A Quick Battle AAR: Shermans vs Pz IVs, Not Your Fathers Combat Mission

[The_Capt]

A question for the Capt:

Is there any reason why you turned around your sherman rather than simply reversing him out of there?

As I recall in CMX1 I'd always reverse because it was fast and you kept your thickest armor to the enemy.

I once tried it with a Jackel in CMSF and was shocked at how slowly it reversed. Result: one dead canine.

So, how does reverse compare with fast forward in CMBN?

Ya..I was hoping you all missed that one....sigh.

Capts Great Sin #4: Showing the enemy your ass

Reversing in CMBN works just fine, about as fast as Move. As I recall I had my 76 and one M10 facing my right flank so it was back out or turn quickly and bolt out. I...er...well I picked the wrong way.

[Sergei]

It helps to have LOTS of artillery. Look at who won the real war.

Michael

I think you're exaggerating, Finland didn't have LOTS of artillery. Just enough.

[scottie]

Ya..I was hoping you all missed that one....sigh.

see now im starting to think you are letting Bil win ... (queue you agreement and therefore face saving excuse for the impending defeat )

[zukkov]

capt, you have nothing to be ashamed of. you did the same sins alot of us would've done flush with some early ko's while his shells were bouncing off. not that bil planned it that way i'm sure, but it reminds me of the battle of pea ridge(american civil war). the yankees set a trap. appearences looked as if they were retreating, the rebs chased after em, then when they came over the hill, the whole yankee army was waiting. the result was a rout in favor of the union and affected the upcoming battle of shiloh as the reb army was supposed to reinforce the army of mississippi. that last part has nothing to do with this thread, just thought i'd throw that in for the cause and effect folks.

[Bil Hardenberger]

Minute 14

At the start of the 14th minute I am feeling pretty good. Warren’s tanks seem to be on the run, or at least re-deploying in a reckless manner. The deadly M4A3(76)W has its rear aspect facing the gun of one of my crack gunners, an M-10 (not sure which it was) is also on the run and taking wild shots on the move. The second and last surviving M-10 I cannot presently see.. but I think I know where it is.

In this image the blue arrows indicate the last known movement of the M-10 and Sherman.

I am going to move the CO HQ tank forward a bit (starting to leap frog forward) and also move 1st Platoon’s HQ Tank (with its damaged weapon controls) around and behind another wreck. I hope to use his eyes a little further out on my flank to get a clearer view of what Warren is up to (see the image above for these moves).

2nd Platoon’s Tank 4 (now re-manned) will be moving online with his element leader (see the image above).

1st Platoon and Co. HQ Element

Almost immediately upon starting the turn I see that the M-10 has re-oriented and is now facing 2nd platoon. The Sherman continues forwards for a few seconds, and before my tank can get a solid target solution the damned smoke floating over the field obscures my view of both of these tanks and I lose LOS. Damn.

At 46:26 both my HQ1 and CO HQ tanks catch sight of the Sherman once again! This time both fire almost simultaneously, HQ 1 from 576m and CO HQ from 451m (both rounds are circled in the bottom image):

Both rounds hit, as can be seen here, one round hits the turret and the other hits the hull side. The Sherman shudders to a halt and starts to burn. I didn't see any crew escape.

2nd Platoon

At the end of the turn Tank 4 has joined Tank 3 on the hill and both are in good hulldown positions and ready in case either M-10 decides to move against them.

Warren is now in a unenviable position. I have him in a cross fire and he can’t really maneuver against one of my Platoons without making himself vulnerable to the other, as was seen with the M4A3(76)W this turn.

Next: Minute 15

[GhostRider3/3]

Damn.... are we there yet... I want my copy so bad I think I just gave myself tourettes!

LOL

Awesome shooting... Where are the Para's Bil, have you made contact with them again?

[vetacon]

Awesome shooting... Where are the Para's Bil, have you made contact with them again?

Something tells me the paratroopers aren't going to be making much of a contribution...

[Battlefront.com]

In an environment where tanks aren't FORCED to engage infantry, but have the ability to engage vehicles at will... infantry is just window dressing.

Now, if this were a scenario where Bil had to attack through a defensive line, then infantry could have been a deciding factor here. But Bil simply has to keep his tanks back a bit and hope for no lucky Bazooka hits. Capt, on the other hand, can't move as there's all that open ground and plenty of PzIV HE and MG fire to keep things less than hospitable.

I think now people are seeing while Capt identified the mismatch between his infantry force and Bil's tanks as the #1 problem. Bil could afford to lose some stuff, Capt couldn't.

Steve

Steve

[PanzerMiller]

Minute 14

Warren is now in a unenviable position.

Definitely the understatement of the thread to date.

Bil -- That crossfire you've got going now is brutal. The image of those two 75mm shells streaking toward their Sherman target is rather ghastly.

Looks like it's about time to hunker down and scan the immediate treelines for paratrooper AT teams, eh?

[The_Capt]

In an environment where tanks aren't FORCED to engage infantry, but have the ability to engage vehicles at will... infantry is just window dressing.

Now, if this were a scenario where Bil had to attack through a defensive line, then infantry could have been a deciding factor here. But Bil simply has to keep his tanks back a bit and hope for no lucky Bazooka hits. Capt, on the other hand, can't move as there's all that open ground and plenty of PzIV HE and MG fire to keep things less than hospitable.

I think now people are seeing while Capt identified the mismatch between his infantry force and Bil's tanks as the #1 problem. Bil could afford to lose some stuff, Capt couldn't.

Steve

Steve

You know when I first looked at this game, I figured that I lost it at the purchase screen. This may seem somewhat obvious as I had 8 AFVs to Bils 12 and 4 of those somewhat fragile M10s. Bils tanks had me on experience. I spent almost 800 points on the infantry, which could have purchased me almost another entire Sherman platoon.

However having read the AAR, I am not so sure this was my big issue. My biggest sin (The_Capt Great Sin #5): Never fight the battle on your opponents terms, fight it on yours.

My sin was not setting the fight where Bil would be expose to the infantry. He had no idea I had two platoons in those woods, even at the end he was wondering if I had another tank platoon in reserve. Bil is an aggressive guy and if I had kept my Shermans and M10s well back he would have pushed, in fact he would have had to as the objective was very exposed. If I had gone that way I would have had a much better chance of doing some damage with those AT teams and infantry sections.

By running out to meet him, I seperated my combat power, leaving roughly 1/3 behind instead of setting conditions that would allow them to fight together.

Oh well, I am the greatest CM player in history, so long as time is running backwards.

[LongLeftFlank]

Take heart, Capt -- once again I look at this test QB map and say "North Germany" or "Poland", but not "Normandy".

For example, in Normandy those clusters of farm buildings would almost certainly have low stone walls around them at a minimum, as well as vegetation (trees, gardens), providing your hard pressed armour and infantry both a last ditch refuge and keyholing opportunities. Don't get me wrong -- you're definitely against the wall at this point no matter what, but if the farmsteads had some substance and area to them, you could at least hope to set up some reasonable defensive combined arms defensive positions and then force him to take some risks moving to flank you.

That's the Achilles Heel of all-armour forces -- they are lousy at taking and holding complex terrain. Dominating a crossroads by fire is something else of course.

As is, those random cottages (sheds?) sitting there all by themselves are death traps for infantry; the Hun can just riddle them with HE at leisure from where he is. So you're stuck with skulking on the edges of forests trying to shoot it out at range against an enemy with superior gunnery and numbers. On his terms, just as you said.

[Alan8325]

Moving backwards in time from modern warfare to WWII, purchasing a bunch of infantry on a map like this is something that I VERY likely would have done prior to watching this AAR. On the modern battlefield with precision air strikes, ATGMs and RPGs infantry often have the power to one-hit kill most types of armored vehicles anywhere on the map. I haven't played a realistic WWII sim for a while now, since IL2 I think, and I'm sure I'm in for some additional rude awakenings when I start playing.

[finalcut]

The screen with the shells coming in on the Sherman,then the screen with the impact brought tears to my eyes.Beautiful stuff,Can't wait to play.

[panzermartin]

Maybe its the screenshot timing but isnt the AP(I guess) impact effect looking a bit too much like an explosion? I remember in CMx1 we only heard that nice "Klang" sound and some splinter flying, and it felt realistic and satisfying. Isnt this a bit hollywoodish..It would be nice to see an effect like a short violent flash, some dust and debris flying instead of an explosion bitmap.

[PanzerMiller]

Oh well, I am the greatest CM player in history, so long as time is running backwards.

Well said...easy to see the right path in hindsight, eh? Given the nature of the engagement and your initial successes, I can see where you had confidence in moving forward. But holy crap, fortunes changed in a hurry!!

[ClarkWGriswold]

Maybe its the screenshot timing but isnt the AP(I guess) impact effect looking a bit too much like an explosion? I remember in CMx1 we only heard that nice "Klang" sound and some splinter flying, and it felt realistic and satisfying. Isnt this a bit hollywoodish..It would be nice to see an effect like a short violent flash, some dust and debris flying instead of an explosion bitmap.

I guess that would depend on where the round hit. I've seen lots of tank kills in historical footage. Some of them show a puff of dirt and debris and a neat hole when the shell hits, others shoot sparks, still others shoot flame out of the hatches and turret ring, and finally some blow up in what could best be described as a mushroom cloud. So, if EVERY hit blows up in a hollywood style explosion, then maybe it's overdone. But some of them? Seems realistic to me.

We also need to keep in mind that we're seeing 1/30th (or thereabouts) of a second of gameplay. It's quite possible that we're seeing what only amounts to a brief flash when viewing things in motion.

[Waycool]

Hope April zooms by to launch date like an 88mm shell tearing through the air or a Sherman 75mm cracking some Krupp steel. Equal opportunity hope kinda guy lol

The game looks super.

[Battlefront.com]

My sin was not setting the fight where Bil would be expose to the infantry. He had no idea I had two platoons in those woods, even at the end he was wondering if I had another tank platoon in reserve.

Absolutely. This was a winnable battle for you, but not with the strategy you employed AND with the luck you had AND with Bil's skill. My comment was more about where your infantry stood after all of that naughtiness had happened as it had

Your comment about playing the battle to your strength's and not your opponents is a very good one, of course. The problem was you didn't find out what you and Bil had for strengths and weaknesses were until it was too late to really affect a serious change. Which is one of the big problems with a meeting engagement. Usually the player that has some combination of good luck, guesswork, and tactical competency will prevail against any opponent that has made even a minor mistake in any. The margin of error for such battles is razor thin, therefore second chances are few and far inbetween. The best thing an initially beat up player can usually hope for is a Draw.

Steve

[Bil Hardenberger]

The problem was you didn't find out what you and Bil had for strengths and weaknesses were until it was too late to really affect a serious change. Which is one of the big problems with a meeting engagement. Usually the player that has some combination of good luck, guesswork, and tactical competency will prevail against any opponent that has made even a minor mistake in any. The margin of error for such battles is razor thin, therefore second chances are few and far inbetween. The best thing an initially beat up player can usually hope for is a Draw.

Steve

This is why I enjoy playing QB meeting engagements so much.. it isn't realistic probably.. but it does pit skill against skill like no other battle type.

Personally I think Warren's big mistake was not performing any recon to try and ID what I had before committing his main force. I did and lost several tanks (four) in short order (and not one since)... but I also found out where he was and basically what he had and thus could make an educated decision on how to employ my assets.

Absolutely. This was a winnable battle for you, but not with the strategy you employed AND with the luck you had AND with Bil's skill. My comment was more about where your infantry stood after all of that naughtiness had happened as it had

Of course, Warren's tanks had the luck on their side much longer than I've had it on mine so far... we are on turn 14 and it wasn't until turn 10 that I killed my first Sherman.

Bil

[Michael Emrys]

I think you're exaggerating, Finland didn't have LOTS of artillery. Just enough.

My point is that by having lots of artillery, you can cover more possible places where the enemy might be hiding. That may lead to overkill or just simply wasting ammo, but in most cases, better safe than sorry.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Moving backwards in time from modern warfare to WWII, purchasing a bunch of infantry on a map like this is something that I VERY likely would have done prior to watching this AAR. On the modern battlefield with precision air strikes, ATGMs and RPGs infantry often have the power to one-hit kill most types of armored vehicles anywhere on the map. I haven't played a realistic WWII sim for a while now, since IL2 I think, and I'm sure I'm in for some additional rude awakenings when I start playing.

And believe me, in 1944 infantry was much better armed to put some hurt on armor than in 1939-42. During the early years, if you didn't have an ATG or another tank nearby to protect you, your position was all but totally hopeless. Yeah, there were AT grenades and Molotov cocktails, but unless you were in terrain that allowed you to get close without being seen, you weren't likely to live long enough to use them.

Michael

[Peregrine]

This is why I enjoy playing QB meeting engagements so much.. it isn't realistic probably.. but it does pit skill against skill like no other battle type.

Personally I think Warren's big mistake was not performing any recon to try and ID what I had before committing his main force. I did and lost several tanks (four) in short order (and not one since)... but I also found out where he was and basically what he had and thus could make an educated decision on how to employ my assets.

Of course, Warren's tanks had the luck on their side much longer than I've had it on mine so far... we are on turn 14 and it wasn't until turn 10 that I killed my first Sherman.

Bil

It is a bit ugly but against humans the games tend to get a bit more gamey. After your initial loses your opponent is obviously ahead. At this point for him it should be run and hide. Am I right the green area in the middle was a victory location? If so the best thing to do for him is hide everything of value and recon with infantry. The onus is then on you to do something special to make up the ground while his units of value are keyholed in spots with quick escape routes or geared up to clobber anything the tries to occupy the VL.

I have always felt large QB meeting engagements are the most balanced simply because if I lost it was because I cocked up. Either tactically or in my earlier days doing something a bit too extreme in force selection.

Also that little victory condition bar in CMBO/CMBB/CMAK was too useful in letting you know how are going. Once you are ahead (say 58 to 62%) it is tricky to reign someone in unless they start overcommitting their units.

[The_Capt]

This is why I enjoy playing QB meeting engagements so much.. it isn't realistic probably.. but it does pit skill against skill like no other battle type.

Personally I think Warren's big mistake was not performing any recon to try and ID what I had before committing his main force. I did and lost several tanks (four) in short order (and not one since)... but I also found out where he was and basically what he had and thus could make an educated decision on how to employ my assets.

Of course, Warren's tanks had the luck on their side much longer than I've had it on mine so far... we are on turn 14 and it wasn't until turn 10 that I killed my first Sherman.

Bil

Well that is a good point. I think a platoon of Stuarts (or Greyhounds) would have done me more good than the M10s. I did have recon elements but they were infantry...should have let them lead out to that woodline. Of course you didn't have any recce assets either so we both sacrificed main element cbt power to try and ID each other...my problem is I ran out of armour first and should have used them last.

Most of our QBs wind up in victory for someone...I don't think we have pulled a draw yet.

The_Capts Great Sin #6: Luck. Not for pushing. (I hope someone is keeping track of these sins btw because I know I am not...they really aren't in order of priority either...I would have made a really poor old timey prophet)

[Bil Hardenberger]

Yeah, tanks don't make good recon assets. You at least had M-20s... for a while anyway.

Does anybody want to wager which tank, HQ1 or the CO HQ tank gets the kill for the M4A3(76)W near simultaneous impact? You won't find out until the end of the game when I post the kill statistics for each tank.

[scottie]

"Personally I think Warren's big mistake was not performing any recon to try and ID what I had before committing his main force"

I had always played CMx1 in a different way , the aim was to get all your Armour over a summit at the same time to get maximum guns on a probably single target with the aim of having less losses (i.e Napoleon style put all your guns in once place for max effect). Units coming over a summit one by one could be picked off one by one by a single enemy asset as they had time to reload. Granted i was playing the AI and CMx2 is a different beast.