Basic tactics when advancing up a road

[Eagle2]

I believe that CM is quite amenable to a one size fits all approach - and certainly when it comes to reconning a road. I was curious what other folks do.

To be specific, how much distance do you guys like to keep between point and immediate (squad) support in (1) Forest, (2) Urban, (3) Light-Moderate cover?

I'd have to agree with you on that one, I find that I usually stick to the same techniques regardless of the specific situation.

I tend to keep my guys around 40-50 meters back in wooded area, 25-30 in urban, and 60-75 in light cover. This is all METT-TC dependent though, I'm just giving you my average distance.

[Erwin]

Thanks Eagle. That's what I was curious about.

I also thought gibson's point about no further than half the range of the weapon was interesting - altho' I generally keep the supporting units rather closer than that. Assuming 300m-400m effective small arms, 150m-200m seems an awful long way for point to be ahead.

[gibsonm]

Thanks Eagle. That's what I was curious about.

I also thought gibson's point about no further than half the range of the weapon was interesting - altho' I generally keep the supporting units rather closer than that. Assuming 300m-400m effective small arms, 150m-200m seems an awful long way for point to be ahead.

I think you'll find 400m is a bit optimistic for "small arms" for example our F-88 Steyr is only rated for effective Section Fire at 300m.

Individuals shooting is less again.

Hence my comment was concerning MGs rather than generic "small arms".

[Erwin]

Ok, so do what would the approx rule of thumb for small arms range % to have point ahead?

(I tend to do what Eagle does - 25m-75m max depending on terrain.)

[gibsonm]

Well by and large personal weapons don't count.

Sure in a built up area they are important, but out of the cities they are primarily there for the soldier's self defence.

A PL or COY or BN gets its firepower from the crew served weapons (MGs, AGLs, etc.) and the assault rifles are there to protect them and fill in the gaps between them.

So to your question I don't have a rule of thumb as I don't consider them.

Indeed in general I have few "rules of thumb" because again every situation is different and you need to make your own assessment - being predictable and always following some sort of playbook will get you killed.

But if 25m - 75m works for you I'm not going to argue.

[Erik Springelkamp]

Well by and large personal weapons don't count.

Sure in a built up area they are important, but out of the cities they are primarily there for the soldier's self defence.

A PL or COY or BN gets its firepower from the crew served weapons (MGs, AGLs, etc.) and the assault rifles are there to protect them and fill in the gaps between them.

I notice that in CMSF, especially with US soldiers, a large part of the destructive firepower comes from the squad rifle grenades, while I find that MG's have a modest effect in the game.

[gibsonm]

In what situation?

Built up areas?

Rural?

I'm sorry but if you want a detailed response it helps if the question is less general.

[Erik Springelkamp]

Erik Springelkamp> I notice that in CMSF, especially with US soldiers, a large part of the destructive firepower comes from the squad rifle grenades, while I find that MG's have a modest effect in the game.

In what situation?

Built up areas?

Rural?

I'm sorry but if you want a detailed response it helps if the question is less general.

I have noticed it in both built up areas and rural situation, upto quite a long range, at several hundreds of metres.

Of course when there are vehicles with rapid fire cannons, or grenade throwers, those are the dominating destroyers, but with only infantry it always seem to be the rifle grenades that really hurt the enemy, whether it is in a house on the opposite side of the street, or in the fields behind a rock at 300 metres. And they do the killing of the light enemy vehicles.

I still try to position my MG teams, but when there is a fire team with rifle grenades next to them, those seem to be the effective ones.

[Eagle2]

I have noticed it in both built up areas and rural situation, upto quite a long range, at several hundreds of metres.

Of course when there are vehicles with rapid fire cannons, or grenade throwers, those are the dominating destroyers, but with only infantry it always seem to be the rifle grenades that really hurt the enemy, whether it is in a house on the opposite side of the street, or in the fields behind a rock at 300 metres. And they do the killing of the light enemy vehicles.

I still try to position my MG teams, but when there is a fire team with rifle grenades next to them, those seem to be the effective ones.

Really? I've really never seen the UGL's do much in my experience. Of course I usually don't let my rifle platoons do much work unless its a light infantry company. I'm glad you find them useful though, maybe some of your luck will rub off on me

[Erwin]

I found the machine grenade launchers are very effective.

The manual says that the original under barrel launcher ammo has a range of 150m. The manual also states that the MGL's use the same ammo. However, in "From Dawn to Setting Sun" I had to set covered arcs of 500m for the Marines, and the auto grenade launchers were surprisingly accurate at 500m+ ranges.

Is that an accurate depiction of RL?

Also, if personal weapons are only for self-protection, does that mean one shouldn't waste ammo by setting covered arcs of over 150m, but let the crew served weapons or vehicles do all else?

[LUCASWILLEN05]

I found the machine grenade launchers are very effective.

The manual says that the original under barrel launcher ammo has a range of 150m. The manual also states that the MGL's use the same ammo. However, in "From Dawn to Setting Sun" I had to set covered arcs of 500m for the Marines, and the auto grenade launchers were surprisingly accurate at 500m+ ranges.

Is that an accurate depiction of RL?

Also, if personal weapons are only for self-protection, does that mean one shouldn't waste ammo by setting covered arcs of over 150m, but let the crew served weapons or vehicles do all else?

Depends what you want to do. Personally I don;t set up firing arcs as they can be too restrictive. However, for setting up an overwatch position or an ambush that kind of approach is useful. how you set up your fire arcs may be dependent on your mission.

Luke

[abneo3sierra]

I usually also wont have fire arcs for extended times..while advancing I may, because it gets your people to "look" in a direction you want them to look in, but if they run into something usually it is quickly take off the fire arc and let them react. Will use fire arcs for vehicles sometimes, if I can get two, for example, to cover an area, one covering one side, the other the other side, to minimize time required to rotate the gun/cannon...but again, as soon as something happens, I free up both and let them engage normally.

Also, the fact that personal weapons are primarily for defense, does not negate their use in covered arc, etc...if you need to defend in that direction, while having your heavier weapons concentrated on something else, for example, then it is still a good idea to use that...most of RL tactics are generally making due with what you have, anyway, since normally a commander never really has what he wants.

[Erwin]

That some players don't use covered arcs much is a big surprise to me. I want my guys looking in the desired direction at all times - both to facilitate quicker spotting as well as quicker max fire. (That is the major reason I really miss the single click 180 degree arc of CM1.)

So what is the story with the machine grenade launchers? Are they able to fire accurately at 500m+ compared to the declared range of the under-barrel version of only 150m?

[abneo3sierra]

IRL the under-barrel version has much less range than the MGL also.

[gibsonm]

So what is the story with the machine grenade launchers? Are they able to fire accurately at 500m+ compared to the declared range of the under-barrel version of only 150m?

Well ones on a tripod with a good sight and uses a better round, the other is being held by a person and is affected by his breathing etc. and usually has a pretty rudimentary sight.

[jnt62006]

MK 19 40mm Machinegun (yes the US Army simply refers to it as a machine gun) fires the same caliber round as the M203 single shot shoulder version but it is actually massively different. Like a .38 and a .357 can be fired on the same pistol frame, but one will knock you on your butt.

The MK19 has an effective range of 1500m. The M203 around 300m. You take a MK19 round and try to put it in your 203 and it will dislocate your shoulder (though I doubt it will fit). The MK19 is an area weapon. You just cant get very precise lobbing 10 baseball sized objects through the air in 5 seconds. Great for taking out afghan rpg and machinegun positions on a far ridge or across a valley. (And no, we dont go check the bodies after to see if we violated the ROE.)

On your original road clearing question. The real question lies in what do you do after the enemy is spotted? If you are playing a human opponent he is very likely going to keep his guys hidden until the last minute and then move, provided he has a covered and concealed route to an alternate position. So, just as in real life, you need to be able to fix and finish pretty much right after you find, while still protecting your force. This usually requires up to three maneuver elements regardless of the size of the unit. One to fix (suppress), one to finish (assault) and one in reserve to take over leading the movement (find) while the other two consolidate and reorganize. Hence, a US rifle platoon with a weapons squad, bradley or styker in support provides you with that. Or a marine rifle squad (three fire teams). For bigger objectives you can go all the way to Division (three maneuver elements at each level).

Its dont that way for a reason, because with almost a hundred years of experience fighting the machine gun its proven the most efficient.

You should keep your three elements (or two if you have a crew served or vehicle mounted weapon in overwatch) to one side of the danger area. Utilize two elements (one on each side) if you need to. The point being stay out of the d#$% road! Push a fire team forward of you feel like you need to. Its called traveling overwatch. The lead element pushes out up to 50m (depending on terrain), but the rest of the element is always fairly close to finish the enemy once your lead element makes contact and begins suppression.

[c3k]

All these pieces of advice, often from experienced professionals, are extremely important to understand and try to port over to your CMSF tactics. Thanks to all those who have chimed in.

I have a slightly different experience with CMSF. If I elect to use a full squad to scout up a road, due to expectations of a fire team or more waiting up there and wanting to give my guys a chance at fighting back, I am guaranteed to find a large IED. The squad gets wiped out. Well, instead, I'll outsmart my opponent. Using a single fireteam means they get wiped out by enemy forces who I never spot. Sending a second fireteam results in the same outcome. Using two fireteams, one up front on one side of the road and the second dragging on the opposite side, allows the second team to locate the enemy who just wiped out the first fireteam. Unfortunately, the second team gets wiped out by the minefield/Kornet/mortar strike/RPG ambush which gets unleashed seconds later. This has taught me an infallible battlefield maxim: every time I get curious about "what's over there?", it'll cost me a squad. I'm a naturally curious kind of guy. Sorry, men.

In a more serious vein, using the techniques shared above, and TRYING them savegame after savegame, will teach you better than any wordy discourse. Every situation is different. Once you get a feel for what works and why, you'll have the tools available to best approach the next situation.

Ken

[Erwin]

Thanks for the useful comments:

jnt: "The MK19 has an effective range of 1500m. The M203 around 300m. You take a MK19 round and try to put it in your 203 and it will dislocate your shoulder (though I doubt it will fit)."

I forgot there was a tripod or vehicle mounted automatic grenade chucker - that is NOT the one I was referring to.

I don't have the manuals here, but I recall that the manual says that the two handheld grenade launchers (the underbarrel and the handheld grenade chucker one the Marines use) use exactly the same ammo. Is that inaccurate?

My question was prompted by my experience in CMSF that the Marines' handheld grenade chucker was able to fire reasonably accurately at over 500m in CMSF. I wondered if that was realistic.

Re scouting a "relatively restricted route" in urban or when you have vehicles, yes I play primarily vs the AI. That may account for my "one size fits all" theory since I am getting better at fighting the (rather good imo) AI.

I love PBEM in CM1, but I find CM2 PBEM requirements just too onerous. The files too large for e-mail etc. Also, CM2 is so much less forgiving that CM1 and thus requires so much more brainpower and thought than CM1, that by the time I get a CM2 PBEM file back I forget what intricate move I was going to make. Errors in CM2 can be so costly as to immediately ruin the game. Thus the frequent need to restart (which I virtually never do in CM1) simply in order to continue to enjoy the challenge. You can't do that with a human oppo.

However, I find my scouting techniques to be a lot more more successful than what c3k describes. I recommend moving by HUNT and HIDE, with frequent waypoints - each with a 10-15 sec pause. The pauses are important in helping spot. Also, one needs to try to use units with binoculars. (I think they spot better in the game?) The pauses also help the guys recover so they don't tire too quickly.

I have learned that when scouts suddenly hide for no apparent reason (no enemy icons appear), one needs to take that warning seriously and be very cautious from there on.

For longer distances (several hundred meters) on roads - I like to send a less-valuable vehicle on FAST for part of the distance followed immediately by REVERSE to not as far back as where it started, followed by FAST to further than the last FAST, and REVERSE and so on etc etc. Am hoping to attract fire with the vehicle almost immediately reversing away from danger.

I like larger scenarios and with the time constraints one usually has, the above is the only way I have found to efficiently recon longer distances esp along roads.

What do you guys do?

[gibsonm]

I love PBEM in CM1, but I find CM2 PBEM requirements just too onerous.

What do you guys do?

I use a product called “DropBox” which is like your personal slice of the “cloud” (or a simple to use FTP server if you like).

It creates a folder on your machine which you can share with others.

You play your PBEM turn copy it for outgoing files to the “dropbox” and your opponent (if they are on the ‘net) gets a message saying the new file has arrived.

They copy it to the incoming folder and play their turn.

No more email attachments to worry about.

[Lt. Smash]

I've been enjoying this thread, thinking about how I might apply it when the time comes and then Ambush Alley turned up as my next mission in the TF Thunder campaign (my first time through). As you experienced players know, this scenario requires you to advance up a highway with small hamlets and objectives along the way.

I was able to use several of the techniques to great effect:

First, I didn't advance directly up the road but used alleys and side street to advance my force. This, of course, gave me much better cover then sitting up high on a flat paved road. Only once are you forced to go down the highway due to a bottleneck on the map. Even then, the techniques described here worked well.

Second, I tried to move my units in groups of threes with one on the point an the other to on support. Once the first one reached its destination, I would move the second two units together or one at a time depending upon the situation. I found this technique effective if I were using two splits squads and a machine gun team or two full squads and a machine gun team or Stryker.

Third, I used overwatch (rather than bounding overwatch) throughout the scenario. As described, this was a great technique. I felt it provided very good protection for the elements moving together as it allowed two of the three or all three elements to bring their weapons to bear on a threat.

Thanks, guys.

Bob