Obstacles

[Stndrtnfhr]

This thread is expanding on what Mad Russian mentioned in his analysis of round 1 of the StE tourney. Being a Combat Engineer in the Marine Corps, I have a lot of real world experience in planning and implementing obstacle/barrier plans. Many players do not really make the best use of obstacles and hopefully this will give some insight as to how to use this asset and also a look into Marine humor. We have an acronym for the use of obstacles called "FOCPIG". This is what it stands for.

All obstacles will be:

covered by Fire
and/or Observation
be Concealed when possible
Protect defensive postions
Integrated into the fire/defensive plan
be of a NonGeometric pattern to confuse the enemy


Any obstacle not covered by fire or at least observation for indirect fire, a TRP in front of an obstacle works best for this, is a wasted obstacle and does not contribute to the defensive plan. Remember, obstacles will not stop the enemy, only delay him in a kill zone or force him to move into another kill zone. Hopefully this will be of use to anyone who wants to use obstacles in battle.


Stndrtnfhr Out!

[Stndrtnfhr]

Ooopps, I put this in the wrong thread, can a Moderator move this to the tactics thread? Thanks.


Stndrtnfhr Out!

[Nemesis Lead]

This thread is expanding on what Mad Russian mentioned in his analysis of round 1 of the StE tourney. Being a Combat Engineer in the Marine Corps, I have a lot of real world experience in planning and implementing obstacle/barrier plans. Many players do not really make the best use of obstacles and hopefully this will give some insight as to how to use this asset and also a look into Marine humor. We have an acronym for the use of obstacles called "FOCPIG". This is what it stands for.

All obstacles will be:

covered by Fire
and/or Observation
be Concealed when possible
Protect defensive postions
Integrated into the fire/defensive plan
be of a NonGeometric pattern to confuse the enemy


Any obstacle not covered by fire or at least observation for indirect fire, a TRP in front of an obstacle works best for this, is a wasted obstacle and does not contribute to the defensive plan. Remember, obstacles will not stop the enemy, only delay him in a kill zone or force him to move into another kill zone. Hopefully this will be of use to anyone who wants to use obstacles in battle.


Stndrtnfhr Out!


This is great!

I see players make this mistake all the time.

An obstacle not covered by fire is useless (but people do it). I would just go around it or blow it up.

An obstacle that can be seen can give away the location of your MLR. In a recent game on Band of Brothers....my opponent had barbed wire in front of woods. I saw the wire and shelled the woods. He was massacred.

[TacCovert4]

I've been known to place obstacles in weird, yet not totally useless defensive posts as a immobile diversion. Nothing is funnier than to watch mortar fire rape a line covered by barbed wire with a couple of HMGs far to the rear.

As a note, what are the best ways to utilize roadblocks and daisy chain at mines?

How should you incorporate easily spotted defenses such as wire and trenches into your defensive scheme?

Has anyone actually seen an infantry assault stalled by ap mines?

[Stndrtnfhr]

I've been known to place obstacles in weird, yet not totally useless defensive posts as a immobile diversion. Nothing is funnier than to watch mortar fire rape a line covered by barbed wire with a couple of HMGs far to the rear.

As a note, what are the best ways to utilize roadblocks and daisy chain at mines?

How should you incorporate easily spotted defenses such as wire and trenches into your defensive scheme?

Has anyone actually seen an infantry assault stalled by ap mines?

TacCovert4
Employing obstacles as part of your deception plan, as you noted, can work very well. Fire directed anywhere but at your troops is a good thing. The placement of roadblocks and daisy chain mines is dependent on the terrain. All obstacles should be tied into terrain features if at all possible. Daisy chain mines between woods, road blocks between buildings, etc... An obstacle placed in open terrain that is easily bypassed doesn't help. I know these sound like MOTO(master of the obvious) statements, but many players have varying levels of experience with obstacles.
During round one of StE, I used AP minefields to good effect in front of the village and stalled the attack which allowed my infantry more time to engage his infantry before they could get to cover. Eventually though the minefields get used up and become less effect as more infantry move through them.
Using wire is a little more of a challenge. I like to place it deeper in woods so it cannot be seen from the edge. It is placed just at the end of LOS for squads in the woods. That way it slows the enemy and makes infantry fire more effective. Placing wire to deny the enemy use of terrain works as long as you have it covered by fire or observation for indirect fire. Just remember FOCPIG.

Stndrtnfhr Out!

[TacCovert4]

I'm also looking at using DC AT mines as a deception tactic, placing them in terrain that is close to, but not really in, the effective range or los of an AT gun. His tank or vehicle hits it, boom, and later, when he sees a vehicle get engaged with a 'gun', he'll assume it was a good gunnery shot instead of a lucky mine.

[Lurker]

Perhaps a dumb question, but is wire automatically spotted in the open if it isn't in the LOS of the attacker? In other words when viewing from a top view does wire automatically show up on the map, or is this dependent on the FOW setting?

Reason is wire could be effective in the open if it's on the reverse slope and out of the attackers LOS.

[Iron Mike USMC]

Perhaps a dumb question, but is wire automatically spotted in the open if it isn't in the LOS of the attacker? In other words when viewing from a top view does wire automatically show up on the map, or is this dependent on the FOW setting?

Reason is wire could be effective in the open if it's on the reverse slope and out of the attackers LOS.


I just did a quick check in BB, and found that wire not in LOS is not seen from the overhead views.

[mangus2000]

I'm in the middle of a game at the moment and my oppo had trenches.
I had planned to smoke them so my green russain SMGs coould move in close, the smoke mission messed up and moved some tanks up to pound it using valuable time in the process.
Anyway to cut a long story short the damn things were empty.........Sneaky dog:laugh:

It served it's purpose of slowing me down though which is a valuable lesson!

[Lurker]

I'm in the middle of a game at the moment and my oppo had trenches.
I had planned to smoke them so my green russain SMGs coould move in close, the smoke mission messed up and moved some tanks up to pound it using valuable time in the process.
Anyway to cut a long story short the damn things were empty.........Sneaky dog:laugh:

It served it's purpose of slowing me down though which is a valuable lesson!So now you have some perfectly good trenches where your troops can relax and share some vodka. :p

[TacCovert4]

Before you call in a smoke mission on a trench line, you might be best to hit it first with some HE rounds, followed by a team level infantry probe. Carefully check to see if your infantry is being shot at from the trenches themselves, and exactly where in the trenches is the fire coming from. You can then either bolster your recon into an assault, HE those individual positions with on map guns, or call in smoke or HE from off map arty.

[KGPanzerschrecK]

In a recent CMAK QB with a friend, I was defending a very rocky area. I also had ample trenchs but no other Obstacles. For a large section of the line i was defending, there was only three ways Armor/Vehicles could pass through the rocks, three roads. So i stacked up the trenches 3 deep side ways and placed them across the roads on each road. With all the rocks around i could afford to use the trenches as improvised roadblocks/tank traps. The trenches slowed his Shermans and M8's down to a crawl and they were slaughtered by my Pak's.

[John Powderly]

Does a trench's protection change depending on the angle/aspect of the incoming fire? That is to say, is fire coming in parallel to the trench more damaging to the troops in the trench compared to fire coming in perpendicular to the trench?

This comes from a few messages up - someone said the trenches were empty, and another person quipped that the troops had a nice safe place to relax and drink some vodka. Well, what if the defender had placed a TRP near the trench and lined up a large gun parallel to the trench. If the gun was boresighted, it might be more than a deception but also one heck of an ambush.

[Stndrtnfhr]

In a recent CMAK QB with a friend, I was defending a very rocky area. I also had ample trenchs but no other Obstacles. For a large section of the line i was defending, there was only three ways Armor/Vehicles could pass through the rocks, three roads. So i stacked up the trenches 3 deep side ways and placed them across the roads on each road. With all the rocks around i could afford to use the trenches as improvised roadblocks/tank traps. The trenches slowed his Shermans and M8's down to a crawl and they were slaughtered by my Pak's.


Well done Schreck,
That is exactly what an obstacle is supposed to do. Delay the enemy and keep him in the kill zone. You should have been a Combat Engineer. Your sig gives me the impression you have had some time in the Corps.

Stndrtnfhr Out!

[KGPanzerschrecK]

Well done Schreck,
That is exactly what an obstacle is supposed to do. Delay the enemy and keep him in the kill zone. You should have been a Combat Engineer. Your sig gives me the impression you have had some time in the Corps.

Stndrtnfhr Out!

The picture you mentioned is of my Dad. Its my little way of honoring him with each post i make. He served in WWII in the Marines as a Corporal. He was in the 25th Regiment, 4th Marine Division. He fought on Siapan, Tinian & Iwo Jima. I put together a history of my Dads service in WWII and a history of the 4th Marine Division over at KG's website. If your interested here is the link -
History of the Fourth Marine Division in WWII - Kampfgruppe (http://kampfgruppe.us/showthread.php?p=39808#post39808)
Its lenghty, but well worth the read if your at all interested in WWII in the Pacific.

I fully intended to follow in my fathers and my ancestors foot steps by joining the military. There has been at least one member of my family in every war this country has fought since the French and Indian War up to and including the current Iraqi Conflict. The year after i graduated high school i broke my one ankle in 14 places, thus ended any chances of joining the military.

I always have engineers/pioneers in every CM game. As far as im concerned you cant win without them.

[Stndrtnfhr]

The picture you mentioned is of my Dad. Its my little way of honoring him with each post i make. He served in WWII in the Marines as a Corporal. He was in the 25th Regiment, 4th Marine Division. He fought on Siapan, Tinian & Iwo Jima. I put together a history of my Dads service in WWII and a history of the 4th Marine Division over at KG's website. If your interested here is the link -
History of the Fourth Marine Division in WWII - Kampfgruppe (http://kampfgruppe.us/showthread.php?p=39808#post39808)
Its lenghty, but well worth the read if your at all interested in WWII in the Pacific.

I fully intended to follow in my fathers and my ancestors foot steps by joining the military. There has been at least one member of my family in every war this country has fought since the French and Indian War up to and including the current Iraqi Conflict. The year after i graduated high school i broke my one ankle in 14 places, thus ended any chances of joining the military.

I always have engineers/pioneers in every CM game. As far as im concerned you cant win without them.


Schreck,
I would say you have the heart of a Marine already. The link is great, thanks I really appreciate it. I recognized the patch on your Dad's shirt and was going to ask you about it. It had to be circa 1940-50s as we no longer wear patchs on uniforms. The Marines of WWII set a very high standard for the Corps, please pass my respects to your father. Your comment on engineers/pioneers is right on target. When ever the Grunts run into trouble the first thing I hear is "Engineers Up"

Stnrtnfhr Out!

[TacCovert4]

Engineers/Pioneers are great for their morale and close combat abilities. On the defense or offense, at close range, their explosives almost always will make the difference between success and failure. Nothing is better than watching a Tiger shrug off frantic AT and Sherman fire, only to fall prey to the satchel Chunkers!

[mangus2000]

Quite right Tac. For a while i went with all engineer forces but their long range fire power can be on the low side.
Close in though they come into their own!!!

[KGPanzerschrecK]

Thanks for the kind words Stnrtnfhr.

As far as im concerned, the best troops in CMAK are American Engineers. They have the long range firepower of the M1 Garand and in close the M1, Tommy Gun & BAR are very good. Plus you have Ample Rifle Grenades and Demo Charges. They can hadle anything from Infantry to taking out buildings to taking out Tigers.

[TacCovert4]

I've found out that as Germans, especially on the defense, it is best to let your enemies close to point blank range before opening fire. at 200 or less, the Germans are deadly, much outside that though and their firepower drops considerably.

Also, on the fortification note, remember that as the defender in a QB, you have around 30 foxholes that you can add to the terrain, either as an enormous set of foxhole tank traps, fall back positions, or as part of a deception plan.

[Lurker]

Concerning German engineers in CM, you'll find them rather weak in small arms FP. Typically they may have one MP40 but that's about it. Their entire worth IMO is the explosive charges they carry.

I find that interesting because in ASL the German Pioneer was the strongest German unit in terms of FP, typically being SMG heavy.

I wonder which modeling is correct - anyone know?

[KGPanzerschrecK]

Pretty much of what i read it depends on which part of the war it was. Early war Pioneers were like CM but by late '42 they we starting to become armed to the teeth with SMG's and assault MG's for in close contact work.

[Lurker]

Pretty much of what i read it depends on which part of the war it was. Early war Pioneers were like CM but by late '42 they we starting to become armed to the teeth with SMG's and assault MG's for in close contact work.That was my general impression as well. I think CM went with an overall generic early modeling. Too bad because it detracts from their effective close assault use when the charges are gone.

[KGPanzerschrecK]

That was my general impression as well. I think CM went with an overall generic early modeling. Too bad because it detracts from their effective close assault use when the charges are gone.

Agreed. Rather stupid of them IMHO. If they could have all those different and evolving other Infantry types, why not Pioneers too? The other countries Engineers suffer the same fate as the Germans as well. As far as Americans go, their weapons didnt change, just their tactics, so the effect isnt noticed. Thats why they stand out as such effective Infantry.