Jump to content

Rugged Defense CM Tournament AARs - Vandal vs Broken!


RobH

Recommended Posts

The fifth in the series of AARs from Round 4 in the Rugged Defense Short-75 and Panther-76 Tournaments and accompanying movies is now available on the Rugged Defense Combat Mission Tournament AAR website.

Also, read all about the Tournaments themselves from the Rugged Defense Combat Mission Tournament website.

In this battle AAR, Vandal concentrates his attacking force of 2 x SS Infantry Battalions and 8 Tiger I Lates into a true German "Iron Fist" to try and blast his way up the road and into the town. Broken!'s defending British Paratroopers have other ideas though and literally rip this "Iron Fist" apart with a combination of highly effective artillery strikes, reverse slope infantry ambushes and 17 pdr AT guns. By Turn 18, the battle is over and the German "Iron Fist" now barely a limp handshake ;) !

This is the same map of course as for the previous AARs but you will again see another entirely different style of attack and defense in this battle.

Thanks Vandal and Broken! for another very instructive battle! There is a lot many of us can learn from this battle as I know both of you have already done.

Previous AARs from the recent Rugged Defense Tournaments have already been covered in the following threads:

Barleyman vs Buckeye

Buckeye vs Me262

Me262 vs Barleyman

Hodo vs Vandal

This is the last of the Round 4 battle AARs where the defender wins. The remaining 2 AARs will show different approaches for the attacker to win. One AAR is from the Short-75 Tournament, the other from the Panther-76 Tournament.

These remaining two Round 4 AARs will be published shortly.

As previously, any discussion on the AAR is most welcome on this thread.

Rob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bump! 'Cos this really is a great set of movie files if you want to see how to conduct a good defence and stop an attack right in its tracks. Especially if that attack is not particularly well executed by bunching up all your infantry too much :eek: !

Rob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This battle was very different from the others.

The defense against the tigers was very effective. I was astonished to see how four of them were destroyed, apparently 17 pounders are very good!

I went through the defensive platoons and it seems that they were carefully selected by their commanders abilities. The ones with "?" bonuses were selected to ambushes!

Two of the leaders with least abilities were sent to forward observation posts and their platoons were given to Company commanders. Is this a common practice among more experienced players?

Almost all the other players used sharpshooters as observers, any comment on not using them in this battle?

Is there something else to be noted about the

ability selections when choosing the platoons for their tasks?

The left most ambush platoon had a very good place for ambush and it did execute one very effectively. However from that position it appeared to be difficult to get back safely.

Could you elaborate why did you choose that place and not the ridge behind the pond. If given a second chance would you change the position and how?

I also noted that there was a 4.2 inch spotter at the same site as the 17 pounder. Would it be more safe to hide the spotters away from the guns which attract counter fire as soon as revealed.

Teddy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The selection of AVFs for the attack bothers be somewhat.

Are the main points to make the selection:

- Have enough HE fire the be able to destroy the forward defences ASAP to avoid the time delay they arer causing. Also to have enough HE ammunition to support the attack into town?

- Be enough hard to destroy because they have to advance to ridges around the city to provide suppoort fire to the attack into town? The ridges are very open and so a bad place to stay because everyone is trying to hit them.

- Have low Ground Pressure to get to the position over damp ground?

It seems that StuH42 is the most favorate AVF for the attack?

What about the Wespes, are they too fragile to survive.

Tigers are heavy, Panthers expensive, STuGs blast value is not as good as Stuh42.

So would it be a reasonable choice to have a group of Panzer IV:s, StuH42:s and Wespes?

A full eight Tiger force looked very impressive but is it really so effective?

Teddy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teddy,

I often replace no-bonus platoon HQs with company HQs and use these spare HQs for scouts instead. They are about the same price as half squads and don't have a movement penalty for being out of command. Also, losing them represents less of a firepower loss.

I don't use sharpshooters for scouts because effective sharpshooters (vet or crack) are expensive and should be placed where they are not in danger of being overrun. Their job is to kill tank TCs, arty spotters, HQs, etc. Even regular sharpshooters are more expensive than half-squads, so I would rather use a half-squad as a scout if I don't have a spare HQ. Also, half-squads don't die as fast as sharpshooters.

I do assign tasks to platoons based on their HQ bonuses, how many panzerfausts they are carrying, etc. A critical defensive position might get a platoon with combat and morale bonuses, for example. How you assign your platoons is part of the "art" of CM.

You are quite right about the leftmost platoon. It was in a risky spot and I should have dropped smoke as soon as the ambush was triggered, so that the platoon could withdraw safely. The sudden appearence of the eight Tigers caught me unprepared. I felt that I needed to place a platoon there to protect the AT guns close behind. The reverse slope position that you mentioned would have been better for the infantry, but I placed a priority on the positions of the 6 pndr and 17 pndr AT guns, which in turn, required that I place infantry in front of them.

Yes, placing the spotter with the AT gun was risky, but what a wonderful location for a spotter! It was his arty that destroyed the German infantry (over a hundred casualties).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, that was really devastating fire!

To understand the different defensive forces I have tried to analyze their content. It seems that there have been great variations between 6 players:

Infantry: from 7 1/3 to 12 platoons

AVFs: from 2 to 6

Guns: from 0 to 6

FO:s from 0 to 4

While looking at the defensive positions I get the feeling that to cover the whole area with under 10 platoons the defense gets too thin? And if concentrated to the city the defense could be flanked?

It also looks like the FO:s and their usage is the key to stop the enemy infantry. If used too early they don't have the maximum effect. Dropped into concentrated infantry like Vandal onto Hodo or Broken! onto Vandal it really made its job well!

Most of the guns were only able to kill one enemy AVF so were they enough effective? One is enough but the risk to be in a wrong place is still quite big?

Most of the AVFs were used in the city itself. Were the hills behind the city too far from the propable enemy positions so that they weren't used as hull down shooting positions? Or was the ground too wet so it was safer to keep AVFs in city?

Teddy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teddy,

I felt that 12 platoons were needed to defend the north approach and the river fords. Vandal attacked with 18.

Placing the allied armor behind the town would not work, since visbility on this map is limited to 750m due to the fog. Also, the German armor has an advantage at long range.

You are right about the use of FOs. Most CM players fire their arty too early. It is hard to have the patience to wait for really good targets.

If an AT gun can get one good tank, it has done it's job (unless it is a very expensive AT gun or a very cheap tank). In my battle with Vandal, two 17 pndrs kill three Tiger Is before being knocked out. Pointwise, this means 192 points killed 525 points, a good exchange. On defense in CMBO, the defender must kill 1.5 points of the attacker for every point lost just to keep the force ratios from getting more in favor of the attacker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...