Mechanized Infantry, fists of iron, jaw of glass.

[Apocal]

I'm having quite a few issues when fighting with US Army mechanized infantry formations in cities. Playing as BLUFOR I'm pretty cautious with vehicles normally. So initially, I'd park my Brads behind a building, in a defile, etc. Of course, anyone who's knows Mech Inf knows the emphasis is on Mech, not infantry, so the dismounts are criminally short on firepower. They get their lunch eaten by any reasonable defending force, leaving four IFVs with no I. So it goes.

Then I started getting aggressive with the vehicles, but all too quickly they are knocked out by AT. If I place them too far back, their fields of fire quickly become limited to the point of complete uselessness. It'd be different if there wasn't so much deadspace, but there is and getting close enough to open it up means I'm eating RPGs.

Any tips on effectively using Mech Inf in MOUT?

[RadioactiveMan]

The "Assaulting Fierce and Agile" thread in this forum has some good tips for assaulting buildings and urban areas.

My advice is to use the fighting vehicles for suppression fire. Put your infantry in the tallest buildings you can find (avoid floors with balconies, but roofs with walls are great as long as there are no other buildings that are taller) and have your IFVs hang back until your infantry identifies buildings with enemies inside. Then maneuver your IFVs to hit those buildings while exposing them as little as possible to other buildings that you haven't cleared. Position them in alleys or at corners, etc.

With this setup you can engage any threats and your infantry is reasonably safe inside the buildings. For added safety you can split your squad between floors or put them in adjacent buildings to minimize RPG damage. When you want to advance and claim a new building there are several ways to go about it. If the building is right next door the "Fast" command usually works well. If the target building is a little further away you may want to use the "Assault" command. If the building is any great distance (more than 75 m) you should probably load up your boys and rush in under the cover of smoke if you suspect a threat. Always, if you suspect a threat feel free to blaze away with your IFVs on any potentially dangerous buildings. Your vehicles have a lot of ammo generally, and you can afford to waste some to keep your infantry safe. Use your vehicles to suppress and your infantry to spot and kill. Lastly, 40mm grenades are your best tool for buildings. Save your SMAWs or Javelins for tanks/IFVs.

[Lethaface]

Since 1.1 I must say MOUT seems to be a lot harder! Even reservists can do quite some damage to troops when they are in MOUT defense.

Much to my approval I no longer feel like cheating when area firing buildings.

For example;

Yesterday I finally finished the second mission of the marines campaign. Total Victory at the cost of 17 WIA and 1 KIA. About 80% of these WIA were caused by 'presumed' empty buildings. Who expects any survivers after several 150MM impacts, minutes of small arms suppressing and plenty of 40mm impacts

Ontopic:

In this mission there are only AAV's in support, but I guess they can be used similar to IFV's in maps without heavy enemy AT assets.

I generally use similar tactics as described by RadioActiveMan. Vehicles are parked behind buildings or other covered positions, in overwatch to take on ambushing enemies nearby. When I identify enemies in a building, Infantry will engage automatic. Then I try to quick move at least two vehicles in LOF and put as much as fire as I can in the smallest amount of time. Smoke used if appropriate (especially if other enemy units might have LOF). Even AAV's can suppress very nicely with their MK 19's. I prefer to target Enemy strongholds with support fires before going, especially after 1.1. If no support is available just shoot the **** out of a building before entering. Never get your IFV's to close too soon, as an RPG might prove fatal at close range. If I really have to move them into the unkown, I generally try to keep them moving fast and keep their flanks covered by smoke as much as possible.

Infantry at higher floors are perfect to counter enemies appearing in nearby buildings, that way at least they can only get off 1 or 2 RPG's before being suppressed, and consequently, blowed to pieces

In my opinion, if your playing with marines you should be much more aggressive and HURRAH your way through the enemy

With the army I played much more conservative. However could be the changes in 1.1 that forces me to take and hold the initiative.

[Dietrich]

My experience with IFVs -- whether Strykers, Bradleys, LAVs or AAVs (I don't play Red much unless it's Red-vs.-Red) -- is that more often than not an RPG hit is fatal or as near to it as makes no odds; either it's a hit that knocks out the IFV and kills/wounds all the crew and most (if not all) of the passengers, or it knocks out the IFV and kills/wounds most of the crew so that the surviving ones bail out anyway. The only Blue vehicle I can count on to survive a hit from pretty much any AT weapon is the Abrams.

Since losing 1-3 guys in a given squad is less costly than getting an IFV knocked out by a not previously spotted RPG, I deploy my infantry forward of my IFVs, and when they spot an RPG, I (often) send the nearest IFV charging into LOF and plaster the building in question.

In the second mission of the Marines campaign, it's easy to lose half your AAVs before you even get out of the city. That was my experience the first couple times I played that scenario. Then I learned to lead with my infantry, use them to pin defenders, then bring my AAVs up to finish 'em off.

In MOUT, whoever gains the roofs/upper floors of the tallest buildings gains the map, unless the enemy already has LOS to those places. "USMC The Old City" taught me this lesson.

[Lethaface]

Dietrich said that very well

In my experience bradleys - and too lesser extent strykers - will survive non RPG-29 equivalent rounds impact at its front armor most of the time, unless they are less then ~50m from the assailant. Any side or rear hit will almost always result in a penetration. All other vehicles, except tanks ofc, stand no chance against direct hits from RPG's.

---

Since I brought it up already; The second mission in the campaign is really well done in my opinion. The first time I played it I was using 1.10 and it was a walk in the park. Only very few enemies, guess it bugged out. This time though it was one of the most intense fights I had in CMSF untill know

Especially because I didn't expect such heavy resistance after my previous play.

My complimtens to the designer.

[Dietrich]

The first time I played the Marines campaign's second mission, I was baffled that, as per the AAR, the only enemy forces on the map were, IIRC, a single static tank.

[Apocal]

Thanks for all the tips. Just one thing: I'm talking about the Mechanized Infantry as in HBCT, Bradley-mounted types. Marines in AAVs I have few problems handling, because they have the organic firepower to handle most things that come there way. With Strykers, the two 240s provide just enough to get me by.

It's the fact that the HBCT mech types are pretty much dependent on their Brads for fire support that has me staring at burning tracs entirely too much.

[Secondbrooks]

I personally don't miss those MG-teams a bit. In that sense HBCT's platoon doesn't feel any less toothless than SBCT would. Well i have to admit i just don't get the idea of MG-teams, i'd more likely would take one more infantry squad with "maxed" assault efficency in their place... I prefer going up close and personal in most situations.

[Dietrich]

In one sense, I prefer getting a squad close enough to unleash a barrage of handgrenades (not least because that seems more effective than point-blank full-auto bursts).

On the other hand, getting up close and personal means the enemy can stick it to you all the better. At the sort of range M240s are suited to (200+ meters), you can inflict casualties on the enemy and degrade his morale without exposing your own troops to as much threat.

Secondbrooks, you could try putting your MG teams in more or less the same place to concentrate their firepower on a given target or area. (Just a suggestion, of course.)

[Secondbrooks]

s to as much threat.

Secondbrooks, you could try putting your MG teams in more or less the same place to concentrate their firepower on a given target or area. (Just a suggestion, of course.)

I do that, but still i'd be more that happy to replace them with one assault squad. Stryker platoon already seems to have enough firepower in vehicles to give support for most situations.

Basically i'd say my MG-teams are running at 30-40% of their efficency (this meaning that they spent too few rounds per mission) all the time. If i need to have suppressive effect on enemy i will use Stryker, not MG-teams. Tasks in which i usually use MG-teams are tasks where regular infantry squad would be more suitable.

With that being said i'd like to add that these days i play mostly heavily forested maps... So that might color my point of view.

[Lethaface]

MG teams at rooftops bring pain at large

[Apocal]

I personally don't miss those MG-teams a bit. In that sense HBCT's platoon doesn't feel any less toothless than SBCT would.

Well, if you don't use 'em, I suppose you wouldn't miss 'em.

Well i have to admit i just don't get the idea of MG-teams, i'd more likely would take one more infantry squad with "maxed" assault efficency in their place... I prefer going up close and personal in most situations.

IRL and game, they require different handling than a rifle squad, but have firepower well out of proportion to their size.

I do that, but still i'd be more that happy to replace them with one assault squad. Stryker platoon already seems to have enough firepower in vehicles to give support for most situations.

Basically i'd say my MG-teams are running at 30-40% of their efficency (this meaning that they spent too few rounds per mission) all the time. If i need to have suppressive effect on enemy i will use Stryker, not MG-teams. Tasks in which i usually use MG-teams are tasks where regular infantry squad would be more suitable.

Rog, how do you keep those Strykers alive in a city fight? I generally post them behind buildings and let the infantry slug it out, for the most part, the vics are taxis with an armory in the trunk.

With that being said i'd like to add that these days i play mostly heavily forested maps... So that might color my point of view.

Yeah. That would.

MG teams at rooftops bring pain at large

This. Everyday and twice on Sunday.

[Secondbrooks]

Apocal: I can't give you one and true answer of tactic's of mine. It's too much situation based. Only thing i can say about my tactics is that i usually miss more to have 7 more men in assault, than i thank that i have 7 men in firesupport.

I think my vehicles fare pretty well. Ofcourse there is only me to judge that, and i think i'm not most objective kind of judge :cool: