"A Helluva road opening" playing advices

[snake_eye]

The comments of Euripides, gave me the idea of doing that advices post about the scenario “A Helluva Road Opening” http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=881

and wipe away his idea that there are considerable AT assets and not enough AFV’s . Well, if all available AFV's are destroyed, something has been done wrongly and these advices are done to help you.

As the title might makes you think of what is going to take place, you should advance with caution.

A road opening is not a pleasant thing to do. It is among, the most dangerous move I can think of.

First don’t move out of the compound and or base at full speed, trying to reiterate a Thunder Run move along the road up to the dam bridge and the Nira outpost.

Some of your AFV’s and or trucks (less likely) will get there with some luck and none might, eventually, do it.

Since, I advice you not to move right away, it is simply because, I would like, that you could get a partial and or clear assessments of the threats along the countryside your are about to travel across.

Get a team with an FO on a dominating feature, nearthe base and look toward your objective. Move along a Stryker. Choose one armed with 40mm grenade launcher. It will be better suited to pour suppressive fire on suspected locations. Get moving your Recon team with theirs Javelins retrieved from their Strykers on overwatch location. Finally move one or the two MGS Strykers on suited locations to support the convoy about to leave.

Don’t forget to use the LOS of the Nira strongpoint and outpost to check and set their field of fire. Deploy their MG’s if not done already.

Leave aside the villages for the time being. Just check them by fire for the moment. Don’t get involved in a fight and or an assault

When, you have a clear idea of the enemy locations and or possible location, have the FO and or suited T.L call for fire on these. Watch for the results.

When the convoy can finally move out of the base, have the BTR’s reconnoitre forward by bounds and move behind them to check area. Stay below the hills crest and move on low grounds. Dismount the infantry Plt from the trucks, if needed and have them, particularly the MG’s teams locate an overwatch fire position to cover the next move of the infantry.

As for the AFV’s, you have besides the recon Strykers another Platoon waiting in the base barracks near the airfield. Another dismounting Plt is already keeping an overwatch from the base left hills. To use either one is up to you, depending of the intelligence assessment you have gathered on the enemy whereabouts.

I won’t spoil anything more for the moment of the scenario. You can go through it well, if you don’t rush blindly along the road at the beginning. Do it a military way : take time, avoid open ground as much as you can and have mutual support it will work for you.

All the forces, Enemy as well as Friendly have been weighted to make a credible scenario. The time limit has been set accordingly.

A last advice. It is a road opening and IED’s or VBIED’s would not be out of place. That does not mean there are any! Just expect them, like you would in a real environment. Doing so, you won’t be surprised.

And you, how are dealing ?

[DaveDash]

Gonna give this a go shortly.

[Erwin]

All good advice snake_eye.

One of the things I like about your design is that one has to perform recon - which is possibly my favorite aspect of the CM1 and CM2 games - discovery of enemy positions so one can call in arty or otherwise safely deal with them.

I have heard it said that the CM games don't require recon and that CM1 and CMSF simulate situations where the recon is done and now the forces go in to shoot everything up. Scenarios like yours show that CMSF can sim the recon phase rather well. Congrats.

Hope you do more scenarios and hopefully a campaign.

[DaveDash]

First impressions, it's an awesome map. Has a real 'Afghanistan' like feel to it.

My basic initial plan is I'm going to move the Platoon of US Infantry across to the right flank and assault and clear that village, then probe ahead and clear as much as they can. The other US Platoon on the high ridge will then suppress the village on the left flank. In the mean time I will assemble my convoy, call down smoke, and move them up the middle towards the main hill, and branch off the clear the left flank. I will use my MGS Stryker to put a few rounds into the building on the hill, not to destroy it, but to discourage anyone inside it.

Once I have everything up to the hill in the centre clear (left, middle, and right flank), I will move the US Platoon on the left flank up and on line, and then move each formation up in bounding overwatch fashion. Infantry up the flanks, convoy up the middle.

Not sure if this is the orthodox way of doing it, but I have three hours, so I have plenty of time.

[snake_eye]

Erwin,

Yeah, A Recon can be made and has to be made in effect to draw a tactical scheme to use. CMSF has worked well for me on that issue.

I have delayed my scenario /campaign made on that map with the Marines getting on LZ by helicopters around the Nira bridge capturing and securizing the area, for a follow up by UK mech's troops. The first part works well, but I am not satisfied by the second. The ground through which the UK troops arrive is too restricted to allow a good fanning of the tracks and their subsequent move toward the airfield to seize it. So, I am working on it from time to time.There is no need to rush, if it results in getting something not enjoyable by the player. I have to think and think about it a little more and make a test.

Dave,

Your planning sounds good to me. As a matter of fact, I came to it after few tests. If you don't have casualties preventing you to move there easily, I think that you should anyway wait for the reinforcement of the Bradley's before attempting anything against the village near the Nira bridge. You could fix the enemy with your troops and have at least one or two of the Brad's go for the bridge and secure it. One remaining to assist the troops.

Let me know.

Cheers

[Erwin]

One comment re your default set-up is that my personal preference is that you simply place all the (rescue column) units in a large set-up zone and while leaving the smaller zones where you currently have small formations set up on the flanks, allow the player to make the decision whether to place units in those flank set-up areas.

The fact that you have already place units on the R and L flanks gives the player a quandary. Are you hinting that units MUST be placed there and do something or the game could be problematic? Can I "safely" remove all those units and do something completely different with them?

So, why do that part of the set-up for the player? Can you allow us to do that, or does that create game problems?

[snake_eye]

Well, Erwin, I am not sure, if I have clearly understood your question. The player doesn't have to follow the defensive posture, I have set on the airfield edge with the Marines Plt on the left hill crest and the Recon's Strykers on the right with the MGS. That defensive posture is one I would have taken, if I had been there.

The left Plt has a good view on the road and the near Sidi Bou Said village as well as on the edge of the Hassan village. They have also a good view on Hill 54.

On the right side the recon teams have also a view on the Hill 54 and on the Al Farouk village, where a ford is located. That could be a place, you would like to have interdicted with fire if needed.

You can have an FO team sent on the hilltop right behind the airfield tower.

With these troops watching and or overwatching from the FFL, you can gather quite a few intelligence assessments on the enemy.

The Plt at the rear with its Strykers is a reserve that can be deployed when and where it could be needed. That is your tactical choice, depending of the move you have made.

The ANA truck's convoy is ready to leave at your command, when you feel that it is safe. before the BTR's come or after. That is your choice.

But as I said, it is up to the player to do what he is feeling best when the game button is activated.

In that military tactical road opening, there are no safe place. If you feel to be in a quandary, it is exactly what you are going to feel if you are going to move the convoy on the road straight away without any alternative plan in mind and or troops able to react to an imminent threat.

So to resume. the troops in a defensive posture are in a logical place to be at the beginning. That doesn't mean that you have to stay there. But if you move, you better have alternate positions from where you can gather intelligence and or defend.

More, since it is a road opening. that doesn't mean that you have to stay on the road at all time. You can move troops on hillocks near the road from where you can check it and defend it, while others are probing forward by bounds. The villages can be cleared or not (that depends if you are having them under control by fire that could be drawn on them instantly) . The only one that is really a threat is the Hassan one, since it is located on the side of the road and that the Nira strongpoint can't have a full field of fire on it.

Don't forget to have the Nira outpost as well as the stronghold, near the bridge operational at all time, since they are able to draw interdiction fire on the bridge and its access, against a possible enemy threat....

Jnt62006 could, surely, write the right tactical analysis about that pending battle and I am sure that he will surprise us with a sound tactical plan as usual.

I give him a go ahead if he reads that post

Cheers

[Erwin]

"That defensive posture is one I would have taken, if I had been there."

All I was saying is that I like to make the decisions re what units to use as outpost/recon etc.

However, some designers put units in certain places as a hint as to what they suggest you do, and it can create a problem if you can and do change their set-up. (I hate that theory of design btw, so am happy that that is not what you have done.)

In this case, you sound like you were trying to be "helpful(?)" But, I would rather simply have all the units in a "laager" in the rear and have the set-up positions that you have allowed us to be empty so I can choose what to place and where.

[snake_eye]

Hi Erwin,

Well, I am not very helpful in the setup, it just happens that it seems normal to have a security screen around the airfield boundaries on the enemy side.

If , I had permitted during the setup the move of all the units wherever the player wants to move, the scenario would have looked like a Human against Human one. In that eventuality, it would have been right to park in a laager all the troops and the player would have moved them where he felt it was the best suited.

In that scenario, I just wanted the player to grab the sense of some reality, just before he would be allowed to play. When, he pushes the red button, he is free to move, where he wants

for the best or the worst depending on the FOW and the A.I behaviours.

More, I don’t think that a Blue posture of some type would bring a great difference, besides another one, in the first few minutes.

Cheers

[Erwin]

Ok, I can buy that.

I was only worried that you were "hinting" to us what we should do at the start.

It's not that your set-up is a bad idea, it's just that I may want to use different units. So, the first thing I may do when I start your (really good-looking scenario) is change a few things on the flanks at least.

[Euri]

Ok, I can buy that.

I was only worried that you were "hinting" to us what we should do at the start.

It's not that your set-up is a bad idea, it's just that I may want to use different units. So, the first thing I may do when I start your (really good-looking scenario) is change a few things on the flanks at least.

Actually at your side of the map its all roads! You can just move units from center to flanks in no time in this scenario. It is more important to decide how you prefer to proceed.

[snake_eye]

Euri,

You are damn right the road in front of the hill allows someone to transfer units from the center to the left or the contrary, rather quickly, with some caution however.

Erwin,

I shall be very interested in knowing about your new departure positions and or overwatch and how you are doing

Thanks to both of you for your renewed interest in that scenario

Cheers

[Erwin]

I am REALLY looking forward to your scenario, as soon as I can stop myself from posting on these forums!!!!!!

Questions:

I started to set up. Noticed that one needs v 1.30? I am at 1.32 I think. Is that ok?

Is there any way to resupply the ANA forces with their 7.62/34 and /54 ammo for the PK's and AKM's (and RPG's also)?

Also btw: Re my personal set-up, my sense is that since it seems clear in the briefing that we'll have to do something about the village on the right flank, I would put more force there rather than a recon element. For similar reason I wouldn't put a whole platoon in the hills on the left since the town problem there is further away and across the river. I plan to set up snipers up on the hills along with any and all MG's. But, to keep the reg inf guys in reserve or on the right flank ready to follow the recon guys.

That's just my assessment. I wondered why you set-up opposite to what I am think of doing? What was your thinking process re that?

[Erwin]

More questions:

The briefing talks of Bradleys arriving at noon, but it's 6.10am and the scenario is 3 hours, so...? Also, we have an air controller, but apparently will never see any air (according to the briefing)?

[snake_eye]

I am REALLY looking forward to your scenario, as soon as I can stop myself from posting on these forums!!!!!!

Questions:

I started to set up. Noticed that one needs v 1.30? I am at 1.32 I think. Is that ok?

Is there any way to resupply the ANA forces with their 7.62/34 and /54 ammo for the PK's and AKM's (and RPG's also)?

Also btw: Re my personal set-up, my sense is that since it seems clear in the briefing that we'll have to do something about the village on the right flank, I would put more force there rather than a recon element. For similar reason I wouldn't put a whole platoon in the hills on the left since the town problem there is further away and across the river. I plan to set up snipers up on the hills along with any and all MG's. But, to keep the reg inf guys in reserve or on the right flank ready to follow the recon guys.

That's just my assessment. I wondered why you set-up opposite to what I am think of doing? What was your thinking process re that?

Most important, you can play it with the patch 1.30 and or 1.31(the last one available).

Unfortunately, there is no way to replenish ANA’s ammo, besides, what might be available in the BTR’s. I don’t recall, if they are carrying RPG’s rounds. The MTVR transporting the ANA, are Marines trucks and the rifles calibres available, are not the same. I have tried to have them grab AT -4 and or LAW’s to no avail.

About your troops setting. You are right, something should be done to the right village ‘Al Farouk) before the left one (Sidi Bou Said), since there is a ford on the former. The Plt on the left hill, since they did not have any strikers, was placed there as a security screen. They are checking by fire the all area from the Sidi Bou Said village to the bridge, up to hill 54 and as far as the edges of Hassan’s village and its near wood.

The left Plt was the one I intended to use against Sidi Bou Said latter on. In the game, when I had them move, while the ANA was further away than the bridge and near or on Hill 54, they did it without any trouble and where able to move along the river on to the village and assault it. An MG team stayed on the opposite river berm and brought suppressive fire, when they close on the village edge. Mortars were fired during their advance as well. A Bradley, when it became available, was attached to them to help in the clearing.

The reserve mounted Plt can be use on the right if you judge it right. It is not a bad choice, rather a wise one.

More questions:

The briefing talks of Bradleys arriving at noon, but it's 6.10am and the scenario is 3 hours, so...? Also, we have an air controller, but apparently will never see any air (according to the briefing)?

I just have checked the editor, I made an error to write midday. The game starting at 06:10 AM, the Brad’s are due around 08:15. The FAAC, just wanted to make a ride in the Bradley. More seriously, I don’t think that the fact that he can not call any air assets is a problem. In RL he would have been better elsewhere. He can however, in the game, call mortars. Effectively an FO would have been better suited.

Keep on going, We are going to discover different ways to get to the Nira bridge.

Cheers

[jnt62006]

Just picked up this thread and want to return to the recon comments since I imagine it was directed at me (I think I am probably the biggest advocate, as of late anyway, for maximizing CMSF's ability to fight the "last hundred yards"). Being a former Scout Platoon Leader with extensive experience and understanding of what battalion level recon assets are capable of (and what they are not) I feel pretty comfortable in my stance that CMSF game mechanics make it very hard to simulate accurately.

In the past a lot of recon advocates in CM1 recommended buying a bunch of jeep mounted units in a quick game and sending them forward willy nilly without any sort of terrain or enemy analysis, relying on the burning hulks to tell them where the enemy is. That is definitely NOT reconnaissance.

In CM1 any unit that could spot an enemy unit, would very frequently also be spotted by said enemy unit or another, resulting in a fire fight and usually a killed recon asset. The hide function would keep units hidden and unspotted, but their own spotting ability was practically nil, making them useless. It is my belief the spotting rules are slightly different in CM2 but mostly along the lines of C2.

Stealthy movement takes forever. If you dont mind playing the 2 hours it takes to move/crawl 1000m into a good OP position than thats great (lets just hope you dont get spotted on the way or as soon as you lay eyes on the enemy, because then its a total waste of two hours).

For example, in my Striker Company Attack scenario I sent forward a sniper team into a forward OP to confirm or deny my suspected enemy positions. (This is the absolute necessary first step in recon, you cant just send units forward and hope they stumble into the enemy. They need an objective, a task and purpose, just like any other maneuver unit.) I spent a good 30 minutes getting them the 400m into position and as soon as they started spotting enemy units they engaged. I could have given them a specific target arc to keep them from firing into areas I suspected there would be enemy units but then their spotting ability drops significantly. Against the AI it wasnt that big of a deal. A human opponent however, would have blasted the ridgeline with arty and probably shifted his forces based on where he spotted me.

I think for CMSF to really make recon doable in an accurate way there would have to be a hold fire command at least. That way your units will not engage unless given express permission to do so. The guys that designed this game are not military numbskulls, I have had interpersonal communications with a couple of them over the years. They know and understand military thought and doctrine. If they thought the ability to move stealthily and spot enemy units without hindrance was important to the game they would have put it in there. But obviously, from a design standpoint, that is not a part of the battlefield they intended to simulate.

I would really like for the recon advocates to attempt to show me that recon is a viable mission set that can be simulated in CMSF. A video showing its use and successful application would be great.

Gauntlet thrown! ;-)

[Euri]

I could have given them a specific target arc to keep them from firing into areas I suspected there would be enemy units but then their spotting ability drops significantly.

IMHO this is not correct. I am now playing Miss 5 of the NATO-German Campaign which has a recon character. A recon team at a good position with a target arc extending to a limited range of only a couple of meters can spot everything. Hide does not seem to impair spotting ability (unless of course you are behind a wall where "hide" puts your heads under the wall)

[BlackMoria]

*** Warning - Contains Spoilers ***

For snake_eye:

Very nice scenario. Gives a very nice feel of 'Outside the Wire' operations that occur on a day to day basis in Afghanistan. Units mount up to do a 'security' op and they know they are most likely going to get hit but don't know where and when.

Setup: I know what Erwin means about the deployment areas. About half the blue force is 'fixed' in place and not moveable and I wonder why you didn't go with setting most if not the entire airfield as a deployable area. You might have a reason but if you did have one, the ability of blue forces to quickly reorganize in a minute or two negates that. I personally don't have a problem with the setup as is because of ability of blue to reorganize and redeploy in a few minutes but it seemed somewhat odd to 'fix' some of blue's forces in place in the first place.

Force Ratio - good balance. If you are going for an Afghanistan feel, you might want to give the Red another unit of mortars or give them more ammo. It seemed after the first 20 minutes, red ran out of artillery to use as I encountered no indirect fire from red for the rest of the game.

Reinforcements: You might want to look at timings for red reinforcements. I was on all objectives and had pretty much wiped the Syrians from the board and sat around waiting for 20 minutes for something to happen. Some players are going to go 'What now?' if the victory condition screen doesn't come up shortly. I know that I did. I wasn't certain what was happening so I saved and then hit the 'surrender' to check the map. All Syrians except a small squad in a deep ravine and the observer were gone and the victory conditions stated that I only met two of my terrain objectives despite me having troops in all of them. Knowing that you do excellent scenarios and that such a oversight most likely to NOT likely to happen, I went back to my save and waited on the clock. Sure enough, after about 20 minutes, more forces appeared, got hammered and then I got the total victory screen.

Assessment: Excellent scenario depicting the dreaded 'route opening' operation. For my tastes, red ran out of mortars too soon but get more feedback from others about this before you change it. I like indirect fire so I my bias is showing. Scenario could be shorter. I was on all objectives in two hours and I thought I was very cautious. Again, wait for more feedback before changing as it could be just me and others might need the time. Reinforcements timings need looking at or in the orders, hint at a possible insurgent attack is possible during the operation so that the player knows that he is to take and hold certain objectives rather than just pass through them. The insurgent attack on the Al Farouk hamlet near the end was only detected and dealt with because I had returned a ANA section and ANA HMG back there prior because I wasn't clear if the objectives were 'touch' or 'hold' (the orders aren't clear on this) so I sent forces to all objectives I had previously passed through (this was during the long period of time that nothing appeared to be happening so I thought the objective might be 'hold' rather than 'touch')

Great work and other fine scenario, snake_eye!

[BlackMoria]

Just picked up this thread and want to return to the recon comments since I imagine it was directed at me (I think I am probably the biggest advocate, as of late anyway, for maximizing CMSF's ability to fight the "last hundred yards"). Being a former Scout Platoon Leader with extensive experience and understanding of what battalion level recon assets are capable of (and what they are not) I feel pretty comfortable in my stance that CMSF game mechanics make it very hard to simulate accurately.

In the past a lot of recon advocates in CM1 recommended buying a bunch of jeep mounted units in a quick game and sending them forward willy nilly without any sort of terrain or enemy analysis, relying on the burning hulks to tell them where the enemy is. That is definitely NOT reconnaissance.

In CM1 any unit that could spot an enemy unit, would very frequently also be spotted by said enemy unit or another, resulting in a fire fight and usually a killed recon asset. The hide function would keep units hidden and unspotted, but their own spotting ability was practically nil, making them useless. It is my belief the spotting rules are slightly different in CM2 but mostly along the lines of C2.

Stealthy movement takes forever. If you dont mind playing the 2 hours it takes to move/crawl 1000m into a good OP position than thats great (lets just hope you dont get spotted on the way or as soon as you lay eyes on the enemy, because then its a total waste of two hours).

For example, in my Striker Company Attack scenario I sent forward a sniper team into a forward OP to confirm or deny my suspected enemy positions. (This is the absolute necessary first step in recon, you cant just send units forward and hope they stumble into the enemy. They need an objective, a task and purpose, just like any other maneuver unit.) I spent a good 30 minutes getting them the 400m into position and as soon as they started spotting enemy units they engaged. I could have given them a specific target arc to keep them from firing into areas I suspected there would be enemy units but then their spotting ability drops significantly. Against the AI it wasnt that big of a deal. A human opponent however, would have blasted the ridgeline with arty and probably shifted his forces based on where he spotted me.

I think for CMSF to really make recon doable in an accurate way there would have to be a hold fire command at least. That way your units will not engage unless given express permission to do so. The guys that designed this game are not military numbskulls, I have had interpersonal communications with a couple of them over the years. They know and understand military thought and doctrine. If they thought the ability to move stealthily and spot enemy units without hindrance was important to the game they would have put it in there. But obviously, from a design standpoint, that is not a part of the battlefield they intended to simulate.

I would really like for the recon advocates to attempt to show me that recon is a viable mission set that can be simulated in CMSF. A video showing its use and successful application would be great.

Gauntlet thrown! ;-)

We think alike. I was an artillery officer and not recce, but I know the importance of recce and doing it right. There was a saying - 'Time spend on recce is seldom wasted time.'

As for your challenge, try this one out:

Halt Hammerzit! - NATO stand alone scenario. I have gotten a total victory just using the Aufklarungs and observers and not moving the main force reinforcments out of the urban area blue starts with.

All red casualties except for one BMP were dealt with by observers and Aufklarungs. It is a great scenario for moving the German scouts around to find the enemy positions and then using artillery to pound the red forces to paste.

I play RT so I have no replay but I might try it again and see if I can get a video but it will not be an exciting video watching the scouts crawl and hunt their way through the map.

[jnt62006]

OK, I just tried the Halt Hammerzit mission. Could only stand it for about 20 minutes. I will acknowledge that the spotting rules seem to be much better than I thought. However, the tactics you were employing here (recon as spotters for arty to clear a map) would probably only work against the AI. A human opponent would try to use indirect and /or direct fires on your suspected OPs as soon as he realized you were calling in accurate arty fires. I realize you are not advocating using this as a legit tactic, just a "hey look what I did". Quite honestly, I know the results I get from my tutorial games are a little skewed because it is against the AI. But they are just to illustrate the lessons.

I ran a test scenario in which I had a rifle squad walk down a street with two syrian squads hiding in buildings with target arcs only a few meters in range. The Syrians spotted the US squad right off and didnt open fire until I gave them the fire command, even though the squad had walked by 10 meters away. This is a great lesson learned for me and will improve my game play significantly. Thanks for clarifying all of that.

If as a player you guys like to spend an hour watching some recon teams crawl across the map then go for it. I would much rather bring up the heavier stuff and engage in a little fire and maneuver.

[jnt62006]

A word on AAF (Anti Afghan Forces, their Politically Correct title) and mortars. You have to keep in mind that Coalition counterbattery assets are phenomenal. If you are operating any where near a FOB the radar there will pick up any AAF mortar fire and slam the firing position with counterbattery fire within minutes. In the open spaces of Afghanistan it is very hard to hide a firing mortar as well. For this reason AAF indirect will always be very inaccurate and very short. The gun team will set up the mortar, drop a few rounds with little in the way of adjustment and then break it down and move, hopefully before Coalition forces can fire any counterbattery or get any air assets in the area to look for the mortar position.

Keep that stuff in mind if you are looking for a reasonably accurate depiction of the fighting in Afghanistan.

[Euri]

I ran a test scenario in which I had a rifle squad walk down a street with two syrian squads hiding in buildings with target arcs only a few meters in range. The Syrians spotted the US squad right off and didnt open fire until I gave them the fire command, even though the squad had walked by 10 meters away. This is a great lesson learned for me and will improve my game play significantly.

Actually the key design purpose of firing arcs is exactly this one: to allow deadly ambushes at medium or close firing range without giving away positions from afar.

[Erwin]

"You are right, something should be done to the right village ‘Al Farouk) before the left one (Sidi Bou Said), since there is a ford on the former. The Plt on the left hill, since they did not have any strikers, was placed there as a security screen. They are checking by fire the all area from the Sidi Bou Said village to the bridge, up to hill 54 and as far as the edges of Hassan’s village and its near wood.

The left Plt was the one I intended to use against Sidi Bou Said latter on..."

I think you are doing too much of the planning/thinking for the player Snake... It's more fun if you let us decide what we want to do.

eg: I felt that the right flank village should be dealt with immediately so as to open up the ford as a 2nd approach. So, I would have positioned the forces with the non-Styker inf on the right.

[snake_eye]

Hi Erwin,

I was just answering to your questions about the do and the don’t of the units placement prior to their deployment from the FFL, without trying to give any spoilers. Again , what you decide to do, after these placement explanation is up to you.

Believe me, whatever you do, I guess you are going to be surprised and that will be fun and you’ll get adrenaline pumping, that’s for sure.

Hi BlackMoria,

About your following setup comments:

(BlackMoria Quote)Setup: I know what Erwin means about the deployment areas. About half the blue force is 'fixed' in place and not moveable and I wonder why you didn't go with setting most if not the entire airfield as a deployable area. You might have a reason but if you did have one, the ability of blue forces to quickly reorganize in a minute or two negates that. I personally don't have a problem with the setup as is because of ability of blue to reorganize and redeploy in a few minutes but it seemed somewhat odd to 'fix' some of blue's forces in place in the first place.(Quote end)

After having thought, a while, at what Erwin had written about it before and following your comments quoted above, I am now convinced, that I should have set the entire airfield area as a deployable area. The obvious reason, for having not done so, was that I had placed the forces as a security screen and or reserve. I had allowed some units to deploy, since it was obvious to me, that they were the ones that should be moved first.

But as Erwin wrote about it, it is more fun for the player to decide what move he wants to do. More, the fact that some of the units could not be deployed, made some of you think that there was something behind it. If, there was, it had anyway no important impact on the move that could have been done or not. At the time of the scenario design and testing, I was more like a chess player analysing every move and subsequent ones, since I had in mind the enemy deployment and reaction.

That is somehow a designer drawback, that I should try to temperate.

About the mortars( 2 X 81mm).I have been quite surprised by their fire volleys more than once during the testing. I felt that it was sufficient, since they are used in Afghanistan in quick and short volleys, before being dismantled, hidden and or carried elsewhere. Maybe, a tube or two could be brought at a latter time as reinforcement for a brief period. That has to be considered.

About the enemy counter attack. As usual, intelligence assessments are not the best. The S2 can be blame, once again!. If, in the briefing we give some indication about its feasibility, it is no more a surprise. However, one should consider, that nothing is granted. In many road opening, I have seen in the past, the attack of the convoy, was more often a way to have the reaction force leave the compound and leave it understrenght in order to attack it and or the Reaction Force. The first time, you are surprise, but you are learning very quickly about the different tactics used by the enemy. They try hard not to use the same tactic, the next time, but some time latter.

About the objectives :

Well, that part is the most difficult one. You get points, for touching some unknown places (obvious ones however), for holding others, for having not destroyed others and finally for destroying enemy units.

However, if you are on an objective, like a village, if it is clear of enemy and not destroyed, you should get points. If you could send me more detail by mail about that, I shall have a look at it, to understand if something went wrong and how..

Just a short briefing reminder:

You are told to secure the Nira Bridge and the Nira outpost, where the convoy has to go.

It is told to fire mortars on hamlets, only if the ROE permitted it and if it really had to be done (You get negative points if damages are sustained).

You are advised to secure the Al Farouk hamlet. That sounds obvious, since there is a ford there. That, makes it a possible infiltration way. That brings an answer to a possible threat. The S2 has finally not to be blamed.

The other one is, by the bridge, near the airbase. Not the best place for the enemy to move by, with the troops overwatching the area.

You are finally adviced to retake hill 54 and set an FO there. That seems logical, since that is the second high point providing a good view after the house on the hill near the control tower. From that one, you have a good view on hill 54, but not on the Hassan village.

You are not told to clear the Sidi Bou Said and Hassan villages, but since you are told to clear the road to the Nira bridge, it sounds logical that its edges should equally be clear.

About reinforcements: As, I have responded about it to Erwin, I have made an error for the Bradley’s timing, writing midday, instead of around 08:30 AM.

Thank you again, for having taken the time to analyse the scenario and providing sound comments about it. I am awaiting your details to check the objective issue.

Cheers

[Erwin]

The other (small) issue if you decide to do a v2 of this scenario is to leave the trucks empty and ready to board the ANA guys. Cos the trucks have most of the US force's supply of missiles etc. I am spending tons of turns unloading the trucks, running them to US forces so they can board and get ammo and missiles etc. Then unload and back to ANA and load them up etc.

This is a terrific scenario but could be really improved by mine and others' comments above.