Rugged Defense CM Tournament AARs - Buckeye vs Barleyman

[RobH]

pilgrim - The best way with sharpshooters is to leave then unhidden, do not give them any targets and allow them to select their own. They will go for tank commanders usually as the highest priority as soon as they are in range and in LOS. They will also go for guns and mortars with a fairly high degree of priority. If you do not wish sharpshooters to fire, and there are often times when you do not wish them to fire or to give themselves away especially if infantry are near, then hide them and they will only open up if a tank comes very close within about 100m of them or less.

Every time a sharpshooter fires, there is a chance of him being spotted or the enemy being given a sound contact. Obviously the further away the sharpshooter is and especially the higher experience he has, the less likely he is to be spotted. Infantry are the best units at spotting sharpshooters, so it is best not to let the sharpshooter fire when infantry are close or he will definitely not be around much longer!

Rob

[TSword]

I really wondererd about that scenario, how in hell can the attacker win ?

Attacker:

1. 160 m deep setup zone ???????!

-> Easy enemy recon and interdiction possible.

-> Difficult to impossible to have proper assembly (Defender with foreward elements)

2. On the attackers left flank only extremely narrow approach possible

-> defends almost itself

3. Attackers right flank (The road) again only very narrow covered approach, advance from the outer right flank can only try to secure main road.

-> Advance only possible after securing road up to last bend.

It's a pure gamble but i would try a broad front rush with gravity centers South and middle (great risk because ground is wet) with lot's of the cheapest armor with inf riding on it and a lot of smoke, but main problem remains the non-existent assembly area and very narrow front on left flank.

To achieve fire superiority over a town costs a lot of arty points (Tanks pay you in almost nothing there). Inf will be slaughtered underway or at the fords by arty...hmm

Defender:

If a wise guy, will deploy a flexible in depth defense (He can trade almost his whole left flank without great danger).

Ford crossings secured by heavy arty and some heavy MG's and indirect firing inf mortars. Reserve force of 3 Inf Platoons (with some zooks just in case) in town itself.

Main effort on left flank to deny or delay enemy posession of first hill on his right flank (Key to secure large part of main road). Again area spiked with HMG's teams and sharpshooters, zooks to make the attacker anxious and slow leaving his left wing hanging in thin air.

2-4 Mobile Tankdestroyers as reserve deployed out of the deep (Initial deployment NW of town) together with some recon vehicles (M8's Stuarts and the like) and some inf (incl. zooks) for protection.

Artillery has to be used up to the max points.

1 platoon deployed as early interdiction and recon force deployed at around borderline of redforce (First Hill NE down to bigger part of lake), there main task slow down advance.

However a two line defence with only some minor forward elements (Sharpshooters and FO's) with main effort in the town will most probably work out almost as good. Second line being the hills W and NW of town.

Expand the map 200 m farther to the east to allow the attacker proper assembly possibility and it would be a balanced scenario.

Would really like to read the AAR of the attacker winning this......

[ May 17, 2002, 01:10 PM: Message edited by: TSword ]

[RobH]

TSword - I deliberately designed the map as I say on the RD Tournament web site to be extremely difficult for the attacker to win, especially given the 30 turns allowed. Indeed I did not really expect any attacker wins at all. It turned out in 12 battles there were 3 Attacker wins so 3 players, or 25% of Attackers, proved me wrong . It takes a very good player to win as Attacker on that map in the turns allowed and that is what the Tournaments are looking for. Two of those Attacker wins you will read about over the next few weeks in AARs. Needless to say all those players who won as attacker are currently playing in the Finals.

Since all players were playing the battle back to back, they each had the opportunity to defend and attack on this map and the aggregate score determined the players who went through to the final Round of the Tournaments.

Rob

[Buckeye]

PILGRIM: Just to add to what Rob said, and to answer your question--normally, I let sharpshooters find their own targets after I un-hide them. But in this instance, I ordered the sharpshooter to fire at the Panther, to be sure that's what he did.

I expected he would be spotted, being on top of the big hill, and I was right, but I didn't mind losing him once he capped the TC. I had other forces in my FSE that could provide recon, and the loss of a TC is a major blow for armor, so it was an okay trade in my mind.

TSWORD: "If a wise guy, will deploy a flexible in depth defense." Guess that makes me a wise guy!

[Ligur]

I still haven't finished all of the AAR, but I have to wonder the armor heavy attacking force, in that terrain and visibility! I might have gone for too much armor too because of the time constraints. But definetly more infantry and cheaper armor. Barleyman appears to agree in his summary.

Great read.

[TSword]

Robert,

Thx, for your clarification, i thought myself it can only be deliberately made that way...

I'm very keen to read the AAR's where attacker actually won.

Greets

Daniel

[RobH]

Couple of comments regarding questions and points raised earlier by Walker:

1. The "b" half squad always joins the "a" half squad's location so if you wish your joined squads to always be in a say foxhole, make sure the "a" half squad is placed in the foxhole and bring the "b" half squad up close and personal to it.

2. The Rules for this Round of the Tournaments prohibited plain AT mines and Roadblocks but it allowed Daisy Chain mines and AP mines.

Rob

[Walker]

Originally posted by Robert Hall:

2. The Rules for this Round of the Tournaments prohibited plain AT mines and Roadblocks but it allowed Daisy Chain mines and AP mines.

Thanks for the clarification. AP mines on both sides of the fords would certainly make it even more difficult (impossible?) for the attacker to cross the river. Looking forward to the next AARs & movies to see how this problem was dealt with!

[Fionn]

Don't forget that since the attacker has fire superiority and only a small number of defender-held areas can actually direct fire on a crossing point an attack across fords can actually be beneficial to the attacker ( at least in the middle portion of the attack and exploitation).

To a large degree whether you win or lose is psychological so I make it my job to feel sorry for the poor SOB on the other side of the ford when I have to attack across one. If I felt trepidation at attacking across a ford I'd probably be beaten every time I did so.

Just my opinion of course.

[Walker]

Originally posted by Fionn:

Don't forget that since the attacker has fire superiority and only a small number of defender-held areas can actually direct fire on a crossing point an attack across fords can actually be beneficial to the attacker ( at least in the middle portion of the attack and exploitation).

I don't believe an attack across a mined and defended ford could succeed in the face of heavy mortar fire. Even if you laid masses of smoke it would be too awful to watch. Don't forget the defender could easily be saving 2 units of 120mm especially for the occasion. And your squads have a difficult approach down to the river, then they have to cross the ford and assault the buildings on the other side. The longer I think about this scenario, the more difficult it would seem to become for the attacker, and the more it seems that Barleyman did a good job to get as far as he did!

[Fionn]

Walker,

The very strength of the position AND the conventional wisdom which says that attacks over fords are doomed is the greatest weapon in the arsenal of an attacker.

Note: Most players who tried to force the fords in this tourney seem to have succeeded to some degree.

Nothing is ever so vulnerable as something felt to be invulnerable.

[Walker]

Originally posted by Fionn:

The very strength of the position AND the conventional wisdom which says that attacks over fords are doomed is the greatest weapon in the arsenal of an attacker.

Fionn, I understand what you're saying. But some positions are so strong that the attack IS doomed. I still say that an assault across a mined ford against a defender of the calibre of Buckeye would be a disaster even for an elite player.

[Barleyman]

If I may have my say..

The battle proceeded pretty much as I had envisioned it while selecting my forces. Perhaps that means my plan itself was faulty.

The attack on the right flank was never meant to succeed. Just to generate as much noise as possible and to tie down defender's resources. I assigned a panther there to make it look like a real thing.

On the left flank my probe was wiped out by arty as I suspected. The main effort was following up in anticipation of defensive arty running out of ammo. However, splitting probe into teams would've given more targets to shoot at. Maybe even as far as to the fords to give arty spotters targets earlier on.

All in all, I would have needed at least company worth of extra infantry and mech recon to save time. Extra time would've been handy at the fords.

I really like towed artillery, they're difficult to deploy, but once in place they're very deadly. Far more difficult to destroy than SPA and they can generally take on any comers. The movie clearly demonstrates a *BUG* in TacAI as the RR on left hill puts one HE after another into a howitzer carrier even as they had plenty of HEAT left.

[Barleyman]

A minor point which did not make it into the AAR. I was mortally afraid of AT guns in my left flank. Hence the careful advance from one overwatch position to another. This was also partial reason for the dubious choice of panthers, which could've shrugged off 6pdr hits.

[Pak40]

Originally posted by TSword:

I really wondererd about that scenario, how in hell can the attacker win ?

Hehe, You'll just have to wait until my AAR is posted.

[Pak40]

Originally posted by Walker:

I don't believe an attack across a mined and defended ford could succeed in the face of heavy mortar fire. Even if you laid masses of smoke it would be too awful to watch. Don't forget the defender could easily be saving 2 units of 120mm especially for the occasion. And your squads have a difficult approach down to the river, then they have to cross the ford and assault the buildings on the other side. The longer I think about this scenario, the more difficult it would seem to become for the attacker, and the more it seems that Barleyman did a good job to get as far as he did![/QB]

As a player in this tourneyment, I can say that it is possible to cross the fords successfully. I myself successfully crossed the fords. The odds are heavily against the attacker but there are many variables to every battle that can change the odds in a heart beat.

Example #1:

When I defended the fords, my attacker brought down 3 (yes 3) 105mm barrages in the exact same place at the exact same time. I watched in horror as two previously undamaged Heavy Buildings collapsed within 45 seconds. Inside those buildings were a MG, two squads and a platoon leader(all Vets). Only one squad survived at about half strength & panicked. Also, a priest was knocked out and another immobilized. Within one minute, 80% of my forces gaurding one of the fords was put out of action. If my attacker had timed it right, he could have waltzed across that ford on the following turn with little opposition. If there were two more barrages of that magnitude then he could have rendered about 75% - 90% of my ford defending force dead or inneffective. Fortunately, he decided to spread out the barrages and use some smoke on the fords also. The smoke allowed him to cross the fords but he still had to contend with my reinforcements. In the end, his attack was wiped out.

[Wolfe]

Originally posted by Barleyman:

If I may have my say..

The battle proceeded pretty much as I had envisioned it while selecting my forces. Perhaps that means my plan itself was faulty.

I think the plan was a good one, but you were handicapped by your choice of weapons. Instead of the Panthers, RRs, tractors, and Arty, you needed a lot more direct-fire HE, IMO. Something like 4 Vet Tigers, 4 Reg 251/9, 1 Crk PzIV/70 (in case you ran into any Churchills), 1 120mm and 2 81mm mortars along with 2 extra platoons of Vet Rifle squads would have done you better for a town assault. The arty would still be there for smoke when crossing the Fords. I think you wasted a lot of points on the arty that could have been put to better use in a direct fire role.

Panthers are certainly better when going up against 6 pdrs than Tigers, but that damn Tungsten can still drill holes in the Panther's turret, even at 800m. But if you do prefer the Panthers over the Tigers, you could have had 4 Reg Panthers and a Reg Inf Plt instead of the Vet Tigers.

BTW, one trick that works well for town assaults is to set up your HE belchers on a ridge where they can *just* see the 2nd story of the buildings. If you can position them accurately (it's tough to do reliably), you can shell the town without fear of receiving return fire from enemy AT assets on the ground level. He would have had to driven up the sides of the hills behind the town to target your AFVs.

The attack on the right flank was never meant to succeed. Just to generate as much noise as possible and to tie down defender's resources.

A very good idea, but I think you may have sacrificed one platoon too many for this. But it's tough to judge how much is enough to convince your opponent to hold his troops on that side of the map. That road over there is essentially a no-go area (a death trap waiting to be sprung), and there's only so much feignting you can do to try to convince your opponent you may make a run at it.

This is still a tough assault for the attacker, not only because of how far he has to go, but also because he can be watched almost the entire way in, so the element of surprise is nearly eliminated. You honestly did better than I expected (though Buckeye did neglect to hold one flag). I figured you'd be stopped cold at the fords.

- Chris

[Fionn]

Pak40's opponent came up with the correct solution. The lack of avenues of attack means that the defender's firing positions are quite circumscribed ( if they wish to cover the ford) and, as such, one can soften up the defending positions quite reliably with some medium or large calibre artillery... they key to this is following the arty up instantly with your infantry or, as I have sometimes done, actually charging across through the teeth of your own barrage. Certainly one suffers some blue on blue casualties but overall casualties are lower than if the troops had gone across without the support.

Chris,

Funny how people differ. My initial thought was that Barleyman spent too much on tanks and DF HE and not enough on infantry and artillery. I guess it just goes to show how different people have very different playing styles.

Personally I'd have gone down the road on the right of the map with my main force.

Why?

It isn't expected and the doctrine I follow preaches attack along unexpected routes... and sometimes the most obvious route is the one no-one expects you to take cause it'd be so suicidal to take it .

Sure you're driving into the teeth of the defence but with your arty and good infantry command you should be able to break the enemy's lines at their strongest point thus totally disillusioning the opponent and invariably winning the mopping up phase.

Crossing the fords with infantry alone would just have left one's tanks FAR too exposed to enemy TD fire IMO ( since your tanks would have had to choose between hiding behind the hills and leaving your infantry prey to enemy tanks or exposing themselves and overwatching the infantry... but being vulnerable to enemy TDs commencing topsky-lowskys.)

[Pak40]

Originally posted by Walker:

[QBThanks for the clarification. AP mines on both sides of the fords would certainly make it even more difficult (impossible?) for the attacker to cross the river. Looking forward to the next AARs & movies to see how this problem was dealt with![/QB]

Actually, wire is much more effective. Imagine sending troops across wire(about 20 seconds to get through),then cross the ford(another 20-30 seconds) and then cross another wire (20 sec). This is all equivilent to running in the open with no cover, being shot at by multiple MGs, tank fire, and small arms less than 100 meters. Oh yea, and dont forget any artillery that the defender might have.

Mines might kill 1-2 persons per squad but they will eventually all be detinated by the mass attack. However, mines will still be usefull if the attacker smokes the fords, wire will still slow the attacker down but the smoke will cover the crossing.

[Pak40]

Originally posted by Fionn:

Why?

It isn't expected and the doctrine I follow preaches attack along unexpected routes... and sometimes the most obvious route is the one no-one expects you to take cause it'd be so suicidal to take it .

IMO, both routes were suicidal. That's a reason why I attacked both routes in my game. The road was my main attack and the ford attack was more of a diversion, but, they were both honest attempts to capture VLs. It all comes down to timing. If the attacker times the ford attack with the road attack, then the defender wont be able to shift forces around to the defend against the main attack.

[ May 20, 2002, 05:14 PM: Message edited by: Pak40 ]

[Barleyman]

Originally posted by Wolfe:

Instead of the Panthers, RRs, tractors, and Arty, you needed a lot more direct-fire HE, IMO. Something like 4 Vet Tigers, 4 Reg 251/9

105mm RR has a lot more punch than a Tiger. A lot cheaper and more difficult to take out too. See the movies, RRs were delivering fire through the very last turn while all of my panzers were smoking wrecks. They'd be even more deadly if there was not a *BUG* in TacAI that makes towed artillery shoot SMOKE instead of HE at infantry. Looks like they enjoy shooting HE at AFVs instead of HEAT, too.

Stu42H + Hetzer can be had for about the same cost as a tiger and it's much better in many ways.

[Walker]

Originally posted by Wolfe:

... I think the plan was a good one, but you were handicapped by your choice of weapons. Instead of the Panthers, RRs, tractors, and Arty, you needed a lot more direct-fire HE, IMO. Something like 4 Vet Tigers, 4 Reg 251/9, 1 Crk PzIV/70 (in case you ran into any Churchills), 1 120mm and 2 81mm mortars along with 2 extra platoons of Vet Rifle squads would have done you better for a town assault. ...

The Perfect Attacking Force : 2 Crk Hetzer, 2 Crk Puma, 3 Reg PSW 234/3, 2 Reg Wespe; 3 Schreck, 2 Sharpshooter; 7 modules Mortars; 17 platoons Infantry. Low ground pressure, speed, lots of infantry, two modules arty to get there, 5 for when we get there. No fussing around with towed guns or HMGs. Maybe a Kübel would be nice too. Question: only 2 companies would be veteran, the remainder regular. Could that be a big problem?

[ May 20, 2002, 06:15 PM: Message edited by: Walker ]

[Barleyman]

That setup sounds a lot like what I blasted to gooey parts in my defensive game. But they just kept on coming..!

[Wolfe]

Originally posted by Fionn:

Chris,

Funny how people differ.

My initial thought was that Barleyman spent too much on tanks and DF HE and not enough on infantry and artillery. I guess it just goes to show how different people have very different playing styles.

Very true, but my biggest fear about the road is getting bottled-up and Arty'd and be unable to bring my firepower to bear effectively. The road would take longer to get through, limiting the time available to strike at the VLs, and would allow the defender more time to shift any (and eventually all) forces over. But apparently it does work.

Crossing the fords with infantry alone would just have left one's tanks FAR too exposed to enemy TD fire IMO ( since your tanks would have had to choose between hiding behind the hills and leaving your infantry prey to enemy tanks or exposing themselves and overwatching the infantry... but being vulnerable to enemy TDs commencing topsky-lowskys.)

A bit of infantry would have to be left behind (along with Schrecks instead of HMGs) to do spotting, and pairing off the Tigers and HTs on overwatch should provide a nice level of protection for both, IMO.

Barleyman wrote:

105mm RR has a lot more punch than a Tiger. A lot cheaper and more difficult to take out too.

Definitely cheaper, but the Tiger can actually get out more firepower per turn than the RR's can. It comes down to how much ammo either unit can unload before they die or the game ends.

See the movies, RRs were delivering fire through the very last turn while all of my panzers were smoking wrecks.

Well, yes, but two of them never got to fire a shot, and the other two had a whole lot of HE remaining when the game ended. Putting a lot of points into a few baskets can certainly burn you, but I think more often than not AFVs will deliver the fire where and when you need it. Also I'm not particularly fond of infantry support units, but maybe I played VoT a bit too much and became disenchanted with direct-fire infantry weapons.

They'd be even more deadly if there was not a *BUG* in TacAI that makes towed artillery shoot SMOKE instead of HE at infantry. Looks like they enjoy shooting HE at AFVs instead of HEAT, too.

Yeah, I hate that. I hope to see some SOPs atleast in CM3, if not CMBB, where units will opt for overkill rather than the "it's close enough" in weapon selection. And the smoke thing is annoying, but the game *is* trying to protect its own units with the smoke. It's infuriating, but atleast it was well-intentioned.

Walker wrote:

7 modules Mortars; 17 platoons Infantry.

:eek: Hey! Whadda ya think this is, the Eastern Front?!? The question would be which would run out quicker: the Defender's bullets and arty or the attacker's infantry!

- Chris

[zukkov]

awesome aar's fellas and very interesting movies, though i've only gone to turn 10 so far. looking forward to seeing the middle and ending, though i can already see the attack on the right has suffered heavily. this map is a tough nut to crack as the attacker for sure. on the operational scale, i'd have to either bypass a well defended town like that, or if attacking as the american, i'd carpet bomb it, though that would be liable to cause a lot of civillian casualties. but anyway, thanks so much for posting the aar's. it makes the game so much more interesting for all of us!