Head to head Hofen - AAR, sort of..

[Phoenix100]

So, after playing Hofen about 40 times against the AI and finally getting into a position where I could get a decisive victory (max delay, all options untouched), and feeling thus very pleased with myself (though realising that, of course, partly my success was due to my massive black 'intel file' after 40 games against the AI!!), I thought it would be nice to destroy a human led opponent.

So 'Sharper' and I have just finished a HvH Hofen. This was my first Head to Head ever, and i decided to try for exactly the same plan that was, by now, leading to almost assured success against the AI.

I sent the two battalions south of the Roer against Hofen nth, I sent the battalion nth of the Roer in a sneaky covered route through the woods at the north to come out near his arty and supplies at the top western edge of the map, and then down into Muntzenich. The sth of the Roer reinforcements I sent to Hofen sth, the northern battallion got to try for Hitler's beloved Monschau, at the end of day 2.

What happened? It was very different to playng the AI - I was (perhaps stupidly) surprised by this. My men moved much slower because he was pounding them with artillery the whole time. His use of artillery really crippled my efforts and this was NOT apparent in the games versus the AI. That's a lesson for me, as I'm very tempted to let my own AI direct most of my artillery - this must be an error, as his manual missions were much more effective. The result? I denied him all his objectives by the middle of day 2, I think, but there was no way i could clear any of them. I suffered a marginal defeat.

It was interesting. Next we will try Race for Bastogne. I wondered whether anyone had any outstanding HvH tips/ Is anyone else playing head to head?

As an aside, my one armoured unit - the StuG reinforcements - i sent to Hofen sth. An allied AT unit got them just sth of Hofen sth and took out 4 StuGs (of 6) in one brilliant (!?) attack. The remains of the StuG unit then routed straight into the AT unit, as per many complaints in this forum, and - naturally - ended up surrendering.

[Lieste]

The artillery strength is IMO a bit too much in the stock game (or at least the terrain cover/protection is a bit low compared to direct fires).
Compounding this is the over-abundance of supplies (particularly artillery ammunition due to priority of demands and generic 'weights') and too low 'per round' weights.

Having said this, it should be noted that his artillery can be 'removed' from the field if you can get eyes on them, and fire a set of suppression/neutralisation counterbattery missions - this reduces the volume and effectiveness of the received fire - if you are lucky you may also force the loss of a few towed systems, but SP weapons seem largely immune from even heavy barrages, so don't waste too much ammunition trying for destructive fires. You can also fire on his supply echelon - if this routs it loses much of the on-hand stock, and this will dent his ability to feed the guns.

If you catch either artillery or supply units moving they are a top-priority target. Firing now will cause far more casualties, disrupt his timetable for the move and most importantly be very satisfying [:D]

If you can see his troops where they pause to reorg prior to an assault, this is a good opportunity to fire also... in fact, if you can't see it, but 'know' where he'll be in dead ground, an unobserved fire can be productive if you can muster enough tubes to spread them to guarantee hitting the units. Wasteful of ammunition, perhaps, but fires on re-orging units are much more effective than assaulting ones, or ones dug-in awaiting your counter-counterattack.

[vj531]

I just played the cards I was dealt and it was good tussle. Highly recommended for those who can find the time and the opponent.

You are probable right Lieste re Arty strengths.

[Phoenix100]

Thanks Lieste. Yes, spotting his arty was a priority, but not one I could do much about, without any fast recon units to use. I have considered playing this scenario with many individual detached units - some sent off as recon, some sent to probe into the victory locations (to deny him possession), whilst saving a main force in some hidden location, resting, by day, to assault better at night. Might try it on the AI.

[nestor]

I've been playing Hofen a lot lately and mucking around with it in the Scenmaker because the casualty ratios between German (human) and Allied (AI) were really annoying me. Typically I was seeing 10 German kills to 1 Allied and the AAR's on the forum tend to bear this out. In reality (if Wikipedia can be trusted) the ratios in the 99th Division area were 18 to 1 in favour of the allies and Wiki has this to say about the first day's fighting around Hofen:

"During the first day of the Battle of the Bulge, the 3rd Battalion took 19 prisoners and killed an estimated 200 Germans. Accurate estimates of German wounded were not possible, but about 20 percent of the 326th Volksgrenadier Division were lost. The 395th's casualties were extremely light: four dead, seven wounded, and four men missing".

From my observation, here's what the defensive AI does really badly in the stock scenario:

1. The AI very seldom stays entrenched once able to move (I bet Sharper did). Even if units stay in roughly the same area they often redeploy for no apparent reason. This is an absolute killer once the German artillery opens up.

2. The hefty initial order delays for the US means that Artillery isn't usually available if German attacks go in immediately the scenario starts - they're sitting 'Waiting'. To be fair, this affects the human US player as well, but it feels unrealistic (did it really take 3 hours or so to get local regimental artillery into action on the 16th, I doubt it). I think the delays have been put in partly to stop the AI wandering all over the map from the word go.

3. 38th Cav are a bloody nightmare - they will not stay in Monschau, but insist on heading to Hofen as soon as they can. This happens regardless of whether an attack is being mounted on Hofen - I think it's triggered by an intel report in the scenario set-up. Firstly, this means that the light tanks get chewed up by German artillery in the open and secondly it usually prompts a move of of the 62nd artillery unit. So, at the crucial moment on day 1, 50% of available US artillery is often on the move. I think that the 38th Cav issue may be a doctrine problem - 'we are Recon, so we will investigate the first intel report we become aware of'.

No matter what I try, I'm having limited success in 'fixing' these issues in the Scenmaker - the 38th Cav problem, in particular seems to be completely insoluble without draining their fuel tanks!

I'm beginning to think that the AI's ability to handle a fixed defence is a bit compromised.

[Phoenix100]

Interesting, Nestor. I must be really crap at the game, because it was at least fifteen attempts against the AI (me playing as germans) before I could get a draw, a lot more before I could get a proper victory. Whereas, playing as the Americans, against the AI, you honestly can get a marginal victory by just telling the 395 to defend in situ, then leave it at that and watch. So I would say the AI has difficulties as german too, in that case. Myself, I think a game where it takes me that many replays to defeat the AI is pretty good AI, but like I said, I might be crap. I was playing most of these games at full speed too, just trying out various tactics. It's certainly easier to defeat the AI if you take time to react properly and pick and choose arty targets etc.

The scenario (and the history) is a lesson in how difficult it is to beat well dug-in men with decent moral. The Germans outnumber the Americans three to one and have a lot of arty assets. The Americans have two arty units and, if I recall, about three Infantry companies, plus various odds and sods of light armour and AT etc. Yet I could not win against Sharper, and had to practice a lot to beat the AI. The 326 starts pretty exhausted and with relatively low moral. Maybe that's the key.

By the way, against the AI, and against Sharper, I was no where near Hofen sth and nth before his arty started to paste me. The orders delay wasn't at all apparent to me. And I gave my lot the straightest route on fastest movement with attacks ticked and no need to wait for stragglers. As i said, I find it takes them ages to cover that initial distance. Don't know why.

Can anyone help with two questions? 1. Are the facing indicators at scenario start accurate? Because the units - in nearly all scenarios - seem to face in very odd directions sometimes. ie; not in the obvious direction the enemy will come from, or not covering the flanks. It's the first deterrent to issuing defend in situ orders, I find. presumably, if I tamper and alter facings to how I would like then they all have to dig in again, which, with the orders delay and the attack already under way, is not ideal? 2. Why is there a penalty (of some kind) on defend in situ? I don't understand this at all (though I'm sure there's a good reason).

Thanks.

[nestor]

Phoenix, don't get me wrong, I've lost to the Allied AI in Hofen on a number of occasions - despite the Allies always taking a hammering, I've often failed to drive them right off the objectives.

I'm happy to be corrected on the artillery delay issue - I thought it was the stock scenario where this happened, but it might have been one of my many variants where I noticed it. I'll check again this evening.

Nestor.

[Phoenix100]

There is a delay, Nestor - you're right about that. It's just that my Germans never seem to move on the objectives quick enough to make use of it. They are always almoist there when the arty comes in. Then they inevitably curl up, panic, flee.

[johndoesecond]

ORIGINAL: phoenix

2. Why is there a penalty (of some kind) on defend in situ? I don't understand this at all (though I'm sure there's a good reason).

This has been discussed somewhere in the forums, and from what we've read from Arjuna, the intention is to enpower a bit the in-situ in the forthcoming patch.

[Phoenix100]

Yes. Thanks. Is there any easy way to adjust the game - ahead of the 'forthcoming patch' (which God knows about, and only God...) to incorporate the new values in the table that Arjuna put up some while back? I guess Lieste might know how to do this.

[Lieste]

First backup BFTBEstab.xml and BFTBEstab.coe from your Estabs folder.
Open the Estab Editor, load the BFTBEstab.xml, and adjust the formations table. You also need to fix the two errors with images (Humber MkIV AC and M2HB iirc - easiest is to tick the 'no image' box). Now Save and Compile the Estab. If there are no errors, the bottom line will say 'Saved as BFTBEstab.coe'

[Phoenix100]

Thanks so much Lieste. Will try that

[Phoenix100]

Tried it. There was one error - because, I assume, I couldn't find the M2 file, and it didn't end with your saved message. It ended with a File Imported message. The game runs, but not sure if I've actually managed to change anything. One odd thing - the figures given in my estab editor differed from those given (as old values) by Dave in his table. I had a frontage of 1.5m, for example, not 2m. Yet I've never been into the estab editor before. ??

[Phoenix100]

Found it now. And now I have your saved message, so I guess that worked. But why would some of my original frontage values be different to the ones Dave gave, I wonder?

[Phoenix100]

Does this mean I can't play H to H with someone who hasn't similarly altered their estabs?

[Lieste]

Glad that it worked

Maybe Dave had been editing them in the past [:D]
It can be tricky keeping track of Estab edits - I've lost some for ammunition weight - they are in a backup somewhere, but I can't find them in any of the 'live' Estabs [8|]

[Lieste]

Probably an idea to share the edited version with your customary opponent(s) or to temporarily restore the backed up version...

Before you do that though, do make a backup of your modified version.

If you keep a zip of each of the two versions-distinctively named in the Estab folder you can 'just' unzip the desired one 'here' to easily 'swap'. Keep the edits 'light' so that there are no unexpected crashes due to missing elements. Ideally you'd make custom versions of each Scn that referred to your unique Estab, named for itself, and parallel to the stock, and share the changed elements (map, Scn, Estab) but that is a pain if this is the only change you intend.

Modding would be a lot easier to do if an existing scn could check & pickup a different Estab, without having to hex-edit or rebuild it from scratch.

[Phoenix100]

Played Hofen again with the new estabs, same settings as always. Got a decisive victory. Germans killed 1,600, lost only 197. It was almost a different game. Can't just be a few alterations to the in situ settings, I hope? Maybe I've just got it fine tuned now. I notice that the 62 Fd arty - so important to the allies - had gone wandering and spent a lot of time trying - it seemed - to attack Hofen nth when we were holding it (or at least setting up on the slopes there, in full view). He wasn't alone, but what was he doing all the way over there? I could see him - as could my AI - and he was pounded mercilessly, so I guess half the USA arty strength was actually pretty much out of the game for half the game. Didn't seem like a good AI move. I recall someone else mentioning uselessly wandering long range artillery. Seems like something that should be addressed.

In reply to a suggestion by, I think, Simovitch, some time ago re the Hofen scenario and an AAR about it (where he suggested you have to take the objectives fast - or at least attack them fast) it's interesting that this time I rested all my units all through day 1 (except the 752 Reg, which I again sent round the back of Muntzenich, resting them in the forest there after the hard hike and telling them to attack in the early hours of Day 2). When they started off they were hardly fatigued at all. They attacked the Hofen objectives close to midnight day 1 and I'd taken both by mid morning next day (by which time we had Muntzenich too). At the end of the scenario I held all objectives and the win was pretty comprehensive. So you can rest them and then attack by night and achieve success.

[Lieste]

At least part of the issue with wandering 'based units' is when the remainder of their defending group is destroyed they don't cancel their mission and find something else to support/collect new line units and try again... instead they attempt to retake the objective against whatever just killed everyone else - which usually only ends badly.

With the fixes to rout recovery it should be a lot harder to reduce a defending group to just the HQ/Base/Based Artillery, so it should/might reduce the frequency that this move is seen. They will retreat more, regroup and counter-attack, or dig in on the next line.

As for artillery in view in this scenario... it is actually quite hard to find good spots where artillery can move off-road, find concealment for a Bn sized element and yet be close enough to a primary route in order to receive supply. The number of these where the artillery can reach to the nearest FPF target, and cover the full area of responsibility without displacing are even more limited. Too close to the front, and IDF are restricted, too far and units can't be protected - too far to either flank and some units get less/no cover.

The SP artillery is a special case, in that it has a respectable APers and AArm strength even without the use of the 155mm guns for HE fire (frequent result of neutralising/suppressing the Base). IRL, the unit would be protected as much as possible against future operations when ammunition supply is assured - even being retreated from sector if required, but in the scenario it is a potent light armour/mixed force, and very (too) hard to counter.

[Phoenix100]

Ah - so that's what's going with the wandering arty. Thanks. Nothing I can do about it, I suppose (when it's the AI opponent's arty?) Except look forward to the patch....