. The Russian gun seems to have been knocked out by the resulting airburst.

Meanwhile with Gaylord, the Russians on the crest of the hill are assisted in their fight with the Germans there by a gun tossing HE to the limits of LOS, just short of the German position. Which it seems was an HMG. Not a great place for it. It was high up but behind the military crest, with most of the area below the hill dead ground to it. I guess the idea was to sweep the level top of the bare hill.

They go down after the third round finds the range - by the fifth they are trying to run. They just make it to the next crater on the snowy open crest when an infantry burst reduces them to a single man. Not completely finished off, but immobile and broken. First round to the Russians.

Now start of 2nd half with Mike - the Russian arty ceases fire. Soon so do the Russian small arms. 3 large German shells slam into one building in the center from which Russian infantry traded shots across a narrow street moments before. In another block on the German right, Russian SMGers sit and take a large quantity of small arms fire without replying.

[ October 28, 2003, 02:38 AM: Message edited by: JasonC ]

[GreenAsJade]

Originally posted by Walpurgis Night:

And I'm not sure how the "tips and tricks" forum benifits from tactical conclusions derived from unevenly matched skill levels.

[/QB]

Um, we've been benefiting heaps. Haven't you been reading along?

[stevebalance]

quote:

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

Originally posted by Walpurgis Night:

And I'm not sure how the "tips and tricks" forum benifits from tactical conclusions derived from unevenly matched skill levels.

[/QB]

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

i have definately learned from this discussion and battles that developed from it. more from the discussion of tactics then the actual battles or aar's, but i do enjoy the aar's.

don't be so bitter... :eek:

[ October 28, 2003, 05:37 AM: Message edited by: stevebalance ]

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Walpurgis Night:

And I'm not sure how the "tips and tricks" forum benifits from tactical conclusions derived from unevenly matched skill levels.

[/QB]

I should have thought this would be of more benefit than an AAR between two evenly matched players, actually.

[undead reindeer cavalry]

it's been cool, but it could have been better. it's been at least as much about MGs and others as it's been about SMGs.

[JasonC]

I understand where Wal is coming from. He has a strong player's perfectionist standard in such matters, and thinks the acid test of a tactic is whether it works against best play, or something approaching it.

Implicitly he is "tactics rich" - he's got hundreds and the problem is to winnow them, to discard the only moderately useful, to keep the best. Of course there is always some need for varity and adaptation to conditions, so that will still be a large set. From this point of view, only play between two strong players "stress tests" an idea sufficiently. Implicitly, it is about finding some sweet spot combination of tactics, abstractly considered as superior.

But for people learning new tactics and focused on their own improvement, this is typically not the problem. It is first of all to get more ideas. And to notice the power they can have on one's play and on battle results. (That's incentive, you see. The difference between a good player and a green one is a modest set of learnable tricks, things you can see and understand immediately once they are shown).

What counters what, what trick to reach for some situation, is not at all obvious to learning players - as it may sometimes seem to a player like Wal. And any thesis on such a subject is an idea to a new player. One he can try out, or vary according to his own next thought (e.g. the guy here who tried 8x75mm leIG to take the town. Aside - take just 6 of those and it isn't even gamey).

There are two of Murphy's laws that apply here, it seems to me. "If it is stupid but works, it isn't stupid." A tactic does not need to be perfect. It just needs to help rather than hurt in the situation in front of you. If it improves your performance, try it out. You can always discard it later if you learn something still better. Tactics aren't permanent. The main point is to grab a rung and start climbing, not where the top is.

The other of Murphy's laws that I think applies, is the one that run "professional soldiers are predictable, but the world is full of amateurs." Good tactics are simple but robust. Rather than being highly tailored for the hardest possible case, they need the ability to take on a wide selection of types of less than perfect play. That is what one will usually encounter - especially if one is in that category oneself.

[JasonC]

Well Adam, you are an expert and Wal is an expert. There is nothing stopping you. He wanted German 2 LMG mech rather than infantry, and village moderate small terrain. Kursk era, 700 point defenders, would fit that easily enough. If would look something like 4 German platoons with 6-8 light armor and an FO, against an SMG company and change, a handful of guns, etc. You want to dazzle us with expert tactics and a comprehensive AAR, go right ahead.

[walpurgis nacht]

Originally posted by Adam_L:

I've played him a couple of times.

I don't remember you

[walpurgis nacht]

Well the orginal reason I stuck my nose in here in the first place was to make the point that there are a wide variety of "solid tactics" that will get a job done. Once you understand how the units and terrain work in this game, tactical absolutes lose their value. With 2 experienced players, the one who uses the most unpredictable "solid tactics" has the advantage. In other words creativity, not sweeping generalizations about tactics, is what seperates the men from the boys:)

I thought it might be interesting to catalog a game where solid tactics are a foregone conclusion . . . freeing the critique to focus on the more artistic/intuitive dimensions of the game.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Walpurgis Night:

Well the orginal reason I stuck my nose in here in the first place was to make the point that there are a wide variety of "solid tactics" that will get a job done. Once you understand how the units and terrain work in this game, tactical absolutes lose their value. With 2 experienced players, the one who uses the most unpredictable "solid tactics" has the advantage. In other words creativity, not sweeping generalizations about tactics, is what seperates the men from the boys:)

I thought it might be interesting to catalog a game where solid tactics are a foregone conclusion . . . freeing the critique to focus on the more artistic/intuitive dimensions of the game.

Hmmm, I don't know, could two "experts" stick to tactics and not let ego and pet theorems get in the way?

EXPERT ONE: As all can clearly see, my maneuvrist stratagems have my opponent reeling, spelling yet again the superiority of great generals like Patton, Nathan Bedford Forrest, and ...ahem...well, myself, naturally.

EXPERT TWO: Yes, rather well stated, if perhaps a bit didactic. Perhaps I'll reel a little more after we've actually made it past the purchase phase of the game. In the meantime, I am sure you will be working out exactly how to overcome my attritionist defence, which as you know was the mainstay of the world's greatest marshalls; Rommel in Normandy, Hindenburg on the Marne, and ... **cough**...well, me, actually.

EXPERT ONE: Yes, well, now that the game is underway, readers of this AAR should take special note to the extended formation of my leading platoons; a little trick Thomas Edward Jackson learned in the Shenandoah Valley; my opponents really do often compare me to old Stonewall.

EXPERT TWO: Really, did Stonewall Jackson always drop artillery on undefended hills?

**Artillery stops falling next turn**

EXPERT ONE: Just a precaution you understand. It may be instructive if you were to surrender your forces now, and let me dissect properly for the readers of this AAR exactly how your setup was deficient to match my superb onslaught - I'm afraid the endgame map shall be rather sparse on your units, old boy.

EXPERT TWO: Yes, well, perhaps we can wait until at least turn two before I surrender. In any event, I have no idea how you expect to get around the fortifications I've expertly deployed; readers should take note that this tactic has never failed to not work in this type of terrain. However given the use of the 5m countours for this one, I would say the conditions are less than perfect for showing off the lines of sight to advantage.

EXPERT ONE: Yes, the use of SLIGHTLY MOIST ground conditions have the effect of increasing bog changes for trucks from an infinitessimal 0.065% in open ground to a very noticeable 0.071%, at FAST speed. I should think this wouldn't be a very accurate test of our abilities. Perhaps we need to rethink the parameters...I mean, just to ensure a proper AAR for all the masses who will be learning from us, naturally.

EXPERT TWO: My girlfriend calls me Rommel, by the way.

EXPERT ONE: What?

EXPERT TWO: I mean, you were trying to influence this AAR by the fact that your opponents call you Stonewall, but I get called Rommel.

EXPERT ONE: I see. My lead platoon is about to make contact with the outer line of defences; I've split the first squad despite the morale penalties in order to scout...

EXPERT TWO: So you're not the only one to have a nickname or anything.

EXPERT ONE: Yes, quite. I see you have an HMG set up in the pines about 255 metres back. Very odd that they weren't hidden. I can deduce from the placement of your HMG that your entire force consists of 2 companies of dismounted Panzergrenadiers (Regular), 1 platoon of PzKpfw IVHs, a 170mm FO (Veteran), 17 trenches, 22 barbed wire, a Pioneer platoon, two extra flamethrowers, and a 75mm concrete bunker. You attritionists are sooo predictable. We used to call my dog Rommel, by the way.

EXPERT TWO: All I meant was you're not the only one to have a nickname, that's all.

**Expert Two sulks**

EXPERT TWO: Well, now that contact has been made, you can see where the attritionist style of play clearly has advantages; the leading half squad had a 22.19% chance of breaking, and luck has played into my hands. Now that I've blunted the attack of his battalion, the question of finishing him off in detail arises.

EXPERT ONE: You make her call you Rommel, don't you. It's not a choice, and it has little to do with your...er...tactics, yes?

EXPERT TWO: Your attack is reeling! You see where the UNHIDDEN HMG has stopped your lead platoon in its tracks!!

EXPERT ONE: It's the moist conditions; given dry ground, they would have routed in good order to the trees 2.3 seconds faster, while your HMG crew changed barrels. I don't think this is a very good test at all.

EXPERT TWO: Perhaps we need to set up again with different parameters. Maybe just for once you could purchase something other than your standard 2 companies of Recon infantry, 2 companies of SMG infantry and 2 platoons of T-34-M41s with 2 120mm FOs?

EXPERT ONE: Well, we could pick Partisans vs. Romanians, infantry only, computer picked forces, but how would anyone learn if we played at less than our peak form?

EXPERT TWO: You're right of course...

[ October 29, 2003, 10:33 AM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[Panzer76]

LOL at Dorosh

[JasonC]

Hindenburg on the Marne - geez. You forgot Falkenhayn at Verdun! Rommel in Normandy, ha ha. You meant Kesselring in Italy of course. And what about Grant in the wilderness? Blucher... ("He's off his meds")

Meanwhile back in Stalingrad, the Germans are making some progress on the right. But one SMGer has stayed behind at the back windows when the rest of his platoon ran (under fire from about a company, through 120 degrees of arc). At the end of turn 15 he got off one shot at 65m against Germans in a neighboring street. The sequel this turn should prove interesting - a test case of how powerful the tactic of SMGs at the back of stone buildings is. The remaining German gun, meanwhile, continues to send 150mm HE into the town, into building after building.

Waiting on the start of the 2nd quarter with Gaylord, who mentioned computer changes in progress two days ago.

[Michael Dorosh]

Kesselring's personal Füsilier company moved from pillar to post in defence of Armeegruppe headquarters, so that makes Kesselring a Maneuverist in my books.

I do wish your Gun would knock some more buildings flat already; I have some poorly sited heavy weapons that I need clear fields of fire for.

[Conscript Bagger]

Michael, are you doing screenies for this battle?

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Impudent Warwick:

Michael, are you doing screenies for this battle?

Only if I win. :cool:

[JasonC]

Not to worry about buildings being dusted. The trains run on time. However, your hopes for cleared fire lanes may be unfounded. You get dust for 2 minutes when the big ones go down. With only 5 minutes remaining, it is only the next few that will clear lanes, for only the final couple of minutes.

Now, if your gun hadn't nixed one of the sIGs, you'd have much wider fields of fire on your right. But your bunker there still wouldn't see anything in that case - there would be 150mm smoke (which gets 30m wide and lasts 3 minutes for a single shell) right in front of it.

Truth be told, Mike is doing pretty well considering the HE I've been able to pound into him. If he hadn't dusted the one sIG and kept the other occupied by a duel for almost 4 minutes, he'd be a shambles by now. But he did, and right now I will be hard pressed to get a draw in consequence.

Incidentally I can see a mistake of my own that if altered might have won clean, in retrospect. It is hard to hit a gun aiming right at the gun with low velocity HE. The difficulty is the range. When on hills this problem is often increased, and that was the case with our duel. A building actually in the LOS (barely) also did not help. One pairing were looking through a corner of windows to see each other, practically.

The solution was to target the upper story of the building across the street from his gun. I eventually did this - deliberately - and it worked like a charm once I thought to try it. It is hard to miss a large vertical target like a 2 story building, and I picked a spot with a bright blue LOS line. 150mm exploding on the second story is like an airburst for anything outside, nearby. Much more effective against foxholes than a ground burst.

This technique makes full use of the power of uber-sized HE. In a straight up duel, the edge is all to the ordinary caliber gun, because it fires 2-3 times faster and so finds the range more readily. But when you can use the fact that "close counts with high explosive" to solve the range estimation problem, the big gun can be better.

What difference would it have made? If it only won the duel sooner after losing the 1st sIG, it would have saved me 3 turns of fire. I'd have delivered ~8 more shells at his infantry. I'd also have received fewer from his gun at my infantry - which it shot up whenever the LOS was blocked by collapsed building dust, etc. This would still have been only a marginal benefit, but an important one.

If, on the other hand, this technique had saved the first sIG, the difference in the outcome would have been enourmous. It would have meant on the order of 30 more 150mm HE shells directed at his infantry so far, and another 10 or so more before the end. My coverage would also have been better, from 2 points of aim rather than one.

This is more than I had any right to expect - his gun trading for one of mine was par for the course. But it shows how much can potentially swing on noticing one trick at the right time.

[Michael Dorosh]

It's also a great example of real world thinking applied to CM. A testament to the game engine, frankly. Wish I would have realized what was going on, but even if I had, my only hope was killing the other gun. Pushing guns in CM takes to long - especially without a reverse command - and we can't, in the current engine, abandon the gun then re-man it, which is what I think a real gun crew would have done - ie wait for the stone building to be rubbled, then reman the gun if still in working order?

[JasonC]

"we can't, in the current engine, abandon the gun then re-man it, which is what I think a real gun crew would have done"

Wouldn't make much difference, though it might distract the sIG for another minute or two. Once your guys abandon, though, it can just target right next to the gun and find the range. Not being in danger anymore itself, it has time for that. It is only at a critical disadvantage when it has to trade one shot for two or three, with either side needing almost a direct hit. Once the reply fire ceases, it can take the time to get a nearly direct hit if it has to.

[Michael Dorosh]

Emmm, but the gun was beside a wooden building. My dudes could have sought shelter behind the building and waited for the stone building across the road - the victim of your area fire - to be rubbled and fall into the street...

[JasonC]

Yes I understand. But after 2 hits on the building across the street and your crew leaving the gun, my sIG crew would change its point of aim. To about 3m to my left of your gun, where I had LOS. If I get the right range there, it is not the crew that goes away, it is the gun itself.

I could not afford the time to do this (find the right range on a basically flat trajectory, to the side of the gun) while your gun was firing, because I faced KO myself every 10 seconds. But as soon as your crew leaves the gun, I have time, and if I have to I can use it to ensure the crew can't come back to the gun. Not by flying shrapnel from an airburst, but from physical destruction of the gun itself.

For the onlookers - we are now down to 4 minutes left. Mike's SMG holdouts went down easily last turn, taking fire from several platoons through about 90 degrees of arc to their right, and then facing another platoon entering their own building from a different 90 degrees of arc. They got off one burst that I saw at men inside the building, before going heads down. They died as soon as they made it into the street trying to run.

But 4 minutes is not a lot of time and I am still only to the first tier or two of stone buildings. HE has gone considerably deeper. Mike remains strong on his right - my left, ahead of the large flag, where the live sIG doesn't have LOS (the dead one did, but is out of commission). Mike will probably end with more flag points. The loss points, who can say? But probably not far enough apart to outweight objectives.

[JasonC]

Last turn's orders sent to Mike. He should win and handily. I'll still be interested to see the casualty screen, however.

[JasonC]

Congratulations to Mike. Our rematch has ended with a Russian minor victory, 62 to 38. He held the large and one small flag, I held the small flag on the German right, farthest from the large one. Loss points were basically even - I did better there by a scant 17 points, from 69 Germans lost to 72 Russians. KIA were exactly the same, 16 each. We each also lost one gun.

The sIG that lived did the bulk of the damage, racking up 31 kills as well as the gun. The 170s got 10. Infantry did the rest, well spread among the platoons - 9, 9, 7, and 5 plus 2 by attached LMGs. The German HMGs, sniper (who was green, as well as shooting into buildings), and 75mm smoke helped a little but didn't hit anyone.

For Mike the biggest score was recorded by one SMG squad on my right, deep in the position, which stopped a half squad in the street outside (not pinned enough obviously), and also blew up a full squad late trying to make it to a different building.

It scored 20 kills. The rest of the SMGs got 22 more combined (2 the rest of that platoon, 14 and 6 from the other 2), while his recon C platoon contributed 7. His 120mm FO got 9 and his 76mm infantry gun 6. The sniper was highly successful with 3 kills (as well as delaying half a platoon for about 5 minutes). AP mines got 2 men on my right.

The battle was hard fought and the victory for Mike well deserved. He has been a great sport too, I must say. I am happy to have kept the knock out points even and made it to one of the flags, against the defense he mounted. I'd have liked my own losses to have been about 20 men lighter. I might have kept them that low if I hadn't pushed so hard on the right at the end, but I wouldn't have reached the one flag without that pushing.

To balance the fight, despite the conditions and some people's contention that it is impossible, I think all you'd need is to downgrade the large flag to another small one, give the Germans 5 more minutes. OK, the Russians would still have an edge with just those changes, but it would be possible to win outright as the Germans.

To make the chances even you might need to raise the odds to 175 to 100 rather than 150 to 100. That would allow the Germans to have pioneers as well as arty and guns. Combined arms for the attackers would also easily balance the strength of the town.

A map with more than 2 tiles of scattered trees in the German set up zone would also help. Replaying on this map after knowing the Germans need guns to get anywhere, it would be too easy for the Russians to e.g. put a TRP on the building nearest the trees.

Meanwhile, I haven't heard from Gaylord since early in the week.

[ October 31, 2003, 04:55 PM: Message edited by: JasonC ]

[Michael Dorosh]

I haven't seen the endgame file yet, but it was interesting and educational. I wasn't sure if the minefields would play any part; I was gratified to see a couple of half squads or squads moving through them. Had I bought barbed wire instead, perhaps that other flag would have stayed in my hands? His Gun was quite effective in scattering my troops. Wished my bunker would have done more also, but I wonder if it didn't have some deterrent effect on his left flank troops?

With five more turns and a few more points, I think the Germans would indeed have a better time of this one.