Our MI-24

[mr_clark]

Well, as you all know we have quite a number of Mi-24 available now. I opened this thread that we can discuss tactics/strategy and exchange hints about helicopter use.

First of all I think we should combine all hinds in the beginning of the game, either in our main thrust or agaisnt the enemies offensive. I don't think they would expect that and it can quickly annihilate a batallion of mechanized troops for nearly no losses, if used properly.

I just have some basic tactics, that should be clear for everyone anyways.
1) The Hinds are our only TI equipped vehicles, excpet for the AAA if I am not completely wrong. That makes them an important recon asset, and allows to plan own ambushes and even evade these of the enemy with greater skill. (the good old "otherside of the hill" thing)

2)Range: The ATGMs have a high minimum range (8). That doesn't allow you to get really close before firing, so in most cases a hit from them is quite unlikely (roughly 20%, which is not all that great if the enemy can shoot back)
What can be a real killer though, are the 122mm rockets. The AP ammo punches through virtually every APC, and even (older) tanks are prey for them if hit from behind or the sides. The minimum range of these missiles is much lower, allowing to close for the kill, or getting a shot of with them when an enemy aproaches surprisingly. In a campaing I was playing against the AI they even seem to have a much higher hit chance after mooving then the ATGM, even on longer ranges.

3) Know your target: Always check what weapon slots are activated before firing. No need to use up the Machinegun and Rocket Pod ammo on a M1...

4) Stealth: Use the terrain to your benefit. Try to outflank the enemy with your Choppers (the maps should be large enough for it) and then roll in from behind, or take out the enemy on map arty, or "high value targets" such as TOW armed vehicles, or the HQ. If we use the strategy I told about above, it can be easy to "swarm" an enemy from all sides at once.
As the US teams Stingers and other MANPADS are generally the most dangerous items against out choppers in the NATO inventory and stealth is your friend try to move behind treelines, hide behind small patches of forest or buildings to let the enemy move to you and thus deny the MANPADS the first shot.

That are the most important things I thought about. Would be glad to hear sometihng more from the more experianced players.

[Pannonicus]

I. At the beginning I would combine the tank regiment, the artillery and helicopters into a strike force. I will see to that we hit the right joint of the enemy, taking out their most valuable assets. Ideally, we should attack so we punch a hole, and next turn our OMG reaches their main artillery and SAM concentration. Rolling it up will give us a tremendous advantage.

My idea would be to attack not directly at these assets, but instead, near them at another point on the frontline. Then we will not move directly West as they would expect, but attack North-West or South-West, in the direction of their support troops.

Meanwhile, other parts of our frontline will assume defensive position.

II. After this strike, they are most likely to counterattack with their M1 units, under the protection of Bradleys. We will wait for them with Hinds this time equipped with ATGMs, taking up ambush positions. AT-6 is effective against M1. (My favourite use of choppers is as highly mobile ATGM platforms.

Our air assets will be useful at this turn, enemy air defense mostly neutralized.

III. After these initial engagements they will most likely try to regroup somewhere, so that they can attack as we did in first turn. To prevent this, we can deploy Recon teams into their rear. (Hinds can carry them :-) They can call in our long-range artillery on their convoys, as well as observe their movement.

IV. We will see then... It will be probably a repetition of either I. or II.

If intel works as it supposed (I suppose it to be) to be, we should be able to execute it well.

[jadpanther]

Good thoughts on strategy...........I like the idea of combining our assests into an overwhelming strike force. The use of the Helicopters in one large swarm will overwhelm their air defenses.................How is the game working with regaurd to fixed wing assests vs Rotary wing? Will we be somehow penalised if we do put all out rotary wing assests together.

Also once they(NATO) see this strategy or even if they think it up themselves how are we going to protect our massed assest in our rear areas?

I am not experienced enough in this game format to offer up fixes..........just to think up problems.............

Jad

[mr_clark]

Also once they(NATO) see this strategy or even if they think it up themselves how are we going to protect our massed assest in our rear areas?

Jad
The idea behind it that we will achieve a decicive (!?!) victory in our first massed battles, destroying a large number of their assets. We need to keep up the initiative and let them react to us wich enables us to think up a new plan every couple of turns and thus makes their "adaption" useless.
Besides we can secure our rear areas by Destroying a large force of NATO quickly and then endanger their rear areas. I think we can be really successfull by simply sticking to "real life" WP tactics and strategy.

[Gun_go_Boom]

I think we can be really successfull by simply sticking to "real life" WP tactics and strategy.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but basic WP strategy was to overwhelm the enemy in one large punch: devastating artillery bombardment (with chemical even, though that is not available in WINSPMBT... :( followed by a swarm of tanks and BMP's and ATGM's just doing wave assaults right on through. Very effective, especially if we can maintain a good attacker to defender ratio of at least 3:1 in our favor. Punch a hole in their front lines, expand that hole and shore it up to protect our penetration forces flanks as they push deeper and deeper into the enemy's rear areas. Neutralize their rear area assets (particular artillery and ADA) and then cruise on through to the cities that are our objectives.

Or at least, that's what I would do :)

[Pannonicus]

I think you grasped well WP operational thinking. It is basically the adaptation of WW2 Soviet warfare, putting the emphasis on operational (or strategic) level of massing of forces, thus overcoming their weakness in tactics/technology.

With the right resources, it is very successful.

[Artur]

I think you grasped well WP operational thinking. It is basically the adaptation of WW2 Soviet warfare, putting the emphasis on operational (or strategic) level of massing of forces, thus overcoming their weakness in tactics/technology.

With the right resources, it is very successful.

Comrades,

You are right. The problem is we do not have advantage in numbers. We have a ratio of less then 1,5 regading tanks and infantry. NATO has TI capability while we do not. Even out Mi24s do NOT have TI. We have FO vechicles in the Russian regiments that have and they are the only one. This will be tough we need to out-maneuver them to win.

Artur.

[Gun_go_Boom]

Call me stupid but I am not quite following with TI equipment...can someone elaborate just a bit please? Not sure what that abbreviation stands for.

[Double Deuce]

Call me stupid but I am not quite following with TI equipment...can someone elaborate just a bit please? Not sure what that abbreviation stands for.TI = Thermal Imaging.

[Gun_go_Boom]

Thank you !

[mr_clark]

Comrades,

You are right. The problem is we do not have advantage in numbers. We have a ratio of less then 1,5 regading tanks and infantry. NATO has TI capability while we do not. Even out Mi24s do NOT have TI. We have FO vechicles in the Russian regiments that have and they are the only one. This will be tough we need to out-maneuver them to win.

Artur.
Or we trick them into actions allowing us to take better advantage of numbers.
I mean the key to victory is shock and shock is derived from (tactical) surprise, numbers, amount of firepower on target and speed.
Theoretically speaking we can achive tactical surprise in every engagement, we can use our forces and "offensive" intelligence to gain a decisive numerical advantage, we are on our way to create lots of firepower by combining our Arty assets. Speed is a bigger issue as it is important both in our planning and in the tactical game. WP doctrine dictates that advantagous positions are to be take early on in engagements and then build up to company strongpoints. Our lack of TI, or better the enemies use of it, makes this point even more important, as we need to gain positions that limit the TI effects quickly.

As stupid as is sounds, in the beginning we must hit weak enemy units with overwhelming force, to make them divide up their troops even more, when they fill the gaps in their frontlines.

[Artur]

As stupid as is sounds, in the beginning we must hit weak enemy units with overwhelming force, to make them divide up their troops even more, when they fill the gaps in their frontlines.

Yes exactly. Key elements are

-Good intel
-Maneuvres to favorable positions
-Surprise
-Unfair battles when attacking
-Delaying & guerilla battles elsewhere

This has to shift the ballace to our favor.

I am sorry to say but we start with a remarkable disadvantage because of the NATO TI capability even if the points are equal. We need to be very patient while implementing the activities written above.

Artur.

[jadpanther]

In addition to the massing of our arty assets would it be to our advantage to also mass our rotary assets to put together a force that could land small infantry untis in their rear areas to ambush their units that move to intercept our forces where we are massing our troops. I believe if we can pull this off our Inf and their RPG's might account for some armor as it moves up. Their equipment is so expensive that we could sacriface some units to form this force.

Question: How effective in a tactical situation are Nato's TI sights? Can they see through unlimited smoke and flame squares? This would be good to know when I have to face them.

Just a few thought's

Jad

[Artur]

In addition to the massing of our arty assets would it be to our advantage to also mass our rotary assets to put together a force that could land small infantry untis in their rear areas to ambush their units that move to intercept our forces where we are massing our troops. I believe if we can pull this off our Inf and their RPG's might account for some armor as it moves up. Their equipment is so expensive that we could sacriface some units to form this force.

Question: How effective in a tactical situation are Nato's TI sights? Can they see through unlimited smoke and flame squares? This would be good to know when I have to face them.

Just a few thought's

Jad

TI cannot see through 6 or more smoked hexes with FRESH smoke. That means 1 turn fresh smoke. TI also cannot see through 2 or more fire hexes.

We can experiment how much smoke can a 18XGvozdika battery make to know whether it is worth blindiing them with smoke or not. Our vision is limited through ONE NOT FRESH hex of smoke already :(.

Well that's the situation comrades.
Artur.

[Artur]

We have to play training battles. There we can try Jadpanther's idea. Bringing RPG units to the NATO rear sounds good not only for causing them damage but even more important to gain intel information. The question is how van we penetrate through their air defense which will contain Stingers, Vulcans and Chapparals.

Artur.

[Gun_go_Boom]

We have to play training battles. There we can try Jadpanther's idea. Bringing RPG units to the NATO rear sounds good not only for causing them damage but even more important to gain intel information. The question is how van we penetrate through their air defense which will contain Stingers, Vulcans and Chapparals.

Artur.

If any of you are familiar with the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, CA, or the Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort Polk, LA, then you are probably intimately aware of Task Force Angel.

TF Angel is basically a company of dismounts that are air assaulted (i.e., moved into position via helo) into the enemy's rear formations for the purposes of disruption, surveillance and guerrilla operations. Essentially they do whatever they can to ruin the enemy's battle efforts.

I strongly suggest that when/if possible we should implement this tactic as well.

[mr_clark]

We have to play training battles. There we can try Jadpanther's idea. Bringing RPG units to the NATO rear sounds good not only for causing them damage but even more important to gain intel information. The question is how van we penetrate through their air defense which will contain Stingers, Vulcans and Chapparals.

Artur.
Hmm we might not neccessarily need the choppers. RPG teams and scouts can also be moved quite easily and fast with BTRs. Apart from that there are always blind spots for our choppers to go through in the beginning of a battle.

[Pannonicus]

With good intel work we will find their undefended spots, so infiltration will be accomplished, both on land as well as in air.

[mr_clark]

With good intel work we will find their undefended spots, so infiltration will be accomplished, both on land as well as in air.
Right. I'll try to turn on my assets as well.

[wulfir]

Some thoughts on the use of helicopters...

As recon;
use the ability to pop up to high altitude and see what's moving around the map. Avoid crusing around the map too much with helicopters becuase the Stingers will kill you.

In the attack;
Pop up from behind cover, single out the high value targets concentrate ATGM fire on one tank, SAM unit etc until it is dead before moving to the next target, head back into cover. DO NOT FIRE ATGMs after moving. If it's possible let every move with attack helicopters follow after scout helicopters, even if it's only to move from low to high altitude. Better the Stinger kills a Hip than a Hind.

Always remember: helicopters are vulnerable.

Air assaults might be useful against lightly defended areas, but I have seen many players - especially Russian players - favour the air assault (both paratroopers and helicopter mobile units) in the main front line. It is very hard to pull off against a human opponent.

One interesing use of helicopeters is in the Air Defence Battle.
With helicopters you can quickly forward deploy lighter AA units and establish an AA umbrella over the front line...


I like the idea of massing striking power, but I'm not certain the helicopter will really deliver. I have more faith in the artillery. I think we must become master artillerymen before we become aviators if we are going to beat the enemy TI tanks.

[mr_clark]

I like the idea of massing striking power, but I'm not certain the helicopter will really deliver. I have more faith in the artillery. I think we must become master artillerymen before we become aviators if we are going to beat the enemy TI tanks.
A very good point, the problem is that our Arty mainly consists of 122mm and some 152s wich have only a slight chance to kill enemy tanks, and are not so good as area supression thanks to the relatively low Rate of fire.

We should have asked for a couple of BM-21 or -24.

[wulfir]

A very good point, the problem is that our Arty mainly consists of 122mm and some 152s wich have only a slight chance to kill enemy tanks, and are not so good as area supression thanks to the relatively low Rate of fire.

We should have asked for a couple of BM-21 or -24.

I agree, but with the ammo trucks I should think we'll be able to keep up a steady pounding. If we can mass our resources in artillery and other weapon systems where we want to strike decisively we might have an answer to the TI.

When we attack I think we should make every effort to really pour it on, artillery, air, everything. Create a mighty sledgehammer and bring it down hard.

BM-21s are monsterous against infantry on the move, BM-22s with ammo trucks will kill just about everything on the ground - moving or not...

[wulfir]

hmm..., I could have been a bit wrong about the Hinds.

Have been doing some testing, playing Arturs NATO vs WP meeting (the big version) and the ATGM fire from the Hinds, even when stationary achieves little.

The AI pushed a lot of M1 Abrams forward and just for the hell of it I decided to attack them with the rockets. Firing point blank against the rear resulted in a lot of burning M1s with relatively few Hinds shot down.

The massed Hind attack might be a real winner provided we can neutrilise or separate the enemy AA defences...

[Artur]

...

Have been doing some testing, playing Arturs NATO vs WP meeting (the big version) ...

Hey somebody tried out my BIG scenario! Wow...

Nice ideas here comrades!

Artur.

[Pannonicus]

hmm..., I could have been a bit wrong about the Hinds.

Have been doing some testing, playing Arturs NATO vs WP meeting (the big version) and the ATGM fire from the Hinds, even when stationary achieves little.

The AI pushed a lot of M1 Abrams forward and just for the hell of it I decided to attack them with the rockets. Firing point blank against the rear resulted in a lot of burning M1s with relatively few Hinds shot down.

The massed Hind attack might be a real winner provided we can neutrilise or separate the enemy AA defences...

I can confirm this. While somewhat suicidal, this tactics works the best. Fleyta is almost hopeless against Abrams frontal armor, has some chance from side. Sturm is better, but still depends on chance.