A bunch of questions about defense.

[Omi]

I recently played many quick battles as Germans on defense and I have some questions.

What's the use of mines and when do enemies detect them? I tried to set a trap for the enemy infantery by putting barbwires in a V shape in front of a moutain with pill boxes on it. Then I left a bunch of mine fields at the short end of the V. The enemy walked right in my trap, but it seems like only 2 or 3 mines actually exploded out of 6 mine fields. I expected much better since nearly 4 or 5 platoons walked on them.

What's the difference between all the types of guns? I know AT gun, but what exactly are infantery, flak, recoiless guns? What are they used for?

What makes a 105mm Infantery gun different from a 105mm Howitzer?

Also, what's the best place to put AT and infantery guns? On top of hills where they have a very good view of the battlefield, but are vulnerable to almost everything, or hidden in smaller strategic positions with limited view and range?

How should I use MG42s? Is it better to keep them hidden until the enemy gets closer to save ammunition? On my last game, I had about 10 MGs and they were in in very good locations like houses on top hills. So they were able to fire at the incoming enemy very early in the battle. By the time the enemy infantery was in very close range, all my MGs were out of ammunition. I doubt all the long range fire caused any real damage, it may have slowed the enemy advance for a few turns at best.

Same questions for infantery. Should I hide them in forest and houses and use them for close range fighting only? It seems like making them fire at the advancing enemy always leads to disaster, they suddenly draw all the enemy fire in their direction and eventually get massacred by artillery fire.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

I'll pass on the mines issue, never used them much.

As to the various guns, the difference is the roles they designed for.

Infantry guns were designed to be in the fronlines giving direct fire support. Since they need not nessecarily have a long range for this role they have a low muzzle velocity(MV)

A howitzer OTOH was designed to hurl rounds a fair distance away, often slighly to the rear of the front line. The bigger explosive charge needed to achieve this led to a bigger gun carriage and higher MV.

Flak are Anti Aircraft guns designed to shoot down aircraft. The 20mm, 37mm and quad 20mm do this in the game. The 88 flak however was designed to shot down high flying bombers and was not designed to shoot at the low flying fighter bombers. It does have a very high MV to reach those bombers so an AP round of this gun can penetrate every tank in the game. The light flak guns are real beautis for dealing with light armour, but lack the punch to deal with medium tanks or better. Real buggers to spot. The recoiless were designed to give maximum firepower for minimum gun weight. This results in a low MV and a backblast that shouts it's presence to the enemy. Avoid using these guns if you can.

Best place to put guns, it depends what terrain,, the enemie force etc. But the top of a hill might seem great but everybody on the map will fire at you when discovered, they die quick. The more limited LOS placement guns livwe longer but might suffer from never seeing an enemy for the duration of the fight. I prefer a medium between the two, not too exposed, but not to confinde a field of fire. Unless I have several guns, when I might just go for big LOS locations and hope I can outgun the enemy. but don't get too attached to your guns, against any semi-decent opponent, they WILL get KO-ed.

Oh dear, you brought up machineguns.

Sadly in CMBO they don't work as they are supposed too. Infantry at most ranges don't seem to mind getting MG-ed. Thus you either kill troop or they keep on moving, unlike in CMBB where troops will cower on their belies in fear of gettining MG-ed. SO since in CMBO you are unlikly to kill anyone at range best use them at medium range (250m or less) but don't let them too close as your MG crew has just one weapon, a squad easily eight, so they start outgunning you the closer they get.

Squads however are best used as ambush. The close the better. With the high firepower upclose anyone hit by the first shots of your squad might very well not be able to return fire.

But do this in a massed way, don't let your squads be overpowered one by one. If you spring a trap use all nearby firepower to maximize your own firepower and devide the enemies counter fire over several tatgets. I'm guessing that's where you went wrong. Support your ambushing troops and they will do better. And if possible, haul ass to a back up position before the arty drops 2 turns or so after the ambush. Scattering might work to limit your losses aswell. But mostly, arty will cost more points then it will kill and is moste usefull for disrupting the enemy prior to attack. So if no attack seems imminent, taking the arty on the chin isn't to bad.

There are better gameplaying tips by greater commanders then me, search for them in the forum subsection called TIPS & TRICKS.

Good luck and enjoy!

[Freyland]

I have to disagree about not using Recoiless Rifles.... while they do "show up" quite quickly after firing, they are very effective even against armor and you can buy an insanely large number of them for a low price (unless that has changed with a patch). I actually tried to avoid buying more than 2 to not be 'gamey'.

Most guns get spotted after one or two shots anyways, IMHO.

Jonathan

[Cabron66]

Well, guns are something I've been playing a lot with recently. I have to say they are difficult to manage against the AI which seems to seek them out like a bear does honey. The better they are the longer they take to unlimber and that means the harder they are to position on any kind of fluid battlefield. After trying a bunch of approaches I've found that you should never put Allied guns in a highly visible place because the will be destroyed in short order. German guns seem to be a bit more survivable and harder to find. But in both cases they are never attacking weapons and always need to be placed in ambush unless they are expendable or used as bait. Also, many scenarios start with the guns being towed by trucks. Keep them well hidden if you want to set them up outside of the starting box because nothing seems to draw more enemy fire or get knocked out more easily. My reccomendation is to set them up in the initial phase of the battle and hope you examined the map carefully enough to have a chance of getting a target or two.

[Dandelion]

I'll have a go on the mines issue then.

If a guy steps on a mine everyone around him will normally freeze.

If its your men exploding, you will notice that your move command is most probably ignored after the detonation. At least if your move order leads the men into the minefield. Not just the squad actually hit, but any squad of the opinion that it too is endangered by the mines, will simply stop. The men of course do not know exactly where the rest of your mines are, and will be generally cautious. But somehow they do seem to know that its impossible to place any field smaller than the CMBO size, and will thus stay clear of the area the unfortunates trampled into.

The AI will try and trace a path past the danger, ever desiring to fulfil your every movement order, but chances are it will either fail or choose an absurdly stupid path.

If its the enemy stepping into mines, the assault force (the typical mine trampling unit) will halt, and generally accidentally crowd in front of your minefield. This is exactly the point where you open up with direct or indirect support (see posts on cannon above).

A minefield is never a permanent block to enemy movement, nor is it really a killer of men. If the field is left unsupported by suitable weaponry it is also never anything but area denial and delay. In fact the Germans themselves had a doctrine to never lay any mine that couldn't be reached by supportive fire, as they weren't much into operational area denial. The enemy will be temporarily slowed down by such an 'abandoned' field, possibly unable to use a specific piece of ground unless he removes the field with engineers. Of course, both area denial and delay are often quite valuable in a CMBO scenario.

However, if the mines are to be part of a tactical defence, you may want to see them as fly tapes. You know the altmodish kind that hung from roofs, collecting flies that got stuck to them. For a brief moment in time, the enemy will - surprised, hopefully - be halted in mid-assault, stop and crowd helplessly at a point where you really, really want him. And not only is he crowding under your barrels, he is shook up too, far more susceptible to ideas of departure as a valid option once your fire begin. (a routed attack and a mowed down attack often have the same end effect in CMBO scenarios, when fighting over flags).

Barbed wire will help keep him there for a longer period of time. Especially if he simply has to pass and will send up sapper parties to clear the mines. Engineers clear mines if placed next to them and remain static for 2-3 minutes. If they still have demo charges left.

Generally, I feel it advisable to count on a 2-3 minute fire spree before his smokescreens start popping up. Whatever one has to deliver, it has to be delivered before that.

As it is extremely difficult to detect mines with moving units, it is advisable to place the fields where you believe the enemy will be making a run for it, preferably in the open. This is typically the assault stretch in front of your positions. If placed in woods or the like, a slowly advancing or crawling enemy has far greater chance of detecting and avoiding the field altogether.

Cheerio

Dandelion

[Dandelion]

...ah yes, another thing I recalled, a mistake I learned from - don't start fire on the enemy before he hits your mines. If you do, many of his men will drop and start crawling, increasing drastically his chances of detecting the mines before stepping on them.

Cheerio

Dandelion

[Cabron66]

First of all, I would like to thank Dandelion for going first on the mines. They are fairly simplified in CM and I think far less common than they actually were (judging by their still popping up even today), but he's dead on about their uses. They were deterrents and not themselves, killers. If a few of them are placed side by side in a strategic position with a few MG's in ambush they can make the attacker cry for his mommy.

Every GI account I've ever read has something in it about dealing with minefields. While opinions vary, grunts almost always chose to cross them directly instead of trying to find a way around. Vets seem to refer to them as annoying and no more. This alone tells me exactly how potent they were on the battlefield. Ever read what they said about the German 88s? See what I mean. In later wars they become more deadly, but in WWII they were still in the beginning stages of mass use. Actually, I'm hoping for better minefields in CMAK because they were anywhere and everywhere in the desert.

I find it hard to buy enough of them to really make a difference, but when I make scenarios I love them. Especially in a mixed salad with cheese and bacon bits.

[Cabron66]

Oh yeah, here's a mistake I learned from. Watch how you maneuver tanks around minefields. Just because one, two or three followed a path and squeezed around doesn't mean others will. Clear them out if you can or steer wide. Just the other day I saw three make it by a nearby field only to see the next two get immobilized. It was painful to watch.

[Dook]

As Cabron66 points out, mines in CMBO are not as prominent as they were in real life, at least based on my reading, although the AI does seem to buy more mines than most human players. The same is true, incidentally, for artillery. Much more artillery was used in RL than in CMBO.

AT mines could be fairly effective, especially in extended operations. During the Roer Plain offensive, most of the Allied tank losses came from mines and mud. The 747th Tank Battalion had only 2 tanks operative one week into the offensive.

Some of the differences between RL and CMBO can be explained by the scale of the game. Tanks could hit mines as they approached their line of departure and prep barrages could occur before the scenario begins. Still, my impression is that actual battles had much more artillery, many more mines, and much less movement than CMBO battles. I know Dandelion argues that German doctrine did not provide for the extensive employment of mines, but what I've read about the Roer plain suggests that they were very common in that area.

My 2 cents, hopefully presented in a civil manner.

[Dandelion]

Very civil. Indeed, much more civil than the mines I encountered playing your scenario

I had the opportunity to involontarily test if one can run into ones own minefields. I had a lapse of mind (ok I panicked) and ordered men to retreat across mines. They stopped before anyone stepped in it. Not sure if this is a general rule, but it seemed to me that they 'knew' the mines were there.

Also agree that the Germans were not all uptight about doctrine. The basic line of thought was that mines - like all obstructive fieldwork - were basically evil because they inhibited the doctrine of mobility used by the Germans. Engineers were trained and equipped accordingly. But it was just a basic principle, requiring you to actually believe you will be attacking over the ground you therefore refrain from mining. By the time of the Roer battles, such belief will have been in short supply I guess. In Italy and as mentioned in the Desert, German minefields were very extensive, including operational ones, and there were created special Corps level groups of booby trap specialist units. Booby traps are mostly used in places you do not intend to refrequent, thus 'abandonded' mines. They knew they weren't coming back.

Another interesting and possibly underrated aspect of mine warfare in CMBO - already mentioned here - is the psychological warfare effect. Is it just me who freeze when my men step on mines? Suddenly every step becomes a liability, and on me at least it has implications on performance out of proportion to numbers or effect of the actual mines.

Cheerio

Dandelion

[SgtMuhammed]

Mines are definitely one area I hope gets attention in the next build. Hopefully they will quit being "units" and become features meaning you can paint them over an area rather than laying little squares. The more mine points you buy the higher the density of the minefield.

When placing obsticals just remember than an obstical that is not overwatched is no obsitcal. I once laid a mine/wire obsitcal in front of one of my platoons and watched then shred an entire company. They can be effective but they are not impenaterable. They are best used to give you that extra few seconds that can spell all the difference in a battle.

One quick note about infantry. One of the best ways to use them is to put them on the back side of a woodline. That way the enemy has to come to you and his support weapons have no LOS while yours probably will. Always remember to choose your own ground to defend it is one of your greatest advantages.

[ August 25, 2003, 02:33 PM: Message edited by: sgtgoody (esq) ]

[Omi]

I tried using my AT guns like this. It worked well, I was able to get most of the terrain covered while all my guns were protected by terrain/building/trees from the majority of enemy units. It also forced enemy tanks to rotate their turret to fire back which gave more times for the gun.

[ August 25, 2003, 04:20 PM: Message edited by: Omi ]

[Dandelion]

Flanking fire, limited fields of fire, interlocking fields of fire and full frontal protection. Looks like they're more than 50 meters apart. Nine points out of ten in my book There is just the reverse slope missing in this picture.

Cheerio

Dandelion

[Omi]

Okay...time to try being the attacker. I think i can handle defense.

[JasonC]

Defending against the AI is easy. Defending against humans can be hard. They get a lot more out of those 50% odds.

[Joachim]

Originally posted by Dandelion:

Flanking fire, limited fields of fire, interlocking fields of fire and full frontal protection. Looks like they're more than 50 meters apart. Nine points out of ten in my book There is just the reverse slope missing in this picture.

Cheerio

Dandelion

If inf was hinding behind the forest or the house, the ATGs protect the space between the reverse slope. It is a perfect example how to set up heavy weapons to cover the gaps in a reverse slope defence.

Gruß

Joachim

[Beta1]

Dont forget AT mines.

If theres a likley avenue of armor advance/forward position a couple of AT mines across the route can really pay off. You only need to KO a HT to pay for 2 AT minefields and if you get lucky and bag a cat your well up on the deal. Just remember to put the mines somewhere where an immobilsed tank will not be able to shell your troops. You want it stuck and out of LOS not stuck where it can dominate the map!

Anti-personnel mines are pretty good for stopping an advance. A line of mines/wire is likley to cause a couple of platoons to jam up in cover behind them where you can drop arty on them (esp) if youve TRPed the cover)

I find Anti-personnel mines are often more effective somewhere in the open where they are likley to be crossed while under harrassing fire or (even more evil) used to deny cover to panicing troops. If you can shake up an advancing platoon as it crosses open ground the troops tend to break for the nearest cover. Of course if its full of mines.....

You can also use them to deny cover to an attacker in the conventional manner - ie if theres a patch of woods with LOS to your men that you dont want to be used as an approach route filling it full of AP mines can make the attackers life tricky.

[DavidFields]

Perhaps an odd question:

If you remove a minefield with engineers, does it count as a dead unit for the enemy in VP terms?

[Redwolf]

I hope I;m not posting too much overlap with what others posted already:

Originally posted by Omi:

What's the use of mines and when do enemies detect them?

Uncovered mines are pretty much useless. You want to cover them with fire to exploit the temporary standstill of the enemy units and/or you lay the miens so that a route around them leads into more dangerous terrain.

AT mines (not daisy chain) cannot be deteced in CM before a vehicle blows up on them.

What's the difference between all the types of guns? I know AT gun, but what exactly are infantery, flak, recoiless guns? What are they used for?

What makes a 105mm Infantery gun different from a 105mm Howitzer?

You probably mean a 150mm infantry gun and a 150mm howitzer, there was no 105mm infantry gun.

The infantry gun is much lower velocity, limiting accuracy and range, but making it much lighter. In addition the ammunition is lighter, which is a big factor for leg infantry. The rounds for a 75mm infantry gun are actually tiny, but they pack the punch of the 75mm - class guns (same applies to round for the short 75mm on vehicles, the rounds are very handy). The 150mm infantry gun is a big monster but it is incredibly much lighter than other 150mm guns or howitzers.

A single-shot AA gun, e.g. the 8mm, is the same thing as an AT gun as far as the firing is concerned, but has different mounts and different towing equipment.

The small AT guns up to 40mm are usually autocannons which makes a huge difference for anything vulnerable to them.

The recoiless rifles (named that way although they are gun-class weapons) are used as their howizter equivalent, but are much lighter. Instead of trading the weight for range and accuracy as in the infantry guns, the RCL trades it for more noise and higher use of propellant. They are basically guns without a breech. The propellant charge explodes into the open, leaving a huge sound, dust and leaves marks, and you need much more propellant for a comparable projectile speed. They are usually used as artillery in situations that require to be light, e.g. paratroops, airborne and mountain troops.

Also, what's the best place to put AT and infantery guns? On top of hills where they have a very good view of the battlefield, but are vulnerable to almost everything, or hidden in smaller strategic positions with limited view and range?

Depends on a lot of factors, but in CM it is usually best to go for limited view and long[/] range.

Same questions for infantery. Should I hide them in forest and houses and use them for close range fighting only? It seems like making them fire at the advancing enemy always leads to disaster, they suddenly draw all the enemy fire in their direction and eventually get massacred by artillery fire.

Again, lots of dependencies, but generally you want to set them up so that the enemy cannot fire from them from long range. That can be tricky, since they must protect your long-range AT guns from enemy infantry.

Somebody asked why the German guns are more robust: in CM the only difference is that guns with shields have a bonus, otherwise all should be the same. Maybe big guns are at a disadvantage, but I doubt it.