Tatical question in regards to armor...spearhead or backstop?

[Kinjari]

Ok...I must first say that Im relatively new to TBS games and really to strategy games in general but I do realize that the situation (terrain, objective, opposition) and equipment are the two major variables in determining sound tactics in battle. So, my question...

What is (generally speaking) the most effective use of armor in combat? I had always assumed (thats where I went wrong!) that armor utilized as a spearhead supporting infantry is usually a sound bet (all other variables such as terrain, weather, and estimates of enemy strength considered). Yet most of my engagements so far (Ive only had the game for about a week) have been dismal defeats. If I attempted to spearhead with armor and support infantry following (using armor for cover) most often a couple of AT's destroy my tanks before I can get my infantry in a position to eliminate them. If I push with my infantry and use armor as a backstop in support from the rear my troops usually end up tangled in engagements with enemy infantry while my armor is decimated from AT and/or enemy tanks from waaay across the map.

Any advice to a struggling n00b? I must say this game is mind-blowing and I love it. Realize Ive got lots to learn but hopefully can pick the brains of you vet grog's here and learn a thing or two about a thing or two.

Thanks in advance!

[Soddball]

Try lots of tiny quick battles, 500 points or less, and let the computer pick your units. Drop turns to 20 and you can get through 3 of these games an hour.

In a typical QB, you might end up with a company of infantry, some supporting MGs and mortars, and a couple of tanks. I tend to use some tanks on overwatch and push a few forward about 50-100m behind the infantry.

There is lots of advice in the Tips and Tricks forum which you should avail yourself of.

[Dar]

My thoughts:

It's better to use the tanks to overwatch the infantry as they advance. They pack a punch from a greater distance, and they are vulnerable at close range and blind, so it's better to let the infantry close with the enemy and let the tanks (and other heavy weapons) keep the enemy's head down.

That being said, don't expose your tanks by putting them on the highest hill on the map. Although they can see everything from there, everything can see THEM as well, and you're bound to lose them. Use cover and concealment as best as you can to get your assets into position, and focus on targeting one area. Then hit it with everything!

Also, don't forget your off-map arty and most on-map arty have smoke rounds available. If you're attacking a clump of trees (clump "A") and expect the enemy has some AT guns and other heavy weapons in another clump of trees (clump "B") farther off, and there's no way you can approach "A" or support the attack on "A" without being in LOS of "B", drop some smoke in front of "B".

Hope that makes sense...?

[xerxes]

In general, it is advisable to lead with your infantry and use the tanks at longer range to support the infantry. Setup the tanks so they have LOS to woods/buildings that could be hiding enemy mgs and infantry. That way when your infantry comes under fire you have something to reply with.

As with any rule, there' times when you need to break the infantry leads rule.

[Herr Oberst]

Originally posted by Kinjari:

What is (generally speaking) the most effective use of armor in combat?

To crush your enemies...

To drive them before you...

And to hear the lamentation of the women...

[Keith]

If you want to be successful in CM you need to learn the essential tactic of overwatch. Overwatch is the technique where you always have a large firebase of troops/tanks providing covering fire while you advance groups of troops/tanks towards the enemy. You can use bounding overwatch where you leapfrog your units taking turns in overwatch and moving. If you think the enemy some antitank assets around a corner or over a ridge then use the scoot and shoot command to pop over the ridge/around the corner and quickly back out of site. Also always try to have your armor in overwatch in hull down positions. Move your infantry in short rushes from cover to cover. Finally use Area fire to supress suspected enemy postions. Machine guns and support weapons are very good at area fire.

[vanwag]

I think it depends alot on the terrain... open fields you probably need to let the armor lead... forest/city the armor should be closely supported by the infantry.

Also it sounds like you need to be using 'scout' units to probe for enemy positions/strengths rather than rush blindly into unknown positions. Halftracks/Kubelwagons/scout cars/light tanks are made for this kind of duty and were used as such in real battles. If you're purchasing units in Quick Battles, invest in a few of these.

[jgdpzr]

Originally posted by Kinjari:

Ok...I must first say that Im relatively new to TBS games and really to strategy games in general but I do realize that the situation (terrain, objective, opposition) and equipment are the two major variables in determining sound tactics in battle. So, my question...

What is (generally speaking) the most effective use of armor in combat? I had always assumed (thats where I went wrong!) that armor utilized as a spearhead supporting infantry is usually a sound bet (all other variables such as terrain, weather, and estimates of enemy strength considered). Yet most of my engagements so far (Ive only had the game for about a week) have been dismal defeats. If I attempted to spearhead with armor and support infantry following (using armor for cover) most often a couple of AT's destroy my tanks before I can get my infantry in a position to eliminate them. If I push with my infantry and use armor as a backstop in support from the rear my troops usually end up tangled in engagements with enemy infantry while my armor is decimated from AT and/or enemy tanks from waaay across the map.

Any advice to a struggling n00b? I must say this game is mind-blowing and I love it. Realize Ive got lots to learn but hopefully can pick the brains of you vet grog's here and learn a thing or two about a thing or two.

Thanks in advance!

What you are experiencing is very typical. Your assumption that an armored spearhead was a sound tactic is very accurate. However, it may be somewhat misleading. What it meant was that having tanks in the vanguard of your forces was advisable. It did not mean, however, that they should saunter out by themselves, ahead of accompanying support on a CM sized map.

Think of it like this: View your entire CM force mix as the vanguard of a larger (imaginary) force behind you. In this sense, the tanks are in the right place--up front. However, this doesn't mean you have to actually lead with your tanks on the CM battlefield. The CM battlefield represents the actual cutting edge of operational manuever. Use the complimentary elements of the combined-arms team to mutually support and protect each other. Usually, this means moving in bounds until contact, using less-valuable assets for reconoitering the enemy (infantry and/or ACs depending on the required pace of the advance are such examples), using infantry for close defense and to hold objectives, guns for flank defense, artillery to overcome enemy strongpoints/AT assets, etc. Before long, you'll get the feel for how each asset compliments others.

A couple final tips for armor survival: Go hulldown whenever possible, use the new shoot-n-scoot tool and use oblique angles (example: advance at a 30 degree angle to expected targets rather than head-on).

[Bullethead]

Kinjari said:

What is (generally speaking) the most effective use of armor in combat?

What others have said so far is usually the best idea, ie, keep the tanks back. It does, however, depend on the situation. Sometimes "back" means at the friendly map edge, while at other times it means maybe only 100m or less behind the point man.

I think the key to deciding how best to deploy and employ your armor is realizing that all attacks have to be planned around the available fire support. Basically, the grunts can't advance without concentrated firepower clearing a path for them, and in CMBB this is best done by armor. So what you have to do is look at the map and plan a route to the objectives where your armor can best provide fire support.

You also have to account for 2 basic features of almost all CM battles. The first is that your armor can't start blasting away at defending infantry and MGs until you've dealt with the enemy armor. So the "mid-game" of most CM battles is a struggle for "tank superiority". Whoever wins this will then use his armor to smash the other side's infantry. Thus, you've got to position your armor in anticipation of this phase of the battle, in addition to being able to support the main infantry advance.

The other usual feature is that you WILL lose AFVs to ATG ambushes. ATGs are IMHO harder to dispose of than enemy armor because usually your first indication of them is when they hit one of your tanks. And spotted guns often have the advantage 1-on-1 with your other tanks, so unless you can get them with mortars or arty, you have to take them out with several tanks at once and expect to lose at least 1 of these as well.

There often isn't a whole lot you can do to prevent an ATG ambush from happening. The best bet is careful map study during the set-up phase, to pick a route of advance that limits potential ambush sites. This has the added benefit of shielding your other units as well. Then use your arty to barrage as many of these possible ambush sites as possible. After that, all you can do is hope for the best and expose the minimum number of tanks at any one time.

In CMBB, the old tactic of leading with a light vehicle to draw the fire of AT units isn't as effective as in CMBO. For starters, vehicles now have C&C like infantry. Second, there are scads of ATRs out there. So often the light vehicles get shot up by ATRs without revealing tank-killing ATGs.

[Kinjari]

Thanks a bunch all!

Great advice, yes indeed the concept of overwatch and bounding cover are some key elements that I have not been employing...as well as the use of smoke to screen suspected LOS that would leave me vulnerable and scouting / angle of attack on enemy armor.

There is so much to consider and account for, and to work with. I cant imagine how any commander was able to accomplish all of this sucessfully IRL. Seeing men and equipment solely as tools to accomplish the end to your means...and then having the fortitude to order them on to accomplish those means as determined by you, the conductor in an orchestra of death and destruction. This game is truely amazing in its depth. As Patton once was heard to say...

'God help me, I love it so...'

[blackbellamy]

keep your armor as tight as possible - if you spread them out you will have the advantage of covering the entire battlefield, but unfortunately when you see the enemy armor it will be rare that you will get fire superiority because not all your tanks will be able to bring fire to bear on one target.

if on the assault, try to drive up one side so you can eliminate worry about one flank. send in the infantry and/or scout cars first, find the enemy, then move your armor to suppress and eliminate them.

enemy tanks are not that hard to spot usually - your scout/lead element's main worry is to find any ATG guns, as these usually are not seen by your armor until they fire.

[Warlord69]

Not all of these tactics will work on the eastern front though. Sometimes you have to spend 15 rounds dodging arty and advancing with Inf+heavy weapons, while keeping all your other weapons hiding behind a hill, till you spot the weakness in the enemy's line with your inf+scouts...and then your reserve out and punch all the way through, then clean up the other flank.

It all depends on... well, lots of different things, but you learn those things with experiance. What weapons you have access too, what weapons your enemy has, the terrian, the weather...this list goes on and on, BTS has been nice over to model a lot of them. Lucky its less then real life warfare.

Sometimes a mechanized assault up a wide open area without much cover will totally surprise your enemy, and you can smash his flank hard, then hit him with your slower forces. Not very often, but Coup de Mains sometimes give great rewards.

Sometimes what you do one day doesn't work, but the next day it would. Your not always a bad commander, you have to make a decision, and go with it, follow through. You have to at least try, using everything you can think of to hurt your enemy.

War is an Art. You don't become Michalango after 5 paintings.

[PeterX]

Bullethead posted:

In CMBB, the old tactic of leading with a light vehicle to draw the fire of AT units isn't as effective as in CMBO. For starters, vehicles now have C&C like infantry. Second, there are scads of ATRs out there. So often the light vehicles get shot up by ATRs without revealing tank-killing ATGs.

Well, that will make you think twice before leading with AFVs and HTs. However the ATR teams, at least the Tungsten equipped ones, won't open fire on trucks or, uh, kubelwagons. I see scope for abuse there.

Additionally, Bullethead, I can see how vehicular C&C could inhibit free scouting for the early Soviets but not the Germans. Or not much. Their radius of action is, IIRC, 600m+ with radios. And their radios don't break.

[Zebulon Pleasure Beast]

Most of the time (since I'm forced to play small QB's due to lack of computing power) I prefer to use my tanks in overwatch of the infantry advancing some distance in front of them and overwatching each other. The distance between the tanks and infantry also varies from terrain to terrain. The tanks need to be able to swiftly suppress any threats to the infantry before your poor landsers/ivans get broken and run to mama.

Then again, in larger battles, with lots of time at hand, I prefer to use armoured cars and scout infantry to probe and try to locate a possible weak spot in the enemy line. If one is found, try to rush a spearhead of armour throught it to ravage everything. A human player might lure you into a trap with this, though.

Recently I've played lots of QB's attacking vs. the AI, using the tanks on overwatch, with terrific rate of success. Mostly I end up losing some 3 men with the enemy losing 150.

Having said this, always remember to be flexible, and adapt to the situation at hand.

[Nippy]

I always move my forces as one big steam roller. Cheap and expendable armored car in the front, infantry a little ways behind with the armor and support weapons right behind them. Plus lots of pre-attack smoke and arty missions not to mention a little bit of on map heavy arty guns for extra support.

I always manage to pull at least a 5 to 1 kill ratio over the AI.

[Bullethead]

PeterX said:

Well, that will make you think twice before leading with AFVs and HTs. However the ATR teams, at least the Tungsten equipped ones, won't open fire on trucks or, uh, kubelwagons. I see scope for abuse there.

Why? MGs and squads kill trucks and kubels with ease. This at least is an improvement over CMBO, where soft vehicles were nearly impossible to kill at all. In CMBB, however, soft vehicles ain't safe w/in 400m of a mere rifle squad. So even if ATRs don't target them, you've got plenty of other things to take out the trucks and kubels.

Additionally, Bullethead, I can see how vehicular C&C could inhibit free scouting for the early Soviets but not the Germans. Or not much. Their radius of action is, IIRC, 600m+ with radios. And their radios don't break.

Well, it's like this... There's an incentive to buy vehicle platoons because those in C&C work better than those beyond C&C, just like grunts. Plus you get a quantity discount: 3 tanks in a platoon are cheaper in total than 3 identical tanks bought independently. But in your typical small battle, the players usually don't have enough points to buy a platoon each of both tanks and light vehicles. They need tanks for their firepower so they buy a tank platoon. This means if they want some light vehicle scouts, they have to buy them individually, which means they are always going to be out of C&C if sent out scouting.