US Army vs Brits

[Waaarg]

I am playing as the Brits in a meeting engagement against US Army. I am at a loss on how to tackle it, forces are Armor mixed with a company of mech infantry.

Facing that many Javs has me baffled on how to tackle this battle.

Any advice that could help give me some sort of game plan would be most appreciated.

[dan/california]

Does the map allow for some version of a reverse slope defense? You cannot have your armor in static positions with long range frontal visibility. you have to be able to pop them up and down. push your infantry out in front of the tanks and try to engage the Jav teams. None of this is easy. Thats why the gazillion spent on the Javelin was worth it. Its one of those rare occasions where the military industrial complex justifies itself.

If you are attacking, god help you! You either have to have more Armour than he has missiles or enough artillery to maintain suppression. Attacking unsuppressed Javelin teams in nearly suicidal for a mech heavy force.

[Alan8325]

Are you playing against another person or the AI? The AI will not acquire javelins from their vehicles and you would better be able to use your vehicles for fire support. Try and spot their more lightly armored IFVs with your dismounted infantry and then maneuver your tanks to take them out. Use your javelins, if you have any, on their Abrams tanks.

Against a human player your vehicles are pretty much screwed unless you keep them hidden because you can assume that every infantry squad of his will have javelins. Like Dan said, you will have to move your vehicles under the cover of artillery suppression against his infantry if you are attacking.

[Waaarg]

Ya this is vs a human opponent. The map itself doesn't help me at all. The only chance for a rear slope defense for me is in my deployment zone. He has a rather large hill with vegitation.

Middle is a tiny house surrouned by trees (obj)' with a few structures and wasps to the right leading to the map edge. It must be the smallest map size (first QB).

There are a few positions I can get hull down but many offer wide angles to be spotted and engaged from. But the middle approach offers very little opportunities to get out of Los.

The limited threads I could find suggested it would be a bad idea to match my challengers against his M1s, that still hold true? Anyhow, hope this gives better info to go on.

[hoolaman]

I've had an even battle of Challengers vs Abrams and the Abrams came out on top by a fair margin. I think they win out in CMSF, whether or not it should be so IRL.

There is also the possibility that your game is wildly unbalanced for a fair fight and your situation is hopeless .

[flamingknives]

Challengers vs. M1A2 SEPs is definitely a bad idea. At some point on the various M1 variants, going backwards, the CR2 Enhanced comes out on top.

[dan/california]

Playing against a a human opponent you have to figure that something like half of the Javelins are going to take out a a vehicle. If that means you don't have any vehicles left and there are a couple of Abrams standing on the hill blasting everything that moves with impunity, then you have a problem. Good luck and try to at least make it expensive for the other guy.

It takes far more effort to balance a game than just saying One mechinized company from this nation and one mechinized company from that one. Among other things there is no standardization whatsoever in how many personnel are in a company. Then you start counting high grade ATGMs and so on. And a force balance that makes for a good game with the weaker side on defense may be completely unfair for a meeting engagement. It ALL matters.

[Alan8325]

I wouldn't match Challengers to the Abrams if I were you. I would keep my Challengers hidden and see if I can pop them up long enough to either get a shot off at an IFV or fire off an area shot at an infantry position, and then pop back down before getting hit by a javelin. Target acquisition with the javelins takes like 20-30 seconds IIRC.

[Damian90]

Well, turret front and side armor on Challenger 2 should have the same protection as M1A1SA, M1A1FEP and M1A2SEP, only differences are that CR2 side turret multilayer armor protects only crew compartment, turret bustle is protected only against auto cannons by thins steel armor, but in bustle there anything that should explode, IRCC there are NBC system, radios, probably turret drives. Also gun mantle in CR2 is bigger, so weak zone is a bit bigger than in M1. Hull is a different thing, in M1 glacis plate is from 50mm to 80mm or more thick, I have theory that depending on place thickness can differ, on both sides of driver glacis can be thicker and under glacis there are fuell cells that acts as additional armor. Lower Front Hull in M1 is very thick 550-650mm multilayer laminate armor, same as on turret front and sides. In CR2 situation is different, glacis on both sides of driver are multilayer laminate armor, rather thick (maybe 200mm), but Lower Front Hull is rather thin and made only from RHA steel. Also on both sides of driver there are batteries and "armored" bins for ammo propelant charges.

Of course CR2 (Enchanced) got Lower Front Hull protected with thick module of Dorchester armor, so it is almost equal there with M1's + better turret side protection due to additional armor there.

Side hull armor protection against HEAT is similiar to M1's with TUSK but a bit superior against APFSDS and APDS ammo. So as You see protection is rather equal.

In fact the main weakness of CR2 against M1 is in fact it's main gun and ammo that it's not capabale to perforate front armor of M1, but, M1's ammo, even M829A3 will got also problems with front turret armor of CR2.

[Alan8325]

Interesting. How come in the game the front protection of M1 is a thick '+' and in CR2 Enhanced it is a thin '+'? Is this due to the front hull armor?

[Damian90]

Maybe, You see, M1 was more, universal tank, good in offensive and defensive tactics, due to glacis angled at 80 degrees that makes it not only very small profile but also rather good protection as for something that have thickness in driver hatch area of only 50mm (then there is something about 200-250mm RHAe vs. KE and more for CE, but it depends on angle of hit, projectile quality etc.) and in other places possibly 80mm or more.

The more exposed in M1 is Lower Front Hull that as I said is very thick.

Brits were thinking more in defence tactics with fighting with hull down positions and moving from one cover to another, this is why multilayer laminate armor is placed on Glacis not in Lower Front Hull, but in field Lower Front Hull is more exposed.

Besides this, bigger gun mantle in western tanks it is protected by armored mask, with some sort of laminate but it is still a weak zone, just make a comparrision of sizes.

[Waaarg]

Thanks for the advice guys, its an interesting perspective, playing at a disadvantage equipment wise. The US Army is brutal. I was initially expecting to face Strykers, but within the few turns its quite clear way worse...Bradleys. I loaded up a test of Warriors vs Brads and it wasn't close as I had thought.

I had expected a push on my right flank, but he was far more aggressive than I anticipated. Based on his movements I believe he has dismounted his infantry and are using them to cover his Bradleys and M1's. Managed to knock out 1, but my infantry ripple fired their LAWS/AS which is unfortunate.

He initially used 2 M1's to probe the left and draw fire, I miscalculated and was only able to get LOS with 1 Jav team instead of 2 and only dropped 1. He retreated and my only other option was to try and KO his M1 with Challengers. I used 2 to shoot and scoot but did not draw a bead. 1 moved up to what I thought was a pretty safe hull down position but again I think I miscalculated. I managed to hit his M1 3-4 times but most deflected ala CMx1. But I heard a Jav launch at the end of the turn so something is about to die =)

Overall you guys were spot on. It was pretty clear how much firepower the Army can bring when playing the campaign, but being on the receiving end gives you a greater appreciation of how devastating is, with everything being able to KO whatever you can bring to bear. Its pretty cool =)

[Damian90]

M2A2's and M2A3's got upgraded frontal and side armor, so these variants are fully protected against 30mm ammo, at least the older one. FV510 with WRAP-2 upgrade is also rather good protected but M2's got M220/BGM-71 TOW-2 launchers, it is not good idea to attack them if You have no ATGM on your IFV's.

Proparly used M1's are real pain in the ass, of course FGM-148 are good weapon against them, and only one really usefull when M1's are faced frontal armor on You.

Well, US.Army with rather small infantry squads have devastating firepower, because they got many armored fighting vehicles in their inventory, with good armor protection + powerfull artillery support.

Maybe it would be easier to fight against Marines, then again, Marines got infantry squads that are big and have grwat firepower, they can be also supported not only by AAVP-7A1's and LAV-25A2's but also by M1 tanks, and also they got good artillery support.

So the best way against Yanks is, making ambushes in close range, using artillery and air support.

[MikeyD]

I know whenever I play U.S. I'm always foolishly overestimating my own invulnerability and making tactical errors. "I don't have to worry about a flank attack, I've got an Abrams!" then... BOOM! Fighting against a stronger opponent usually takes patience. If you can force him to travel the length of the map in an effort to get a clear shot at you your chances of forcing him to make a tactical error go up.

[scottie]

Interesting. How come in the game the front protection of M1 is a thick '+' and in CR2 Enhanced it is a thin '+'? Is this due to the front hull armor?

Ah so this is what BF mean by hiding much of the info that was available in CMx1. The actual values must be used for ballistic calculation , user simply sees the average values in the form of THINK + etc ? i.e to stop competitors simply buying the game and stealing the research ?

Still miss the kill stats though

[Waaarg]

I know whenever I play U.S. I'm always foolishly overestimating my own invulnerability and making tactical errors. "I don't have to worry about a flank attack, I've got an Abrams!" then... BOOM! Fighting against a stronger opponent usually takes patience. If you can force him to travel the length of the map in an effort to get a clear shot at you your chances of forcing him to make a tactical error go up.

It kills me how many times my M1 or Challenger has been knocked out by a side RPG shot.

My opponent just called for a ceasefire, but to be mentioned I pre-ordered 2 155 strikes before the battle started. I didn't even think about that being gamey. When I saw my forces(5 Challengers), my only thought was "I have to thin out his Abrams." I assumed I was facing Strykers, but brads vs Warriors are a totally different beast.

Basically the majority the dmg I could see was done from Javs and 155s. My warriors were basically cannon fodder.

Thanks to all, your advice helped form a game plan that panned out.

With NATO out, I wonder what Blue vs Blue would provide both parties with a fun challenging battle.