using Pioneers/Engineers

[Apache]

While their name implies what they should be used for I'm not sure I actually use them well in CMBO. Anyone got any pointers as to how they can be MOST effectively used and why they are better at it (in game terms) than their other troop counterparts?

[JasonC]

In CMBO, there are really only two things engineers are better at than ordinary infantry, especially considering their cost. Those are dealing with defending minefields, and attacking concrete pillboxes.

Engineers with demo charges remaining can remove spotted enemy minefields by sitting stationary within 25 yards of the field, for a minute or two. It takes longer with men already lost or under fire. They do it automatically, if you leave them there without further movement orders. Daisy chain AT mines can be removed without a demo charge and relatively quickly.

When enemy mines are thin enough on the ground, just a few fields here or there, it is often simpler to just go around. But when many mines are laid in long chains, or every vehicle route through largely impassible terrain is mined with AT mines, then engineers are essential to resuming the advance.

Log Bunkers can be knocked out relatively easily with a wide variety of weapons. Even light 37mm cannons will do it with direct fire. And since such bunkers only have MGs to reply with, any AFV will take them out without loss. 81mm mortars can do it without reply, as well. Regular infantry can manage it with bazookas if they can make it within 100-125 yards. Because of the relative ease of dealing them, they aren't engineer material and don't justify their expense.

But concrete pillboxes can be another kettle of fish. Some of them have high caliber AT guns that make tackling them frontally with AFVs expensive to suicidal (though with numbers and distraction tactics it can still be done). They are thick enough to withstand virtually all indirect fire. Bazookas can occasionally KO them firing from within their covered arc with firing slit hits, but these are rare and the life expectancy of a 2-man bazooka team so close to them is limited.

Pillboxes have three weaknesses. They don't move, they have limited covered arcs through which they can fire, and their rear doors are more vunerable than they are from the front. A demo charge placed against the rear door will KO them without fail. Flamethrowers can also panic their occupants and make them bail out of the pillbox.

Therefore, if engineers can make it to the flank of a given pillbox, outside its covered arc, they can usually work their way close to it and knock it out. In the meantime, all other units stay outside the covered arc or in dead ground, waiting for the pillbox to be silenced.

To prevent this, the flanks of pillboxes are often covered by other elements, or by the fire zones of additional pillboxes, in interlocking fields of fire. Other elements have to be dealt with in the usual manner, by arty or direct fire heavy weapons, supplimented if necessary by close infantry assault. When the defense is based on mutually supporting pillboxes, however, this gets rather harder to do.

In that case it is often possible to map out a scheme of attack that will dismantle the defense. Because the pillboxes cannot protect their own flanks, each requires the support of particular other pillboxes to remain unapproachable. The key to each one is some other one.

Well, either by flanking the whole position or, more common, by taking out one selected pillbox by AFV direct fire from the front, it is often possible to "crack" such a system at one point, and then to exploit the "holes" in the defending scheme of fire that result. Often with engineers. Sometimes a temporary smoke screen can have the same effect, letting engineers "through" a fire-lane to the flank of a key pillbox.

Once they knock out one or two more, the rest lose their mutual support and become flank-able in turn. Slowly but relentlessly, a group of engineers can work through the position, silencing each pillbox from relative safety. Once the first crack has been made, to be sure.

Since pillbox positions are built up defenses, they may also be supported by mines, meant to prevent approach to their flanks to mask their weakness there. This combines the two engineer capabilities. They can remove the mines once discovered, make it to the flank of the pillbox, and then knock it out. Where ordinary infantry would be stuck on the mines.

They really aren't good for much else. Some claim success using engineer flamethrowers in city fighting, but their expense is a serious drawback in that role. More numerous ordinary infantry, or SMG-equipped infantry, can often do the same job. And direct fire HE can work over defending buildings much more safely than FTs, since they need to approach so close to shoot.

Even from building cover, the replies will often pin or break the FT operators, unless you've already achieve so much fire ascendency that you'd take the position regardless. FTs can succeed with the right conditions, but usually so would almost anything else of similar value with the same conditions.

Vehicle mounted FTs can be more effective in such town fights, because they are much more robust and have longer range. One Wasp, e.g., is a better bet to more than pay for itself in a town fight.

For any attack on a defense that uses many mines, one platoon of engineers might prove useful. They are only essential if you face concrete pillboxes (plural), especially if there are also mines.

Engineers also have slightly better AT ambush capabilities that ordinary infantry (especially US or Brit, non-paras - others have AT ability without engineer specials), since thrown demo charges and FTs can potentially KO enemy armor. But they need very close ranges to do so, and most commanders will not send unsupported armor through unscouted areas first. Foot troops typically lead.

As a "stupid AI trick", Allied engineers can sometimes succeed in hidden armor ambushes, particularly in tight terrain (forest roads, bridges, towns if the forces are large for the space involved). But it will rarely work against humans, and you'd be better off with ordinary infantry with extra zooks. Zooks have more range and are cheaper.

[Moriarty]

An infantry rifle squad will also chuck grenades at the rear door to take out the big boxes.

[xerxes]

Engineers seem to spot minefields more readily then regu also. Their demo charges can do some extra damage against infantry in close proximity. The demos will also be used quite effectively against afvs.

The FTs also work well against armor.

Unless you're a QB player, the issue of cost and choosing is irrelevant. The only question is how to get the most out of the assets you're given.

I use engineers for (in order of priority):

1. spotting minefields

2. close assault on afvs

3. clearing mines (I put this later because mines that have been found can often be avoided.)

4. close assault on enemy infantry (particularly if the enemy is in a damaged building)

5. bunkers (regular infantry take these out, takes a little more time)

6. as regular infantry

-marc

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by xerxes:

Engineers seem to spot minefields more readily then regu also.

Anti-tank minefields (no daisy-chain) are never spotted by infantry, including engineers.

Their demo charges can do some extra damage against infantry in close proximity. The demos will also be used quite effectively against afvs.

The demo charges are a bit strange. They have a high blast value, but in the open they don't even suppress infantry well.

Unless you're a QB player, the issue of cost and choosing is irrelevant. The only question is how to get the most out of the assets you're given.

This is far from true, due to victory points. Fighting with the considerably more costly engineers in a situation where they get chewed up like any other infantry (artillery, tank fire) will leave you with noticable less victory level. Not to speak of the expensive and fragile flamethrowers.

The only AT pillbox I ever encountered in a against-human game was taken out with a hand grenade by a 2-man platoon HQ, so I am not very found of engineers in CMBO.

[xerxes]

Far from true. Pfft. If losing 2 engineer squads makes you lose the game rather then losing two rifle squads you were doing rather poorly anyways.

You don't drive the enemy from the field by worrying about knockout points.

-marc

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by xerxes:

Far from true. Pfft. If losing 2 engineer squads makes you lose the game rather then losing two rifle squads you were doing rather poorly anyways.

You don't drive the enemy from the field by worrying about knockout points.

You can't win by losing costly units in situations where cheap ones would do as well.

And besides, it is the scenario designers (including the Quickbattle generator) that place so few flags on maps that knockout points and not flags determine the outcome in any game with serious clashes. Don't blame me, I think I did my best to convince people to change this, but scenario designers are just not intrested in victory points

[Dirtweasle]

Apache, As for the German Pioneers; the firepower of the standard Heer Pioneer unit is slightly less than that of the Heer '44 rifle squad unitll you get to close range where the rifle squad actualy has a bit better firepower, and both have 9 men in the squad. The Panzer Grenadier Pioneer (Armored) on the other hand is a very formidable squad. 11 men, and a firepower rating of 152 at 100m, and 245 at 50m... they pack a punch! Cheap they are ar not, but for the 586 points (regulars) you get in addition to the larger squads, seven SPW 251/1, a 20mm AA gun, and of course the 2 flamethrowers. So for the extra 276 points spent up from the Panzer Grenadier Armored Platoon you get 3 more shooters in each squad (9 total), 3 more halftracks, a 20mm gun, and the flamethrowers.

Is it worth the 276 points? Could be, I never really noticed the extra 3 shooters in the armored pioneers before, and the increased firepower sounds pretty good on paper. ...I may have to try these out somtime soon.

I've had some experience using the regular Pioneers and they are as others mentioned about on par with regular infantry, and their special skills are not really modeled in the scope of CMBO to much extent, IMHO. Though there is a certain allure to the Pioneers I have to admit.

[Boo Radley]

Ah, now it all becomes clear. I sent a team of engineers to the back of a bunker once and they just sat there. It never occured to me that they might have used up all their satchel charges (this was late in the game). I just tried it last night with a fresh batch of men and voila! knocked out bunker.

[Apache]

Thanks very much for the replies. I thought the Pioneers were very similar to Engineers and I have to say I'd overlooked the Pz Grdr version. At least I'm not missing out by using them wrongly. I tend to just take a platoon or two for a safety net unless I know I'm facing heavy pre-prepared defensive positions. I may try out the Grdrs a bit more.

[Folbec]

I find them usefull in defensive game, if there is a town or a fairly dense village : demolition charges are deadly in closed spaces and FT are usefull to render building useless for cover for the opponent.