Experimenting-Ground forces

[Artur]

Comrades,

I made some experimenting scenarios in order to get familiar with the toys both sides have :smoke: .

Play them against the AI from both sides. Experiemnt try different things.

My conclusions so far.

If there is no smoke and/or low vis the T80Bs are the best MBTs and the T60Bs are also very good. The reason they have good ATGMs and can take several hits __from greater distance__ (except for TOWs).
BMPs also have a decent chance against the Bradleys.

BUT

Smoke and low vis changes all that. With smoke and Low vis the TOW missiles and the Tanks with TI rule the battlefield. That is too bad since a competent commander will fully use that to his advantage.
(I did the same in the Red Army Tournament at Blitzkrieg -I am playing on NATO side- I destroyed 40 T80s and 30 T72s with 12 Chieftains and 6 Challengers while losing 5 MBTS only. All I did is fireing whrough smoke.)

One more thing the US has many Dragon ATGMS. they do not see through smoke, and they usually are harmless to MBTs.

That's it for now, more to follow.

Artur.

[mr_clark]

Allright, I am just reposting my AAR of my short battle again to make it possible to discuss it in a secure way again.
Allright, I just finished a random battle US vs GDR.

Forces where the following:
GDR
Company of 10 T-55AM
Platoon of 3 BMP1P with 3 mech infantry sections
Section of 2 ZSU57-2

US
Section of 2 M60A3 (TTS)
Section of 2 M1 (the more expensive of the two available)
Platoon of 4 M113A2 with 3 mech infantry sections and 2 Dragon
Flight of 2 A-10 with 2*6 Mk82 equipped

Admittedly there is a sizable imbalance of numbers favouring the GDR player, but they were purchased for an equal number of points

MAP

It was one of my favourite sized maps for SPMBT, 40*80, and was an urban setting.


AAR:
The Tanks advanced fast forward to capture the flags in the middle of the maps by turn 2, one PLatoon leader was shot at and destroyed by a single round from a M60 at a range of 1450m, so the other two tanks took position at a crossroad right just behind the destroyed tank.
One Platoon of T-55 proceeded on a long straight road in the north, taking the onle flag around.
IN the south a platoon was advancing towards a group of flags at a crossroad just in the american half of the map, were shot at by M1, so they dispersed left and right of the road.
The BMP and infantry were taking flags in the Urban territory behind the Tanks, while the ZSU took position on the crest of a slope in the rear area.
In the enemy turn 2 the M1s advanced down the road, as expected (AI is sometimes quite predictable) and where ambushed by the first T-55 for no kills but one no-damage hit with the gun and several no effect hits with the MGs. M1s fired back, one hit no kill. No visual of the M60s, and no idea where the infantry is.
My turn 3. I had a lot of luck this turn.
My southern tanks attacked the M1s, first the one facing them shot at one of them, getting a 30points weak spot bonus, blowing it up by a HEAT hit through the front turret armor, return fire of the other M1 kills the now no more so lucky tank. Other T-55 move to the flank of the M1, range 50m first shot 80% chance, miss, no return fire, second shot hit chance 99%, hit penetrates the side turret, kill. T55 takes postion again in anticipation of enemy units moving on the road.
Middle platoon remains static, should be reinforced by BMP and infantry the next turn, further advance in the north, now moving in the supposedly rear area of the Enemy.
Enemy turn: A10 strikes, bombing runs down a road by both planes kill a BMP, second run kills the bailed out infantry and crew.
Collapsing structre a little northeast of the position of my middle T-55, M60 emerges in free area next to the structure, assaulted by T55 hit for no damage, no return fire.
M113 moves into the trap set by the two middle T-55, kill, second M113 follows hit, no damge, third M113 arrives, again shot, no hit. Then infantry bails out the M113, taken under fire by T55s MGs for casualties and supression.
In the south an M113 appears as well is killed by one of the T55s, after that one of them is assaulted and killed by a infantry squad.
The rest: Mopping up, Mech infantry and tanks move for killing the remaining infantry in the middle, northern forces move to get behind the suspected position of remaining M60, southern T55 destroys infantry and moves along the road to capture flags, as no enemy is to be expected, kills enemy HQ two turns later.
Casulties is one immobilized T55. Further casulties through last M60 attacking and destroying a BMP, until attacked in the rear by T55 platoon. Enemy Airstrikes on immobilized T55, second A10 kills it with cannonfire. One of the two A10s got hit for 17 damage by ZSU.

Results:
losses: GDR USA
men 26 58
IFV 2 4
AFV 4 4

marginal victory



Lessons learned for the tournament:

The T55AM is a very good tank, if it can count on areas reducing the vision advantage of the american tanks, to sneak in close.
BMP1 is effective against M113s, only good in AT role in very close range, best is to have the enemy just outside the minimum range of the ATGM.
NATO airpower is extremely effective if properly used, plus hard to counter with AAA. Both ZSU fired three to four times on each A10 during the attack runs each time reaching between 10 and 20 percent hit chance, an actual hit does good damage, though.

That means for us:

Need to advance coverdly to point blank range for Hungarian and GDR units. Protection through AAA and SAM recommended, though it is unlikely to actually shoot down the enemy planes the risk of damage is always there, thus the NATO player risks a lot if he uses airpower too boldly.
Try to move to favourable terrain early. Though a sitting target might be easier to hit, sitting still also improves the hit chances of earlier WP tanks decicively. Positioning a platoon of tanks behind a hill, allowing them to overlook it without being seen from the other side, or deployment of mulitple tanks covering one hex, likely used for advance, can reduce the Western Armours superiority.

[jadpanther]

Good Information, and nice job on the testing. I would not overestimate the abilities of these tanks though. You were testing against AI and it's not the brightest opponent....I've seen the list of who we will be up against and they are not fools. In 1973 a platoon of M60's tore up an entire battalion of Syrian T-62's. Lesson learned is that numbers do not always carry the day. I am just adding this for the less informed, not in anyway to detract from your findings though. Thanks for the read it is very good.

Jad

[Double Deuce]

In 1984, M60's with TI and Laser Rangefinders can be very devastating in the defense. The object is to make them displace from their fighting positions as they are large, slow and don't have advanced or well-sloped armor.

At least in RL. :laugh:

[jadpanther]

I was just making an observation......I am by no means experienced enough with this game system to do anything else than that. LOL.....that's why I don't say much in these forms.

Jad

[Pannonicus]

Your observation was good indeed. We have to be careful with these tanks. Dislodge them with artillery and air strikes, and then finish them.

Another way of dealing with them would be to use ATGM-armed tanks (other units) to overwatch advancing formations. Then they can take out defending armor on long range with guided weapons.

[mr_clark]

Your observation was good indeed. We have to be careful with these tanks. Dislodge them with artillery and air strikes, and then finish them.

Another way of dealing with them would be to use ATGM-armed tanks (other units) to overwatch advancing formations. Then they can take out defending armor on long range with guided weapons.
That should be the objective...
Hmm, we should have asked DD for an artillery division...

[Pannonicus]

That should be the objective...
Hmm, we should have asked DD for an artillery division...

I did, but he refused. But maybe we should combine what we have, and use it as a break-through asset. I am willing to put my BM-21s and towed 122mm-s into the pool...

[Vesku]

My 18 Godzillas are detachable, it leaves me some mortars for support.

Vesku

[Pannonicus]

Maybe I should give my Gvozdikas too, and retain towed M-30s. So the "strike force" is highly manouverable. My towed things then have to survive somehow on the battlefield. :confused:

This will leave me mortars and a few 122mm-s. Not much, but we have to create masses to achieve breakthroughs.

[jadpanther]

If I have any detachable assests I am willing to put them into a combined unit. I think the Nato players would be very suprised by this action, and it would give us a great advantage in the fists several encounters where we could deploy them. But we must also send extra Air defense elements to protect them from roving Nato air units.

[mr_clark]

Well, the GDR has 18 M1974 (Gvozdikas) as HQ asset, I guess that would be the detachable unit then. Would be glad to pool them.
I have another six with the division itself, but no mortars, so I guess I'll better keep those :D

[Artur]

Comrades,

That's what I call togetherness and cooperation :smoke: Way to go comrades!

Of course I can throw my regiment's artillery in the pool.
(No to mention the Tank regiment will never fight on it's own and most likely will move together with the artillery group :D )

I thought about the same regarding the SPATGM companies. We have 2 in the 2nd MRD HQ detachments and two more in the Tank regiment+the BTR regiment. These two regiments excel more in attacking.
The BMP regiments including the GDR and Hungarian regiments excel in defense. (OK maybe except the Hungarian Tank battalion.) We could bolster their defense capabilities with the SPATGM units.
Of course we may also use the SPATGM units to cover the advance that is another good use of them. The situation will tell.

I feel we have a very good team already :) .

Artur.

[Artur]

... we must also send extra Air defense elements to protect them from roving Nato air units.

I could not agree more on this.

Artur.

[mr_clark]

OK, I tried out your scenarios Artur, and, well, I was actually surprised at how good out equipment is. Both the T-80 and the T-64 are vastly superior to the M60, and most interestingly they are even effective at long ranges. That's because the 105mm gun has nearly no chance to penetrate our tanks at ranges beyond 1.800m while a hit from our 125mm is more or less always a kill.
Against the M1 it is a little different, but at least I was able to be victorious against the AI without losses. Actually the Kobra is a real evil weapon against them. High accuracy and 2/3 more penetration then needed. On the other hand the maingun is useless against the M1s on ranges higher then 1.500m, what makes for an interesting situation as at larger ranges both guns seem generally unable to knock out opponents at larger ranges.

What is really bad is the Bradley. I was unable to win once on the WP side against the smoked in Bradleys. At two kilometers the tanks were simply blown up one by one, without even seeing what it was...
The BMP-2s performed quite good, though their guns are unable to penetrate the Bradleys front armor (at least for me).
I must admit I had some strange experiances in the Bradley/BMP scenario. I played it a couple of times and everytime it was that at least two of the Bradleys survived hits from 3 ATGM at 99% hit chance, unfortunately it all was over so fast everytime that I couldn't see the 'calculation' of penetration/armor. I think that is really strange somehow.
Another point is that, altough the hit probabilities of the BMPs were higher the Bradleys scored more hits. I don't know how that works, or whether it was all just random, but with 15% hit chance I don't think it's allright that 50% of the shots hit, while on the other side with 40% HC only every fourth round hits something...

[Artur]

OK, I tried out your scenarios Artur, and, well, I was actually surprised at how good out equipment is. ...

Yes we have good hardware if they can see their targets. Dealing the Vis/smoke.night problem will be key.

Artur.

[Pannonicus]

I just found out, that on closer ranges even T-55AM has a chance against M60s. They penetrate frontal armour as well, so basically the tank that hits the other first will win. M60 usually hit me (both tanks slow moving) with 2nd or 3rd round, while my T-55AM also did the same. So it basically depends on who gets the first shot, and whether you have numerical superiorty (at least on ranges below 600m).

[Rompa]

Ohh my, I did some testing and I need more experience in the modern battlefields before going to war.
Me being used to the WWII battles (SPWAW),I am not used to all these missiles flying in the air and taking out my armor, the tanks are popping like popcorns in fry pan :dead:

The advice of not staying in the open,so the NATO forces cant use there long range guns and thermal sights sounds good.

But the T80 looks promising it has both gun and armor to compete with even the M1.

[Pannonicus]

T-72Ms grinded down in an urban environment a company of Leo1s and Marders, without loss. The main gun of a Leo1 however, killed a Mi-24!

Gepards are good, but not particularly effective against Su-22s. However, Roland SAM is really a problem, they have a high probability of kill. Be careful with them!

The S-80 rockets with HEAT easily knock out Leo1s.

[azog_]

Greetings comrades,

I've been testing a little bit with the Hungarian forces and would share some thoughts.. The core of HUN forces, BMP1 companies, they're good defenders, but they have one minus - the Malutka ATGM's need 12 hexes to fire. So they should operate on open areas.. East German BMPs with Konkurs could be placed on forests and urban areas...

HUN BMP1s can support infantry well and even knock out those M60s, but the M1 seems a very tough opponent... Malutkas/Fagots at most immobilize Abramses, only very few lucky shots destroy them.. So HUN forces need some AT-power if the M1s gets involved.. T72s can match them but not without losses..

Unless no other WP AT-support can be attached, only way to destroy Abramses that I came up would be to stop them with infantry at close range, and then flank with tanks if available, and throw shells to their rear..

Also I agree on that idea of making a separate striking task force with lots of mobile artillery and air support.. It might surprise NATO quite well.. Only let's hope & plan that they don't get a chance to counterattack heavily on our flanks..

[Pannonicus]

Azog,

I agree with your observations totally. M1 is a very hard nut to crack. However, if you concentrate your fire (1 platoon is shooting 1 target) then it is likely that you succeed taking them out. The best way is to ambush from the side and rear.

I just finished a training battle, I lost 6 T72 versus killing 8 M1. Bradleys are not that bad, if it is meeting engagement, and they are on the move. In defence, they are though!

I think with PATIENCE and good tactics, we have a good chance here. Vulcans and Chapparals are not that dangerous, our systems are better.

[Tanker]

In the BMP vs Bradley scenario I played the Soviets.
Obviously it was good vis and no smoke or obstruction to vision.
IIRC it was 4 Bradleys vs 6 BMPs. I crept along at 2-3 mph with infantry as spotters. The Bradleys opened up with autocannon at 2500m. Exchanges of TOWs and Konkurs followed. All hit were on frontal armor. All Bradleys were destroyed by ATGMs. Only slight damage suffered by 1 BMP.

Conclusion: Our APCs are equal to theirs in unrestricted visibility and day time.

[desh44]

Hi I am new to the campaign games system but have some experience with the game. I have been doing playtesting for Bill Wilder so have had a chance to try out some ideas. I agree with everyone about the vision task...I have played a few scenarios from both sides and the an experience player for NATO is going to drop smoke as soon as engaged and fight from behind this...this is a tactic I used when fighting from the NATO side. The thing I found that works for WP is to use the terrain as much as possible and try to ambush the NATO forces on the move.
Am looking for to working with all of you.

Tom D :)

[Artur]

...I have played a few scenarios from both sides and the an experience player for NATO is going to drop smoke as soon as engaged and fight from behind this...this is a tactic I used when fighting from the NATO side. The thing I found that works for WP is to use the terrain as much as possible and try to ambush the NATO forces on the move...


YES.

Artur.

[mr_clark]

I think we are going to have even better opportunities if the patch comes out and we can 'smoke out' the nato TI abilities. Coming to knife fighting range uindetected gives us the edge again, if we work on always achieving numerical superiority.

Besides: Anybody here up for a short practise game?
I would like to put the tactics I just read on about in the Operations manuals into 'Reallife' use...

[desh44]

I had a chance to play out all the scenarios you posted Artur...very interesting. It matches with the game play I have done on random battles. I agree that the greatest threat we face is with the ATGM's....we will have to use terrain a lot and try set outselves up in positions were they are advancing on us. Strategically we will probably need to move our forces so as to force them to advance on us so we are in more of a defensive posture. Tank for tank I think we will be able to hold our own. The missles are another thing altogether. I think if we keep their missle troops supressed by artillery or on the move we should do OK. They would not be as bad if you could spot them after they shoot but they are real hard to see.

I am going to play out some random battles using the forces we will face just for the practice although playing against the computer is not quite the same as a human opponent. But any practice will help develop tactical ideas

Tom