NATO vs WP in The Next War turn 2

[larryfulkerson]

Hostilities didn't begin until turn 2 so I'm starting there with this AAR. As you can see in the picture below I invaded Denmark with paratroops, heliborne troops, and have some backup provided by those ships you see offshore. I'm thinking those units are too small to hold their positions for very long so I need to press upon the Polish folks that they need to press ahead in spite of losses to break through to the paratroopers before they get destroyed. Further south the situation is a little different because I actually got some tanks across the river(s) and started the toe-to-toe fighting that is typical of modern day bloody combat. If you can see it on the battlefield now a days you can kill it. Weapons systems have evolved to be so good at what it does ( whether a kinetic weapon, or some kind of anti-tank missle ) that the battlefield is good and bloody. I'm thinking the slider that determines how bloody the combat is needs to be adjusted. I've seen good order units evaporate in "minimise losses" attacks on NATO units. Mostly tank units so far but I'll get to his infantry soon enough.

I really like the flexibility that the heliborne troops display. On this side of the battle field one turn and on the other side the next turn. Cool. Kind of makes planning your attacks somewhat harder since you can now draw upon resources from the other side of the map almost. And those SSM units ( surface to surface missles ) are useful to bombard airfields and arty parks. Death from far away. I don't have much use for the ships so if they get sunk well, that's okie dokie with me. Then I don't have to worry about where to move them. Naval combat in TOAW is modeled wrong I think. It's like they're being treated almost as land units in combat when you and I both know they shouldn't be. Maybe I'm thinking wrong but Naval combat leaves something to be desired.

Roger is probably going to release his reserves and pummell me hard about the head and shoulders with his anti-tank helicopters etc. He's an aggressive opponent when he gets the chance. I need to be careful around his units. You never know what they are going to do next. And he's got heliborne troops too so I need to think about guarding my bridges and road intersections etc. I'm putting a lot of SA-2 SAM sites on the obvious river / rail crossings so he doesn't get too excited about dropping my bridges. When I was the NATO player in our first game I went to great lengths to drop bridges so I suspect Roger will too.

I have put together a simple AAR for this turn and have loaded it on a file server here:

http://www.mediafire.com/file/l4moppr4f ... rn%202.zip

But I plan on posting a bunch of pictures and verbage here as well for those of you who can't download stuff like the rest of us.

[larryfulkerson]

I also planned on invading Austria. I'm hoping it's a pushover. LOL. He's probably going to clean my plow there in Austria. I may need to rail some more units down there to help out some. I haven't seen any austrian units yet. Maybe there aren't any?

[larryfulkerson]

Here's what Berlin looks like now. I attacked two of the hexes and almost lost one of my regiments. Those Allied units aren't as weak as they look. And too, some of my units started the scenario at 50% health. I suppose I could have waited to attack the Berlin garrison but I couldn't see the need to wait for the other shoe to drop. What in the world does that mean anyway: wait for the other shoe to drop?

[larryfulkerson]

Here's a tiny flaw in my plan. I left a hole in my front lines and Roger can take advantage of that. I need to rail a bunch more people down there to form a proper front line.

[toawfan]

My first AAR post ever so we'll see if I get these pictures embedded correctly, etc.

First of all, here are the basics about this scenario and the start:

[toawfan]

...and the initial news report where you see that Larry as Warsaw decides to trigger hostilities at the beginning of his Turn 2, including attacking Austria, which gives him 20 VP and opens a very troublesome front in the far South of the map.

You won't see it in any of these screenshots, but I've got a pretty good power base moving to defend in the mountains. We'll see if it works in another turn or so.

[toawfan]

Now, to the action of Turn 2 Nato (me) vs. Warsaw (Larry):

You can see that he tried to disrupt my supply lines and cut off the northern peninsula by dropping paratroopers and digging in -- the small red unit on top of Regusburg (spelling). The next couple of posts will show how I made him pay for such a bold move.

[toawfan]

Go home, you Commie paradogs...

[toawfan]

Larry's losses:

[toawfan]

Larry tried an amphibious assault in Denmark and I punish him royally. This is the first battle; he evaporates in the second.

[toawfan]

Second strike...evaporation...

[toawfan]

Please post tips about my air setting question in the screenshot below:

[samba_liten]

Only one thing that looks strange to me. If i read the screenie correctly, those are helicopter units. I would not put them on interdiction, as they have a rather short range. I'd leave the interdiction mission to longer range fixed wing assets. 

[toawfan]

ORIGINAL: polarenper

Only one thing that looks strange to me. If i read the screenie correctly, those are helicopter units. I would not put them on interdiction, as they have a rather short range. I'd leave the interdiction mission to longer range fixed wing assets. 

I'm actually using the air assistant, and only overriding a few settings, so it chose interdiction for the attack helicopters. I have moved them as far forward as I can, so maybe it's going to hit armor when it's in the open and moving instead of entrenched.

Am I right about that assumption? Are the helicopters somehow more vulnerable on interdiction than combat support? Is it even better to specifically move them to the targets in direct attacks?

[samba_liten]

My reasoning is that the choppers can only cover a short distance beyond the front, whereas your fixed-wing assets can go further, and therefore have an impact over a wider area.

Any air unit will have a bigger impact on a battle if you directly assign it to that battle. However, in that case it will participate in that battle ONLY. If you leave the unit in question on combat support, it will participate in ALL battles within its range.

Helicopters are more vulnerable than fixed wing aircraft no matter what mission they perform. Also, consider that units take increasing losses depending on which mission you assign them. In order from lowest to highest (losses):
*Rest
*Interdiction
*Air superiority/ Combat Support
*Direct assignment to attack a hex or take part in a battle.

How many losses you take is, of course, also influenced by the air superiority situation, which you can see in the air briefing. Whichever side has the higher number in the briefing has air superiority, and is likely to shoot down more bombers than the other side. It also affects things like air/helo transport.

Finally, remember that you can attack enemy air units on the ground by selecting "airbase attack" from the "right-click" menu. If you decide to try this, be sure to check whether you have sufficient fighter units (on air superiority) within range of the target. If not you are sending the bombers un-escorted!
DO NOT assign the fighters to attack the airbase directly. Leave them on air superiority!

EDIT:
Forgot to mention that you can use artillery/ships/SSM's to attack airbases as well.

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: polarenper
I'm actually using the air assistant, and only overriding a few settings, so it chose interdiction for the attack helicopters. I have moved them as far forward as I can, so maybe it's going to hit armor when it's in the open and moving instead of entrenched.

That's what I would do.

ORIGINAL: polarenper
Am I right about that assumption? Are the helicopters somehow more vulnerable on interdiction than combat support? Is it even better to specifically move them to the targets in direct attacks?

I'm using a combination of both actually. Those targets that I really really need to move / destroy get direct attacks by those AH-1 units that don't have any non-combat units in them ( OH-1 and or UH heavy lift dudes, yes the scenario designer included them as part of the equipment of the unit. I wouldn't have done that myself but.... ).

ORIGINAL: polarenper
I'd leave the interdiction mission to longer range fixed wing assets.

Good idea. I second this notion

[toawfan]

ORIGINAL: polarenper

My reasoning is that the choppers can only cover a short distance beyond the front, whereas your fixed-wing assets can go further, and therefore have an impact over a wider area.

Any air unit will have a bigger impact on a battle if you directly assign it to that battle. However, in that case it will participate in that battle ONLY. If you leave the unit in question on combat support, it will participate in ALL battles within its range.

Helicopters are more vulnerable than fixed wing aircraft no matter what mission they perform. Also, consider that units take increasing losses depending on which mission you assign them. In order from lowest to highest (losses):
*Rest
*Interdiction
*Air superiority/ Combat Support
*Direct assignment to attack a hex or take part in a battle.

How many losses you take is, of course, also influenced by the air superiority situation, which you can see in the air briefing. Whichever side has the higher number in the briefing has air superiority, and is likely to shoot down more bombers than the other side. It also affects things like air/helo transport.

Finally, remember that you can attack enemy air units on the ground by selecting "airbase attack" from the "right-click" menu. If you decide to try this, be sure to check whether you have sufficient fighter units (on air superiority) within range of the target. If not you are sending the bombers un-escorted!
DO NOT assign the fighters to attack the airbase directly. Leave them on air superiority!

EDIT:
Forgot to mention that you can use artillery/ships/SSM's to attack airbases as well.

Very helpful post. Thanks to you and to Larry.

[larryfulkerson]

I've finished my WP turn 3 moves and put together an AAR for it and I think you can click on the link below to see the AAR without downloading anything.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/zk788802x147ks8/toc.html

My file server host keeps mangling my GIF files so I have to send it somewhere else. You can see the Warsaw Pact moves by clicking on the link below.

http://b.imagehost.org/0196/moves.gif

[toawfan]

I dig in and try to shore up the lines amid enormous losses. I've lost the Danes to surrender and doubt that I can hang on. My only hope is that the
Warsaw Pact has punched themselves out. My air superiority is the only glimmer of hope and his losses are far higher than mine in the air.

[toawfan]

NATO losses