Infantry versus Tanks in a CM:BB City

[Thomm]

Last night I wanted to recreate some of the aspects of a "Thunder Run" in CM:BB.

I set up a map consisting of a straight road with tall heavy buildings at each side of the road representing a typical city street. The victory flag was situated at one end whereas the Russian setup zone was at the other end.

The attackers consisted of 4 JS-II tanks, 4 halftracks as troop transporters and a platoon of infantry.

The defenders where arranged in several layers:

1) the first 4 buildings at each side of the road contained a single sniper each.

2) the next buildings at each side of the road held a platoon of german engineers between them.

3) 4 Panzerschreck teams where positioned in a side street.

4) final layer consisted of another engineer platoon with Heavy MG42s and flame throwers.

AAR, player as axis:

The snipers killed the tank commanders and the halftrack gunners rapidly. The infantry platoon was pinned down most of the time, unable to advance.

Three of the JS-II tanks were stopped cold by the pioneer platoon. Only one JS-II reached the Panzerschreck belt, dying within seconds.

No enemy came even close to the flag.

I replayed from the Russian side. I cleaned most of the snipers, destroyed 2 building blocks and harassed other infantry until my tanks ran out of HE. My infantry was forced to move in and out of buildings, losing morale and soldiers. By the end of the game I did not even reach the Panzerschreck belt, my soldiers were panicking all over the place, the halftracks all useless, the lead tank destroyed.

I do not know how relevant this is for CMX2, but the fact that it took, in essence, a few snipers and a platoon of engineers to stop a heavy tank force in a city gives me hope for the Syrians in CMX2.

Best regards,

Thomm

[undead reindeer cavalry]

Originally posted by Rollstoy:

I do not know how relevant this is for CMX2, but the fact that it took, in essence, a few snipers and a platoon of engineers to stop a heavy tank force in a city gives me hope for the Syrians in CMX2.

in CMSF all squads carry Panzerschrecks. in CMSF the equivalent infantry AT team of Panzerschreck team has effective range of 1500-5000 meters. the downside for the defender is that IS-IIs are now invulnerable (just mobility kills) to squad AT weapons (not AT teams) from frontal arc. all tanks are vulnerable to all AT weapons from sides & rear - no more Tigers or KVs.

[KNac]

Well, i find some favours in your setup IMO

You lack infantry, at least one armored infantry company should be going with the tank platoon. I think the usual way of operating would be the infantry dismounting close to the city and going forward checking each building, with the APC following close but behind and giving proper fire support, same for tanks.

Also, modern APC is not open and gunners are better proetcted against enemy small arms fire.

And you haven't said which experience did you give each force. Axis should be conscript or green at most (to reflect how fast they break and their poor markmanship)) and Soviet should be veteran or elite.

Try with this and tell us which was the result.

P.S: oh I forgot about arty/air support totally, but is difficult to reflect modern air support in CMBB. I think a crack radio mortar spotter could do the job, and 3 o 4 TRPs free to place.

[akd]

All those that participated in the 3rd ID's "thunder runs" commented on the unique tactical environment, both advantages and disadvantages, posed by the major highways and highway interchanges that led into Baghdad. I don't think you can recreate this environment in CM:BB.

[aka_tom_w]

major highways and highway interchanges that led into Baghdad.

aka "Curly, Larry and Moe" ?

-tom w

[M1A1TC]

Use attacking infantry to clear the houses along the street, killing the AT teams,while using tanks as support from long distance. Keep infantry ahead of armor

Your scenario is lop-sided. In reality, the attackers would have 3-1 superior forces, plus UAV and air support. Try adding 3 more infantry platoons to attackers, and 1 engineer platoon.

[akd]

Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander:

Use attacking infantry to clear the houses along the street, killing the AT teams,while using tanks as support from long distance. Keep infantry ahead of armor

Your scenario is lop-sided. In reality, the attackers would have 3-1 superior forces, plus UAV and air support. Try adding 3 more infantry platoons to attackers, and 1 engineer platoon.

mmm...there is not much evidence that U.S. held a 3-1 force ratio during their runs into Baghdad. In some locations, there was probably a significantly inferior manpower ratio. That was one of the surprising aspects of the "thunder runs," but is tied, again, to the unique tactical environment.

[M1A1TC]

US Army doctrine dictates 3-1 ratio, even more when conducting MOUT combat. Most of the time the ratio was around 20-1.If the ratio is not there, the defenders have superiority, and can hold out a very long time. This doctrine is for equally trained forces, I guess against terrorists it would be different

[gibsonm]

You also have the CMX1 limitation of Infantry being unable to move between adjacent buildings without going out into the street and being exposed to fire.

As mentioned before, the Infantry would lead but would create "mouse holes" to move from building to building WITHOUT going out into the street.

The geometric layout of most cities provide numerous impromptu firelanes for both infantry and anti armour weapons. This is what "soaks up" large quantities of troops as to secure this single route may need several blocks either side to be cleared from rooftop to basement.

[Beastttt]

What where the troops grade(green,veteran,elite)

I would figure most would be green and the engineers might be regulars or maybe veterans

going up against regulars to crack

[Battlefront.com]

Yeah, lots of things to consider. First, unless the Axis were Conscript, or at best Green, and the Allies Vet or Elite, then there really isn't much to even start with because it's too different.

Second, like AKD said the highway system in Baghdad is difficult to recreate in CMx1. It can be to some extent, but you got to spend some time doing it.

Thrid, there is no comparison between a US halftrack and a Bradley. Protection is completely different, firepower is vastly different.

Fourth, the key thing about Thunder Run is that they did not stop. They allowed themselves to be taken under fire and risk more fire further along. If the Allied player stops for any reason, then things become undone rather quickly.

Fifth, the enemy was not aware that this flying column was coming. At least not like a player would know. From what I gather Iraqi forces had only a few minutes notice that the enemy was coming, and not necessarily from where. Since the column was moving, and moving fast, organized resistance was difficult to mount.

Sixth, the timeline for Thunder Run was a lot longer than anybody would want to do in CMx1, so whatever is done for one scenario will not necessarily be indicitive of the entire run. There were parts of Thunder Run that were less successful than others, but overall the mission was a great success.

Steve

[Cpl Steiner]

I hope the map editor for CM:SF includes some nice modern road features such as major highways with cloverleaf junctions etc.

I've been playing Sim City 4 a lot recently, and it has a very nice feature for creating all sorts of highway intersections, including elevated highways so you can have urban roads running underneath. I was hoping to put a snapshot in this post but couldn't get it to work.