German Infantry in the Closed Defense

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

German infantry in the "closed" defense

Lots of CM players like the heavy German tanks, but there is much more to the German army than that. Especially on the defense, the Germany infantry forces have special methods and weapons that can have Allied attackers pulling their hair out if you use them correctly. While there are several general options for defenders, one that the Germans are especially good at is the "closed" defense, in its most common form a "reverse slope" infantry defense.

An "open", or "forward" defense, is one in which the defender sets up long-ranged weapons in locations with wide fields of fire over open areas, with the idea of shooting "early and often", and killing the attacker before they can get close. The strength of this common type of defense is the vunerability of moving attackers in open ground, compared to stationary defenders in foxholes or buildings. But the drawback of a forward defense is that those wide fields of fire work both ways, and soon the more numerous attackers have everyone shooting at you. Often the defenders just do not have enough firepower to fight this way, and trying it gets the defenders killed outright, or the defense gets pried apart after several positions have been overwhelmed by the attacker's superior firepower.

By contrast, a "closed" (or "back", or "hidden") defense does not seriously dispute the attacker's crossing wide areas of open ground. A few delaying machineguns or indirect fire missions may be added, but mostly the attacker can get pretty close to the defender without being seriously molested. But then the fun begins.

The main idea of the closed defense is to figure out where the attacker can set up bases of fire from which to out-shoot you, then locate the defenders exclusively in places that cannot be seen from those firebases. Other things flow from that idea as consequences, but the initial idea is clear enough - stay away from his (ranged) firepower.

The most "canonical" version, of which the other types are really adaptations to other settings or types of terrain, is the "reverse slope" defense. The rest of this article will deal with the reverse slope defense proper, using a ridgeline as the main terrain obstacle. At the end I will suggest some of the other cases in which some of the same ideas can be applied.

Instead of explaining all the principles involved abstractly at first, I will start with a sample set-up (from a recent QB against the AI), so you have some idea what I am talking about. I could go into all of the factors involved in elaborate detail, but to make this article more comprehensible (especially without a map), I will stick to the main points.

Instead of long-ranged weapons, all along the crestline itself is sewn a field of mines. Trying to block a road? Then the road itself gets AT mines, the rest of the fields are AP. You have the option of placing an AP mine behind (closer to you) the AT mines to plug the anti-infantry gap in the field there, or you can leave it open, purposefully, which gives him a route in and you a route out from behind your minefields, but a very narrow one.

There are several fine points about using mines in CM, and a realism-minded German defender should try to learn them. The Germans historically deployed about 21 million mines in WW II, which means they had several per Allied soldier and around 100 per allied tank - or 400 of the things for every tank of their own. Compared to their historical abundance, they are a little too expensive in CM, perhaps 50% more than their proper cost. But that is a game-design quibble.

First when deploying them, understand that single minefield markers all on their lonesome are pretty useless. They will cause 1-2 casualties when stumbled upon, then be avoided for the rest of the fight by all concerned. Instead, you want a field at least 100 yards long, meaning 5 AP mines. That is the minimum for a decent effect, and the usefulness of mines will go up with the number you have. Deploy the mines side by side, with either no gaps or narrow ones, irregularly. When putting two side by side, stagger them a little front to back, so the forward edge does not look like it was created with a ruler. This also allows a second field behind a first occasionally, if an opponent likes bringing engineers to clear your fields - you may suprise him with the "second depth" field. And it is a useful way to plug an AP layer and an AT one on the same road.

Minefields are not impenetrable barriers in CM. Engineers can remove them with time, but in addition ordinary infantry can sometimes walk clear through a single-depth AP minefield without setting one off, by pure chance. Generally they will take 1-3 casualties and be stopped and pinned in the field, but the results will vary. AT minefields can also "miss" in this fashion, but they have a good chance of immobilizing even the heaviest tank. They do not effect infantry, though, since men are too light to set them off.

The minefields on the crest are an extremely useful component of a "closed" defense. They make it difficult or impossible for the attacker to set up ordinary infantry bases of fire on the crest itself. They tend to cut off and isolate forward elements that make it through the minefields, or the gaps between them, from support by their "friends". They make withdrawl difficult. And they channel the attack toward the gaps in the mines, or the flanks of the field-line. All in all, the minefield is the "shield" of the closed defense.

A critical idea of the closed defense is to defeat small portions of the attacking force at a time, with superior local odds despite the overall numerical edge favoring the attacker. All of the attackers on the far side of the crest might as well be on Mars, from the perspective of one of the few squads already past the crest, which feel like they are facing the whole German army. You can't shoot *through* a hill. So only the men past the crest, are available to fire on the defenders on that side.

This gives the attacker only a few choices. If he limits his men in each spot of terrain to the usual amounts, then the defenders, firing from a greater depth down and behind the hill, and also in the case of the Germans having lots of MP40s at close range, are likely to win the firefight and chew through the attackers. In CM, lopsided odds in a short-range firefight result in extremely bloody losses for the locally outnumbered side, while the other side gets off comparatively lightly. Many of the less numerous local force get suppressed, aren't firing at all or frequently, while the more numerous side pours in the fire and remains unsuppressed.

If instead the attack desides to use his numbers despite the extremely limited available space, between the crest and mines and the fire-spitting defenders, he can concentrate a "big push" of bulked up attackers. Then it is time for the defenders to back off to their secondary foxholes farther down the slope, temporarily, while the defending mortars plaster the near side of the crest.

The bunched up attacker's numbers will not do them any good against mortar fire, and instead men will fall faster in proportion to how tightly they are packed into the available space. The line of SMG fire is still there, in a somewhat wider ring, holding the men into the "pocket". The mines are holding them in from the rear. The mortars come down from above. Not a nice place to go to work. After the barrage has shaken the massed intruders, the defenders counterattack rapidly, shooting still cowering men with their SMGs until they die or run.

The mortars are as essential a part of the "closed" defense as the mines and the SMGs - in fact, more so. They allow the defender to defeat attempt to concentrate numbers by merely packing the men in. They also are the defender's means of reaching "over" the ridge.

Another thing the attacker can try, is to blast a way through with the artillery. Here the defender has to use judgment and be flexible, and the secondary positions farther down the slope are essential. The hardest part of conducting a "close" defense is deciding when to stay just below the crest, and when to fall back down the slopes for cover, and how far. This is a matter of assessing the state of the attackers overall, and the danger from their artillery.

Understand, the defender does not face the same requirement to concentrate men in order to fire at the crest-line and just beyond it. His infantry firepower may be highest there, but all his MGs, light cannons, and longer-ranged infantry fire too, can sweep the whole "backside" of the ridge, from positions down in the valley or on the front of the next ridge farther back toward the defender. The defender wants to "hug" the hill high up, because that limits the space the attacker has to deploy. But he does not *have* to, and if doing so would bunch him up too much, he just backs off some.

With the Germans, another benefit of the "closed" defense is it puts the begining of enemy LOS and the effective range of a Panzerfaust in the same overall scale. This makes even ordinary infantry quite dangerous tank-killers, and avoiding getting too close will often reduce the attacker's vehicle support firepower dramatically. They just won't have LOS to targets turn after turn, and getting close enough to have one will look (and be) too dangerous. That lets the infantry vs. infantry fight progress on closer to even odds.

For longer lines of sight, like down a road or to a bald hill-top, use Panzerschrecks to suppliment the shorter-range Panzerfausts. Try to keep the range at around half the stated maximums for most effective shooting, though. Meaning, the Schreck at ~100 yards, and the fausts at 30-50 yards, or roughly the distance you can see through trees.

In addition to the essential mortars, mines, and MP40s, a fourth "M" is the supporting machineguns. These belong on the flanks of the main blocking position. If they are forward far enough, they can deliver some flanking fire on the enemy as he is approaching your ridge, but do not use all of them for that or try to keep it up very long, or you will just lose them. (Although it is a fine supplimental mission for e.g. 1 log bunker with MG).

Generally, you want the MGs farther back. The main options are wider out and lower down on the same slope as your main infantry position, or across the valley about half-way up the next ridge farther back. A poor-man's substitute for the last of those is down in th valley floors, if e.g. your map doesn't go back far enough.

Deployment on the back of the main slope has two drawbacks. One, it is generally easier for attackers to overrun you, and two, depending on the shape of your particular hill, the slopes may restrict their lines of sight. The benefits are that they can more easily reposition there after some early harassing shots on the approaching attackers, and that they will tend to hit the flanks of attackers trying to find away around your main mine-and-infantry "block" in the center of your position.

Then there is the other P.F. besides panzerfaust, this time Pak and Flak. I mean the light cannons that the German infantry will use to support and complete the defense. The rules for locating these are similar to those for machineguns. More attention has to be paid to what routes are practical for enemy vehicles, and it can also work to have 1-2 guns at the rear, outside corners of the main central infantry "block", to get some crossfire going with flanking MGs or guns, against people trying to go around instead of through, again.

How can you possible remember all of that? 4Ms and 2 PFs. (Mines, MP40s, Mortars, MGs, Panzerfausts, Pak&Flak). The German infantry system is nearly perfect for the "closed" defense, as those are some of their best weapons and they are cheap and abundant. And if the enemy manages to get through your closed defense and keeps the ridge your tried to hold? Then fall back half a kilometer and make him do it all over again.

What about the other terrain types I promised to mention, where some of the same ideas can apply? Very briefly, just hints to get your started thinking about them. It is not all the same, and there will be adaptation to the local terrain. But key ideas from the "closed defense" can still apply.

If you don't have a ridge, you might manage the same effect from a body of forest by defending inside the tree-line. Use the next clearing back as your substitute valley. It is harder to get the support of all your own heavy weapons in this version, but several aspects are the same - MP40s, mines, mortars e.g.

Or, you can use the buildings of a village as a poor-man's ridgeline, especially if there is any drop in the ground or block of woods breaking up long lines of sight, to help out. Treat the outer ring of buildings in the village as the "crest". Here the drawback is that the line-of-sight "block" is not perfect, because of the gaps between the buildings. Another item that is somewhat different in villages is that buildings are better protection against indirect artillery and mortar fire, but are more vunerable to aimed direct fire HE, and that has to be taken into account. So to break attackers that bunch up, you'll need some of that (like an assault gun, e.g.), not just mortars.

I hope this is interesting.

[109 Gustav]

Excellent article. I believe that the Germans' real advantages in CM are not their "uber tanks" but their wide variety of infantry. You can make a defense over any range, with rifle squads for long range, SS motorised or SS rifles for midrange, fallschirmjaeger for close fighting, and SMG squads for melee work.

All the allies get are rifle squads or paratroops, and the US paratroops have too many supporting weapons to make them cost effective for close range fighting. British paratroops are about the best option for close range fighting IMHO.

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

Well my skiff's a twenty dollar boat, And I hope to God she stays afloat.

But if somehow my skiff goes down, I'll freeze to death before I drown.

And pray my body will be found, Alaska salmon fishing, boys, Alaska salmon fishing.

-Commercial fishing in Kodiak, Alaska

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

Addendum -

There is one aspect of using the "closed defense" in the basic, "reverse slope" fashion that I realize on review I haven't explained. I mentioned the ability of the mines to act as the defender's "shield", and went through the strength of the "block" against frontal attack, regardless of numbers. But the flexibility of the "closed" defense stems from those two things and a few other considerations, and I should have spelled that out.

When the attacker finds out how strong the front of the "block" is, he will often give up even trying to get through it. The mines urge him to "go around", and the reception the first men through ought to receive is often all the convincing the attacker needs. If he persists in frontal attacks, it is relatively easy to operate the defense as already explained and make him pay for it.

But the closed defense is not "undone" by anattacker's decision to go around. To see this, a principle from chess may halp. In chess, "overprotecting" a piece or square is a key tactics, and the idea is the mobility of each piece defending some vital spot, increases, when other pieces are available to help. They will do the job if say, this piece moves away, and therefore it can afford to.

Similarly, with a strong "block" ahead, the mobility of your infantry platoons is pretty darn good. One platoon can easily hold the block for some length of time against all but the most determined assault. So if the enemy decides to go around, the bulk of your force can manuever to counter them.

Say he comes around your left. Then the left-side platoon does a left face (gee that was hard), and the center platoon drops down the ridge and to the left, making a new "line" at 90 degrees to the original one. The right side platoon moves over to the center of the "block", which it guards well enough, while also being your little reserve.

When he comes over the crest on your left, then, he faces a full-strength infantry line from the crest to say half-way down the ridge. All your supporting heavy weapons and machineguns can open up on him from the ridge behind. If you have flanking MGs on the same ridge as your block, they will be behind him as he turns to fight your "block", when you choose to reveal them.

Another aspect of the closed defense also deserves mention in this connection. It is very hard for the attackers to keep track of where the defenders are. Unless attacking frontally and in strength, there will be little info about anything going on behind the minefields - some "infantry sounds" and such but little else.

To exploit this, the defender should shift his positions from time to time. One line of foxholes will be up by the crest, another set lower down for shelter (e.g. during your own barrages). But the men do not have to stay in the holes, either. Near them, sure. But the enemy "ID-ing" your foxholes should not mean he knows where you are.

The psychological effect you want, is that you own your side of the ridge, and can go where you like on it, and attackers than come over it get into deep trouble very fast. He can have his side. (Although, a stay-behind sharpshooter off on one flank isn't a bad idea...)

[Gremlin]

Superb posts. Thanks.

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

New to Combat Mission?

Visit CM Boot Camp at Combat Missions for tips.

[Horncastle]

How does one give an order to an enginneer to clear mines in CMBO? Or do they automatically do it if you place them near one taking a few turns?

Cheers

Peter

[L.Tankersley]

Originally posted by Horncastle:

How does one give an order to an enginneer to clear mines in CMBO? Or do they automatically do it if you place them near one taking a few turns?

The latter. The engineers also have to have a demolition charge available to clear mines IIRC. I'm not sure if they have to be inside the field or just next to it.

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

Leland J. Tankersley

[Henri]

Originally posted by L.Tankersley:

The latter. The engineers also have to have a demolition charge available to clear mines IIRC. I'm not sure if they have to be inside the field or just next to it.

Are you sure? I don't see how a demo charge would help to clear a minefield.Although I haven't done it myself, my understnding is that the engineers have to stand next to the minefield for a turn or two.

Henri

[L.Tankersley]

Originally posted by Henri:

Are you sure? I don't see how a demo charge would help to clear a minefield.Although I haven't done it myself, my understnding is that the engineers have to stand next to the minefield for a turn or two.

Henri

Reasonably sure, though far from certain. I think the demo charge is (was?) used to abstractly represent various resources available to the engineers. This might have been something that changed in one of the patches (or even between gold demo and final). Anybody with more recent experience clearing mines?

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

Leland J. Tankersley

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

Engineers don't have to be in the field, 25 yards away is close enough (LOS distance through woods or pines - easy enough to remember). They can remove "daisy chain" AT mines without a demo charge, since those are on the surface and thus easy to find and (relatively) safe to get at for men on foot.

The reason they need a demo charge for the other types, is they are not actually digging all the mines out of the ground (which would take far too long and is way too hard to do during combat), but instead are blowing lanes through the field (e.g. with bangolore torpedos or what have you), and marking those lanes for the folks who come behind.

Even that takes a full squad several minutes, because they can only blow the lane so far in, then they have to go out and blow the next bit forward that they can reach safely, and so on. If the unit has lost men (or is a half-squad) it will take them longer.

[Count Sessine]

Thanks, Jason. Very instructive and interesting. I for one, has been somewhat on the lookout for hints how to deploy PAK guns, and IG guns. My experience is somber. Usually they get blown apart almost immediately, or pinned and then killed by small arms fire.

/CS

[Gremlin]

I don't recall if Jason covered this, but placing them with frontal cover (with buildings, crests, trees, etc.) but open LOS to the sides of the map prolongs their life somewhat from direct fire.

Arty attacks are another matter. If possible, hold off using the IG's until you think the enemy has expended his arty (and preferably lost all his armor), and don't place them in areas likely to draw arty missions because of the nearby presence of other choice targets the enemy will become aware of during earlier segments of your defensive plan. Ideally, as the enemy is cutting deep into your defenses with his infantry, after bypassing your forward defenses, you can then open up with a howitzer or two relatively unhindered. His troops should already be mauled badly, and when they come under direct fire from a field gun, they're history. There's actually some wisdom, depending on the defensability of the terrain, in letting the enemy get sucked into the middle of your side of the map, and then blast him from both flanks simultaneously.

Obviously with Paks, you'll typically reveal them earlier, as soon as you get a good chance of a kill. Smaller AT guns on your flanks can work very nicely. Don't get into a long-range shooting match with tanks, as you'll usually lose once revealing your position. Still, an at gun for a tank is a good trade, usually. The idea of keeping cover between the gun and the enemy side of the map still holds, though.

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

New to Combat Mission?

Visit CM Boot Camp at Combat Missions for tips.

[This message has been edited by Gremlin (edited 02-01-2001).]

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

Fine questions about the gun portion of the defense. I can provide a template for German infantry deployments in reverse slope, to work off of. Obviously some modifications are needed for terrain, total points, and mission, but this gives you an idea. And I can then discuss the role of the guns in the defense.

Mentally divide the frontage into three zones side to side, left, center, and right. The center portion should be a bit bigger than the other two, but it needn't be on the middle of the map. It is the center of your position, not of the map's edges, in other words. Then divide each zone on the other axis into a forward and a rear zone, lining those up with "just behind the crest of the front ridge" for the forward, and "mid-way up the back or next ridge" for the rear zone. OK?

Two ridges are running parallel, and your troops are on the different ridges - the front one or the back one. But the troops on the front ridge are on its back side, and the troops on the back ridge are on its front side. So they can all see the same valley, and they can all see the crest of each ridge. (Naturally, woods and such will break that up somewhat; I am simply specifying the locations).

Forward and left, a flanking MG position, facing rightward.

Forward and center, the main infantry position, with submachinegun infantry if at all possible, and protected in front by mines. At the outer edges, right and left, of this infantry position, and toward the back of it, you may optionally include two MG positions, facing outward toward the flanks. This is best if you can afford it.

Forward and right, a flanking MG position, facing leftward.

Thus, the forward zone, in "silly ASC graphics", looks something like this (OOO is an infantry platoon) -

-> <- OOO OOO OOO -> <-

Next, in the rear zone. Rear and left, PAK, 1-2 anti-tank guns facing rightward and forward. Far enough apart to not be under the same barrage footprint. Usually you can only afford one anyway.

Rear and center, the "company support position". At its right and left ends, 20mm FLAK. In its center, 1-2 75mm infantry gun (I generally just use 1, and sometimes skip it). These 3-4 guns should be spaced enough that again, they will not be under the same barrage footprint. Located to cover this collection, one reserve platoon of rifle infantry (often an ad-hoc, small platoon commanded by the company HQ). The 81mm mortar FO. These infantry troops should have alternate positions far enough from the guns to not be under the same artillery barrage footprint.

Rear and right - PAK again, facing left and forward. So, in even worse ASC graphics, the rear zone looks a little like this -

/ ^ O I O ^ \

The names of the positions are, respectively - left MGs, left PAK, right MGs, right PAK, main or infantry "block", support or company fire position.

The MGs are supposed to prevent flanking movements by infantry around the block. The PAKs are supposed to sweep the crest-line and flanks of the block position from crossing angles, to ensure one with a flank shot. The FLAK are supposed to act as additional MGs vs. flanking infantry, handle light armor and halftrack flankers of the blocking position without revealing the more vital PAK guns, and to support the main position by fire along the crest. The infantry gun(s) are suppose to support the main position by fire along the crest, and especially to zero in on foxholes within the "block" taken by the enemy. The reserve rifle infantry is supposed to add its fire relatively unsuppressed, defend the central gun positions, and react through the covered route of the valley between the ridges to enemy movements. The FO sees the crest line and fires "blind" beyond it when necessary.

If you have the manpower, it is nice to have weaker rifle platoons to support the flanks on the main ridge, to help prevent the MGs from being overrun there, and to work with them as OPs and delayers ahead of the reverse slope position.

E.g. if you take a Volksgrenadier company, 1 additional rifle-armed platoon (added SMG platoons for the "block" if you have even more points), then you have 6 rifle squads and 2 rifle platoon HQs. Have each give one rifle squad to the company HQ. Now you have the company HQ rifle "platoon" of two squads back in the reserve fire support position, and still have 2 rifle "platoons" of two squads plus platoon HQ left. Put one with each forward, flank MG.

They can start ahead of the front crest, with alternate positons back where you want the MG to be in the main fight. The MG can harass at range in "shoot and scoot" fashion, while one of the squads can divide into two "OPs" to spot the attackers then vamoose. The rifle "platoon" then supports the center block's flank, can work behind an attacker going around that, prevents easy overrun of the flanking MG. If nobody comes its way, it can move to the blocking position, or back to the rear ridge as an added reserve, etc.

A sniper or two can be added to these groups as "stay behind" harassers. Also, if you skip one of the interior MG positions on the flank of the "block", you might use one log bunker with MG ahead of the ridge somewhere, as another kind of delaying force well before the main position.

Put the Panzerschrecks in the main "blocking" position, and cover any road with them, or put them on the flanks to cover the right and left open areas between the block and the MG positions.

Because all the guns are on the second ridge, it will be hard for the attacker to knock them out rapdily via direct fire. Because the PAKs do not have to open up to prevent themselves from being scouted out or overrun by halftracks or scout cars (sine the FLAK can handle them), they can remain hidden until they have tank targets. Because of their angled deployment, they can hit those from flanks. Because tank targets will be in the MG fire zones, they ought to be buttoned, making detection of the firing PAK harder. The PAKs are protected from frontal infantry by the MG flanking positions, with (in the best case) their small supporting platoons, as well as fire from the MGs in the main "block" and the FLAK guns, at any infantry coming over the ridge on either flank.

The gun positions are far from the main infantry position, so artillery fire at them will not be dangerous to the main infantry body. The only partial expection to this is the support company fire position, which contains infantry and foxholes. They just have to relocate to their alternate positions in the event of a close barrage, and generally only one aimed at the infantry gun will be close enough to them to be dangerous.

As for the danger of artillery to the guns, I am quite happy to see the enemy fire off his artillery ammo that way. Yes, in the case of the most expensive and vital PAK guns, it can hurt - especially if they have not fufilled their role in the defense yet, and you are left without powerful ranged AT weapons while the enemy still has tanks.

But generally, if a gun shoots something up successfully and is then silenced by artillery, look at the exchange involved. You bought a ~30 point light artillery piece. It shot up some ~30-45 point squad or light vehicle. Then the enemy expended 1/3 to 1/2 of a 100-200 point artillery module on it. You are ahead 3-5 to 1, far more than the attacker's odds. Think of it this way - for this battle, your gun took out target A *and* the enemy artillery.

In the case of the better PAKs, the cost to you is higher, but if you bagged a 100-150 point tank or better yet two, it works out the same. The only thing to avoid is revealing a powerful PAK to kill a Bren carrier or halftrack, then losing it to 81mm mortars or something. That is why you have the cheaper FLAK guns, to kill those little things and leave the PAKs hidden. (Obviously, once you defeat the enemy heavy armor, you can open up at everything).

The only times a gun doesn't repay its cost, are either 1 nobody ever comes into its LOS, or 2 enemy infantry overruns it without it getting to fire at its proper target types. With a deployment like the above, 1 is only going to happen if you are winning so big there is no need for the gun's support. 2 is a larger concern, but that is what the flanking MGs and their platoons are there to prevent, and the guns are a long way back to boot.

Incidentally, I have also seen the AI dump an entire module of 3" mortar on a single 50mm PAK in its foxhole at the edge of some woods, without hitting a single man. Oh, it broke the crew all right, but they remained there, terrified. They recovered to "OK" before the end of the fight and even expended most of their meager HE allotment shooting at enemy mortar and MG positions, after the barrage! This is admittedly rare, but the point is the enemy cannot be sure he will get you for a small expenditure of ammo, which is a significant part of his total available "force" regardless.

Taking out several PAK, FLAK, and a gun position with just arty fire is possible in the above set up, but only after #1 he gets onto the slope, #2 he gets shot up there by the guns, #3 he walks his shells over 5+ different, scattered positions on the second ridge back. That will take him a lot of time and ammo. And will leave little or no shells falling in the one place you are actually worried about them being fired - the middle of your main infantry "block".

As for how to adapt the above plan to a fight with fewer points, there are a few measures of economy possible. You can skip the infantry gun. You can use one powerful PAK in the center instead of two on the flanks, and have it play both roles. You can skip the MGs on the outer parts of the "block" and just use the flanking two. You can make do with only 1 Panzerschreck in the block instead of one for each flank of it. You can reduce the "block" infantry to just two SMG platoons. You can use the rifle platoon and the company HQ as flank protection teams, without a reserve back in the support company fire position. You can use a shorter minefield ahead of the block or leave some gaps in it. You can skip snipers and log bunkers and delaying forces, and make do with just a couple of half-squad scouts to see the enemy coming, then run.

You need about 700 points to do it, basing the defense on a Volksgrenadier company, "infantry" force. With 1000 points you can do it right, with added infantry platoons and all the proper guns, though it is a bit tight to be sure. Anything above that and it is easy to afford the essentials, and you will have some extra points to upgrade the PAK types, strengthen the infantry positions, add extras like snipers, upgrade unit qualities, or whatever works for you.

I hope this is useful.

[Wisbech_lad]

I found this very useful, and tested it three times (admittedly against the AI, but with modifiers) Total victories everytime. On medium size, medium wooded, large hill maps.

My typical 700 pt force was taken from:

1 x mountain company

1 x ‘schreck

2 x HMG

1 75 mm IG

1 75/50 mm PAK

1 105 RCL (or 50mm PAK)

1 20mm flak

4 x AT mines

4 x AP mines

1 x wire

Deployment as you suggest, with sometimes a platoon at the back of a “hanger” (wooded area on a slope), with AP mine or wire at the front of the woods – nasty! The incoming infantry make a beeline for cover once they crest the ridge and the HMG’s on the flanks open up, and that cover ain’t friendly.

CO HQ directed 2 x 81mm mortars. Not as effective as an FO, but I found that you can usually spot areas close enough to the enemies approach march to harass them. Once the enemy crests the ridge, the onboard mortars are very accurate, and can put down fire very close to your own troops in foxholes

The AT guns (whether 75 or 50mm or RCL) against the AI acts as an arty magnet once it uncovers, as you say, this is extremely useful in keeping it away from the infantry. AT mines effective in forcing abandonment of tanks (even a Jumbo on one occasion) 20 mm keeps away HT’s. Only having one ‘schreck and hoping that at least some enemy armour will hit a minefield is risky, but...

Mountain troops are lethal at close range, a platoon can chew up a company in a matter of minutes.

I’m not sure how I would attack such a defence. I think I would scout ahead over the centre of the ridge, to try and locate the centre blocking platoon and AT mines there. Then dump medium arty on it (25lber/ 105mm), quickly moving in infantry (engineers?) and close support tanks behind. (Sherm 105/ UK 95mm tanks) “over the top”, and blast out with direct HE fire the second echelon, and any counterattacking infantry from the flanks. Then bypass the other infantry platoons that didn’t counterattack to hop to the front of the next ridge and set up a reverse defense of my own against counterattacks, now if the enemy wants to withdraw he is in trouble. Of course this is a bit artificial as it presupposes I can commandeer inf support tanks. It is also very reliant that your arty will disrupt the centre block long enough (or force it to move enough) that you can get enough units over the top to crack the defence. Sounds all a bit WW1 to me, I’ll try this weekend though.

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

How to crack it? If you know where it is, what it is, and have a force adequate for an attack on it, then it is not too hard to pry it out of place. The tricks are knowing that is what he is using and figuring out where the real position starts and stops on the back side of the hill, without getting so much of your force killed finding it out, that you can't carry out the attack program.

But the attack program is -

Send an entire company of infantry straight at one of the flanking MG positions on the front slope. They will take fire from the guns and the block. Put arty down on the near side of the block to prevent any sortie and break-up their longer-range shooters or send them back into their treeline, etc. But make sure you save a fire mission or two.

Shoot it out with the MG flanking position and send a platoon at least into the actual location of that position. On map mortars and MGs are on gun-suppression.

With the infantry company in place along the ridge as "overwatch", bring up the tanks on that one sector of the ridge only. With the help of the infantry's fire, duel with all of the guns that open up on you and silence them. Put one arty mission on the company fire support position as soon as you identify it, but save one fire mission.

Send a platoon through the valley and climb the ridge on the other side, then turn it inward looking along the second ridge.

Once the forward platoon is in place on the second ridge, move half to 2/3s of your remaining tanks to the second ridge, looking back and down into the valley and sweeping it with their fire. This will pin the infantry into the block, if they haven't skedaddled into the valley already.

You are basically done. Shoot into the block, creep along the second ridge, send a platoon along the valley floor slowly and farther back to cover the flank of that advance. So, imagine you did this to the western flank of the block - the company is now oriented eastward in an echelon left formation, leading platoon on the second, more distant ridge.

The difficult part of this program is that the defending arty will hit the company on the ridge, and that you will lose some tanks in the fire-fight with the guns. But you should avoid the main infantry blocking position, most of the mines, and most of the reserves.

The bulk of the German infantry will only be able to grapple with you by counterattacking, either down the back of the front ridge or through the valley. With an entire company and tanks and your one saved arty mission for "final protective fire", you should be able to stop any such infantry counterattack.

I recommend the 81mm FO over the on-map mortars, BTW. Yes, the on-map mortars are accurate against point targets, but you've got the 75mm infantry gun for that. And for the same points spent, you get twice as many mortar rounds with the FO and you can put them anywhere. The delay is not that big a drawback, not twice as many rounds worth. And e.g. against the program above, I think you will find 24x2 81mm HE just isn't enough to break a company of infantry.

Where to get the points to stretch 2 on map 81 for 1 FO? You don't need so many AT mines. Use only 1-2 AT mines on an obvious vehicle route or a road. AP mines for the rest.

Incidentally, I love the idea with the wired patch of woods. That is genius - LOL. Great comments overall.

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

An afterthought. This shows how defense and attack evolve in measure and countermeasure. I was thinking about your wired-woods idea and the flanking attack program I explained. Maybe an improvement anticipating one and using the other?

So, for example, suppose the two forward-ridge, outer MG positions are made somewhat thornier from the front, via 2-4 wire...

[Gremlin]

I tried a couple defenses against the AI (for what little the AI is worth ) using setups very similar to what you describe, Jason.

AAR from the one I just finished, me defending as the Germans vs. Canadian attacking AI:

Attacker: 361 casualties, 12 mortars knocked out, 12 vehicles knocked out

Defender: 37 casualties, 1 mortar and three guns knocked out, 2 vehicles knocked out (the latter two only because I got lazy, as I usually do against the AI)

Axis major victory 83 to 17

1:10 casualty ratio ain't bad

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

New to Combat Mission?

Visit CM Boot Camp at Combat Missions for tips.

[Gremlin]

I forgot to mention about that game: four of my six platoons never fired a shot, a fact which will influence future purchases.

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

New to Combat Mission?

Visit CM Boot Camp at Combat Missions for tips.

[Silvio Manuel]

Bumped to show some great info on infantry defense tactics.

[Moriarty]

Originally posted by Wisbech_lad:

My typical 700 pt force was taken from:

1 x mountain company

1 x ‘schreck

2 x HMG

1 75 mm IG

1 75/50 mm PAK

1 105 RCL (or 50mm PAK)

1 20mm flak

4 x AT mines

4 x AP mines

1 x wire

Mountain troops are lethal at close range, a platoon can chew up a company in a matter of minutes.

Gebirgsjaegers also were pretty rare in the CM scheme of things. If you're attempting to play historically, they should not be used. I would be more interested to hear how you fared with vanilla rifle platoons or PzGrenadiers, rather than SMG-heavy VGs, VG Fusiliers, FJs or GJs.

[Apache]

I find the addendum very useful. Couple of queries though:

1) If historical accuracy was an issue, the combination of units suggested by Gustav109 would hardly ever occur would they?

2) Are there any good recommended battle scenarios which will allow practice, infantry, combined and armor versions?

3) Do you use split squads to enable more than 1 line of foxholes to be dug on setup and then restore squads to normal size?

4) I haven't checked the orders for PAKs etc but to prevent them opening up on rubbish targets do you set them to hide or lock them to ambush markers nowhere near anything?

5) If playing with more than one company on a large map etc do you merely double, treble etc the support or chuck in other bits and pieces as well?

6) This can presumably be played with AFVs replacing support (providing they have similar roles) in a combined arms or armor version?

[JasonC]

Sure, splitting squads to get 2 foxholes is a standard defense procedure. You can also get extra defense positions by incorporating some stone buildings into the defensive lines, without starting inside them.

For the scheme laid out, the most essential place for alternate foxholes positions is away from the crestline in the main "block". You want a second line of foxholes, farther down the slope, to shelter in when artillery is hitting the high part of the slope.

It also allows you to shift in reserves from the rear area support group, back up a weakening section of the block position, shift forces to one side or another to meet enemies trying to flank the block on one side, etc.

The PAK just hide. Choose your moment to open up manually, by coming off hide when you have an appropriate target. If you have already spotted a tank you want to kill, with other units, but it hasn't yet come into LOS of one of your PAK, then you can use an ambush marker where you expect it to move (range permitting).

Normally you want to avoid ambush markers because even infantry or light armor can spring them and reveal your heavy PAK, which then draw arty or mortar fire they can't reply to. But if you expect a "snapshot" at a full-fledged tank, briefing, then one can make sense.

If you have two companies, you can put the equivalent of one of them inside the block, while the other is spread over the support positions. Meaning, a platoon on each flank, the rest in the rear behind the block. The last then acts as your reserve for maneuver and counterattacks, and in the meantime can support the main ridge with rifles and LMGs when necessary.

There is little point in putting more than a company into a single block. If you have still more guys (e.g. a full battalion fight), do not bunch them up in one overstuffed or oversized block. That will just give the enemy a huge artillery target. You are better off duplicating the scheme side by side, with two blocks or more and sizable gaps between them.

You want your side of the ridge to include places the enemy might miss all your guys, altogether, if he drops artillery there. Remember it is hard for him to get intel about your side of the ridge. He doesn't know where you are. His few scouts only uncover pieces, and often get shot up or forced back.

If you also shift positions (e.g. close to the ridge, and farther back), the result can be that the enemy has only old reports about your location and doesn't know where to drop his arty. If you make one huge position, you will solve this problem for him, so don't. You want him probing over the ridge here and there, looking for gaps, and running into fire zones and ambushes.

If you have AFVs as well or instead of an infantry force, you can use some similar ideas, but things also change. A simple adaptation is putting Hetzers or StuGs where the PAK would be. Another idea is to put 2-4 AFVs behind the support position, with a reserve infantry platoon, and use them for counterattacks. In general, your tanks "live" either on the back ridge or just off the crest of it forward or back.

Forward, they remain hidden somewhat by the first ridge, but can fire at anything that crosses the crest. Back, and they can hunt up and down to the crest of the back ridge, to create and break LOS to the near side of the forward ridge. This can be a better reserve position at the begining, since you won't be spotted e.g. by his infantry and light armor scouts when they crest the first ridge. You only hunt up when you have a target.

The downside of the "back" position occurs when the second ridge is higher than the first. Then cresting it can expose you to enemies on high ground beyond your whole position, which is a bad thing. If the second ridge is higher, therefore, you may be better off on the forward side of the back ridge, to remain off the overall crest-line.

I hope this helps.

[Apache]

Thanks. More and more I find buildings a nuisance. OK to hide behind perhaps but not in, unless facing infantry only. I recently played the 'Smoke 'em' scenario and was doing excellent as axis defender. Until that is a 'crocodile' came over the hill and torched two buildings I had about a company of infantry split between. screwed up my plans no end!!

[Yeknodathon]

Thanks Jason

V. interesting and thought provoking... puts lots of things into a different perspective

Yeknod

[xerxes]

The best way to break a good reverse slope defense (great explanation of the principles here) is to flank the reverse slope or to find a "crease" in the terrain that allows infiltration to effectively flank the reverse slope.

QBs, due to the map generation algorithm fairly often provide good broad reverse slope positions. Scenarios almost never provide reverse slope positions for the width of the map (I haven't seen a single instance). In scenarios, reverse slopes cover some of your defensive line, but not all.

-marc

[Charlie Rock]

Great article. Very good points.

While German infantry with SMGs are well suited to defeat Allied infantry, a closed defense or reverse slope defense is also well suited to the Allies, perhaps more so.

In an anti tank defense, it gives you the ability to set your AT guns and tanks up as close to the crest as you like, where in an "open" defense if the fight starts at a longer range than you like you may not have the firepower to punch through German front armor.

Also, unless the German attacker is very well coordinated, you will not see the entire panzer force cross the crest simultaneously, so you can mass your fires better.

Unless the allies have a heavy artillery package, a long range duel between a PAK and a sherm is more to the defender's advantage than a long range duel between a 57 or 76 and a big cat.

Again, great points.