Rear Screen Element - A different way to fight the recon battle?

[billcarey]

I've been reading some of the posts on how to fight the recon battle and the use of FSEs and whatnot and I was wondering if anyone has (historically or otherwise) used rear screening elements in the defensive.

The rear screening element that I use is usually:

1 x Platoon CO

2 x Volksgrenadier Squads

1 x HMG-42

1 x 81mm Mortar

1 x 20mm Flak Gun

1 x 75mm AT Gun

1 x Sharpshooter

This super-platoon gets placed about 200m behind my MLR which is composed of mostly SMG troops and Panzerschrecks and is used in an hit and fade role.

Each rear screening element engages any recon elements it sees with the appropriate weapon, with the intent of drawing out either a strong infantry response to be ambushed by the MLR or an armored response to be dealt with by the 20mm flak or the 75mm pak.

I generally use these teams in pairs in a thousand point defense, and have had fantastic success against the AI (not surprising) and some success against live opponents.

Just wondering if anyone else has located their recon screening elements behind their MLR - I suspect it has some advantages.

- Bill

[Redwolf]

Do I understand the point about this is that you engage enemy recon units by shooting over the head of the MLR units?

[billcarey]

Originally posted by redwolf:

Do I understand the point about this is that you engage enemy recon units by shooting over the head of the MLR units?

That's the plan. You use long range assets that the recon elements can't respond to hopefully forcing your opponent to reveal his long range hitters which you can then kill, allowing you to use your MLR in either a hit and fade or counterattack role.

If you want I can send you what a defense would look like on an autogenerated map. Because your counter recon troops can't be rushed (they are far away and there's an MLR in front of them) they can be very spread out, which makes them a poor artillery target too.

[Redwolf]

Sure, please post a screenshot if you can.

It seems to me that a force arrangement like this will very often require to have the MLR units in positions where they are overly exposed to long-range fire.

[Tarquelne]

I do something like that, though not as systematically. I'll often just have some long range weapon - often mortars or machine guns - with a long field of view and NOT placed near other units, and preferably placed somewhere with lots of good cover. (In other words, somewhere where one might like to hide many units.) It won't be hidden at the start of the game. It'll engage the enemy ASP, and hopefully draw some interesting fire and slow down the enemy, too. Placing a Stealth leader near them is good. Not being able to locate the fire for awhile often draws a bigger response.

There are numerous variations: Have the unit "shoot and scoot" (or at least "scoot" as much as a HMG or gun is capable.) Immedietly respond to any return fire with lots of mortars. Force-fire a light calibur gun at a distant target and then hide. Have a concentration of AFVs pop up, fire and hide again near the end of a turn, and then have them all move by covered routes elsewhere.

In bad weather I once fooled someone into thinking fire from a Wespe was the beginning of a barrage (run, infantry, run!), and a spotting round or two was from the Wespe (resulted in the responding Sherman getting Immobilized in the barrage). Ah, that was good. Of course, this was a LAN game, and I was also distracting him and "playing with his mind" at the time, too. Heh heh.

I think of the units I described as "bait," or deceptions. I like the RSE idea, though. I'll have to try it.

[billcarey]

This is definitely a very open defense. It works pretty well when you don't have suitable terrain for a good closed defense.

1000 point Allied Attack

March '45

Small Hills, Medium Trees, Village

German OOB:

294 1 x Volksgrenadier Company

99 1 x Volksgrenadier Platoon

56 2 x HMG 42

46 2 x Panzerschreck

54 2 x 81mm Mortar

134 2 x 75mm Pak

42 2 x 20mm Flak

47 1 x 75mm Artillery Spotter

102 1 x 120mm Mortar Spotter

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

874 Base cost of defense

You can add to this something to shore up whatever's weakest in your playing style. I'm wretched at tank and gun fighting so I'm going to shore up my at defense with a 50mm Pak and a StuG III. Pretty standard stuff.

It's going to take me a while to get a screen shot together. Probably the easiest thing would be for me to e-mail you a scenario with one of my defenses set up.

My understanding of the counter recon stuff was that your counter recon effort should be aimed at forcing the attacker to reveal his valuable assets (tanks, massed infantry, heavy artillery) and attrit them where possible while not revealing your main defensive body.

I guess most people accomplish that by having a skirmish line that the attacker must cut through and in doing so reveal his stronger forces. The rear screen accomplishes this by engaging his recon assets at a range where they are unable to respond effectively. This should force him to either conduct his recon under heavy fire and losses or bring something to bear that can respond at that range.

If he dumps his heavy artillery on your spread out skirmish line all the better. If he brings tanks or assault guns to bear on your line, you have AT guns to kill them. If he rushes his his screen forward you can counterattack with your MLR which is supported by your rear screen.

Just some thoughts.

[Fionn]

If something works against a poor player it doesn't mean the tactic is, in itself, sound.

[ June 21, 2002, 07:27 AM: Message edited by: Fionn ]

[Tarquelne]

IOW the term "Rear Screen Element" is incorrect IMO.

"Rear Forward Screen Element"?

"Rear Main Line of Resistance Forward Screen Element"?

What you are actually describing seems to be a classic example of a heavy weapons platoon or company in action

The heavy weapons platoon often engaged the enemy's recon elements?

billcarey - what's the appropriate target for the Vlksgrnder squads?

[JasonC]

Yes billcarrey, I do that sort of thing all the time. It needn't imply the MLR is exposed to the enemy either. The classic case, in many ways the best case (which as such you don't get, have to make do with less, etc) is two ridges a few hundred yards apart.

Put the MLR infantry "block" on the reverse slope of the front ridge in cover. Put the heavy weapons on the back slope just below the crest. When scouts appear on the crest, break them with the heavy weapons only, and only as many as you need. The MLR continues to hide. When the enemy main effort appears, the MLR unhides.

There can be problems with it, if the scouts get too close and your forward men break fire discipline, opening up too soon. But that depends in turn on how close to the LOS break the MLR guys are - or, otherwise put, how long the heavy weapons have to deal with the scouts before they get too close to the MLR.

Another version is less dependent on perfect hills, and instead uses angled crossfire. Imagine wide areas of open ground with scattered bodies of woods. You put your MLR block in some central bodies of woods, but on the *back* side of them.

The heavy weapons go out on the flanks, on forward or "corner" positions, giving them LOS to their own front and also to the open ground ahead of the MLR body of woods, through "open lanes". AP mines along a portion of the MLR treeline facing the enemy can also be added.

I generally like a larger fire group overall, though. I also use portions of it as a reserve, and the functions blend into each other. The portion that opens up "screens", the rest support the MLR by range fire as a classic FSE, or can act as a counterattack reserve when that is what is wanted.

For example, VG company plus VG rifle platoon as fourth platoon. Guns, teams, etc. The two SMG platoons go in the "block", along with schrecks.

The two VG rifles each give a squad to the company HQ, creating 3 "mini-platoons" of HQ, 2 VG rifle. Each of these then adds HMGs, snipers, FOs, or guns to round out each platoon position.

The platoon HQ versions go on the flanks, sighted inward to cross their fires ahead of the block if possible, or at least with one seeing there. The company HQ platoon goes directly behind the block, midway between the two flanking groups. It is sighting to cover the "joint" between each flanking group and the block.

So, if the enemy comes around the left, the right flank platoon is free. It becomes the reserve, and its infantry can rally on the company HQ position. Giving 4 squads there and 2 HQs, enough for a platoon scale counterattack or reinforcement where needed.

Compared to a forward deployment of a few HMG teams, for example, it is harder for the enemy to just overrun your scout-suppressors. If e.g. I put 2-3 HMGs forward and used them to shoot up half squads instead (everything farther back still hiding), then he can just push a platoon as each of them in turn and overrun them. But he can't get at a "back" FSE so easily, or if he tries to with a full platoon he runs into the MLR "block".

Another way of putting all of this is that the recon-suppression screening role can sometimes be accomplished by sending ammo rather than men. It does work best against small scale recon efforts, though - 1-2 light armor and 2-4 half squads, that kind of thing. You don't want to expose lots of gun positions in the course of breaking just his recon guys.

[billcarey]

Originally posted by Fionn:

What you are describing isn't what you are terming it...

Sorry 'bout the terminology - learn something every day. Were heavy weapons companies employed against recon elements before the MLR engaged or were they brought into the battle once the MLR committed?

It's not so much the use of heavy supporting weapons, it's using them before you engage your main line that I'm mostly concerned with.

Thanks

[billcarey]

Tarqulene,

"what's the appropriate target for the Vlksgrnder squads?"

They open up usually right before his assault makes contact with the MLR and serve as a mobile reserve once the battle is fully committed. (I've been tempted to move four squads to the command of the company HQ as a super-reserve platoon, but I haven't tried that in a game yet.)

Jason,

I agree with everything you say until the last little sencence. (In fact, the force composition you describe is almost exactly what I use most often)

You don't want to expose lots of gun positions in the course of breaking just his recon guys.

Aah, but I do. If I expose guns he will be forced to either let them wail on his forces or kill them somehow. His infantry isn't close enough to be effective, and I'm happy to trade light flak guns and HMGs for large modules of artillery. If he rolls out his tanks, I have long range AT assets to destroy them.

You can use this not just to do counter-recon work, but actually to do recon work. If you have a forward screen, he can punch through that with light recon assets and some infantry. If you have a ranged weapons recon screen he has to reveal heavier assets to remove it (or expend valuable arty on low priority targets). That's why I like it better than a forward screen.

[JasonC]

I understand being ready to accept arty fire, and welcoming AFV counters. But it seems to me you are forgeting the bane of lots o' little guns, which are light mortars.

If you reveal too many gun positions just dealing with a few scouts, you can wind up having them silenced by enemy light mortars long before the main battle opens. At pretty trivial cost to the attacker, who can sneak the observing HQs into LOS without exposing the mortars.

It will take up some time, to be sure. If he trades off his mortar ammo for a few HMGs or 20mm FLAK, fine. But when it comes to things like 75mm infantry guns (or PAK, or 37mm FLAK), I'd rather have them for the main firefight if possible.

[ June 14, 2002, 08:13 PM: Message edited by: JasonC ]

[Fionn]

If something works against a poor player it doesn't mean the tactic is, in itself, sound.

[ June 21, 2002, 07:28 AM: Message edited by: Fionn ]

[Fionn]

If something works against a poor player it doesn't mean the tactic is, in itself, sound.

[ June 21, 2002, 07:29 AM: Message edited by: Fionn ]

[imported_Hiram Sedai]

Originally posted by Fionn:

If you don't cover an IV line with your men and weapons the enemy can and will just waltz over it whenever he feels like it. A HILL (not covered by weapons systems) is NOT a barrier to movement and recon if the enemy commander is determined.

Would that IV line have Glucose or Saline? What is an "IV line" as it pertains to CM?

I do have questions about your "recon in force ideas" as I like to call them. I'm wondering if the purpose of scouting and attriting the enemy with front soldiers will defeat the purpose of defending land. I know you say that you use infantry to "mop up" the remaining forces, but wouldn't you end up sacrifice your forces by sending them so far forward? I ask this because the nature of the game dictates that the Attacker has more points to spend, therefore has more forces to attack with.

Fionn, I'm not trying to be pedantic, just inquisitive. So, here is a summary of my questions in a format you can easily reply to:

1. When you start, your troops are in foxholes (fighting positions). Do you waste the advantage of having them by shifting your forces so far forward?

2. You have X points to spend on your troops and the attacker has X points to spend on his troops. With your aggressive scouting, do you act as if you are playing the role of the attacker even though you don't have as many troops or armor?

As a disclaimer, it's entirely possible (probable even) that I am still of the mindset of defending land and flags as opposed to attrition of the enemy so he is incapable of moving forward aggressively.

Any replies are welcome.

[Fionn]

If something works against a poor player it doesn't mean the tactic is, in itself, sound.

[ June 21, 2002, 07:31 AM: Message edited by: Fionn ]

[Fionn]

If something works against a poor player it doesn't mean the tactic is, in itself, sound.

[ June 21, 2002, 07:33 AM: Message edited by: Fionn ]

[imported_Hiram Sedai]

Fionn,

I guess I'll have to see and experience some of what you are saying in order to really understand it. If I had said the same thing, it would be false bravado (cut to ribbons etc)

I'd like to trade passwords after the 3 turn PBEM game we have going. That way I will know how you emasculated, eviscerated, bludgeoned, and violated my troops.

The odd thing is that I still won't be timid in our fracas. I've got to know. Make me a Billy BadAss CM player, Fionn. I want to beat JDMorse!! hehe

[Fionn]

Mike,

No worries mate. Password trading was always part of the deal anyway. It has to be for debriefing purposes etc.

P.s. If you want to see this from the "other side of the hill" so to speak ask Harv about our current game in the Pool. It has been a somewhat torrid time for him .

[Fionn]

" It accomplishes all the roles of a screen without needing the physical infantry element. "

So, why don't you tell us all what ALL the roles of a screen are. I believe that a deficit in your knowledge about ALL the roles of a screen lies at the core of some of your rather far-featched comments here ( referring to the ability of a reverse slope MLR backed up by heavy weapons to fulfill ALL the roles of a forward screen).

Please enlighten us.

[JasonC]

I think the misunderstanding here, if I may, is a bit of confusion over the different roles of terrain masking and sending firepower instead of men. Fionn is correct that just sitting behind an LOS block won't stop scouts. But he doesn't seem to me to have acknowledged the actual idea, which the original poster was discussing and in my examples.

Which was not at all relying solely on an LOS block. The idea is to use the superior range of heavy weapons to pin enemy scouts before they reach one's own MLR, without revealing your MLR, and without imposing a screen of your own infantry ahead of your MLR. What is substituting for the physical screen by a maneuver-element FSE is ranged fire.

One must send some sort of firepower to prevent easy close approach of your main positions by enemy scouts. Call that need the "screening function". (There is another role of screens to be sure - to spot the enemy. But defenders can often perform that with a few isolated and hidden teams, since the attacker must advance into his defended zone). Then the question is, what can create that firepower?

Infantry can at close range, if the infantry is positioned ahead of your MLR. That is the traditional FSE idea. Ranged weapons can at long range, if they have LOS to positions ahead of your MLR that enemy scouts must cross in order to locate a hiding MLR. That is the alternative the original poster suggested.

The role of the LOS block in my examples may be somewhat misunderstood. It is not that enemy scouts cannot find you because you are behind a hill or at the back of a body of woods. The purpose of the LOS block is not to hide from his scouts. Firepower into open ground areas will deal with his scouts.

The LOS block has a different purpose. And one that is necessary as a "counter to the usual counter". See, trying to stop the scouts by opening up with long ranged heavy weapons has a potential weakness. It reveals a few heavy weapon positions while the bulk of the defending force is hiding, and wants to stay hiding.

Now, the attacker has overall odds and therefore superior overall firepower. If only a few units on the already weaker defenders are firing, then they can be badly outshot at long range e.g. by tanks, overwatch mortars, FOs, and occasionally groups of "fire base" machineguns.

So the idea is, if you are going to stop his scouts with ranged firepower, you need some way of protecting that ranged firepower from his ranged firepower support. Which is typically well behind his scouting element, because he does not want to advance his main body into undiscovered kill sacks.

Conventional FSE infantry typically uses the method of ambush and fall back. The falling back is essential, because the attacker can quickly bring far greater odds to bear on the outnumbered defender FSE. The FSE wants a short firefight with the enemy scouts only and then to get out of dodge before heavier stuff arrives to counter them. Simple enough.

But notice, that what is key about that procedure is that the FSE breaks LOS to the follow-on attackers. That is what lets them stay alive. Now, ranged firepower from heavy weapons is often less mobile. (AFVs have both, but not letting him know where those are is often half the point of all this). So what is their substitute for "fall back"?

And it is there that the LOS block enters. The enemy seperates his scouts from his overwatch voluntarily. He creates a front-to-back split in his force. He must, else the limited losses idea behind the scouting expedition is defeated, and he walks into unseen kill sacks with his main body.

As soon as he seperates that way, he makes it potentially possible to engage just the scouts and not his overwatch behind them. Even with stationary heavy weapons. That is what the defensive positioning is meant to achieve.

You don't want long LOS lines from all the defending heavy weapons clear to all the attacker's overwatch. You do need reasonably long LOS lines to open ground ahead of your MLR, if firepower is to pin the enemy scouts before they reach that MLR.

How do you get one without the other? That is the problem that can be solved by either successive ridge lines (the front forming the LOS block, the rear providing wide LOS to "your" side of it to heavy weapons), or by inward diagonal sight lines reaching open ground in front of a "backside defended" wood.

Firepower stops scouts. It can be delivered in different ways. Avoiding the attacker's riposte is then the key question. Because he expects his scouts to get shot at by something. He just wants to kill whatever that something is, in a many on few, and so even the score for his loss of some of his scouts.

The defender's problem is to deliver the scout-stopping firepower and still get out of the way of the riposte - without exposing his MLR prematurely. An infantry FSE that uses ambush and fall back is one way to do that. But not the only way.

[ June 18, 2002, 04:52 AM: Message edited by: JasonC ]

[billcarey]

(sorry for the hiatus - way too much work)

Jason hit the nail on the head.

I'm not arguing that you shouldn't have a FSE or that terrain can do it for you.

There are (imho) multiple arrangements of a FSE.

One is a group of infantry in front of your MLR that engages the enemy first.

Advantages:

1. The screening infantry are cheap in terms of points

2. They present a physical barrier to the attacker

Disadvantages:

1. The screen can be broken with local (short range) pressure

Two is several clusters of heavy weapons placed behind your MLR which engage the enemy first.

Advantages:

1. The screening heavy weapons are immune to a local attack (there is a big MLR in front of them)

2. The attacker must reveal his heavy and support weapons to remove the heavy weapons screen.

Disadvantages:

1. If the attacker just rushes his main body forward, the rear screen won't slow him down much. (But I suspect this is true of a infantry screen too)

2. The screen is more expensive than a light infantry screen.

The reason I tend to favor a heavy weapons screen is that it accomplishes two things a forward screen does not.

First, it disguises the position of the MLR. Many players I've played and used this against expend their artillery on the FBRRWHWSE (Forward, but really rear with heavy weapons screening element) because they see it first and it looks like a juicy arty target (guns and hmgs and mortars)

Second, it forces the attacker to reveal more of his assets to circumvent than a forward screen does. Thus it not only accomplishes counter recon, but active recon for the defender.

More when I'm back from work.

[imported_Hiram Sedai]

I thought I understood and now I don't. What is really the point of having a "rear screen"? I thought that the MRL was in the rear of your forces with the FSE in the front. Hiram's confused once more.

[Tarquelne]

Originally posted by Hiram Sedai:

I thought I understood and now I don't. What is really the point of having a "rear screen"? I thought that the MRL was in the rear of your forces with the FSE in the front. Hiram's confused once more.

You have to go back to the origional post, and ignore much of the later bickering.

Two of the primary roles of a FSE are taking a bite out of the enemy's recon forces and gathering some intel, right? Oh, yeah, you'd also like your opponent to think the FSE _is_ the MRL - that's important too.

bc's "RSE" is intended to do the same thing... his "RSE" looks much like a standard MRL grouping, but it's _used_ differently.

An RSE would tend open up on the enemy far sooner than MRL units. The RSE isn't really trying to defeat the enemy's main body of units, but rather to make life hard for the recon forces.

Where you want to keep the MRL hidden from view as long as possible (and would certainly rather not have it fired on) you _want_ the enemy to try to hit the RSE elements. They're placed behind your MRL, so fire on the RSE won't endanger the MRL. And your opponent might think the RSE is your MRL, confusing him about the actual location of your MRL. If your opponent allows weapons capable of hitting your RSE to fire you have a good chance of spotting them. So there's the RSE's "intelligence gathering" ability.

Now, you can do the same things with an MRL group, sure. The differences between part of the MRL and the RSE is (bit of a recap here):

The RSE isn't part of the MRL. It might not be able to bring it's weapons to bear on your main "kill zone," for example.

FSE elements can easily take some heavy casualties if you're not carefull. The RSE would also be casualty prone. ("Well, there goes a HMG and 2 mortars... but I nailed that AC... and know I know where a big-gunned AFV is.")

I think the term "RSE" is quite clear... though I on a grognard infested board one needs to be extra careful about termenology. How about "Rearward Anti-Recon Elements" or RARE?

Personally, I wouldn't want to use an RSE instead of an FSE, except in rather exceptional circumstances. I think an RSE would be easier to "defeat" (ie - deny it success.) However, I think it's good to keep the concept in mind - just realize an RSE is a way to use units that would otherwise probably be in the MRL, not in the FSE.

BTW - you said "the MRL is to the rear of your forces and the FSE is in the front." That'd put your forces _between_ the MRL and the FSE, now wouldn't it? Don't get too hung up on the bare words.

[ June 18, 2002, 11:08 AM: Message edited by: Tarqulene ]

[imported_Hiram Sedai]

Dude, I get it now. Thanks. I've done the same thing before with having the rear forces engage the enemy and having the enemy move forward to be suprised by forces that were nearby and hiding.

I'm just a bit unused to the terminology being used. Thanks for the replies.