Thinkings after some PBEM games - mainly from PACT point of view

The new Cold War turned hot wargame from On Target Simulations, now expanded with the Player's Edition! Choose the NATO or Soviet forces in one of many scenarios or two linked campaigns. No effort was spared to model modern warfare realistically, including armor, infantry, helicopters, air support, artillery, electronic warfare, chemical and nuclear weapons. An innovative new asynchronous turn order means that OODA loops and various effects on C3 are accurately modeled as never before.

Moderators: WildCatNL, cbelva, IronManBeta, CapnDarwin, IronMikeGolf, Mad Russian

Post Reply
exsonic01
Posts: 1133
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 6:45 pm
Location: Somewhere deep in appalachian valley in PA

Thinkings after some PBEM games - mainly from PACT point of view

Post by exsonic01 »

1) Airpower, airpower, and airpower. (vs SAMs)
Radar SAMs in this game are unable to control their radiation/signal strength, which results the exposure of the location of the unit to opponent frequently during the game. Any experienced player can maximize this weakness. Shells/SEADs will punish, and AA cover will be broken. Endless "rage" from the sky will follow. Manpads can do some damage, but their range and accuracy are incomparable to radar SAMs. It is impossible to defense all the air threats with only manpads.

Very first thing I do is, change the OB of the radar SAMs to be under the highest HQ, then move them continuously until the end of game. Well, you can't escape from resupply but move them as much as you can. Of course SAMs should be placed in proper positions, here and there. In some scenarios, survivality of AA/AAAs governs the result of the game.

Soviet airstrike is very powerful and deadly as well as the NATO counterparts. Usually NATO units are consist of smaller numbers, which means that the successful airstrike would easily wipe out the entire unit. M1A1s are powerful, but M1A1s without AA cover will be a piece of cake for the PACT pilots. And the result will be devastating.




2) Mistakes are unforgiving, especially when playing PACT
Any mistakes in this game are deadly and will be punished harshly, but if you commit a mistake when playing PACT, the result will be devastating. Against the lethal NATO weapons and thermal sights, a single turn will be enough to take everything out from your command, if you forgot to hide your tanks, or if you mistakenly set up the waypoints to the wide open. Anything other than T-80Us (and even T-80U is not indestructible) will be melt down within 10~20 min if exposed to fatal strike from TOW/Apache.




3) Map analysis
Most of the case, Pickett-style frontal charge will be the worst command that any PACT commanders could possibly issue. In the wide open, smoke shells will not cover you from the thermal sight, and TOW/Hellfire/FASCAM/DPICMs will easily rip apart the armor of your tanks, in massive scale and dramatic manner. Trust me, watching and listening the fireballs after TOW shot is not fun at all, and it looks quite dramatic. (and you will be executed by KGB officer after epic fail XD)

Playing PACT is very map-dependent. Any PACT player should spend enough time to analyze the map very carefully in detail manner. You need to check the LOS and chance to be observed for all hexes of your planned attack route. (Remind that the most of scenarios have PACT attack / NATO defense opening) Frontal assault can be the answer time to time (depends on scenario), but don't rely on it too much.

(Does 89' soviet army issued IR-blocking 152mm/122mm smoke shells to their arty? I'm not sure, some told me yes, but some told me no. )





4) Recon, recon, and recon.
At the early stage of game, use all of your firepower to kill opponent's recons/ATGMs in your planned route. A single observation by the opponent recon is enough to ruin your entire battle plan. If your major route/intention is exposed, FASCAM will follow. And you will lose the tanks for free.

On the other hand, try to save your recons as much as possible, as they are the eye of your forces. They will figure out where the opponent's ATGMs and tanks are located. If you have good idea of NATO defense, the chance of successful flanking will be increased. I know it is hard but try to save recons, and use them wisely, don't just throw them into fire.





5) Flanking, unpredictability and deceiving are the key to success for PACT.
For PACT, proper maneuvering is the key to success. Use anything to deceive your opponent and hide your major assault route. Hide your major intention. Try to be friend with the woods. Regard your soviet forces as Elven army in the forest. Using the riverbanks/valley as assault route can be dangerous, but also can be great way to backstab your opponent, as they reduce the chance of being observed, and reduce the chance of exposure from NATO long-range weapons. This depends on the scenario and the map. Remember, you need to fight with short-distance infighting style.

As a PACT, the basic idea is circumvent the NATO killzone, and drown the NATO forces with your Red tide. To achieve that, you need to close the distance, engage within 1000m or closer. Proper maneuvering is key to accomplish such objectives.



Those hints also can be applied for NATO players. To me, playing PACT is more challenging than NATO in PBEM match, but it is really fun, fight and win against the odds. Again, this depends on scenario. Some scenarios are very PACT-favor.

Now I need to work for my Korean war mod, but my works and a little boy don't allow me the time for it :P Making excel sheet is very difficult than I expected.... [X(]
User avatar
cbelva
Posts: 2217
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 8:11 pm
Location: Nevada USA

RE: Thinkings after some PBEM games - mainly from PACT point of view

Post by cbelva »

exsonic01 - I couldn't have said it better. All very good points and my experience playing Warsaw Pact confirms your observations.
Charles Belva
On Target Simulations LLC
User avatar
Rincovsk
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 1:41 am

RE: Thinkings after some PBEM games - mainly from PACT point of view

Post by Rincovsk »

Really Nice tactical overview exsonic01! Thank you for posting it. As mostly a Pact player, I must agree with every single word of yours. Did you ever try the Polish and East German faction mods designed by stimpak?...it is even more challenging... I am also looking forward your Korean war mod...best,
User avatar
Mad Russian
Posts: 13255
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:29 pm
Location: Texas

RE: Thinkings after some PBEM games - mainly from PACT point of view

Post by Mad Russian »

ORIGINAL: exsonic01


4) Recon, recon, and recon.
At the early stage of game, use all of your firepower to kill opponent's recons/ATGMs in your planned route. A single observation by the opponent recon is enough to ruin your entire battle plan. If your major route/intention is exposed, FASCAM will follow. And you will lose the tanks for free.

On the other hand, try to save your recons as much as possible, as they are the eye of your forces. They will figure out where the opponent's ATGMs and tanks are located. If you have good idea of NATO defense, the chance of successful flanking will be increased. I know it is hard but try to save recons, and use them wisely, don't just throw them into fire.

No game I know of puts as much emphasis as FPC does on recon and keeping it alive. One of our ongoing issues is the right balance between 'Fight and Flight' for them. We are doing an entire update in Southern Storm for Recon capability. It will be improved mission and survival capability in the near future.

Good Hunting.

MR
The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.
exsonic01
Posts: 1133
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 6:45 pm
Location: Somewhere deep in appalachian valley in PA

RE: Thinkings after some PBEM games - mainly from PACT point of view

Post by exsonic01 »

ORIGINAL: cbelva

exsonic01 - I couldn't have said it better. All very good points and my experience playing Warsaw Pact confirms your observations.
Thank you, but I need to learn more :)

ORIGINAL: Rincovsk

Really Nice tactical overview exsonic01! Thank you for posting it. As mostly a Pact player, I must agree with every single word of yours. Did you ever try the Polish and East German faction mods designed by stimpak?...it is even more challenging... I am also looking forward your Korean war mod...best,
Thanks to let me know, and unfortunately, I didn't have a chance to play stimpak's mod, but I will definitely try in PBEM.

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

No game I know of puts as much emphasis as FPC does on recon and keeping it alive. One of our ongoing issues is the right balance between 'Fight and Flight' for them. We are doing an entire update in Southern Storm for Recon capability. It will be improved mission and survival capability in the near future.

Good Hunting.

MR

I can't agree more, and it is great news to hear about the detail expression and more options for recons. Thank you so much for the excellent work.
User avatar
Mad Russian
Posts: 13255
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:29 pm
Location: Texas

RE: Thinkings after some PBEM games - mainly from PACT point of view

Post by Mad Russian »

ORIGINAL: exsonic01

Thank you so much for the excellent work.

Thank you for supporting the game and your feed back to us.

Good Hunting.

MR
The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.
Post Reply

Return to “Flashpoint Campaigns Classic”