Protecting convoys

[securityguard]

I'm currently playing an advance operation where I have lots of soft targets to protect (ie, trucks with guns attatched). So far my strategy has been to move all armored units up to scout after my jeeps do, and if terrain permits I usually take one platoon out of my convoy to move ahead with my AC's. It's actually been working so far and i've made steady advance.

That is, until the last battle. It was night, and I moved my AC's up too far ahead of my convoy, and somehow he jumped me from both flanks. I lost a hefty sum of my convoy, but not too much. I retaliated and got his platoons, but it cost me.

The next bit of the map does not allow me to use my tactics. It is heavy city and rail road tracks in the open, so I have to take the roads. I was thinking about going completely single file, in a pattern like this (from first vehicle to last):

JEEP

ARMOR

TRUCK WITH SQUAD

TRUCK WITH GUN

ARMOR

TRUCK WITH SQUAD

TRUCK WITH GUN

ARMOR

HALF-TRACK WITH SQUAD

HALF-TRACK WITH SQUAD

I have more than that amount of units, but you get the idea. I was thinking that if anything attacked me in the city, my armor at various points in the convoy would attack back and my HT could give even more additional fire.

The downside to single file is that he can hoard more units in one area and potentially do more damage if I go down the wrong road. However, double file can also potentially double the amount I lose.

I am also thinking about just having infantry go through each building, but I want to end the op as fast as possible (this is probably the last battle!) because he gets reinforcments, and the slower I got the faster he supplies.

If anyone has any tips, greatly appreciated!

[ July 19, 2004, 11:31 AM: Message edited by: securityguard ]

[flamingknives]

I'd be inclined to put the HTs further forward, especially if they are 251s. Soft skins and guns would go towards the rear, ready to deploy to cover from counter-attacks or to cover the advancing armour. If the aim of the guns is just to survive, spreading them out a bit is a worthwhile aim too. If you can tow them with halftracks, that would be good, as while infantry can cover ground dismounted, a tractorless gun is a dead duck.

The real trouble is how close to put them. Too close, and a vehicle KO'd will slow the column down dramatically. Too far apart and the elements cannot support each other. Try and avoid following a predictable route unless you can cover it before your opponent can redeploy. Use area fire to cover hiding places by choke points.

[coe]

hmm you want to have firebases all over y'know 105s and gunship support

just kidding

(well if you could have firebases and gunship support you would use them wouldn't you?)

Conan

[Joachim]

The advantage of the Htracked squads is that they can move to danger areas faster and safer (ie give infantry cover to the tanks). But I guess I'd still support fk in using the HTs for the guns.

OTOH if he gets your trucks and eliminates or pins your infantry, you're dead meat in a city.

What about the following plan:

Your enemy will spread out keeping a reserve. In a big city he can't cover every route with his full force.

Stage a mock attack. Let it look like you plan on carefully scouting ahead with infantry. This could force him to concentrate his forces in that area. Your tanks will interdict movement on roads to cut up the city.

Now you have several options:

Scout till your inf reaches an exit from the city. Load up your guns and pass your convoy thru the road you control. It is crucial your opponent thinks you will fight your way thru leaving the guns behind as long as possible. Let the guns fire, then hide them for 1-2 turns. Do this several times. Make sure it looks as if they follow a fire plan to support your infantry advance.

If your opponent moves his force to counter your infantry, try to disrupt his forces. If he has low quality troops, having HQs separated from sqauds will decrease his combat power - he can't deliver a quick unified strike due to long command delays.

If your opponent does not move, you either did not spot him (bad), he has his forces ahead of your inf - or thinks you are bluffing.

Depending on the situation, you will either

a) race your trucks thru town (jeep first) on a different route and unite with the inf behind town. Inf loads on tracks and tanks once the trucks are thru and follow.

Move your convoy thru the scouted area.

Whichever version you prefer - try to make it look like you plan on doing the other.

If you think he called your bluff - make your feint the real thing.

Gruß

Joachim

A good example of a similar tactic is "Breakout from Klin":

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/BOOKS/WWII/20234/2.html

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/BOOKS/WWII/20234/map1.JPG

... or Gulf War I

[Redleg Bob]

In your initial post, you make a contention that I believe is untrue -- specifically that two columns running on parallel roads are twice as vulnerable as a single column. Actually, I think that configuration is much more flexible and lethal.

The most probable enemy course of action is that he will have small groups that hold your convoy in place while a larger group assembles and bogs you down in the city.

The most dangerous enemy course of action is that he will allow you convoy to pass between two sets of hidden units on either flank and then launch an ambush from elevated positions firing down into your thin-skinned vehicles.

A two convoy configuration enables you to outflank an ambush on one or the other very quickly, prevents him from occupying the middle row of buildings (as the occupiers would be taken by the whatever unit wasn't attacked, and generally secures you movement through complex terrain.

Just a thought.

[Joachim]

If he had double the amount of troops I'd consider using 2 convoys. But he has barely enough for one. A single tank (and maybe a HT) plus two squads is an easy target. First attack one column. Have just a feint for the other. If the second arrives to help the first, the first is dead.

Gruß

Joachim

[Redleg Bob]

Joachim,

I guess my vision is that the two convoys are seperated by, at most, the width of a single large building, so it is difficult to engage them entirely seperately as you describe. I think you are absolutely right -- it would be foolish to disperse one's combat power needlessly, and in the absence of immediate mutual support would amount to piece-mealing your units into an enemy strongpoint.

However, having two tanks up front (behind the jeep scout) on a front that is still narrow avoids the sort of double-envelopement that he's already been caught in one, and that would surely spell the demise of his forces as they are mowed down in the process of dismounting the vehicles.

I just get very nervous about the thought of moving through non-permissive territory without flank security. But we can't really say for sure without seeing the map. Terrain will ultimately dictate the proper course of action.

Thanks,

Bob

[Joachim]

Bob,

if you move in two adjacent streets separated by less than 30m or small buildings - yes, your tactic is valid. If you have 2 blocks of large stone bldgs between them they can't support each other. That was my vision when thinking about "heavy city map".

The map is important.... weighing flank security vs the chance that the opponent can bring enough of his forces into contact. You can find lots of pros and cons for both. Probably a gut decision after a look at the map.

Gruß

Joachim

[Slappy]

I guess I have a differnt take on this. Why use the convoy at all? I'd lead with infantry followed by the armor with the trucks and HTs at a safe distance to the rear. Only move up the armor once the infantry has flushed out the defender and only move up the light vehicles once the armor has destroyed the infantry. This method is slower, but protecting a convoy is one of the toughest missions in CM. Two ATRs and a light AT gun or two can cost you 300pts in two minutes. Why allow your opponent that opportunity? Frankly, this is exactly why units didn't ride into battle in unarmored convoys very often in the real world, it's just too dangerous.

[Joachim]

Guess the problem is that he has to advance fast to reach the board edge in the op. Of course you could advance with the inf and leave the trucks behind. But that would be rather gamey if the mission (house rule) is to get the convoy thru (an unusual but quite interesting objective in CM).

Gruß

Joachim

[Slappy]

I don't know for sure what the mission objectives are so I can't say whether my approach is gamey or not. I generally find that preservation/destruction of force is more important in almost all battles than ground and flags. I'd rather get there more slowly alive than fast and dead.

If speed is essential, than I guess he's out of luck. Why not floor it and hope they don't get everyone?

[Joachim]

The "gamey" accusation was based on an "if". Your approach on standard battles is mine... if there are no house rules.

...but the idea of having to escort a convoy is rather interesting. I'd like to hear the whole story (scenario, briefing, ...). There must be some house rules so it all makes sense.

Gruß

Joachim

[Emar]

So how did things work out? Did you capture the city?

[securityguard]

the operation got really sloppy and i lost due to surrender. i shouldve just took everything i had, unloaded it, destroyed everything he had and moved as fast as i could with the last remaining turns. the way the map was setup made it easy as hell to be face to face with all his armaments, because there was no dead mans zone at all. it was actually pretty lame