Soviet Doctrine Case Study: Forward Detachment

[byzantine1990]

Soviet Doctrine Case Study: Forward Detachment

The Soviet military machine is focused on tempo, massed firepower and manuever.

Tempo: The Soviet Military believed that World War 3 would be won or lost in mere weeks. The speed and lethality of the modern battlefield would required new tactics and strategies to keep up. With this in mind, the Soviet ground forces were built from the ground up to be lean and fast. Leadership from the company down was streamlined down to a playbook of battle drills in order to enact orders quickly and with little input. This allowed greater creativity and initiative from the battalion up.

Massed Firepower: Artillery is the god of war. The Soviets field artillery battalions where NATO may use a single battery. They believed massed fire from artillery was the only way to allow large mechanized formations to succeed in the attack

Manuever: It's been said that the US manuevers to fight while the Soviets fight to manuever. Warsaw Pact forces believe in freedom of movement above all else. They would prefer to surround an enemy and choke it out with artillery or sieze an important piece of terrain in the enemies depth.

These three concepts are exemplified in the Forward Detachment.

This formation was not a standardized unit but a flexible template that could be as small as a single vehicle or as large as an entire division. A Forward Detachment was a task organized unit that would move ahead of the main force as water moves through a stream. It would be tasked with taking important terrain like a bridge ahead of the main force or clear out harassing scouts so the units behind did not need to deploy for battle. The commander of this unit had great leeway to use his iniative and would use small dirt roads and other forms of cover to avoid battle where possible.

The scenario "Lesson of War" is a great example of a Forward Detachment in action.

1.jpg (58.64 KiB) Viewed 885 times

This scenario features a motorized rifle battalion reinforced with a tank company, reconnaissance team, air defense and artillery. Let’s take a closer look at each unit.
Reconnaissance is our eyes and ears. They will take point with their speed and elusiveness.
Tanks form the spear tip. They have the greatest firepower and armor of any unit but they cannot clear out infantry by themselves
Mechanized infantry are vulnerable from range but once they get in close nothing is stopping a company of BMP’s and infantry. Note that a destroyed BMP is also a destroyed infantry unit. We will use tanks to soak up fire as we get in range.
Air defense and artillery are self-explanatory.
Overall Strategy
Our mission is to secure the B505 highway for follow on forces. Intelligence estimates we face a small force consisting of infantry primarily.
My first step is to give all units a generous amount of initiative. The enemy could be anywhere and in a small battle every unit is important. We must give them ability to get out of ambushes and other bad situations.

2.jpg (422.35 KiB) Viewed 885 times

I will first send my recce vehicle along the road above highway B505. The rest of my force will move deliberate behind with a pause of 5 minutes so there is one hex between each unit. My plan is to fix any units I come across and bypass them. Once I have a good idea of where the main defense is I will flank them, prep them with artillery and finish them off with an attack from multiple directions.
The Battle

3.jpg (79.72 KiB) Viewed 885 times

In the first turn we are ambushed outside of Stadelhofen. I have spotted three infantry platoons marked with the blue line. I will now flank to the south and leave a single infantry company outside the ambush zone to catch any units that try to chase my flank force.

4.jpg (202.55 KiB) Viewed 885 times

Here we can see the advantage of the flanking strategy. We have caught a group of support vehicles along B22 highway and a headquarters outside of Schedernhorf. We have also caused massive casualties around Stadelhofen with artillery alone. I have used the smaller battery to soften up known enemy positions while the larger has been on call since it has greater range.
To finish off the enemy pocket I will place my units just outside line of sight to the enemy and set them to (Assault). I will use pauses to make sure all units move at the same time. In the meantime, I will set both artillery batteries to bombarding known positions and a few unknown just in case.

[byzantine1990]

After Action Report

5.jpg (94.53 KiB) Viewed 884 times

As we can see, this was not a bloodless affair on either side but look which units took the brunt of the damage. Our tanks did their job of soaking enemy ATGM’s which allowed our infantry to get in range to finish the job.

6.jpg (65.68 KiB) Viewed 884 times

Looking over the butchers bill we can see the artillery and tanks did the brunt of the damage but our infantry cleared out the remaining pockets in close, hand to hand fighting.
Analysis
The forward detachment is built to eat these emplaced defenses for breakfast. The NATO player must be just as mobile to defeat it. If I was on the other side I would have set initiative to generous and had my infantry continually fall back. Punish the Soviets for their lack of aggression. I would also make sure my HQ units were far away from main road ways in case they get flanked. Artillery should be used to facilitate movement with smoke screens rather than focusing on destruction. Finally, recon elements must be placed for the best visibility and be ready to move so eyes are always on the enemy.
Final Thoughts
This scenario highlights strengths of Southern Storm. I could see so many permutations of strategies in this simple scenario. I listed how I would defeat the setup I used this time with mobile units continually falling back but If the Soviets instead charged head first that strategy would have been overwhelmed by the red tide. Each strategy has it’s strengths and weaknesses.
The scope does a great job of giving the player many interesting options. Too small and the Soviets wouldn’t get the chance to maneuver like they want to. Too large and you miss intracies and fast paced movement of individual units.
I look forward to making more of these. I heard there are nukes in this game?....

[cbelva]

There are nuclear weapons in the data file. There are no nukes used in the scenarios. Right now, the AI cannot fire nukes so the scenarios would be one sided. As soon as that is fixed I would suspect we might see a scenario or two with nuclear weapons

[jmlima]

This was a great read. Very nicely done.

[JPV511]

Soviet Doctrine Case Study: Forward Detachment

The Soviet military machine is focused on tempo, massed firepower and manuever.

Yes, this was a very nice read, thank you. Care to share literary sources? I may need to add to my library.

[Comcikda]

A simpler and frustrating plan: your main force can take the path below, bypassing the first VP and attacking the second - the AI's forces will not make any adjustments even if they spot my main force on the move through the reconnaissance elements deployed in the woods.When the scene ends you will find that you have magically taken control of both VPs

[byzantine1990]

A simpler and frustrating plan: your main force can take the path below, bypassing the first VP and attacking the second - the AI's forces will not make any adjustments even if they spot my main force on the move through the reconnaissance elements deployed in the woods.When the scene ends you will find that you have magically taken control of both VPs

For sure. This was meant to be a simple demonstration against the AI. A human opponent won’t sit there under artillery fire for me to flank them.

[byzantine1990]

Soviet Doctrine Case Study: Forward Detachment

The Soviet military machine is focused on tempo, massed firepower and manuever.

Yes, this was a very nice read, thank you. Care to share literary sources? I may need to add to my library.

TRADOC Heavy Opposing Force Handbook. Skip everything except for the Attack chapter. It’s all you need to learn.

[byzantine1990]

There are nuclear weapons in the data file. There are no nukes used in the scenarios. Right now, the AI cannot fire nukes so the scenarios would be one sided. As soon as that is fixed I would suspect we might see a scenario or two with nuclear weapons

Good to hear!

[byzantine1990]

This was a great read. Very nicely done.

Thank you.

[JacquesDeLalaing]

Thank you! Very nice read.

I just wonder, as you mention it several times: What does the "tactical initiative" setting affect?

Also, how were you able to stop your "main force" when the recon unit made contact? You said you had the invervall set to just 5 minutes. So you were either lucky or your order cycles were extremely short in this scenario? Or are there other means?

[byzantine1990]

Thank you! Very nice read.

I just wonder, as you mention it several times: What does the "tactical initiative" setting affect?

Also, how were you able to stop your "main force" when the recon unit made contact? You said you had the invervall set to just 5 minutes. So you were either lucky or your order cycles were extremely short in this scenario? Or are there other means?

Tactical initiate decides how likely your unit will deviate from your orders. It basically unlocks other SOP's like when to scoot etc.

First unit had no delay, 2nd had 5 min delay, 3rd had 10 minute delay and on. I had a 15 minute action phase.