Fast recon, how to beat it in ungamey manner.

[Jarmo]

First to clear out two things.

1. I definitely dont want another thread debating the gameyness of fast recon.

Maybe it is, yeah, but I believe you should be able to beat any gamey whadabang tactic with solid real world tactics.

2. I don't want to resort to gamey tactics for the aforementioned reason. So no using a dozen 20mm AA guns.

The scenerio I'm facing:

I'm defending.

The attacer began by launching a fleet of Humbers. They have been driving right past every side of every tree patch in my side of the map. Effectively spotting every unit I have.

What follows is precision fire to my units.

Offmap arty, mortars, direct fire by tanks.

The thing is, I didn't go unprepared. I protected my flanks with a couple of 50mm guns, a couple 75mm AT guns were also around.

But it wasn't enough.

Sure the recon cost my opponent 6 cars, but as soon my gun whacked one, it was in turn destroyed by mortars.

75mm AT guns don't have a chance against a car going fast, the gun doesn't turn fast enough. Same goes for my tank destroyers, Stugs and Hetzers. A normal german tank wouldn't do any better with their slowly rotating turrets.

[Gyrene]

Next time invest in some anti-vehicle mines, if allowed, and ruin his fast sight-seeing trip.

Elite sharpshooters sould button up his speeding tourists also, greatly reducing their photo opportunities.

Gyrene

[ 05-25-2001: Message edited by: Gyrene ]

[coralsaw]

Jarmo,

I can feel your pain mate... The tactic can be beaten though, considering a reasonable map.

What has worked for me is using a platoon of (good quality) infantry in good cover as a skirmishing line infront of the MLR.

The purpose of the skirmishers are to:

- deny intel info to your opponent

- throw your opponent's attack timing off

Infantry would have done wonders with the Humbies, let them come close and kill them. And if your opponent wants to waste his arty on a single dispersed platoon, so much the better.

It's good to protect the flanks with the Guns, but they should be kept way back and hidden, in case an AFV (impervious to small arms) tries to flank. Otherwise they're dead meat against arty.

One last thing. Don't forget that the cars crews are worth victory points, especially if captured, so don't let them get away with it.

Hope this helps.

coralsaw

[KiwiJoe]

2-3 20mm guns aint gamey and would have done a hella lot better than pak 38's in that situation for less cost. If he's fast moving he cant spot **** if u keep your units hidden in good cover. Hidden german infantry will fry any afv that comes near to them with fausts if they are well hidden. Then next turn withdraw them before the mortars/art hits. And always try and clean up the crews once u wack the afv... they are worth good victory points.

Finally I see nothing wrong with a "few" scout cars deep probing... its 1 of the few allied adantages in CM. However 1/2 a dozen or more is past the point for me. I'd mention it too him at the end and make note not to play him again.

[JMcGuire]

Hell, I'd probably stop playing on the spot. Responding to a gamey tactic is itself necessarily gamey -- you're doing something that nobody would be forced to do in real life. Screw it, life's too short. Unless I missed something, there is no Congressional Medal of Tolerance...

[Jarmo]

Mines are a good idea.

By this time all of them would have probably killed

one car each.

Infantry just plain doesn't work. Fausts will miss,

small arms dont damage humbers.

2-3 20mm guns would do the same damage as 2-3

50mm guns. Each of the guns did kill at least one car,

not terribly cheap.

The main problem is that I'm now pretty much out of AT

capability and the 90mm Cromwells are rolling in.

No, I'm not quitting. I dislike people who yell gamey and quit

when they start losing. (Not that I'd admit I'm losing )

Not everybody can be expected to follow WWII tactics.

[joeski]

Not sure if you had the chance, but upon seeing the 1st scout car. I would hide and set ambush points behind my men/at guns. That way they have a better chance of not shooting the scouts, and just laying low. As for the Cromwells Close Assault those suckers with split squads (that have fausts) on all 4 sides as soon as he get close enough.

[Pak40]

On maps where there are a lot of trees, I always buy several mines. These can effectively block narrow passages and force the attacker to bring his vehicles through routes better covered by your men and AT guns.

To beat the multiple humbar situation, it would have been ideal to have a couple of armored cars with the 20mm cannon, the fast rate of fire and the fast turret could easily kill all of those pesky scout cars.

Large AT guns arn't too good against fast vehicles like you said and neither are fausts, shreks or or other rocket AT guns.

[Redwolf]

Jarmo, the flak guns (Bofors as well) will be more effective than the 50mm AT because they are much more precise. Open the editor, place scout cars and various guns on a map and watch the hit chance display in the LOS tool. And the flak guns should have higher ROF and being faster in turning (not checked and probably doesn't apply to the bofors).

Maybe you can place the AA guns so that they face inwards, that they have LOS only to your own setup area and not to outside. That way mortars and arty will be less effective in taking them out.

You should also move every HQ you have near guns in the beginning of the game, extra combat to the anti-humber guns, extra stealth to the normal guns.

People often complain about the "many small guns" issue. However, I don't think that is so much off versus real life. Most of the small guns are anti-tank guns, just from the beginning of the war. And the bigger guns from later are not better in every respect (ROF, being spottet, time to target), they were introduced because you needed the calibre against the tank breakthroughs. However, in CMBO we pretty much play infantry games, not tank breakthroughs. In real world, the attacker would for the situation given face many small guns as well.

I second the remark about the crews. The car is with 23 point, but a crewmemer 6, captured twice as much. The car has 3 men, multiplied with 6 cars your opponent takes a decent risk.

I generally think that minefields are too small in CMBO to buy singles ones and buy only 10 or more. In this cvase however, your opponent probably drives the fastes way and may be predictable enough to run into single minefields.

If you are against an opponent who makes much use mortars and artillery, it may be better to place guns not in woods, maybe not even in scattered trees, due to treebursts. The woods don't add much cover to a foxhole and treebursts are very nasty. The woods make the guns harder to spot, but that point is moot anyway in this game.

People posted reports of real-world scout cars driving around to draw fire from hidden positions, BTW, so outright refusing to play may be a big much in such a situation. After all, he uses scout cars for scouting, for me that sounds like a challenge.

How much points was the game, BTW?

[Jarmo]

The game was/is 2000 pts.

The reason small AA guns are gamey, is that in real life

a battalion would only have one company of them (6 guns?).

It's unreasonable to expect they would all be placed to

frontline in direct fire light AT role.

The WWII was full of chances to be gamey.

[Mr. Johnson--]

Well yes that is always tricky, balancing heavy AT weapons to take out those Jumbos and Churchells against smaller guns to track quickly and fire quickly to deal with those Cromwells and Greyhounds. Both can bite you.

[Wolfe]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Jarmo, the flak guns (Bofors as well) will be more effective than the 50mm AT because they are much more precise. Open the editor, place scout cars and various guns on a map and watch the hit chance display in the LOS tool. And the flak guns should have higher ROF and being faster in turning (not checked and probably doesn't apply to the bofors).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, all good assets. The Bofors can turn 180 degrees in 14 seconds and can fire ~13 times per turn (Reg unit). The 20mm FlaK gun can turn around in 6 secs (11 for Quad). The 37mm FlaK gets around in 11 secs. Both can fire ~15 times/turn (Reg units). And the good muzzle velocity *definitely* makes a difference in accuracy. The 50mm PaK38, OTOH, takes 45 secs to turn 180 degrees!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jarmo:

The reason small AA guns are gamey, is that in real life a battalion would only have one company of them (6 guns?).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Still, I really don't see anything wrong with having a few AA assets who fill the dual role of AA and AT. Especially to deal with the occasional opponent who likes the mini-car rush. Just try to avoid the "dozen Sdkfz defense".

- Chris

[Mr. Johnson--]

What about that cool German Pz Gren heavy weapons company? That thing is packing 6 20mm for 19 bucks each and a cheap 120mm Fo.

[Banshee]

Well the way to defeat it IMHO is 1 234/1's or 2 251/9's , they are invulnerable to anything the humber can throw at it, and if he brings up armor to counter then you have the battle you were waiting for.. if you have 2 234/1's even better.. a mobile 20mm (more the merrier) will defeat this tactic.. heck forward deployed schrecks will have no problem dealing with these things, if there is any sort of cover just shoot and run. if there is little cover than you have to go with the mobile 20mm's and having 1 or 2 isnt gamey

[catnip]

Jarmo,

The best way to stop fast recon vehicles and not lose anything on your side is to buy a few of those armored cars or the armored 20mm half track(the cheapest one is ok for this). When playing as defender or in a meeting engagement, I'll always try and use my mobile vehicles to kill enemy recon first so that you don't give away the positions of your fixed guns.

If I were defender, I would place a few armored cars behind tree patches near your front line and open fire on the recon vehicles as they pass by. By doing so, they can't be killed by direct fire and you have the option of moving on the next turn.

Also, if you buy armored cars, shifting your defense becomes easier as the battle develops.

Sorry I bought that many scout vehicles.

[KiwiJoe]

Ahhhh so your finally playing Catnip Jarmo Good-luck... ya gonna need it. She's a great technician, can't comment on her tactical skill much as our games didnt last long enough for me to see

[KiwiJoe]

Jarmo it sounds like you've moved on to the next level like me. By that I mean you want to play "quite" historically correct games without getting right into all the dead accurate OOB's and stuff. If so you should take a look at the CAL ladder.

http://tournamenthouse.com/CM/CAL/THCAL.shtml

Here are a summary of the rules:

All games are Fionn's recon, short-75, P-76, or heavy armour rules.

You can only choose units from 1 branch/country - no mixing.

Towed guns will be limited to no more then 3 per side up to 1000 points spent. 1 gun per 1000 points spent thereafter. Thus 1500 point game = 3 guns, 2000 = 4 guns max. And every gun HAS to have an afv capable of towing it (If attacking or playing an ME). So if you buy an 88mm AT gun you have to buy a gun tractor unless on defense.

No more than 3 smg platoons.

Its a great non gamey way to play games... Im really enjoying the quality of players there. I havent had any problems with gamey play yet.

Finally:

The Combined Arms League is setup to offer players a league to play in that encourages tactical play style. We are trying to avoid "Powergamer" play that exploits weakness in CMBO’s game engine or force mix. When you sign on to play in CAL a set of Guidelines is in place to assist with CAL play style.

[Jarmo]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by catnip:

Sorry I bought that many scout vehicles.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey! You weren't supposed to read this!

Tough making secret plans when the opponent is listening..

And I already told you, don't worry about the "gamey" stuff.

It's only that I can't properly respond to your tactics

that's bothering me.

I've sometimes used the cheap 20mm cars, but the problem is that,

they are useless if your opponent doesn't use light vehicles.

[Grunto IV]

--I've sometimes used the cheap 20mm cars, but the problem is that,

they are useless if your opponent doesn't use light vehicles. ---

...actually, the 234/1 can be useful as long as it doesn't meet up with enemy 'heavy' armor or AT, or PIATs or BAZs; or .50 cals.

If you can get the 234/1 isolated on some infantry at say, 300 meters, that 20mm is deadly.

If you're talking about the 250/9, it's the lack of ammo there that makes it less useful against infantry.

If memory serves, you don't like buying standalone 20mm AA because it's 'unrealistic.'

I always convince myself I've got an "AA detachment" and buy a few of those. They're great heavy machineguns which - again if memory serves - someone else mentioned here.

My basic rule is to have some sort of 20mm assets in case the dreaded M3A1s show up on the other side.

In the current model, MG42s are suboptimal against those M3A1s, but 20mm AA are excellent.

As Americans, I often buy a 'cavalry force' and simply attempt to storm the German positions. As Germans, I'm always wary of that so that's why there are always some 20mm AAs in my force.

Also, the 75mm infantry gun is a good, cheap, 'light armored killer.'

Andy

[WWB]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Adam Lloyd:

AA guns. If each Battalion gets 6 guns, that's six guns you can be using for the forward company if you please. Nothing is gamey about that. A good commander realizes the potentials and strengths of his weapons and the nature of the enemy he faces and adapts. I would never criticize my opponent for ingenuity an originality in weapons employment, so long as it wasn't specifically game mechanics related. Keep in mind an AA battery is just as good in the forward company as the rear as far as aircraft defence is concerned.

Adam<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The AA company is much more important in the rear, actually. While protecting the front from marauding Scout Cars and Tac Air is a noble venture, no commander worth his commission would leave his nice, soft supply column unguarded.

Unlike troops at the front, the supply column is generally unarmored and roadbound, making it a nice, juicy target. And if his supply and logistical support get massacred, it makes him just as combat-ineffective as losing his combat forces.

I am not saying all 6 of the guns would be held to the rear, but I would bet that at least 4 of them would be in most circumstances.

WWB

[Stalins Organ]

Um...if a Bn gets AA then that AA's task is to protect the Bn area, not the supply line back to Berlin - there are regimental, divisional, Corps, Army and Luftwaffe AA units that do that.

And AA can protect quite a large area from air attack, while still being of use in the front line. Putting AA 1-300m behind your MLR dosn't seem at all unrealistic for Bn assets to me. Especially if they are in reverse slopes or otherwise hiden from direct observation from the enemy.

Hell at one stage Panzer-Grenadiers had 1 SP AA per infantry PLATOON as part of the standard OB - you'd expect those to be somewhere in the platoon area!

[ScoutPL]

Just a couple quick jabs...

I find it interesting that he is now offering ways to counter "broad front recon" that a year ago (has it been that long?) he would have heartily applauded. The more things change...

If you insist on playing someone who plays this game because they like to win then you shouldn't have a problem with either of you using gamey tactics. The ones who play this game to win every time usually do so by taking advantage of all or some of the "gamey tactics".

If you want to learn to beat Gamey with real world then good luck. The bottom line is your entire outcome will be skewed by the gamey tactics to begin with, so whats the point?

I play this game all the time and to be perfectly honest, I've lost just about as many as I've won. But thats because I play games that are usually fairly historically accurate. The problem with that is, history is usually written the way it is for a reason: given the circumstances, the outcomes will be changed only slightly by skill or chance.

In other words, a QB meeting engagement in which both sides start with an equal number of "points" is actually one of the rarest things you will find on a battlefield. Attackers almost always out number defenders, and if they outnumber them by enough they will almost invariably carry the field. The enjoyment I receive out of playing historically accurate scenarios comes from holding the ground a little longer, losing less men in the assault, or reaching the final objective with more time to spare then the real world commander did. These are signs of good tactics and techniques.

I encourage you to look for gamers with similiar attitudes and quit worrying about losing one. A truly enjoyable game is one you can walk away from totally defeated, saying to yourself, "Man, I wouldnt mind doing that again!" Not because you're a masochist, but because the quality of the game was at such a level you just enjoyed playing!

[Gyrene]

One thing that hasn't come up here...It would all fine and dandy to purchase all the mobile AA assets you want if the option was open to both sides.

But as the Allied side is lacking far behind the German side on these mobile AA guns (As BTS never intended the German units to be used in the way they are used now) it is not possible to have balanced games.

If the allies had the M16 and the HT or truck mounted twin 40mm's (Called M19 during the Korean war, not sure what the designation was in WW2) than this would not be a problem, but that is not to be.

So purchasing a bunch of units that the other side can't field, not because they didn't exist but because they were not included does end up being gamey.

Gyrene

[Freak]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ScoutPL:

Just a couple quick jabs...

I find it interesting that Lloyd is now offering ways to counter "broad front recon" that a year ago (has it been that long?) he would have heartily applauded. The more things change...

If you insist on playing someone who plays this game because they like to win then you shouldn't have a problem with either of you using gamey tactics. The ones who play this game to win every time usually do so by taking advantage of all or some of the "gamey tactics".

If you want to learn to beat Gamey with real world then good luck. The bottom line is your entire outcome will be skewed by the gamey tactics to begin with, so whats the point?

I play this game all the time and to be perfectly honest, I've lost just about as many as I've won. But thats because I play games that are usually fairly historically accurate. The problem with that is, history is usually written the way it is for a reason: given the circumstances, the outcomes will be changed only slightly by skill or chance.

In other words, a QB meeting engagement in which both sides start with an equal number of "points" is actually one of the rarest things you will find on a battlefield. Attackers almost always out number defenders, and if they outnumber them by enough they will almost invariably carry the field. The enjoyment I receive out of playing historically accurate scenarios comes from holding the ground a little longer, losing less men in the assault, or reaching the final objective with more time to spare then the real world commander did. These are signs of good tactics and techniques.

I encourage you to look for gamers with similiar attitudes and quit worrying about losing one. A truly enjoyable game is one you can walk away from totally defeated, saying to yourself, "Man, I wouldnt mind doing that again!" Not because you're a masochist, but because the quality of the game was at such a level you just enjoyed playing!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats a great post ScoutPL

I sometimes wish more poeple were like this.

[ 05-28-2001: Message edited by: Freak ]

[Paco QNS]

On the dual role of light AA guns, I cite a few excerpts of doctrine. From the "Normas generales para empleo táctico de las armas de acompañamiento de infantería y caballería" Instrucción E. 8. approved 24, June, 1940 (distributed 30, October, 1940) Spanish Army (very german influenced since the Spanish Civil War) (General guidelines for the tactical employ of supporting weapons, Infantry and Cavalry):

""Anti-air machineguns 20 m/m

74. The general missions of these weapons in combat are two:

Main mission, defense against airplanes

and secondary mission, antitank.

75. Their main missions are:

Defense of marching or stationary units.

Idem of materials.

Idem of depots.

Idem of AA batteries.

Idem of field artillery units.

And in general, of everything that, needing AA defense, don´t have any guns for it.

76. The little charge of shells and the fuzes used (ultra-quick or anti-armour) makes them poor suited for use against land targets.

Only exceptionally they can be used against nests or observatory points, exclusively using their excellent precision to hit their slits.

Mission Anti Air

...

Mission Anti Tank

79. Their effective range with armour piercing ammo is 500 metres, corresponding with the lighting trazes. To this range it can pierce a 20 m/m armour and, their precision for a 50% hits percentage is 0,5 metres vertical and 0,25 horizontal.

The traze permits to correct fire easy and quickly.

80. Their main targets are light and semi-heavy tanks, whose high mobility requires to use automatic fire weapons with traze ammo.

81. Their main purpose are:

Attack the aforementioned tanks, when protecting the enemy infantry advance.

It must be remembered that this antitank mission is secundary, it can´t overrule their main purpose, and, then, generally, the weapons will be sited in the better anti air emplacement, and in case from it they can acomplish the anti tank role, as a secundary mission this latter, and, of course, always in short and medium ranges.

Employment

...

Defensive

86. In general, they will be employed in the resistance position, so sited to defend first the main line of resistance, the support line and the stopping line, and, in case is possible, the Regiment reserves line. Their emplacements will form a rectangle in the majority of occasions.

87. In special cases, when the advance position is ordered to resist, a gun will be assigned to it, siting the other three in the resistance position, forming an equal triangle to protect effectively the main, resistance and stopping lines.""

So, to this light, I don´t see as "gamey" the reasonable use of light AA guns (that is, not more of six for a reinforced infantry battalion, and siting them in dual role emplacements). In fact, the main protection of the supply lines will be by daylight camo and moving only by night. A few AA guns will only "draw fire" to them.

Nonetheless, the idea of buying them and siting them off map to protect artillery and reinforcements has merit, IMO.

[ 06-02-2001: Message edited by: Paco QNS ]