Combined Arms Approach

[Nick R]

Okay, I guess I have been playing too many RTS or overly simplified wargames. So I had to stop and rethink how to best deploy and use infantry, again. I went back to how the German's used their infantry combined with armor and artillary supprt.

What I have found best is to use the infantry to "screen" on foot ahead of the armor and using artillary to either supress or destroy units. Then combined with armored support after some intial "spotting", surpression and some lucky artillary hits can be very effective. I also normally move the tracked vehicles up to support the infantry first and then move up the armor.

One question that I do have is on the "scatter" of the artillary even when using a closed sherth. It still seems very dispersed.

[gijas17]

Actually, I believe the German Army used artillary and/or strategic bombing first which is a form of "shock and awe". Note: the U.S. initial invasion of Iraq in March 2003.............used the same tactic and was probably credited from observing German war tactics in WWII. Then came the tank division's backed by the infantry squads, half tracks etc... This was their infamous "Blitzkrieg" strategy which was extremely effective early on in the war from the invasion of Poland, France/ The Low Countries, Balkin States/Greece and for a short time the Soviet Union. In the Battle of Crete they used Airborne tactics similar to the U.S. in the D-Day invasion which were initially successful in the Low Countries in May 1940 but in small numbers and not expecting much resistance they through several of these German divisions into "The Battle for Crete" which resulted in many casualties because of well-placed anti-air defences around the island. Because of this result they were never used as extensively (in numbers) as they were in Crete through the rest of the war. 
 
The problem with the invasion of the Soviet Union was their supply lines were strung out (too long) and it took days for their infantry to catch up with the Advancing Panzer divisions moving faster than they could keep up with. Also, the sheer size of the territory that the Soviet Union encompasses was against them because by the time Army Group North, Central and South reached the key Soviet cities of Moscow, Stalingrad, Leningrad their "flank" was exposed to attack and "attack" is what the Red Army did. The rest as they say "is history"...........

[Nick R]

I would agree completely that the Germans would use those techniques at a strategic and operational level. But at this games tactical level troops/ soldiers usually just get what they can. So I was trying to worka combined arms approach using "what we get" since we cant get extra troops, the 150 mm and the 82 mm mortor and the stuka strikes.

So with that said, I have been trying different approaches to see what is the most effective. It is still the same approach you noted above that the Germans used just at a smaller scale. If you look at the photos from the Eastern Campaign you will see troops next to, running with tanks. Im probably not saying anything new to long time players but for me (As I said above forgot everything I remembered about classic tactical use of weapon platforms from playing simple RTS games) and maybe some new players, I felt it might be nice to post some feedback.

Some observations:

• I still think the artillary strikes are way to spread out even when using the closed sheath.
• Unit avoidance during movement needs some adjusting. I will be moving tanks, halftracks and infantry and you should see the elaborate circles and paths they do around one another. Try spacing halftracks 10 to 15 meters apart and have infantry move up along side them.
• Cost of artillary at their current effectiveness (see above) seems high.

I welcome your feedback

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Nick R
Some observations:

• I still think the artillary strikes are way to spread out even when using the closed sheath.

Actually they are not spread out enough. Explosions should be larger to really show the fragmentation distance.

[*]Cost of artillary at their current effectiveness (see above) seems high. [/ul]

To be fair Soviet should be cheaper as they don't get to use theirs as much as the Germans do.

[Nick R]

ORIGINAL: Mobius
Actually they are not spread out enough. Explosions should be larger to really show the fragmentation distance.

Hmm, not sure I agree because it seems that you target a specific area and the blasts land over 150m away on the closed sheath.

Are there any ex Ft Sill boys here or history buffs that can comment on that degree of accuracy?

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Nick R

ORIGINAL: Mobius
Actually they are not spread out enough. Explosions should be larger to really show the fragmentation distance.

Hmm, not sure I agree because it seems that you target a specific area and the blasts land over 150m away on the closed sheath.
Are there any ex Ft Sill boys here or history buffs that can comment on that degree of accuracy?

Here's some information:
http://members.tripod.com/~nigelef/erro ... onsistency

[Nick R]

Good points Mobius. It’s probably my lack of being around solid historically accurate games. It just seems with the pressure to get the attack going and balancing that vs the "return" you get from investing those precious point on artillery that has the delay (understandable) but then compounded by the inaccuracy, it seems that buying more tanks would be point better spent.

Any Thoughts???

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Nick R
it seems that buying more tanks would be point better spent.

Any Thoughts???

I tend to go with as many tanks as I can afford rather than infantry.
I don't need armored cars or light tanks (unless that's all the armor that you get.)
Maybe if you had to scout vast tracks of steppe I'd use them to find the enemy. But the game is on a 1km x 1km piece of land. Basically you've found them.

If my infantry can get close with AT rifles I can use those to take out AT guns. Most AT guns at this stage of the war don't have much HE kick so infantry can get a few shots in. But all it takes is a single hit by an AT gun to take out a tank.

[gijas17]

I normally use heavy German tanks since they are more than a match for the Russian T-60 or T-70 which if not taken out quickly can cause a lot of problems for any another units you have on the battlefield as you probably already know at this point.
 
Artillary,DOES HELP but can be somewhat inacurate just hitting what ever is in it's way and not really doing much damage altogether like I remember it did in CM: BTB. I lost a whole division of infantry and heavy tanks due to an Artiallary bombardment in CM. Not much fun to start a mission off with but it's there and you can use it if you feel it helps. I rather throw in some heavy AT guns and-or tanks to back my main tank divisions up when they get in a bind. This seems to be effective for me as well as some Tank Hunter infantry to mix things up.
 
PS Also, Stuka's can do some damage on occasion to tanks if your lucky.

[Nick R]

[font="times new roman"]Okay I have been playing more (I’m addicted) and it depends on terrain. If there is a lot of woods, etc. then infantry will help in scouting out. If on the other hand it’s a lot of wide open space then more tanks are in order. [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]As a side note, don’t you love it when you are “buying” units and you are one point short?  Does anyone know if the points carry over?[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]By the way, my father was in WWII in Patton’s Third Armored from the breakout of the hedgerows, Operation Cobra all the way to the end. He had the French, Belgium and German Campaign Ribbons. [/font]

[Laryngoscope]

Okay I have been playing more (I’m addicted) and it depends on terrain. If there is a lot of woods, etc. then infantry will help in scouting out. If on the other hand it’s a lot of wide open space then more tanks are in order.

Hey Nick, you're getting it. Soon you will be an inf. musta [:D]

Gotta admit I am pretty addicted myself [;)]

Hey, any chance you have photoshop and 3dsMax? Or like designing scenarios?

As a side note, don’t you love it when you are “buying” units and you are one point short? Does anyone know if the points carry over?

No, unfort. no they don't

By the way, my father was in WWII in Patton’s Third Armored from the breakout of the hedgerows, Operation Cobra all the way to the end. He had the French, Belgium and German Campaign Ribbons.

That's cool. At home in Oz I always go the extra mile when anaesthetisting vets. Move them to first on the list, use the "top shelf" drugs, immpecable analgesia, etc. If anyone has earned the right to excellent medical care they have.

[Nick R]

I wondered about your name. My wife is a "gas passer" too. I just do consulting in healthcare and biotech.

I do have Photoshop but not 3dsMax. And yes I do like designing scenarios. I wanted to get the handle on playing before I took that step. I was going to try and do the Panzer Blitz scenarios first and see how they come out but Im open for suggestions.

[oldsoldier173]

Realilistic Sim's take more thought.  First off the "combined arms" of the wehrmacht is quite differant than today's concept, and weaponry is much shorter ranged and less effective.
 
Armor: Use a section of IIIN's, IVE's, or StugIIIC's as pure support.  Place a few rounds in suspect tree lines and or clear LOFs entering built up areas.
          Envelope with other types to keep Soviet concentration of fire minimalized.  I have noticed that the AI has groups of soviet tanks firing at one exposed target till killed while other german forces are free to move exposed unsurpressed.  Soviet AT-guns will fire way too early to be effective.
 
Use 222's to draw fire and expose primary soviet AT positions.  Keep them fast and moving and darting cover to cover.
 
Infantry: 251's are APC's not AFV's.  Dismount Infantry behind cover, spread them out in assault lines and advance or defend with 251's behind formation in support with MG's.
 
Artillery: Is realilistic for the era, 250-500m CEP's were comman in WW2.  Use artillery to screen or suppress, do not depend on artillery for casuality producing.
 
AI's: Soviets seem to bunch more, and to take longer to react to change in tactical situation.  Multi prong attacks with enveloping tactics will get the soviets to DIP (die in place) instead of trying to maneauver out of situtation.  You can isolate soviet infantry in buildings and kill with the advancing support groups at leisure.  Do not fixate on the soviet infantry.
 
Just a few concepts from a retired US Army Airborne Infantry type and historical re-enactor of the era. 1941 Heer Feldwebel.
 
 

[Sgt Fury]

Pz Kpfw Panther G with SS Panzergrenadiers