Matrix Games Forums

I was shocked by the deadly firepower and efficiency of Soviet mech infantry units.

As a long time FCRS player, I didn't expect a Sov Mot Inf Bn will cut through my US company battle group like a knife through butter. Although it is a hasty built defense line, I think my 2 Inf Plt + 1 Armor Plt should be able to handle a Sov BTR Bn in a town + forest terrain. The only entrance will be guarded by FASCAM also. Even in a worst case scenario, I expect my defense should be able to delay Sov attack for more than 1 hour. But only after 20min firefight, two M113 Inf plt have almost been wiped out, they only be able to kill 5-6 Sov BTR and Infantry team.
So in the future, should I stack two US inf plt into one hex? Will that help to stand a better chance in the same hex firefight?

Got any indirect fire assets? Motorized rifle companies in the game are very vulnerable to artillery strikes, or get your tanks working on them too

I'd be interested to see what the LOS was for the two US infantry platoons? I don't know if they would see the enemy until they move into the adjacent forest hexes?

unfortunately my arty was distracted by the situation at right wing so it didn't provide too many help except the FASCAM.

the M1 Plt on the flank brought havoc to Soviet formation. It destroyed at least 26 APC, but the rest of soviets rushed into the town wiped out my two inf plt

22sec wrote: Mon Nov 21, 2022 8:28 pm I'd be interested to see what the LOS was for the two US infantry platoons? I don't know if they would see the enemy until they move into the adjacent forest hexes?

That is correct, they both have LOS to the adjacent forest hex only, the LOS is at about 20. But since they only have one Dragon ATGM I didn't see this as a huge problem. I expect the main firepower should come from the infantry squad in this kind of situation.

Perhaps the mistake come from the carrier setting. I put the option at "Carriers hide nearby". That deprives half of the anti-soft firepower.

I've found infantry to be incredibly vulnerable myself. AGS-17s and HMG teams, plus the BTR's own 14.5mms chew through them like no tomorrow. When you set carriers to hide nearby the result is that you preserve the carriers... but then you'll just have empty carriers.

What scenario? I want to look at TOE of the units/subunits involved.

US campaign Mission 2

Tcao wrote: Mon Nov 21, 2022 8:39 pm

22sec wrote: Mon Nov 21, 2022 8:28 pm I'd be interested to see what the LOS was for the two US infantry platoons? I don't know if they would see the enemy until they move into the adjacent forest hexes?

That is correct, they both have LOS to the adjacent forest hex only, the LOS is at about 20.
los.jpg

But since they only have one Dragon ATGM I didn't see this as a huge problem. I expect the main firepower should come from the infantry squad in this kind of situation.

Perhaps the mistake come from the carrier setting. I put the option at "Carriers hide nearby". That deprives half of the anti-soft firepower.

Those .50's on those M113's need to definitely be part of that fight then. I'd placed my infantry in the adjacent forested hex to deny any terrain with cover to the Soviets' who survive those Abrams on their flanks.

I loaded the save file, changed the carrier setting to support the units. Gave this another try.
FYI, this time the result is slightly better. Two inf plt killed 12 BTRs + Sov inf units. The M113 Inf plt on the left was wiped out, the one on the right is under 50% strength at the end of the turn.

So, adding the M113's firepower helps but overall US should avoid a close quarter combat, or if that is not an option, needs more boots in the key area. Maybe double stack the infantry plt helps.

I interested in seeing IronMikeGolf's analysis of this engagement, but one thing I noticed is that the Amis are outnumbered. You have NATO plts fighting WP companies. If you let the enemy close fairly unscathed (especially if he outnumbers you), you are going to be in a world of hurt. And yes, not having the M113s 50 cals available didn't help.

Soviet formations do seem very powerful up close. Many times I'll put a few NATO units in what I feel is decent defensive ground and they will get steamrolled with ease. No clue of this is correct or not. I do feel like it maybe should be tougher to root inf out of urban locations.

That said I have been massacring Soviet armor at range with M1A1s.

I suspect that in 1989-ish the Soviet mechanized infantry units had a lot more close-in firepower than the M113-carried US equivalents. Their doctrine was also much more about getting up close and personal (largely because lingering at range meant certain death from NATO's far superior long-range firepower). Combined with the relative beefy maneuver unit size it doesn't surprise me that, allowed to get in close fairly intact, the Red forces steamrolled the US platoons.

Of course, when I command, all my troops get steamrolled, so there's that!

Looking back at this scenario, the Soviet companies are mounted in BTR-60PB. Infantry are carrying RPK-74s and RPG-22s - I believe this is a mistake from me, BTR-mounted infantry carried RPG-7s as standard. With them are AT-7s, NSV HMGs which is standard for BTR companies, and AGS-17s.

But looking at the situation, you had two Soviet companies rolling on two platoons of M113 based infantry... with a numerical advantage that is ideal for an attack, and also engaging at the close range that the Soviets love, so that they can bring all their firepower to bare. With your platoons ordered to hold the line, there was no retreat and it seems like they were just outright overrun. If you're attempting close range ambushes, it may be better to set their SOPs up for a fighting retreat while the Abrams take shots from the side. Also if possible, always try to get at least one artillery barrage on each MRC... you'll cut them in half.

In the next version of this scenario, the Soviet forces will fight somewhat smarter. I note watching people's playthroughs that they never reach the primary objectives at the Fils.

Glad to hear that infantry are actually useful in this iteration. Seems like battles are playing out much more realistically.

It's also worth keeping in mind that the M113 is probably the weakest APC (if you can even glorify it with that name) in the game. Weak in protection, weak in firepower. So even in support of the ground troops, it's overwhelmed by the opposing carriers. When you have a couple of platoons facing a couple of companies, standoff is key and trying to go toe to toe at close range is a losing proposition. They can just bring too much firepower to bear, both with their troop carriers and small arms. Soviet doctrine emphasized fighting mounted, so you have dismounted US infantry with their M113s trying to support, fighting against mounted motorized infantry with better weapons, and better protection, even if it's BTRs. If it's BMPs you are up against, it's going to be even worse.

Unfortunately keeping the US infantry mounted is not a better proposition. Then they have only the track's .50 cal to fight with.


Dave

In Tutorial #1, if done correctly, you can see the true might of the Abrams. My screening recon had no fighting chance once Soviets ran into my defenses at Bad Duerrheim, and had to retreat. Once they seized the city, I called arty on the main Soviet force to give my troops some time to retreat to the forest line to the west and south-west and once the Soviets were out of the town and started moving West, 7 American Abrams' were enough to turn them into kibble. By then, my recon managed to retreat in a rather 'ok' order, with only one unit being truly destroyed. In the open, Soviets had absolutely no chance and barely shot back. By the end of the battle, Soviets have lost more than 90% of their initial combat power, including all HQs and tanks, and only had 3 BTRs left.

Soviets were right in their doctrine. If they can't get close, they don't stand a chance. And if weather is not great, giving American sensor superiority a chance to truly shine, you can achieve a real massacre. In Tutorial #2 the enemy lost 94% of its units' VP value, while I only lost 5% (they managed to get my scout helicopter and one tank).

Each side on its own strengh, the key to victory...to red side: proper recon and intel, masking with terrain, getting close, you can easly breake NATO's jaw into pieces...nice discussion.

"I suspect that in 1989-ish the Soviet mechanized infantry units had a lot more close-in firepower than the M113-carried US equivalents."

This very much depends on which TOE or US mech platoons. The H Series TOE was definitely weaker than the J Series, though it's more than the M113 vs M2 (which a lot of people focus on). J Series has only 2 inf squads, but between them, there are 5 M249 SAWs. Those can make short work of a Soviet dismounted company out to 600m.

The Soviets put the 14.5mm on the BTR-60/70 specifically to kill M113s. The base model Bradley's armor was designed to defeat that MG. BMP-2 came out with the 30mm, so the A2 version of the M2/M3 was up-armored to counter that.

thanks for the feedback, it's a very helpful discussion here.

one thing for sure, the Soviets mot. infantry co. (BTR) is no longer the cannon fodder in FCRS. Got to respect them in FCSS. It reminds me the Soviet SMG squad in combat mission red thunder, keep distance, don't let them get too close.

On my right wing there is an isolated M113 plt survive the slaughter. They are not sit on the red juggernaut's main attack avenue. So they survived this , also achieved a remarkable kills (only one BRDM recon plt get into the same hex but it was quickly pushed out of the town)
If a hex must be defended, consider to stack two plt into the same hex. Here I rushed my last reserve force into the same hex. They beat off the Soviets' final push (with roughly 1.5 co strength). However two M113 plt endured heavy casualty

if play this scenario again I would set my M113 infantry plts form a screen from hex 0414 to 0816. Fighting withdraw one hex at a time.