Attack Techniques with Infantry

[Maximus]

As the Leaders said in Desert Storm, "You always want a 4:1 ratio when attacking." That doesn't mean, you have to have a 4:1 overall troop strength to even think about attacking. It means that you want to attack a certain position with 4:1 odds.

What I mean by this is that when you attack with infantry, lets say. A good tactic is to use a full platoon against one squad or team. For example, since most German squads are ~8-10 men, a platoon of 36 men can easily wipe out a German squad. Call it gang-raping if you want, but it works. Oh you may take a casualty or two, but you wouuld have wiped out 8-10 men.

The way to really do this if you know where the enemy squad/team is, and then have a platoon massed somewhere ready to assault. Run all three squads at the one squad and I guarantee that you wipe it out. A lot of the time the defending squad will route and retreat which makes it easier to shoot a running squad than one laying on the ground.

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

Don't mind me. I'm just a little ol' realist.

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maximus:

As the Leaders said in Desert Storm, "You always want a 4:1 ratio when attacking." The way to really do this if you know where the enemy squad/team is, and then have a platoon massed somewhere ready to assault. Run all three squads at the one squad and I guarantee that you wipe it out. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Apart from the fact that that is a positivistic fallacy you fall into here, I think this is a great tactic that I would dearly recommend to all my future PBEM opponents. I am sure it always works great!

Maximus, you seem to forget some things, e.g. cover, firepower, whether your opponent has another unit in an overwatch position etc.pp. No fun to start your charge and then find out that your smart opponent had a HMG team hidden 50 yards back, covering your avenue of approach, is there? But you are more then welcome to try this approach in our upcoming PBEM, I look forward to it. Just remember you might have to write a lot of letters that night.

As for the positivistic fallacy - these numbers look really impressive, and they are very easy to understand, but there are a lot of qualitative factors coming into play (e.g. quality of troops - try this using three green squads to charge a veteran SMG squads, woods, firepower, cover etc.) that it is meaningless. The only conclusion you can draw from that statement is that Schwarzkopf was a careful man, who tended to cover his bases (a bit like your nemesis Monty, perhaps?).

So I would be very careful with this sort of tactic, but as I said, you are more than welcome to test it with me.

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

Andreas

[Guest grunto]

Maximus,

Please let me know when you find an opponent who is deploying isolated squads. I would like to meet him. Now if you changed 'squad' to 'platoon' in your posting i would tend to agree as in, 'if you have 4 platoons and attack a single platoon you're probably going to steamroll through it.'

i would add that crawling across open ground is generally better than running, at least from an attacker-casualty standpoint.

-g-

andy

[Guest aaronb]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy:

Apart from the fact that that is a positivistic fallacy you fall into here<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Given that the 'fallacy' of positivism is usually used in a social policy context (e.g., to discredit numbers-based health care policy, or to discredit a 'body-count' atrocity measurement), this may not be the best way to attack OBMaximus' statements. Perhaps a qualitative attack would be more successful.

To give him some credit, the 4:1 ratio at least lets beginners know that they can't attack on a wide front, relying on the mythic superiority of the Germans small-arms teams to prevail. Concentrate and annihilate.

Simple maxims like this provide on-the-fly guidance, adjusted by other factors. For example, whether your concentrated forces are in scattered trees under an artillery barrage.

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by aaronb:

Given that the 'fallacy' of positivism is usually used in a social policy context (e.g., to discredit numbers-based health care policy, or to discredit a 'body-count' atrocity measurement), this may not be the best way to attack OBMaximus' statements. Perhaps a qualitative attack would be more successful.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aaron, that was firmly tongue-in-cheek, I just like big words (not in my own papers though, never use a long foreign word where a short English will do). Having said that, I still think it is too easy to get carried away by numbers and try to reduce everything to variables in an equation. While that is theoretically possible, I doubt you can do it in such a dynamic situation as combat.

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

Andreas

[Maximus]

Well, Andreas, if you must know. I wasn't quite done with my analysis. I had to leave shortly after I posted that. I was going to follow it up with "other" things (in posts of their own) that you should do to make sure that the above tactic would work.

I'll post my "other" thoughts when I collect them in a nice little package.

[This message has been edited by Maximus (edited 06-16-2000).]

[Maximus]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by grunto:

Maximus,

Please let me know when you find an opponent who is deploying isolated squads. I would like to meet him.

-g-

andy<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didn't mean it as that there was a squad all by itself somewhere. What I meant was that if you attack from the flank, you'll face the flank's end squad instead of running straight into the face of all three squads. And given the highly irregular 3D lay of the land in CM, that isn't too difficult to do. Especially around crest lines.

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

"I for one, am pretty damn close to Genius"--Ol' Blood & Maximus

[This message has been edited by Maximus (edited 06-16-2000).]

[Moon]

Simply ignoring some of the above side remarks, I'd like to add that the 4:1 advantage can not only be achieved by mere superiority in men, but also by applying so called "combat modifiers", like cover, surprise, flanking attacks etc. Check this out for more details when you like (no, not a cheap plug for my site, but really adding to the topic I think):

http://www.gamesofwar.de/Tactics/recon.html

Scroll down to the section of combat multipliers (number 5).

[Maximus]

Exactly Moon. That's what I meant. It's not a matter of "face-value" but of using modifiers such as you suggested. I pull it off like that all the time in VoT.

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

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"I for one, am pretty damn close to Genius"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>--Ol' Blood & Maximus

[Guest grunto]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maximus:

What I meant was that if you attack from the flank, you'll face the flank's end squad instead of running straight into the face of all three squads.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yeah i agree with that 100%. sometimes i see my troops about to 'get their t crossed' and i hightail it into a different position.

andy

[waffen]

its a good plan .but a good commander will protect there flanks with mines or there reserve units, heavy morters etc.and haveing played VOT over and over its easy to do due to knowing the lay of the land enemy forces.playing true blind games this would be a good plan but it could come unstuck very quick.as germanboy said imagine some mgs etc sitting back and pounding the assult.not knowing the lay of the land enemy forces etc will also be a big factor..but like i said it can be a good plan .ive seen it used over and over in VOT sometimes total destroying the german positions and other times a total failure.i do like the plan and ill be intersted to see how it goes on the new maps against a solid defence .i ve seen some players useing the human wave assult on VOT now i would love to see that type of assult and me haveing so heavy arty all those troops in a small area bang bang there wiped out : )thanx its was a great read all

cheers

[Guest aaronb]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy:

Aaron, that was firmly tongue-in-cheek, I just like big words <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

True story: I was waiting on a long General Ledger print-out while reading your post. It seems that doing my corporate taxes is mutually exclusive with having a functioning sense of humour.

As for long words: PNEUMONOULTRAMICROSCOPICSILICOVOLCANOCONIOSIS

;you can read about the more famous one at http://www.mcsweeneys.net/1999/12/20antidis.html

Max is only right in a simple way; as others have pointed out the complete story is on CMHQ.

[Mannheim Tanker]

Some really good points in this thread for those just getting into CM. While one should play fairly in sports, nobody ever said that you should be fair in war! (and love!?) Get those units stacked in there and outnumber your opponent as much as possible. The caveat to this is that you must also make sure that you're not concentrating your infantry in such a manner as to make a nice juicy artillery target out of them. Like someone pointed out here, you must really maximize your support units (artillery, air, armor, and engineers) if you want to minimize your casualties while maximizing the enemy's. And finally, don't neglect recon as you're advancing your infantry. This will help you avoid Germanboy's nasty little HMG team sitting 50m back from the front

[Murx]

I thought (until my current PBEMs) that the classic advance, take good position, recon & strike is a good approach in ost cases but 'daring' asaults can have a real effect (especially on assault missions where you are sure of a numerical/support force).

The defender has to make sure that he doesn't get outflanked but still needs to deploy his troops with a well balanced strength. So the problem is not attacking with 4:1 strength but defending against that !

Maybe someone can give some good points on this question.

murx

[This message has been edited by Murx (edited 06-17-2000).]

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mannheim Tanker:

This will help you avoid Germanboy's nasty little HMG team sitting 50m back from the front <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is actually somethin I find very difficult, when is the right time to stop hiding your HMG team and open up. Do it too early and you get slaughtered, do it too late and you get rushed. Any opinions?

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

Andreas

[Mannheim Tanker]

Germanboy wrote:

That is actually somethin I find very difficult, when is the right time to stop hiding your HMG team and open up. Do it too early and you get slaughtered, do it too

late and you get rushed. Any opinions?

I've always had trouble judging this too. The experience level of the supporting (defending) infantry really seems to be a deciding factor (how's THAT for a profoundly obvious statement). I'll elaborate.

If I have some veteran/regular infantry supporting the MG, I sometimes try rushing the attacker in small counterattacks. Sometimes it really throws them off balance, if my MG and mortars are suppressing them. You can get a bloody nose trying this, however, if the enemy regains its composure while you are in mid-charge! Unless you can throw the enemy back, the MG is ultimately doomed to extinction via tank-fire, artillery barrage, or infantry charge.

[Bullethead]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>That is actually somethin I find very difficult, when is the right time to stop hiding your HMG team and open up. Do it too early and you get slaughtered, do it too late and you get rushed. Any opinions?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, are you talking about MGs in isolation or MGs backing up a line of grunts?

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

-Bullethead

It was a common custom at that time, in the more romantic females, to see their soldier husbands and sweethearts as Greek heroes, instead of the whoremongering, drunken clowns most of them were. However, the Greek heroes were probably no better, so it was not so far off the mark--Flashman

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mannheim Tanker:

I've always had trouble judging this too. The experience level of the supporting (defending) infantry really seems to be a deciding factor (how's THAT for a profoundly obvious statement). I'll elaborate.

If I have some veteran/regular infantry supporting the MG, I sometimes try rushing the attacker in small counterattacks. Sometimes it really throws them off balance, if my MG and mortars are suppressing them. You can get a bloody nose trying this, however, if the enemy regains its composure while you are in mid-charge! Unless you can throw the enemy back, the MG is ultimately doomed to extinction via tank-fire, artillery barrage, or infantry charge.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Glad to see I am not the only one. I think that depending on the terrain you might want to open up at about 100m - 150m, and just throw them off-balance. But HMGs are just so vulnerable to the bloody tanks.

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

Andreas

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bullethead:

Well, are you talking about MGs in isolation or MGs backing up a line of grunts?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

HMGs in isolation, in a libe of defense, placed in areas where I expect heavy arty, that can not be left uncovered. I was also experimenting with keeping my infantry back in a counter-attacking role, relying on the HMG team to stir up a bit of trouble in the enemy's attack plan.

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

Andreas

[Bullethead]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>HMGs in isolation, in a libe of defense, placed in areas where I expect heavy arty, that can not be left uncovered.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I find isolated MGs seem to work best at ranges between 200-300m, where they still have enough firepower to be dangerous or at least annoying but where squads can't reply very well. If you shoot closer than that, a squad (provided it's not too green) can take the MG's first shot and reply effectively. And if you shoot further away, the enemy can safely use arty on your MG.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I was also experimenting with keeping my infantry back in a counter-attacking role, relying on the HMG team to stir up a bit of trouble in the enemy's attack plan.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IMHO you really shoulnd't use MGs in isolation but should have them backing up grunts in some fashion. So using grunts as counterattackers or just having an MLR is the best course I think.

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

-Bullethead

It was a common custom at that time, in the more romantic females, to see their soldier husbands and sweethearts as Greek heroes, instead of the whoremongering, drunken clowns most of them were. However, the Greek heroes were probably no better, so it was not so far off the mark--Flashman

[Guest Germanboy]

Thanks BH - I guess I have to work on my deployment techniques - I think I prefer attacking, much less to think about...

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

Andreas

[jackholt]

Counting mere troop numbers doesn't get it in the real world. It works for board games, but in CM it doesn't. Terrain, unit morale, experience, suppresive fire, flank attacks, weapon types, etc. can work even with a 1:1 ratio of troops. In CM two machine gun nests with 2 men each can take on a whole squad of 10 men (.4 to 1 odds). A whole platoon can be taken out by three machine gun nests providing suppression fire, and a squad executing a flank attack. 16 men versus 33.

I don't want to be ugly, but don't flatter yourself with the term "lil o realist." A squad and a machine gun nest can take out an entire platoon if it is running across open ground with no suppresion fire supporting it.

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

Jack Holt

jackholt@home.com

[Moon]

Jackholt - I would agree wholeheartedly. On the CD, there is a battle (won't say the title to avoid spoilers) where the attacking force consists of FEWER points than the defending force. And still, it is a very balanced scenario due to the force mix (tanks vs. infantry), terrain, availability of arty vs. fixed defenses etc. Stuff like this really works in CM, unlike any other game I have seen...