Assault vs. Defend

[Panzer Leader]

Now, let me start by saying that I do not want to start an argument, nor do I want to call for a "fix" I am just curious about other people's experience with Assault vs. Defend QBs (against other people, of course.. smile.gif )

I have played four of them, twice as defender, twice as attacker, twice as German, twice as American. In each case, the defender was ultimately over-run, usually to the tune of "Total Victory" for the assaulter.

Now, I realize that force selection and placement is of the utmost importance for the defender, so I am prepared to believe that my mistakes were due to a lack of planning, so how have you all fared?

What are some methods you use (as defender especially) to give yourself the edge needed to win.

Here are a few of the things I've found.

1. Study the land

It is perhaps the number one killer for the defender. You **MUST** know from whence your attacker will come, and you need to mass your firepower there, even if it means sacrificing a victory location.

2. Hide your forces, AMBUSH

If you are in the right place for the assaulter, lay low and spring an attack at close range. This is especially effective for guns.

3. Draw them in

Once you know where the attack is coming from, help them along by offering a path into your Zone of control. Once they have taken the bait, make it a Killing Zone.

4. Pick forces wisely

Maybe it is a fancy tank, or maybe just a bunch of infantry, but remember that the assaulter will have a definite advantage in force quantity. It is my opinion that heavy artillery is of limited value as a defender, because soon the assaulter will be in your backyard.

I also believe that expensive tanks do not offer enough "bang for the buck" to a defender - though they might be perfect for the attacker.

Bunkers seem to be a little overpriced, as well as being sitting ducks. I would rather have a 75mm AT gun hidden in trees, than an AT Bunker, plus the cost is less for the gun, and as a defender - COST IS EVERYTHING.

Well, let me re-iterate that I have never won as the defendeer, so any of my opinions may be incorrect, but I want to know what you all think. smile.gif

[ACTOR]

Your points are well made. I have played as defender about 6 times against humans and I have yet to win. This is most likely due to a combination of factors, such as my inability to manage my troops, but is also an indication that defense against overwhelming numbers is a tough job. Like you, I am not complaining, just acknowledging that your observations are on the money.

I keep playing in defense, in the hopes that I will eventually get at least a draw.

[Murph]

Well, I for one played a small (500pts) TCP/IP QB as the attacker last night, and got spanked.

Mostly I attribute it to it being my first tcp/ip ever, and as you all know, playing against humans is a whole new ballgame!

However, the defender successfully put into play all the points you mention in your post:

1. He studied the land and picked the right spot to mass his forces, even though this left one of the two flags undefended. I being a total fool, marched right down that path with 2/3 of my forces.

2. He set up a nice killzone, in which he created a nice funnel of mines and barbed wire and woods that led me right to the killzone. It was extremely well done, although I imagine that perhaps it wouldn't have fooled a more experienced player.

3. He waited in hiding until I was very close, 75m or so (the fact that there was heavy fog made it worse for me in this respect) and then "unleashed hell". I got hit, during the same awful turn, with a 150mm anti infantry gun, rocket artillery and anti-personnel mines. All in a tiny wooded area. There went a whole platoon, my spotter, my machine gun, etc.

Hoewever, it's tough to defend, and everything has to go your way. Factors such as fog, recklessnes on the attacker, and plain luck-of-war plaid a part. Even with the initial onslaught, I flanked him with a platoon infantry and two halftracks, plus a Stuart, and managed to give him a good fight. Bottom line is that unless you hit a devastating first blow as a defender it's sure going to be tough to hold on.

But it sure is fun trying. I can imagine nothing as thrilling as waiting...waiting...waiting, and then dropping an ambush where everything works just right :D

Anyway, that's my take in this interesting topic.

[Jarmo]

I've won defending against an assault, and I might do it again.
But it definitely isn't easy. Not with default settings.

A few things to make it more even:

1. The weather. Make it snowy, or rainy and the defense is suddenly easier.

2. Time. Less time, easier defense.

3. Map size. A small map forces the attacker into coming down
at guessable routes. On the other hand, a large map forces
a hasty assault.

Heavy(ish) artillery can be a real saviour for the defender.
A 150mm or 155mm barrage stops an assaulting force cold.
If you guess the location to strike a few minutes in advance.

Smaller stuff forces the attacker to waste time hiding.

An übertank can stall an attack. A hull-down Jumbo is something
that can't be ignored or easily destroyed.
The effect is as much a psychological obstacle one as it's a "real" one.

Guns. A mix of small and large ones works great. Your opponent
has to deal with them all, this takes time and arty. A 50mm AT gun
that swallows a load of offboard arty is points well spent.

But still.. defense against an assault is hard hard hard...

[Stixx]

I hope this thread continues on this path.

I've never played attack vs defence against a Human opponent so i can't really comment.

I'd love to hear what everyone lese has to say.

[Mr. Johnson--]

Don't worry so much guys. I think BTS changed the values for attack/defend battles so humans would have a good battle vs. the AI. If your playing against a human, give the attacker a -10%. The attacker is still going to have more troops and the attacker can't be wasteful. I've won on the defense, with and without the -10% for attacker. But since 1.1 winning on defense is very very very tricky.

[Panzer Leader]

Well, that is an interesting point, but I don't want to knock the system. I want to win (at least once in a great while) against a human at the standard level that shipped with the game.

There are a lot of good points so far, and I still maintain that the two most important steps in winning a defens are: purchase and placement.

It seems some people like artillery and heavy tanks, some like guns, some pillboxes, but whatever force you choose, it must be with a cohesive plan in mind.

And it has to be a very stable, adaptable plan, since you don't get to see the map before starting.

As for placement, I think we are all in agreement that finding the route of advance (or FORCING it) and having close ambushes (perhaps after a bombardment) is the best way for placement.

Any other ideas? People who have won a defense, what tactics did you use?

[jgdpzr]

No doubt defending at the default settings against a human is a dodgy affair. I firmly believe that the margin for error is much tighter for the defender.
I echo many of the points others have made. Placement is indeed critical. But, to me, the larger issue is selecting the type of defense that best matches the situational factors. Do you defend in depth, place all on line, maintain large reserve for counter-attack, do you rely almost solely on a reactive defense, or do you undertake a more proactive approach? The terrain, conditions, and force mix all must be considered in making this decision. There is no one single best approach. Some are more difficult to pull off than others, but given certain considerations, the more difficult ones may provide your only hope. And finally, although setup is critical, knowing when to vary from your plan is also of utmost importance. Few plans survive enemy contact for very long, and knowing when and how to shift tactics or units cannot be underestimated.
I have played quite a few defensive battles in pbem, and lost more than I have won. But I have found that as my intuitive skills at forming a "strategic" approach during setup have improved, my chances at victory have been exponentially bolstered. But each battle, victory or defeat, has been quite different and it is therefore very hard for me to distill anything down to hard-and-fast axioms.
If you are interested, Pillar and someone else (the handle escapes me) had a long discussion on some of the finer points of defensive actions. You might want to track down that thread to get some more specific pointers.

[Panzer Leader]

Yes, maybe our esteemed colleagues would be willing to re-iterate some of their previous conversation as well as any new strategies they have devised, but in order to keep this CURRENT dialogue open, I wonder about a few choices players make.

Such as a line defense vs. a defense in depth. My strategy has been to have a defense in depth with split squads and a fall-back position. This does two things: 1.) allows me to prepare my "Killing zone" and 2.) give my men a place to run once they are overrun.

However, in practice, my troops, by the time they leave their forward position are so broken and shot up that they are pretty much useless ever-after.

Another choice is to have a mobile vs a static defense. Is it better to have well-place well concealed units along the front you protect, or is it better to have some mobility (such as half-tracks) ready to react to the attacker.

In the past, I have always tried to make the attacker react to my plans rather than vice versa, but always, I have ended up shifting forces from inactive fronts to where my lines are starting to crumble. this is done slowly and on foot due to my stinginess with spending points on vehicles during a defense. I wonder how it would play out with a mobile reactive defense...

[Jarmo]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzer Leader:
However, in practice, my troops, by the time they leave their forward position are so broken and shot up that they are pretty much useless ever-after.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes. Abandoning the forward positions is a form of art.
I've met a few guys who do it beautifully, I usually screw up. smile.gif
One thing is certain, you absolutely need to have a company
or battallion HQ at your secondary positions to rally the men.

[MrSpkr]

If you are defending in an assault scenario, it is extremely useful to have three zones: the initial line of resistance, the primary line of resistance, and the final line of resistance (terrain/objectives permitting). The purpose of the zones is NOT to set absolute limits on your forces' movement and deployment, but rather to conceptually guide your defense. Normal tactics (i.e., maintaining an adequate reserve, etc.) are assumed in this discussion.

Zone one, the initial line of resistance, is primarily for recon; i.e., where the heck is the enemy and what has he got. I like to put snipers, maybe a platoon in this role. Occasionally I spice it up with an anti-tank gun that I expect to lose anyway -- it keeps the attacker honest.

If the terrain is open or is such that you have a good field of view, an FO is useful here as well.

When the attacker is close enough to assault your front lines, you have two choices. You can (1) leave your sniper/platoons up front, try and slow him down, maybe kill a few tank commanders (useful if the attacker is under a tight time constraint); or (2) run for the main line of resistance. I generally opt for choice two unless I have little in the way of options. NEVER let your forward troops get whacked for no good purpose.

The second line of defense is the primary line of resistance. The area in front of it should contain minefields along the most likely paths of advance. Troops should be placed in mutually supporting positions IN COVER. This line should also be well to the front of the objectives (at least 250m if possible).

This is where you bleed the enemy. As your troops flee from the initial line of resistance, target artillery on the area you expect the enemy to occupy in the next two minutes. IF you left your troops on the initial line long enough to eyeball the enemy, you should be fairly accurate with your Arty. This will disrupt/slow the enemy advance, and may break some units, making it easier to break in the assault. Do not use all your artillery yet - save a little for later.

The troops arriving from the initial line of resistance may be broken or worse, so have HQ's ready to rally. Previously broken units should not be placed back on the front line, but rather can form the reserve for the sector.

As the enemy approaches, make him pay for every inch of ground. In an assault scenario he will have lots of troops and tanks - you must thin these formations out significantly. Make sure your HQ's are in position to rally troops. Allow your units, for the most part, to pick their own targets.

Vehicles should largely be in this line of resistance. They should be on reverse slopes if possible and definitely hull down. If the enemy begins to zero in on their positions, have them reverse out of sight, then move to alternate positions nearby. The enemy will lose track of your vehicles (though he will know they are around SOMEWHERE), while your other troops should do a fine job of keeping track of his! When you are ready for your vehicles to crest and fire again, focus some machine gun fire on his tanks. This will probably cause thme to button and buy your tank a couple of unreturned shots.

As your forces bleed, it is time to consider when to withdraw to the final line of resistance. This should be in and around the objective area itself. Knowing when to do it is more of an art than a science. If you do it too soon, the enemy will be too strong and will probably push you out of your positions. If you wait too long, your troops will be weak and demoralized and unable to put up much of a fight.

Generally, you should move units to the last line of resistance piecemeal if possible. The worst thing to do is suddenly abandon ALL of your forward positions. If the enemy catches on to what you are doing, he can push hard, get through the primary line of resistance and cut down your troops trying to pull back to the final line of resistance.

Try to move back any FO's with ammo left first. Set them up so that they can target the main areas the enemy is attacking in the primary line of resistance. In his assault, the enemy should be fairly bunched up and present a marvelous arty target. If you are able to time the artillery arrival so that it hits just after (one turn or so MAX) the last of your troops withdraw from the area, you generally tag the enemy for a number of casualties and impede his ability to reorganize for the push against your final line of resistance.

At the final line of resistance, you simply need to trade time for men. If you have withdrawn a force intact enought to withstand taking casualties during the endgame, you should be alright. A small reserve force is useful here to counterattack when necessary.

Using these tactics, it is usually possible to pull out a draw.

Just my $.02 worth.

MrSpkr

[ 04-12-2001: Message edited by: MrSpkr ]

[mrcobbler]

good stuff. the reverse would be true for the attacker? he should avoid all the above situations if possible, never do the obvious.

Shoeman

[CombinedArms]

MrSpkr has said a mouthful. I'll just add a few more general points drawn from recent experience:
1. The HIDE command is really important. Keep all troops on defense hidden and in cover until you can engage the enemy advantageously. It's very unnerving to advance against a totally unknown enemy and more unnerving to take fire from unseen locations.
2. Don't overlook the WITHDRAW command, which can get you out of a bad situation in a hurry. I often wait too long--but saving even one or two squad members is worth the trouble.
3. Let armor lurk behind buildings or terrain features until the enemy armor has been spotted and can be attacked from advantageous angles. If woods or scattered trees are thick enough, they can completely block line of sight, so don't overlook their potential. On the other hand, even hull down positions can be too exposed against superior numbers. CONSERVE that armor! Make the enemy expose his armor to find yours.
4. Use interior lines (both shorter and covered from enemy LOS) to shift forces laterally to meet unfolding threats. Lurking armor can do this really well, but so can infantry if shifted promptly enough.
5. Strive for local advantages against the attacking enemy and exploit them to beat his force piecemeal. Choose timely withdrawal if the enemy has a local advantage and you can't reinforce soon enough to regain the advantage.
6. For protection against encroaching armor, infantry can withdraw deeper into the woods, out of LOS, without actually conceding the position.
7. Until the game nears its close, conserving your force while inflicting maximum damage on the enemy may be more important than holding ALL victory locations. If you force survives while inflicitng serious losses on the enemy, you may be able to retake lost positions, especially if the enemy has to shift forces to attack your NEXT position.

So: hide, lurk, shuttle, pounce, withdraw, hide, lurk, shuttle, pounce, withdraw, hide, lurk, shuttle, pounce, hold! (or counter-attack!)--one definition of an active defense, maximizing the defender's one key advantage--the attacker must expose himself to come at you. This isn't going to work all the time, but it might give you a fighting chance and make the enemy earn his victory.

[ 04-12-2001: Message edited by: CombinedArms ]

[Banshee]

Well I think the average terrain on the average CM map is highly favorable to attacker. Try heavy forest, rural map and I bet you will fair better. But the average, village map (even with heavy forest selected) is still far too open for a solid defense unless the lay of the terrain (i.e. being able to get reverse slope positions) is just right. If the person you are playing insists on village maps, then insist on fog (to limit visibility) or rain/snow(to limit afv maneuverability) to bring it back in balance. Wide open (long range LOS) = good for the attacker, close in = good for the defender. Challene the same opponents again to a battle Rural, Heavy trees, large mountains, any weather, I bet you do better.

[Banshee]

oh yeah, my other beef (not really I still play just think there needs to be a change) is the flags in CM. I think defense would be much more meaningful if flags were either gone OR there were much fewer. I ignore the flags as much as possible but honestly I know they influence my thinking. Ideally (IMHO!!) I think the defender would have his own objectives to defend (say Hill B), and Attacker would have his objectives to take (Say Hill C). I wouldnt know the attackers objectives (yes I know about dynamic flags) and the attacker wouldnt know objectives. Sometimes the objectives would be the same (I would say probably 70-75% of the time) but sometimes they wouldnt.

But then again I want deeper maps, a modified ambush command (see NScoot thread), and a modified menu system. I wont be getting any of those either! ;)

[Lorak]

I agree mostly with the Flag comment.
Defense isn't really too bad. The problem is that the random flag placment often times forces you to defend an area that no one would normally defend.

Only way around this is to really have your maps built by a third party. At least thats what I do.

Other trap that I notice a lot of new people falling into is trying to defend everything. The game often gives out a lot of flags based on points. As a defender if you try to defend all the flags you have already lost. Try to pick out the higest total value of flags that are close enough together for you to actualy defend. If it means leaving a small flag or two open, so be it.

The other biggest factor in defending is the time limit of the games. The longer the time limit, the bigger the benifit to the attacker. I find that on most normal Defensive maps 20-30 turns should be the max(for 1000-1500 points). Anything longer than that gives the attacker too much time to coordinate his attack and after a while you just will not have enough men left to hold enough positions to win reguardless.

Just my .02

Lorak

[Banshee]

on village and city maps you would think it would be easy to put a big ole flag smack dab in the middle of the town and that would be realistic in the general case. Most US troops daily objectives were the next little village down the road. I think for other maps you just pick the highest ground on the defenders side and put a big ole flag there too (hopefully there is some cover!). I would rather have more flags stacked deeper, than CM's way of stacking more flags , wider. Like I said I try to ignore the flags as much as possible, usually leaving 50% or so uncovered , and the other 50% just happen to be in the terrain that I think is most suitable for my operations.

p.s. I dont think further point reductions are the answer.

p.s.s. Also I think it would help the average joe who lets the computer pick for both sides if the purchasing AI was smart enough to give you a TRP every once and awhile if u have an FO (or even an AT gun or mortar). Right now any person attacking when computer purchases KNOWS that TRP's aren't in the cards for the defender (BUG! hehe).

[Clubfoot]

I've had success once or twice with setting up my main lines of resistance in positions that flank the main objective flag cluster (when there is one, usually in village defense)as opposed to sitting on top of it. Then an attempt is made to force the fight's location. Decide where you want your stand to take place (preferably between two equal, flanking defensive forces) and then attempt to manipulate the fight to that position.

As has been said already, falling back from initial lines of defense is very tricky. But when handled correctly (be it by skill, luck, or both), the perception of a "soft spot" or "crumbling" defense can influence the direction of your opponents assault.

Smoke. It's not just for the attacker. If you can gauge the general tempo of the fight, smoke can be called to cover your withdrawal from the front line of defense. This will save some of your men, cover the exact destination of your retreat, and hopefully provide a screen which the attacker believes he can "make use of" to exploit your "crumbling" defensive line. It's often hard to pass up exploiting "free" smoke.

TRP's. They're pretty cheap and help immensely with both the retreating behind smoke trick, and covering anticipated avenues of advance.

Place your mines and wire creatively. As was stated above, experienced players will expect mined and wired areas to be covering soft spots. Every once in a while, slap some down in front of a hard spot. If the coverage of these static defenses isn't too dense and appears to be located in a relatively "cold" area, your opponent may be inclined to attempt a breach in these areas.

I'll close by saying this: What a GREAT thread. It's nice to open a topic and really learn something!

[JMcGuire]

I find that you can sometimes use mortar fire to create on-the-fly killzones when the attacker shows up where you didn't expect him -- wait until they're committed, then use the mortars to build a corridor and channel them where you want them. People usually won't run their men directly into area fire (cratered ground with shells still falling makes it conveniently easy to avoid).

Mostly I try this when the attacker is well hidden, I know a rush is coming, and my mortars won't site directly on them.

I also use lines of mortar fire to "nudge" the attacker into especially good killzones, which works really well when the mortar units are not visible to the enemy.

In fact, I'm starting to think mortars are easier to use effectively as defensive weapons. It's like being able to lay down a wall at will.

[Warmaker]

I love defending against an assault. Pretty exciting trying to hold back the floods. Anyhow, here's my favorites. Keep in mind this is from a German perspective.

1.Know the terrain: likely avenues of approach, assembly points, etc.

2.You're gonna be outnumbered anyways, so NEVER string your defenders out too much. This means giving up on an objective or two to hold on to the "big flag."

3.Have an idea on where to fall back to. Example, know where to send the 1st line of defense to assume new fighting positions behind the 2nd line of defense. As it pulls back, the 2nd line provides covering fire as needed. There's only very few cases where you should stand and die fighting at the initial line of defense.

4.Arty. If you can, of varying sizes, from on map 81mm mortars to 105mm. 150mm for a good concentration of enemy troops that begs to be stalled/shattered. The mortars provide a quick response against infantry attacks to stall & suppress them so HMGs can do their magic.

4A.Target Reference Points (TRP's). Not that many here talk about them. Practice with them and you can do some heavy damage. A TRP can drastically cut the arrival time of off-map arty for your FOs. Also it increases the accuracy of all units who remain stationary in their setups. Great for support units like HMGs/ATGs/"Tiger Pillboxes" in a hulldown position. A place where you think the attacker might assume a nifty hulldown position to attack you with? Place a TRP there and watch the soda cans lids pop off when AT fire of all sort seems so accurate that the opponent swears there's cheating going on.

5.Panzers, if at all possible. Quality ones to boot. You can use them as "pillboxes" but learn to use most of them as a mobile reserve to react to bad situations or to mount an opportune counterattack. As much as I would like to try to use a PzKpfw IVH it's obsolete and too frail. Panthers provide excellent mobility, armor, firepower. Tigers though slower, are well armored and provide better soft target killing power than the 75mm's.

5.A. This is more of a personal preference of mine. TDs over ATGs. Yes, you can only get a few number of guns w/ TDs than ATGs but TDs are armored so suppression isn't a problem as much. Also, TDs can provide mobility to shift AT defenses on the whim. Also, TDs are generally cheaper than the Big Cats so it frees them up for reserve actions.

6.Another personal preference. Veteran troops if possible, esp. infantry. For me, it's quality over quantity.

[Andrew H.]

I want to second Banshee's point about it being harder to defend village-type terrain. I can think of two main reasons for this, although there might be more. The primary advantage that I find villages give the attacker is that they negate the defenders' - for lack of a better word - foxhole advantage. That is, as soon as the attacker can get a toe-hold in the village, it's almost always over for the defender because now the attacker's cover is as good as the defenders', and there are a lot more attackers. I recognize, of course, that the attacker does have to reach the village in the first place, but I tend to find that the losses he suffers doing so are not so grievous as to prevent him from winning once he has captured part of the building.

The second reason that villages hamper the defender is that they tend to constrain at least part of the defenders' set-up (unless the map is so felicitous that the defender can completely ignore the presence of the building). In part, the defender has to form a defense around the building to keep the attacker from using it for cover. Also, buildings block line of sight, which is bad for a defender, in most cases, so the defender will have to set up in a way to maximize his line of sight despite the buildings.

Compare this with an attack in a rural/farm terrain type. Because there is no village that the defender must prevent the attacker from getting, the defender can choose a better defensive layout. Often, this layout can be more spread out than it would be defending a village, which reduces the effectiveness of the attacker's artillery. Plus, the advantage of the defender having foxholes vs. the attacker not having foxholes is significant. For example, two squads plus a HMG (in a wheatfield, say) can do a disproportionate amount of damage to an attacking company, while being almost immune to arty below 105mm.

Occasionally, I've found that this set up can make the company almost unfit for further fighting -- one way to do this is have the HMG and one squad near the front of the wheatfield, where they can use long range fire against the advancing attackers. The second squad is kept farther back in the wheatfield (maybe 50m back or so), hidden, where he usually remains unspotted. Often the company will spend several turns shooting at the two units it can see, trying to suppress them; usually this requires heavy weapons. All the while the attacker takes its own casualties. Finally, the two units are suppressed and the attacker moves up a couple of squads, or maybe a platoon, to assault the suppressed units. Unfortunately, as soon as the advancing units get close to the suppressed units, the hidden unit farther back in the wheatfield opens up on them at close range, at best causing severe casualties, but almost always sending them retreating back to where they attacked from. Now the attacking company has to suppress *three* units before it can attack.

The advantage of this set up, of course, is that the defender can have numerous small strongpoints like this across the board, each of which requires a certain amount of concentration for the attacker to take.

But even if the attacker goes by the book and stuns the defenders with 150mm arty before mopping up with the company, theoretically taking few losses, the defender is still in a much better situation than he would be in in the village. First of all, the attacker has used a valuable 150mm firemission and has only affected two squads plus a HMG; typical losses to a defender in the village would be higher because troops are closer together. Second, the attacker does not, by dint of capturing the wheatfield, have cover equal to that of the defender -- he only has three foxholes to put his company in, and, assuming some intelligence on the part of the defender, the next strongpoint will now be able to open fire on the company sitting with no cover in the wheatfield.

It *is* harder for the defender to shift units in more open battles, unless the hills are placed just so. Nevertheless, for the reasons listed above, I find it much easier to defend when I don't have to be the village people.

(Edit) I would also recommend the "probe" type attack to people not interested in doing MEs all the time. IMO, it's more interesting than the straightforward attack, and is also, IMO, a better representation of the most common types of actions in CM's time scale.

[ 04-13-2001: Message edited by: Andrew Hedges ]

[Steve McClaire]

Here are my thoughts on the subject:

-- Make a plan and try to stick to it. For every position you place men in, decide under what conditions you'll fall back, by what route, to where, and how the retreat will be covered. Don't make your plan thinking you will stop the attackers. Plan to give up most of the flags on the map -- I usually pick one or two central flags as my 'Alamo' position (the place to make my last stand). This is the only place I'm normally willing to have my men stand and die to hold.

-- HIDE, but don't HIDE too long. If you wait until the attacker is on top of you, you may get in a few good licks, but you will usually be slaughtered when you try and withdraw. Shoot at the attacker from a distance, and then leave your positions when it looks like he's going to bring overwhelming fire or numbers down on you in the next turn or two. Having men under fire tends to make most people slow down their advance and react to the threat. Be a nuisance. Distract the attacker. Make them deviate from their plan. smile.gif

-- KEEP A RESERVE! Hide at least a few squads and a Company HQ in a central position. Don't jockey them around to react to every threat that appears, and don't commit them to the fighting too early. When the enemy fights his way into a critical part of your main defensive position, pelt him with as much fire as you can (mortars, artillery, and direct HE hopefully) and then counterattack with your reserves. With luck your men will be fresh and have full ammo, while they will be fighting squads that have just taken a beating, have not had time to get in good positions, and are low on ammo. Once the reserve has done it's job, pull it back to the reserve position again. Don't go chasing after fleeing enemy survivors.

[Nabla]

I have only one thing to say: TRPs (target reference points) are the defender's best friends. Just totally stopped an enemy attack using them. You can easily destroy enemy concentrations. Well, if it it's night then it's more difficult.

Note that you can set TRPs outside your setup area.

[Apache]

I haven't read through the whole of this thread so I apoloogise if I am repeating comments above but there are some good articles on tactics/defence at CMHQ in the articles section. Jason Crawley also did a 'German Infantry in the closed defence' article too. If I could use the bloody search facility I would indicate where to find it.

[ckoharik]

I disagree that all assaults should be restricted to 20-30 turns. The whole point of playing an assault is the challenge of stopping a well prepared and determined attack. To say the attacker would only have 20-30 minutes to achieve his goal is somewhat ludicrous.

Any competent commander with such a force advantage should be able to take the object from a defender albeit with the possibility of heavy casualties.

[Clubfoot]

I'll have to agree w/ Panzer BoxB,

My droogs and I typically play Assault/Defend QB's of at least 40 turns. This allows the attacker to recon, probe and attempt to employ feint tactics without feeling hampered by a need to rush. Much more challenging to defend against.

[Windopaene]

Interesting thread, especially as I see a couple of opponents who have beaten me! In my last loss to Panzer Leader, I was the defender. One flag on the left, city on hill in the middle, all the other flags in hilly terrain on the right. Seemed a great defensive setup...

Placed minefields in key spots, one platoon to the left with an AT gun and some MG and zooks. Put a bunch of MG's in the town, in all the good sight spots, all of the rest of my inf and mg's by the flags.

Result, complete and total destruction. He avoided the minefields and my TRP. My zooks and AT gun on the left never had anything to shoot at, the MGs in the city got off most of their ammo before being overrun, (I didn't expect much from them though), and with three or four flags on the right, there wasn't much room for falling back. It was a head scratcher, as I thought I had done all the right things. Back to the drawing board I guess.

But on the other hand, I played a Probe against another poster on this thread, who pretty much wiped out my attacking Brits. An excellent defensive position on the top of a hill, but with an AT pillbox taking out my Stuarts, and a Panther to deal with my Churchill, I was unable to make much headway with my infantry, getting close to two of the flags, but not nearly close enough. He had a reserve I'd guess, though I never really was able to force him to use any defensive tactics, as I don't think he ever had to fall back. His forces did execute a nice infantry counterattack on some squads I got to a building on the top of the hill.

Not really sure what I did wrong in either of these situations, although sometimes I suppose even the best plans fail.
Guess we've just got to keep playing them, and try to learn from our mistakes.

[MrSpkr]

One point I omitted from my previous post -- I almost never place my primary line of resistance in a town or village. It is an obvious focal point for the attacker, cover is poor, and soldiers are too bunched up.

Consider defending in a village against enemy armor attacking at long range. The first thing he will do when he believes you are in the village is call down heavy artillery and use his armor to begin to dismantle the houses. This maximizes the effectiveness of his armor against your infantry because when the building collapses, you take much higher casualties than you might have taken entrenched in woods.

Defending in the village also gives the attacker a pretty good idea as to where your defensive lines begin and end. Again, this allows him to concentrate on the line, then work from one end and roll it up.

Instead, your primary line should be in cover in front of the village if at all possible (and given the space you have to set up in a typical assault scenario, it is almost certainly possible). Sometimes it is fun to go ahead and place a little bit of barbed wire or a roadblock in a position in front of the village (yet behind your primary line of resistance). Put them in places visible from the enemy lines if at all possible. This gives the enemy the impression that the village is indeed your primary defensive line and can lead to errors on his part. There's nothing quite like the feeling you get when an enemy column runs right into your main line and is crushed because your opponent mistook the village for your primary line of resistance!

I usually reserve the village for the final line of defense. This has several advantages. First, it offers your men decent cover and concealment to make the last stand. Second, if you have timed everything right, your opponent will not have nearly as much time to crush the village with long range tank fire or artillery as he would if you had started your defense there. Third, it is much more difficult for a blooded, battered attacker (and he should be if you have done your job right) to make a hasty assault on a village than it is for fresh troops. Finally, if you have sneakly placed (in front of the village) a little barbed wire, a roadblock, maybe even a minefield (AP, not AT) or two, the attacker may not have enough time to either scout out a proper route in or to blow a hole through the obstacles.

Again, just my $0.02 worth.

MrSpkr

[ 04-13-2001: Message edited by: MrSpkr ]

[gengisjon]

Quick question - can you build a second line of defense to fall back into? I.E. a line of foxholes. Or do you have to use on "natural" areas of cover? (I did a couple searches but couldn't find anything - so please direct me to an older thread if I missed something). Also any recommendations on what to use as a second line of defense (if I can't build them) would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.

[Mlapanzer]

I think everyones ideas have merit. The one thing I would add is on defense you MUST be patient. Too many people including me at times want to move units around alot. It is tough to just sit there and let the battle come to you.
One little tactic I like to use if possible is not to try and hold all the OB's but to hide a small counter attacking force that can come in late in the game and retake some over run OB's that are away from the main attack. Since most players will try to hold OB's with as little residual forces as possible it is possible to retake them with some weaker armor or 1/2 tracks with Infantry. I have used this tactic to gain a draw were none seemed possible and even a victory.
But it is still very very hard to defend and it takes a lot of time and practice.

[MrSpkr]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gengisjon:
Quick question - can you build a second line of defense to fall back into? I.E. a line of foxholes. Or do you have to use on "natural" areas of cover? (I did a couple searches but couldn't find anything - so please direct me to an older thread if I missed something). Also any recommendations on what to use as a second line of defense (if I can't build them) would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Can you BUILD one? No. But What I am talking about with my three zone defense is really something you do at set up time, so building is irrelevant. Also, as mentioned previously, my final line of defense (generally unmanned or very lightly manned at the start of the battle) is in the village or cover around the victory location.

One tactic you can use to get more foxholes is to split your squads into teams. Place a few teams in areas you don't plan to hold initially, but will get to later. They will start out in foxholes; then you can run them up to reunite with their platoon. You have to be careful and keep them concealed, however, or they will reveal your primary line of resistance to the enemy.

MrSpkr

[MrSpkr]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mlapanzer:
One little tactic I like to use if possible is not to try and hold all the OB's but to hide a small counter attacking force that can come in late in the game and retake some over run OB's that are away from the main attack. Since most players will try to hold OB's with as little residual forces as possible it is possible to retake them with some weaker armor or 1/2 tracks with Infantry. I have used this tactic to gain a draw were none seemed possible and even a victory. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Devious and gamey. I like it!

MrSpkr

[ 04-13-2001: Message edited by: MrSpkr ]

[Mr. Johnson--]

PANZER LEADER!!! The attack/defend values are not what the game shipped with! The vaules have been tweaked. And I think give a tremendous advantage to the attacker. He can make more then one mistake. If everyone relizes this and agrees that a -10% for attacker is more challenging for the attacker, we can start having fun attack games. Not just lame MEs where both sides just kick the snot out of each other and both sides lose.

[Mlapanzer]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MrSpkr:
Devious and gamey. I like it!

MrSpkr

[ 04-13-2001: Message edited by: MrSpkr ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't want to get into a gamey not gamey argument. But I concider this keeping the other guy honest.

:D :D
If he garrisons his taken OB's properly it won't work. This then has the effect of weakening his attacking force. This garrisoning of taken OB's is what slower MG's and towed guns are good for. One time I garrisoned an OB with 2 flametrowers. He counter attacked with some beat up infantry and got toasted. redface.gif Pun intended.

[ADAman]

Banshee wrote, "But the average, village map (even with heavy forest selected) is still far too open for a solid defense..."

This seems to go against my conceptions of what one would want in the real world. I wasn't a ground grunt but in the infantry training I did have, attacking across open ground was not one of those tactics they recommended. Assuming Banshee's correct with what works in CM, this would seem an area that might be revisted by BTS some time down the road.

[Banshee]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ADAman:
Banshee wrote, "But the average, village map (even with heavy forest selected) is still far too open for a solid defense..."

This seems to go against my conceptions of what one would want in the real world. I wasn't a ground grunt but in the infantry training I did have, attacking across open ground was not one of those tactics they recommended. Assuming Banshee's correct with what works in CM, this would seem an area that might be revisted by BTS some time down the road.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you look at WW2 in europe, where were we held up the most? Places like Huertgen Forest, Normandy Hedgerows, Mount Cassino in italy, etc places where we had limited maneuver room, airpower was neutralized by terrain, LOS for artillery observation was limited by terrain, etc. When we had to go village to village across your standard german/French countryside, we did it pretty easily. All of our firepower could be brought to bear. I think CM models this accurately. What you are thinking of from an infantry point of view is that you are supposed to advance under as much cover and concealment as possible. But you want as much supporting weapons and overwatch as you can get, which is what the open maps give you.

[MrSpkr]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Banshee:
If you look at WW2 in europe, where were we held up the most? Places like Huertgen Forest, Normandy Hedgerows, Mount Cassino in italy, etc places where we had limited maneuver room, airpower was neutralized by terrain, LOS for artillery observation was limited by terrain, etc. When we had to go village to village across your standard german/French countryside, we did it pretty easily. All of our firepower could be brought to bear. I think CM models this accurately. What you are thinking of from an infantry point of view is that you are supposed to advance under as much cover and concealment as possible. But you want as much supporting weapons and overwatch as you can get, which is what the open maps give you.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Umm - I don't think that is entirely accurate or the point.

Monte Cassino was, I think, a different issue entirely.

AI agree witht eh Normandy Hedgerow - however, the speed of our subsequent advance had as much to do with the German inability to reform the line as it did with the type of terrain. The germans in late July and August 1944 simply were in no shape to form an adequate defensive line once we stretched the length of the front with the Normandie breakout.

As to the Huertgen forest, keep in mind that many of these villages in the ofrest had large cleared areas on their outskirts for farming and grazing purposes. Certainly there was more cover than in, say, north-central France, but it was not wall to wall trees right up to the edge of the village.

MrSpkr

[Banshee]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MrSpkr:
Umm - I don't think that is entirely accurate or the point.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A) what part of the point did I miss? the person I was replying to said that he though advancing in the open was a bad thing. I explained how his perception was inaccurate since he was applying it to the scope of all of CM when he was talking purely of infantry tactics

B) What was inaccurate? I think you mean the stuff below,to which I will respond .
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

Monte Cassino was, I think, a different issue entirely.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Big huge mountain range which limited maneuverability and the inability (due to terrain) to bring armor to bear against enemy positions. How is this a different issue entirely. Terrain was key, even though LOS was not directly blocked (i.e. you could see the whole mountain), LOS to the direct german positions was blocked and/or out of range of direct fire.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>


AI agree witht eh Normandy Hedgerow - however, the speed of our subsequent advance had as much to do with the German inability to reform the line as it did with the type of terrain. The germans in late July and August 1944 simply were in no shape to form an adequate defensive line once we stretched the length of the front with the Normandie breakout.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


When did we "break out"? When we got outside the restrictive terrain, thus making a cohesive defense much harder. The plains of france and germany (and the steppes of russia) make for fast advances. Defensive lines were usually attempted at places like river crossings , fixed fortifications (sigfried line), big cities (Aachen is a good example), and heavy forests if possible (Huertgen). Where terrain maximizes defenders advantages. My point still stands and is valid so I'm not sure what the issue is, The defender was out in the open, where our airpower, firepower, and maneuverability could be brought to bear. In close in terrain this is much more difficult.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

As to the Huertgen forest, keep in mind that many of these villages in the ofrest had large cleared areas on their outskirts for farming and grazing purposes. Certainly there was more cover than in, say, north-central France, but it was not wall to wall trees right up to the edge of the village.

MrSpkr<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Even when we were able to get to the village of Huertgen (i may be wrong about the name of the first big village we took, I'll have to dig out my copy of bloody forest) our forces were driven back. The terrain was still limiting the ability to reinforce/resupply, ability to find and fix the enemy, etc. Remember we drove the germans out of the village , but were subsequently driven back (when WE were in the village). Thus my earlier point of saying villages are not suitable places to defend is still valid. The maximum amount of damage that was inflicted on us was IN the close terrain of the forest. So im still not seeing your issue with my comments.

Edit: fixing many spelling errors lol, dont worry there is more! ;)

[ 04-13-2001: Message edited by: Banshee ]

[MrSpkr]

Oh geez - I misread your position entirely (that's what happens when you start off with a Guiness right away)!

smile.gif

Withdraw former objections - you are pretty much on the money!

MrSpkr (hiccup)

[Banshee]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MrSpkr:
Oh geez - I misread your position entirely (that's what happens when you start off with a Guiness right away)!

smile.gif

Withdraw former objections - you are pretty much on the money!

MrSpkr (hiccup)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol it is a loooong thread, I am just wishing I had a Guiness too!

[Chupacabra]

One tip for defending in village/city settings: use the troops that were designed to operate in such settings, for example SMG-heavy and pioneer units. That's what they're there for, after all.

[MrSpkr]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chupacabra:
One tip for defending in village/city settings: use the troops that were designed to operate in such settings, for example SMG-heavy and pioneer units. That's what they're there for, after all.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Definitely true; however, in most assault scenarios, the enemy will have enough firepower to simply level buildings. But, if you HAVE to defend in an urban setting, then of course you are correct.

MrSpkr

[Banshee]

Kind of a side point to what Chup is saying has anyone received Gerbisjager troops through computer picks, I can't say I ever have, is this another situation like not getting TRP's when computer buys or am I imagining this one?

[Adam L]

Ambush, Ambush, Ambush.

Use indirect means to suppress scouts when possible. Small teams on OP work too.

Mass your firepower on his main effort once he makes one. That may mean all your artillery.

Use maneuver elements (armor and infantry) to counter attack him where he is weak at the decisive moment.

These few points are all a beginner really needs to know to start defending. All the rest is timing.

If you really want to enjoy CM, start thinking about the situation beyond the engagement. For example, start asking yourself what consequences one will suffer if one is fixed by the enemy. Sure, you may stop his attack but if you can't move then there is a second ecehlon moving on your flank beyond this engagement.

Many players are defeated in CM without even knowing it.

I'll probably be starting a BCE (Brigade Combat Exercise) for people generally interested in learning tactics and working in an environment greater than just CM engagements (thus fitting a context to each game) this summer. Historical TOE's will be used. Will need 10 players, 3 battalion commanders per side, one brigade commander per side, one reconaissance squadron commander per side.

Will be using the excellent COCAT software and CMMC rules. See www.combatmission.com (http://www.combatmission.com) CMMC for more on those.

- Adam

[Jarmo]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pillar:

I'll probably be starting a BCE (Brigade Combat Exercise) for people generally interested in learning tactics and working in an environment greater than just CM engagements (thus fitting a context to each game) this summer. Historical TOE's will be used. Will need 10 players, 3 battalion commanders per side, one brigade commander per side, one reconaissance squadron commander per side.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh! Me! Me! Me!
I want in! :eek:

[Stixx]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Banshee:
has anyone received Gerbisjager troops through computer picks?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No i haven't but i play against a bloke (Guderian) who uses them regulary. Last night one Gerbisjager(Mountain troops) whiped out a complete U.S platoon with only 1 casualty. Not bad for a 5? man squad.

[Londoner]

Some good points here. Heres my 2p the day.

As the defender you will typically have less armour than your opponent. DONT force or be forced into an armoured engagment early. Let your AT guns go to work first, remember your opponent has to take those VLs. At some point hes gonna have to come down from those nice HD postions and get dirty, esp. if he thinks you've still got hidden tanks near the VLs.

When on the defence, using tanks as pillboxes is ineffective IMO, keep the enemy guessing. Also, even most German heavies will get KOed frontally from a relatively cheap allied TD. Keep your armour in reserve, only commit it when your opponent makes a major thrust, endangering a part of your line. Timing, as mentioned is critical though.

Most maps gives the defender the option of defending at least some VLs while being out of enemy long range LOS. DONT be baited out, dont display ANY of your assets until your fairly sure you can bag a decent number of enemy troops before the enemy can react. IMO the best way to KO enemy armour is getting it as its moving, not when its sat on that hill HD, in overwatch. Make that tank move, dont give it easy targets!

[ 04-14-2001: Message edited by: Londoner ]

[ 04-14-2001: Message edited by: Londoner ]

[ 04-14-2001: Message edited by: Londoner ]

[ 04-14-2001: Message edited by: Londoner ]

[Londoner]

Also I'd be very careful about placing infantry ahead of your MLR as mentioned earlier. Unless youve got good LOS from heavy weapons to their area they will simply get cut off and destroyed for little enemy loss.

[Warmaker]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Londoner:
Also I'd be very careful about placing infantry ahead of your MLR as mentioned earlier. Unless youve got good LOS from heavy weapons to their area they will simply get cut off and destroyed for little enemy loss.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Which is why you place a split squad(basically a 5-man Fire Team) as observation posts to scope out enemy advances & strengths, and if possible ambush w/ opportunity. To do this information gathering, hide your troops as much as possible. LMG42's and sharpshooters are well suited for this since they're cheap and small in numbers(harder to detect). If you want to be a real jerk, place a cheap, expendable Puppchen along with those Observation posts to harass enemy armor. A cheap 20mm FlaK gun can be used to deal with annoying HTs. They're cheap so their loss won't be felt much. But your split squads should fall back to their parent units before things get too hectic.

We all agree that numbers and firepower play huge roles, but also remember that information/intelligence is just about or if not the most important factor. Poor intelligence gathering will increase your time to react and the chance to commit errors. Knowing the force composition of your enemy also helps in your decision making.

[Londoner]

I agree m8, intel' is critical. However, in my experience, on the defence there is no need for this recon/screening force as you suggest, unless your were defending on a heavily wooded map. As long as you have at least one unit in a 2nd floor building or on a hill, you can get the gist of any large scale enemy movement without having to sacrifice anything.

[Stixx]

You have both got good points.

You don't need many units to act as scouts when you are defending. A unit or 2 with LOS of the most likely lines of attack is about all you need.

Something i have started doing on Large maps with a large force is making a couple of light platoons. No Mortars, MG's, Zook's, PIAT's etc. Just 2-3 rifle teams and HQ. Use them as scouts they are fast don't tire quickly and to an extent expendable.

Scout cars etc are good for this role aswell but it's hard to sneak a AC over the top of a hill undetected.

By stripping the platoon of all it's support units you also end up with a couple of Heavy platoons. Mount them on your Armour or just keep them moving behind your main line and you have alot of firepower when you need it.

Anyway i know it's a little off topic and some of you probarly already this. Just thought i'd share it with you. ;)

[MrSpkr]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pillar:
I'll probably be starting a BCE (Brigade Combat Exercise) for people generally interested in learning tactics and working in an environment greater than just CM engagements (thus fitting a context to each game) this summer. Historical TOE's will be used. Will need 10 players, 3 battalion commanders per side, one brigade commander per side, one reconaissance squadron commander per side.

Will be using the excellent COCAT software and CMMC rules. See www.combatmission.com (http://www.combatmission.com) CMMC for more on those.

- Adam<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oh geez that sounds great. I would LOVE to join in.

MrSpkr

[The Commissar]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pillar:

I'll probably be starting a BCE (Brigade Combat Exercise) for people generally interested in learning tactics and working in an environment greater than just CM engagements (thus fitting a context to each game) this summer. Historical TOE's will be used. Will need 10 players, 3 battalion commanders per side, one brigade commander per side, one reconaissance squadron commander per side.

Will be using the excellent COCAT software and CMMC rules. See www.combatmission.com (http://www.combatmission.com) CMMC for more on those.

- Adam<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sounds like something I would enjoy, Pillar. If you have any spots left open, Ill be there.

Cheers!

[Adam L]

Glad to see some interest already. Go ahead and email me and I'll put you on the player list.

I am giving priority to those who participated in the "CMRPG" last year (which was never finished), but I haven't been able to contact many of them.

Looking forward to seeing all your names in my mail box. smile.gif

[MrSpkr]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Londoner:
I agree m8, intel' is critical. However, in my experience, on the defence there is no need for this recon/screening force as you suggest, unless your were defending on a heavily wooded map. As long as you have at least one unit in a 2nd floor building or on a hill, you can get the gist of any large scale enemy movement without having to sacrifice anything.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I disagree with this strategy. If your opponent has half a brain, as soon as he realizes that there are two story buildings with lines of sight to his units in or behind your set up area, he will concentrate on levelling those buildings. This denies you needed intelligence AND reduces the risk of artillery barrages to him.

The best way is still to have snipers or half-squads on a forward line. They can run like heck before the enemy can overwhelm them (the withdraw command is wonderful for this) and provide you lots of good intel.

BTW M8 - I LOVE the Puppchen idea. I may have to try that next time out!

MrSpkr

[LimShady]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pillar:

Will be using the excellent COCAT software and CMMC rules. See www.combatmission.com (http://www.combatmission.com) CMMC for more on those.

- Adam<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pardon my ignorance but what is COCAT?

Chris

[Adam L]

COCAT is the software used to keep track of units, orders, movement etc. on digital maps with the CMMC. For more information, go to www.combatmission.com (http://www.combatmission.com) and click on "Meta Campaign."

As for reconaissance, e.g. half squads in the front line vs. observation posts in buildings, there really is no solid "correct" method. Just make sure your approach allows you to identify the enemy main effort and if at all possible deny him reconnaissance information (poke out his eyes.)

Mostly I use a very mobile screening force but if the terrain is relatively open I may use long range spotting and indirect means, such as mortars to suppress enemy reconaissance probes. When it comes down to it though, you'll always need some infantry in the OP/SRE if you really want a clear picture. There are many elements of friction in the "distant spotting" type of observation which will disrupt it, such as long range HE and smoke. Therefore, it cannot be relied upon (though it may still be the only opportunity at the time, situation pending.)

When attacking of course it is even more important to send forth small teams to develop the situation.

During World War One, Rommel when in command of two companies of infantry would send forth scouts with telephone cable. They would move forward in small armed teams (what in CM would be split squads) and report back what they found. One advantage was that if a Scout found an opportunity for exploition, the Rommel units could simply follow the telephone cable to the scout unit and swiftly exploit the opportunity.

- Adam