Schwerpunkt

[wulfir]

The TI units of the enemy will dominate the battlefield if we let them.

In the attack or counterattack it is IMO of crucial imprtance that we have numbers on our side because we must be able to carry the attack forward when we actually do attack, even in the face of punishing losses.

Piecemeal commitment of our own forces will be disasterous I think when faced with TI units. We must have the strength to reach them behind their cloak of smoke and to do this we will need plenty of indirect fire support, both from artillery but also enough weapons that can Z-key fire the hell out of the enemy positions.

And enough units to survive all they way to what will likely be point blank range.

With battles of 20 turns, I doubt there will be much time for fancy manouvering...

[Tanker]

I tend to agree with you Wulfir. I'm playing the Sov. against Artur's US and if I hang back I will get nibbled to pieces by the TOW's. We must get to knife fighting range.

[Artur]

If operationally we have no other option then attacking units heavily equipped with TI (the Americans) I absolutely agree with the things written above.

However at the operational level it serves our interests the best if we rather attack the Germans or Canadians. NATO may get smart by giving a few of its TI units to the Germans (I would give them the TI ATGMs but they can be more easily overwhelmed).

The most problematic TI units are the:
1.Abrams _by far- because they have a good punch, they are fast and yet have thick armor (they are real ***** unfortunately) Best move against them what I fond so far is getting them with PGMs in standoff air attacks. Getting close with tanks works but it may be costly and not always effective.
2.The M60s because of their TI and ROF but they are vulnerable and _sloooow_
3. ATGMs they have the TI and Tow may be accurate sometimes-not always- but they are both fragile, poor ROF and cannot shoot after moving.

That means we should not attack hexes with Abrams defending in them if we have other options.

Artur.

[wulfir]

Getting close with tanks works but it may be costly and not always effective.

I agree, it will probably be costly. Especially if the enemy commander is an experienced player.

I'd be surprised if the enemy is not keen on getting their top gear into the battle - sooner or later we will have to face the Americans.

When we do we must have have enough weight behind us so that we won't just feed our forces into the grinder and gain nothing. IMHO.

I have lost some faith in strike aircraft because they tend to target friendly forces a bit too much, but the massed helicopter attack might have the speed and punch neccessary to defeat the Abrams. Suppose we face a concentration of Abrams and fight a defensive battle with our ground troops - and while the enemy advances we hold back our Hinds - with luck the troops supporting the Abrams' like AA and infantry will suffer losses through artillery fire etc and become somewhat separated - that is when we unleash the Hinds. From point blank range the rockets will kill an Abrams...

[Tanker]

I've had good luck with the Mig-23's stand off weapon (Fleyta?) I've taken a toll on Artur's M1's and Tow launchers with them.

[Artur]

I've had good luck with the Mig-23's stand off weapon (Fleyta?) I've taken a toll on Artur's M1's and Tow launchers with them.

Thoss missiles are called "Kerry" and I confirm both Tanker's and Jadpanther's Mig23s with Kerry took a considerable toll on my Abrams' in our training battle.

Artur.

[Artur]

I agree, it will probably be costly. Especially if the enemy commander is an experienced player.
Yep. Too costly. We have just "simulated" that in a training battle.


I'd be surprised if the enemy is not keen on getting their top gear into the battle - sooner or later we will have to face the Americans.
Yes absolutely.
The question is, how do we do that? It matters very much IMHO. I would like to meet the americans in defensive battles where our BMP-s are waiting for them behind obstacles (wire and minefields) and we have armor and helicopters in reserve and artillery is supporting. If we manage to bring Airplanes the better.


When we do we must have have enough weight behind us so that we won't just feed our forces into the grinder and gain nothing. IMHO.
Yes, Absolutely. That is never good. With our recon we must dentify their schwerpunkt and maneuvre our shock troops accordingly. If we manage to reach the objectives in row 7 first we have to fight defensive battles. Where they attack with their mass we counter-attack. If they are there first-that is a problem plans have to be worked out for that situation. That will be very hard for us, and then we should rather attack the units that have no or have less TI IMHO. And that is NOT the Americans. Of course a lot will depend on who is commanding that part of their front :).



I have lost some faith in strike aircraft because they tend to target friendly forces a bit too much,

Quite interesting, I have rather good experience with the airplanes. They would surely take a heavy toll with their standoff attacks IF they reach the place of the battle. I am more worried about the NATO HAWKS system.


but the massed helicopter attack might have the speed and punch neccessary to defeat the Abrams. Suppose we face a concentration of Abrams and fight a defensive battle with our ground troops - and while the enemy advances we hold back our Hinds - with luck the troops supporting the Abrams' like AA and infantry will suffer losses through artillery fire etc and become somewhat separated - that is when we unleash the Hinds. From point blank range the rockets will kill an Abrams...

Yes I absolutely agree. Hinds have earned my respect in the training battles and during playing our training scenarios in solo. They are massive, can dogfight well with Cobras, eat PAHs alive and can do heavy damage with their unguided rockets including the destruction of M60s.

In short.
-If we arrive to the objectives first.
-and if we fight defensive battles
-and if we have our shock troops in reserve (Tank and BTR regiments)
-and if we have our helos kept alive and commited at the decisive place
-and if our air defense can keep the A-10s away
We have the best chance against TI equipped Americans IMHO.

Quite many Ifs but that is why we made
-the recon plan with it's delaying part,
-the air defense plan
-our "engineering" concept
-and the over-al layout
-and our training
to achieve as much IFs in our favor as we can...

Artur.

[wulfir]

Quite interesting, I have rather good experience with the airplanes. They would surely take a heavy toll with their standoff attacks IF they reach the place of the battle. I am more worried about the NATO HAWKS system.


Well..., maybe I've had plenty of bad luck with the airstrikes..., or maybe you all have been lucky. :)

All the same I'm happy if the aircraft keeps the HAWKs busy - because free to deploy in the frontline they will be pure murder on our Hinds...

[Artur]

Well..., maybe I've had plenty of bad luck with the airstrikes..., or maybe you all have been lucky. :)

All the same I'm happy if the aircraft keeps the HAWKs busy - because free to deploy in the frontline they will be pure murder on our Hinds...

Now that's an interesting point... I never thought about that BUT if NATO doest that we call artillery on them if they are located. Then we call in air support or try to get them with ground forces-I know the latter is not going to be easy.

Artur.

[Gun_go_Boom]

Now that's an interesting point... I never thought about that BUT if NATO doest that we call artillery on them if they are located. Then we call in air support or try to get them with ground forces-I know the latter is not going to be easy.

Artur.

In a case like this, or any other time that we know the exact location of enemy air defense assets, we call in a SEAD, or Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses. Essentially the goal is, at a minimum, to keep enemy ADA from being able to fire their missiles/munitions at our aircraft. Ideally, of course, that would mean the destruction of their air defense equipment. Typically in real life American combat ops, the SEAD is thrown out before the main body of the maneuver forces are in position to engage the enemy, and it is followed closely by close air support missions, if possible. Or something like that, in case I don't have the exact TTP down for it.

[Vesku]

Well..., maybe I've had plenty of bad luck with the airstrikes..., or maybe you all have been lucky. :)

Keeping vehicles under trees makes a huge difference, maybe your oppo has done that while others have been able to hit them in the open.

Vesku