Pathfinding, the school of hard knocks, and THAT bridge!

[TheVulture]

Anyone who has played the Courage and Fortitude campaign will no doubt have fond memories of mission #2 - The School of Hard Knocks, where you have to assault across a bridge with absolutely no cover to speak of. Much fun duly ensues, but I did have a problem that after a tank got immobilised on my end of the bridge, my infantry could no longer cross it. Sort of. (Don't know if it was the tank that was the problem, or something else...). Generally most of an infantry squad would get stuck on the near left corner of the bridge, and be totally unable to move from that spot for the rest of the battle. Not everyone in a squad would be affected; a typical 12 man squad would have 3-4 members cross the bridge safely and the rest stuck in the exact same position. And I mean exact. I tried to take a screenshot of the amorphous mass of dozens of helmets and rifles all at slightly different angles, with their unit bases perfectly aligned.

By the end of the battle I had over a platoon stuck on that spot that I couldn't get out in any direction. If they had movement commands the squad got tired, and the few free men ran around, but the rest didn't budge an inch.

Not a fatal problem, since you can move through the mud either side of the bridge to work around the problem. Curiously, I late on discovered that my tanks didn't have the same problem; they could cross the bridge quite happily (although it took me a while to figure that out because I just assumed the tank immobilised on my end was blocking the bridge; turns out there was just enough room for the rest of the tank platoon to edge past, so they had the feredom to become targets for tank hunter teams further on).

As an aside, normally I'd hate a misison attacking across open country and a single bridge like this, but I found the fight engrossing. Nice work whoever designed that (will go back and find out at some point).

Save available featuring my stuck platoon (and possibly a few flying soldiers near the bridge too, although I haven't checked if that is reproducible from the save).

[WriterJWA]

My God that mission pissed me off! I'm gonna' have to go back into it and "re-attack" it see what I can do. I don't like wasting time waiting on tanks, but it appears I'm going to have to. I would do what I could by breaching the wire obstacle with engineers (because arty/mortars didn't seem to work) and then rush the bridge with infantry to the low hedges and walls on the far side while mortars and artillery beat on the hill and other possible defensive positions. I could get a platoon across with engineers, but it was a quick moment before the German artillery was on me. Thus failure ensued....

[Stitch]

Obviously a German TRP. No spotting rounds at all...

The typical tactics of smoke and fire & manuever don't apply here. Must resort to gamey tactics...

[TheVulture]

Obviously a German TRP. No spotting rounds at all...

The typical tactics of smoke and fire & manuever don't apply here. Must resort to gamey tactics...

smoke, fire and maneuver worked reasonably well for me. A 'long' smoke mission from one of the 105 batteries will give you around 10 minutes of cover if you dump it in a line across e.g. the barbed wire on the far side of the bridge. Do that with each battery one after the other and you have 20 minutes to deal with the bridge if you need it.

The only gameyness I resorted to was as a result of the amount of enemy mortars. The support units on my side would shift position every 5 minutes or so on the assumption that a barrage was incoming, which it usually was. My only real casualties to enemy artillery were one mortar team of my own that was slow packing up, and those squads that got stuck on the corner of the bridge which took a fair few casualties (and one squad that went for a run at the wrong time right into a barrage and got wiped out).

For me it wasn't an exercise in gameyness as much as pushing troops into enemy fire until they'd had enough, and then the follow on platoon took the lead.

As an aside relating to another discussion, with 600 men to start with, I took around 100 casualties that's a little over 15%. No tanks lost. Or from another point of view, 4 of my 6 infantry platoons were pretty much ruined as combat units, as were 3 of my 5 tanks (immobilised, crew losses, serious damage to tank systems, crew morale state). My battaltion was essentially done as a fighting force and in need of some serious refitting, with 15% headcount losses (and only half of those actually dead).

[Stitch]

I am on my second attempt at this scenario now.

***SPOILERS***

My first ended when at about 10 minutes in, 3 squads were wiped out by heavy artillery as they were securing positions along the walls at the far end of the bridge. I was attempting to establish a fire base covering future manuevers towards the hill by pinning incoming German fire from the foxholes along the stone walls, along with mortar support.

As you've mentioned, the constant enemy artillery keeps coming in, making this an exercise that is more maneuver and manuever. Obviously, I will need another plan of attack.

Just curious, but why did you move your mortar(s) up? The max visibility that I've seen so far has been ~700m, so I don't anticipate any issues with just leaving them in the far rear.

Also, have you continued to the next battle with your forces in such bad shape?

[TheVulture]

Spotting works at more than 700 meters once units start firing, and increases as time passes and the sun comes up. But mostly I moved the mortars up to give them the option of direct targeting rather than staying out of LoS and only being indirect. I figured direct targeting of foxholes would give better accuracy and quicker responses and faster suppresion. In retrospect I'd have been more patient and kept them out of LoS.

100-150 casualties is 'good' for this scenario I think. The briefing says to aim to keep tem below 25%, which is around 150. Anything below that counts as success, enogh to carry on with as anticipated. The next scenario is a minor 'chose the route' think with just a few recon units. Down the branch I took, the next real scenario has the same two companies - I and K - that were used in the bridge mission, but with some replacements (and recovered morale state obviously). Of the 5 platoons I had to play with in the next battle, 3 were at full strength, one was slightly depleted and one was about half strength. I'd say I got something like 60% of my infantry losses replaced, so I have plenty enough to continue. I won the next battle with minimal casualties, so hopefully with more replacements soon I'll be back up to full strength in the near future.

[Sergei]

Too bad about that bridge being blocked by immobilized vehicles, I hope that this can be fixed in the first patch (soon to come). This battle portrays an assault under difficult conditions and little preparations, so it really does test your skills as well as your nerve, ie. how ruthless a commander you are. The reinforcement levels after this battle are high, though, so it's not going to stop your advance if you shed some blood...

But if you don't think your attacks are effective, you can also ceasefire and go to University of Hard Knocks. This represents a better prepared attempt. Enemy casualties carry over between these two battles, so even failing in your first attempt will not be all in vain if you killed a few Krauts.

[Stitch]

I noticed the daylight effect of the increasing LOS as well. Unfortunately for my light mortars, German spotters noticed it too. They were able to pull off a nice counter battery barrage (a tight small grouping), and I lost 2 out of the 4 support units.

It's good to know I have an out. I'm slowly advancing with around 50 minutes left. While I've knocked out 2 AT guns, I lost 3 tanks in the process (used them as bait so as not to get too gamey). Not too happy with their loss combined with the light mortars.

[bbaker]

<Spoilers, obviously...>

About the wire blocking the near side of the bridge: twice I've had engineers use a demo charge to "blast" a hole through it, just as I would bocage, or the wall of a house. Each time, a significant portion of the engineer squad is killed by the explosion. Is this a [edited for the all-important "y":] boob[y]-trapped bit of wire (can you do that in the game? maybe by placing a mine under it...?), or does this happen any time you try to blast wire with an engineer squad? What gives?

[IRUNSAMOK]

bbaker:

There are definately mines under the wires at the near side of the bridge. I too was surprised to see an engineer fireteam BLOW THEMSELVES THE HELL UP AND FAIL TO TAKE OUT THE WIRE. The next team spotted the mines, blew the wires, then RAN INTO THE MINEFIELD AND BLEW THE HELL UP. The next squad moved up to mark said mines AND WAS SQUISHED BY MORTORS. Sorry about the caps, this mission makes me type like that.

Also, I feel like the bridge is a bit buggy, I know I'm not the only one having problems setting waypoints around it.

And yet I still love this mission and the cruel jerk who designed it. Seriously, that guys a jerk.

[bbaker]

Thanks, Amok. I suppose that means that it's all working as intended. Cold comfort to Seargeant Rice's family, but he knew the job was dangerous when he took it.

[PLM2]

I concur. This mission was designed by a jerk

[Dr.Jones]

bbaker:

Seriously, that guys a jerk.

Amen.

br.

Dr.Jones

[womble]

That bridge is a serious pain. Not tactically. No, that's all expected. It's supposed to be difficult to cross a defended bridge. It's the incredibly erratic waypoint placement around it that is annoying. Enough to seriously consider just accepting the draw because I couldn't face the clicking necessary to herd another platoon across it without them running off into the swamp or throwing themselves on the large pile of comrades who've already been killed by mines.

Either that map is built 'funny', or bridges don't quite work right. ISTR Steve saying they were a monumental PITA to get working at all, but if they're all like this one... :-/

[Boche]

I agree... It wasnt the fact I was taking casualties that putt me off it was the fact that the men where running towards the road then left or right exposing themselves...but hey probs gona give it another try one of these days

[Hot Potato]

I know I'm late to the party, but I'm glad I'm not the only one having trouble with this mission. I'm getting wiped out. No cover, horrid bridge crossing design for the AI, guys running haywire, refusing to use the land to either side of the bridge... I'm nailing other mission, but this isn't going so well...

[Bulletpoint]

I know I'm late to the party, but I'm glad I'm not the only one having trouble with this mission. I'm getting wiped out. No cover, horrid bridge crossing design for the AI, guys running haywire, refusing to use the land to either side of the bridge... I'm nailing other mission, but this isn't going so well...

The mission is not so tough actually, once you realise it's all about getting across the bridge fast while it's dark. If you wait till daylight it becomes pretty impossible. I think the reason people find it so difficult is that the game graphics show nighttime as a kind of half darkness, so that the player assumes his troops will be vulnerable, and fails to move fast enough.

[simon21]

This is a mission a lot of people don't like.  It's very unrealistic.  There also have been changes in the machine gun rules since it was created.  It is possible to win.  It's not a fun mission exactly.  More of a showcase of the mechanics.  

 

How to win : 

1.  First using about one split up platoon and advance to the bridge, blow the wire, and mark the mines.  Then get across with whatever you can.  The job of this first platoon is to pin point enemy anti-tank guns.

2.  Use arty to knock out the AT guns.  Once the AT guns are gone get your tanks on the back ridge to tear up enemy positions and start sending troops over the bridge.

3.  Advance slowly toward the hill keeping infantry in front of the armor to avoid panzerfausts.

4.  You will lose a lot of guys, but eventually you can push the Germans off that hill.    

Edited March 9, 2016 by simon21

[JoMac]

I haven't played any 'Campaigns' myself (mostly Small QB's or Scenarios against Human Opponents), but will probably try one out to see how it goes.

Wow, loosing 100-150 casualties in a Battalion for a 'Campaign' as a whole seems pretty High...Then again, this is CM and we expect casualties to be high.

Joe

[Harsmith]

I think its a very realistic mission and campaign. You are commanded at battalion, regiment and divisional levels by sheer incompetents who can't arrange for you to attack on favorable ground, with coordinated companies and adequate artillery preparation from the start and with adequate resupply. I don't think that that was that uncommon in the initial period after the landings.

More seriously though, the mission is bloody but doable, and there are a number of historical posts on how to achieve it.. Darkness and then smoke are your friends. The enemy AT assets must be spotted and eliminated and then your tanks are key.

 

[Childress]

Never getting past battle#2, I find it amazing that players can actually win this campaign. Or that BF decided to include it in version 1, one suspects that it turned off a considerable number of new CMers. And what was a laborious grind turned into Sisyphean futility once MGs got a testosterone injection in the patch. Hats off!

[AttorneyAtWar]

This scenario is probably responsible for the most forum sign-ups though !

Edited March 13, 2016 by Raptorx7