Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Hi, everybody. My name is Ketch. (all choras, "Hi, Ketch") And I send my tanks behind enemy lines unsupported. (lose it, break down and start sobbing like a new born babe that just realized it was left on a doorstop.)

In my current campaign I've already lost a couple of AFVs to the AAA and ATGs that always haunt the rear areas. I'm getting better at not sending my tanks to uncertain death, but my infantry always gets left behind and if I load them up, (whether on tanks, trucks or HT) there ride gets blown out from under them and they go running for the hills so I lose more men AND the AFV. I just tried taking a sniper with me for support (they can hide better, scout things out, etc) but he got mowed down by a couple of MMGs. While I can wait a few turns to get the objectives at the back of the map, I would really like to be able to flank the forward elements and come at them from behind, not to mention raid the artilary park that keeps on routeing my troops.

I guess that my biggest question is, how do you get it to work and are there any perferred ways to get support for those units that you want to send through the enemy's rear areas?

(FYI - I generally play on 80X80 map with a battallion sized fource as it allows me room enough to flank the enemy, but not so much that I am freaking out about leaving too many holes in my line.)

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Mr Ketch Sir you like to live on the edge. The question you should be asking yourself is could the AI do it to you without loss? The AI to tries to stop you doing it but its not a goal to aim for till part way into the battle & taking troops with you is important as they see the guns a lot better. If the guns are capable of destroying your armour creating a corridor with smoke can help restrict the area & let troops run up. Also once troops up as far as possible they ac drop smoke to protect any vehicles. Patience is the key but sometimes taking slight losses to get behind a force can be worth it as destruction can be dealt quiclkly as they run into your arms. Your sniper cant hide better if he unloads insight of the enemy so drop smoke just in front of where he gets out. MBT with TI good ATGMs & fair ranged RPGs this can be a tricky thing to pull off.
___________________________________
99.999....% Of an atom consists of nothing, its totally empty so the Universe only just exists.
If you could remove this space the entire human race would fit in a grapefruit.
If you could harness this power the atom bomb would look like a matchstick

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

My best suggestion is to dedicate some sort of mounted recon and support to your flanking elements. The AI will always have some sort of AT or AA guns in the rear and infantry if it's a delay or defend. Odds are, you won't spot those units until they fire so lead out with mounted recon and support. Better to lose an inexpensive half-track or armored car than a tank with an experienced crew. If you send in unsupported tanks, expect to lose some.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Hi Ketch,

When done right, and with a little luck, a few AFVs to the enemy rear can be very rewarding and a lot of fun. Of course, you shouldn't expect a high potential pay-off without a little risk.

My most successful behind the lines operations were achieved with stealth (at east initially) not fire power.

Therefore, large maps (compared to force size) lend themselves to success, and maps with plenty of cover but where you can still move quickly.

You must consider where you are likely to come across enemy units (especially playing against humans) and choose to avoid these areas or approach from an advantagous direction with caution.

Use fast moving vehicles.

Have a place in mind where you want to reach before being discovered.

Choose the longer (covered) safer route to get there.

Use a fast armoured car for point. Other vehicles follow the same path, so you're less likely to be discovered.

If you take infantry along, be prepared to unload them, move them forward to engage and KO ATG or whatever, then load back up and move on.

If you get caught in a heavy firefight, and you're not near your objective. Just disengage, load back up and move out; take another even longer route this time. It may be a couple of turns before your opponent (assuming human) realizes you're gone; and this can cause even more panic and confusion for him, than if you were still fighting him.

When behind enemy lines, 'hit and run' tactics will keep your men the most safe and have the biggest psychological impact.

Your enemy may have to completely reshuffle his forces to react to...
You know what they say 'order, counter-order, disorder'.

The size of the force you send behind lines, depends on your objectives, the map, and what you can spare. There's pros and cons to small and large forces.

Here's screen shot of one of my large and successful sorties behind the lines against a human opponent.

http://img136.imageshack.us/my.php?i...attle8civ9.jpg

You can read about this battle here:

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=31135

(it's post #8, Battle 8)


cheers,
Cross

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Without a doubt, very sage advice :bow:

It the given scenario, extra care will have to be taken to get to the rear of an battalion sized enemy on an 80x80 map.

Much depends on the opponent. The AI is not likely to react as much to units in its rear area, but a human player is likely to have fits. And Cross does have experience in PBEM games :)

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Thank you all of your advise. I'm looking forward to applying your tips and strategies in my next battle (the current one is, at the moment, too engaged in other ways). If anybody else wants to chime in, I would love to have your two bits.

Imp, You raise a very valid point. I always try to have a flexible defense for my rear units, but I do need to work better on my screening my flanks from those annoying scouts and AT teams that try to slip by. I like the corridor of smoke idea. Thanks.

RERomine, I am hesitant of mounted units, but more because I need to work on my tactics with them than any ineffeciency on their part. I don't expect loses when I send in unsupported tanks - it's a given. I don't like losing any units, but I can definatly see the advantage of a support HT being sacrificed for the "greater good." Thanks.

Cross, I remember reading that AAR and enjoying it. I try to implement several of the suggestions you gave (I'm usally pretty good about using the terrain to my advantage), but I hadn't really thought of disengaging (and thus cause more confusion) in favor of flanking the flank. Thanks.


Allow me to elaborate more on the most common of my problems in the event that it raises any more discussion. The situation - midway through the battle after my forces have clashed and meshed witht the enemy, the majority of the enemy is pinned or running. I send my tanks after those retreating while my infantry slogs through the sea of dead or dying humanity picking off the half squads, scouts, snipers, and AT teams that are lost in the fog of war. My tanks, in pursuit of the retreating elements blunder into a nest of ATGs/AAA/AT teams that are hiding in the rear area. Or I send my tanks after a plume of smoke less not far from their position and blunder into a nest etc.

I know that patience is the key, but at the same time I don't want the fleeing units to get into a calm stretch of map and rally back. I'd just as soon wipe them off the face of the earth while their running than have to do it when they're charging me, firing. Any additional thoughts, or do I just need to learn the dreaded patience?

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Isn't that more a diving in the wedge strategy or outflanking?
If you are getting that much in your face infantry,increaseing map size would be the way to go as Cross has said.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Btw, i try to keep my core force 2000-2500 never more on a 100x100 map size so flanking is possible.
If i decide to increase my core, then i will inch up map size as well.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

If you are not talking about going after his arty park but cutting off runners keep a small reserve behind main force. You can commit if you need to but the goal is as follows. Find the enemy engage him perhaps taking location into acount. Push forward only to close range so effective not to push back.
Now hold him even considering droping back everywhere except the weak spot which you hit with everything including the reserve. There job is to advance & when you judge it safe go round & cut off. If you think this will bring fire from guns further back smoke them out. If you have a reasonable amount of transport & face a large infantry force smoke to screen to a suitable size that means you can route most visible units & send transports in to unload adjacent preferably behind for rapid point blank destruction.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

unsupported tanks behind enemy lines and how to get at arty parks.
Not geting bogged down i think was the point of this thread.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Usupported tanks?behind enemy lines?got a single word to this, suicide, tank with no inf support gets assaulted, hit by inf-at, atgm, atg, whatever you can find in the enemy's rear area, i'd mount cheap grunts on tanks and have a few ACs or HTs(esp if more infantry in there) with them, even though it may wreak havoc on the enemy's defensive line, it can be costly, yes, i love infantry, nothing else can eat so many shells, just keep moving fast and have arty(mortars?) falling around your tanks and you'll get through it

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

If we're talking about chasing down fleeing units, then it sounds like you've already know what you're doing wrong, and are getting a bit carried away in the moment.

It may help to remind yourself of your objectives, which likely isn't to anihilate every last man.

Damaged units may rally, but if you've beaten them back once, chances are you'll do it even better the second time.

I find fighting campaigns encourages me to play more conservatively, as I'm not as willing to risk good crews in a foolhardy 'charge of the light brigade'.

If you do see a good opportunity to use armour against fleeing infantry, try to drop smoke beyond the fleeing units, in front of likely ATG sites. Artillery is often down to smoke rounds by this stage of the battle anyway.


Another thought on map size

I first learned to play against an opponent who loved huge maps. So it was normal, and doesn't bother me, to have gaps in the line and vulnerable flanks. Any disadvantage is the same for your opponent; it's just another style of play.

On a large map with limited forces, it's the objectives which dictate company positions, and where you put what. This encourages a much more strategic rather than just tactical battle. Of course, it helps to have a decent amount of mobility in this sort of fight.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Yeap!!!
( Patience grasshopper:)
It's not just a game. It's a character builder! !!!
The proper thing to do is plan your advance/assault with the "constraint" that 1/3 or 1/4 of your force will be in "reserve mode" either to exploit gaps in the frontline, flanking etc OR reinforce an attack that has gotten bogged down OR dealing with an aggressive counter attack.
This practically means that a sizeable chunk of your forces must not be commited until midgame! And that takes alot of character indeed!:)

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Just for sake of clarity, I typically don't raid into the enemy rear area. I move my whole core into their rear. Support units punch a hole and core elements exploit the gap, leaving nothing in my own rear area. The enemy is welcome to take it and search for something to engage. I've seen the AI with units cruising along my back edge and finding nothing. This is only works if I'm advancing or assaulting and I would never try it against a person.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Should try it sometime RER,Strategy! Rommel always used his army and panzer's for the "go for broke" flanking maneuver and it worked! until Hitler bleeded him dry for his Russian campaign.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Lastly,why fight in a small battle box anyway?.
Realistically would you have map constraints on a real battlefield?

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

I guess in many real life WWII situations you would have a battalion to your left and right, which would be your operational constraint.

So smaller 'boxes' could represent a more densely defended front, with larger boxes simulating the more spacious battlefields.

For example, when fighting in say North Africa 1941 you may want to fight on a huge map to make it more realistic (unless you were replicating a battle over a specific airfield or feature); and in Normandy 44 a smaller map to force size ratio may keep your battalion in realistic proximity.

But this is one of the great things about SP, and why I never get bored with it. There's an unlimited number of things we can adjust and change. Map and force size can certainly have a large impact on the style of battle that develops.

cheers,
Cross

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Re map size its been discussed elsewhere but I agree with Cross in most cases your map size should correspond to the size of your force. You are tasked with this bit of front & other units are on either side of you dealing with theres.
Vs a human changing the size adds variety as you both adapt.
Vs the AI once you start getting to big real estate vs units involved the advantage goes very much to the human. You are spread out but so is the AI but the big diffrence is you hopefully exploit this well by getting localised force superiority while the AI does not react well to this keeping pretty much to the plan.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Well over 3 years ago, I allowed the AI to pick ATG in the advance and attack (the pick had not done it when "going forwards" before) but at a reduced chance from the defence.

That was deliberate, to let it protect its rear areas from any unsupported armoured attacks.

Cheers
Andy

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Thank you all! I've known that there has been a lot that I needed to learn about strategy and tactics and this helps put me on a good track. There is much that I don't think of and miss (as is evedent in this thread, I'm sure), so thank you again. I'd love to keep this discussion going.

Additional thoughts:

I like the mortar idea and have used it before which is one reason why I don't use it much anymore. I imobilized one of my own tanks with a mortar shell. It probablly didn't help that it was a 100mm mortar. I studied in the school that when it comes to artillary, the bigger the better. However, I've identified the uses and needs for smaller caliber ART. What is a good size for mortaring your own tanks?
I also agree about the infantry, but have found that unsupported infantry get chewed up by ART and AFV in the open. I'm trying to work on my combined arms as I tend to swing to extremes.

I think one of my problems (in addition to the ones previously mentioned) is that I make "anihilating every last man" one of my objectives. I'll work on that. Thanks for the reminder.


Not a bad idea. What organization do you normaly have when you hit the rear area? For example, your set up your forces: recon up front, tanks and infantry main body, mobile reserve in rearish area of main body and then just press forward maintaining the spacing between the recon and body.
Or, after you hit the enemy do you fold around his flanks and penitrate his line at weak spots letting the units that penitrate in force ravage the rear? Let me put it another way, do you advance like a bulldozer or like water?

The reason I ask is because I'm curious how you keep from losing too many units to the rear forces. As I've related, I'm always losing the units that penitrate the line. I understand that good recon can help with this, but how do you set it up? A basic thought for me is to regroup my forces after sending the enemy packing and reestablish the scouts (which ever ones are left) and basicly begin another advance against the rear units. Any thoughts or personal experiences?

(Crap this has gotten long! Sorry about that. Kudos if you make it down this far.)

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Usually, I find the bulldozer works better when attacking. It's easier to defend them attack, so a half competent opponent can make you pay a high price (too high) as you steadily advance across the board.

Most military colleges will probably tell you that you need a three to one advantage to prosecute a successful attack (rule of thumb).

In the world of wargames, three infantry sections 'always' beat one infantry section. That doesn't mean I lose one of my three and he loses his one; but the three overwhelm the one, and the three take minimal casualties.

SP battles are often fought against equal forces, so to shift the odds in your favour you must plan an attack in a specific geographic area (choose an area that gives you the advantage); and bring your combined arms forces to bear in this place.

The beauty of SP is that your opponent can't see your build up. Hold off the attack until enough units are in place to suddenly apply overwhelming force.

Don't bunch your forces up and let enemy artillery turn your brilliant planning into a disaster; but place your forces close enough to one another where they give mutual fire support.

Remember 3:1, you want three of your units firing at one of his, or rather your opponent's unit has to try and fire at three different targets. This will actually give you a much better than 3 to 1 chance of success.

I don't actually try to have a 3:1 advantage, but I do try to overwhelm a weaker defense with superior fire power. The better the odds, the better the odds. :confused:

I'll attach a SP tactics doc I wrote a while ago. It's called 'Top Ten PBEM Mistakes'; and is geared towards human opponents, but much applies to AI battles.


cheers,
Cross

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

1) for danger close on armour only forces then I would go for 60mm (if you have the range) or 81mm mortars. Or 76mm arty and field guns, or infantry guns - your 75mm IG might have more reach than your 8cm mortar.

- the idea is NOT to drop on your boys, bar strays, but to pound the box you intend to go through next turn, then move the belt of fire and repeat. You may want an armoured OP vehicle with the force to shift arty further by having LOS to the pounded ground, as LOS to the impact zone is now critical, otherwise you will only get a shift of a hex or so without unacceptable delays (or will need more arty and accept that those on a long shift will get > 1.0 delay, and have to plan ahead more).

2)A pure tank penetration is likely to run into problems without grunts having eyes on the ground.

- best to have a platoon of APC with the tank coy, following behind (e.g. with the reserve tank platoon or coy HQ).

- Don't use snipers as drop-off riders, they have nil survival value if hosed off by MG fires and are less value as reactive armour than scout teams. But they can be useful if you leave them behind in overwatch, they have long range weapons and can deal with a discoverd AT gun. But a sniper is only useful when dismounted and unseen - so drop him off in cover behind a contour or building or wood, an let him walk forwards next turn before moving the armour and let him have a look-see first.

- If you intend to use small rider teams then use 3-4 man scout teams or inf-AT teams. Minimum size 2, but 3-4 better and size 0. At least 2 elements per tank platoon.

Small teams cost less MP to drop off and pick up. So drop some off each end-turn and see what happens. maybe they will draw fires, well that is information. Next turn, pick them up and trundle off. Do not worry if some are in retreat mode and cannot be rallied. Be prepared to leave passenger scout rider teams behind, to follow the advance on foot if they have to e.g once rallied. They may see things like flank attacks behind you.

I happily drop off non-command scout or AT teams behind a pure tank advance like a little trail of breadcrumbs :)!.

Actually the breadcrumb trail of little scout OP teams left behind a mobile advance as security elements is a rather good idea, since it gives you an over-watched corridor that you can then use to retreat back through or send reinforcements down.

I like the UK carrier section as a drop-off behind an advancing force - they can take over a hill, village or small wood and put 3 scout/inf-at teams on the edges looking out and the carriers can wait in cover or move to give MG support or pick ups as required. often I will do this a turn or 3 before the advancing tank company is due to go through the area. By then the carrier section has either cleared the box, or bumped into things. Unless you stupidly deploy all out in the open and buck nekkid to enemy fires then a contact on a carrier section will usually only lose an element or 2 rather than the entire section, and they are cheap anyway. No worries, there will be a second carrier scout section with the tanks - the 2 carrier sections should be leapfrogging through each other. 2 leapfrogging carrier scout sections and one supporting pair of armoured cars (Daimlers say) preparing the corridor of advance for a tank coy is a good idea.

Andy

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

In an assault, support units (engineers) lead out to breach the obstacles. Initially, the engineers move out alone because they will be delayed at the obstacles and draw artillery. The core moves out attempting to arrive in time to exploit the breach just as it opens, but after enemy artillery has started falling. Once the incoming mail starts, you can alter your advance to avoid the impact zone. People shift artillery, but the AI doesn't seem to do so. This doesn't mean the AI won't have uncommitted artillery to still bring in.

Recon units, followed by armor, half-track mounted infantry, SPAs, SPAAs, etc., breach the gap. It's important to move fast, because the AI will target the lead elements with artillery as soon as they are spotted. The lead elements will be clear of the targetted area, but the rear of the formation could get beat on if the movement is too slow.

My forces attempt to approach the objectives from the flank or rear and close to within 10-20 hexes. One company of infantry will dismount at covered/conceiled locations and advance on the objectives. Targets identified by this infantry will be engaged by the infantry, artillery or my armor as appropriate. One mounted company of infantry is held in reserve.

If the situation is under control, I'll push the reserve on to other objectives with some tanks I peal off from supporting the first company. There will always be casualties, but I tend to keep them away from my armor.

This method isn't always practical. Terrain and time are the determining factors.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Cross read your Top Ten Tips, nice & clear & must say that pretty much covers it.
The message is combined arms & local superiority in numbers punch well above there weight as you have far more options.
It all applies to the AI but you can relax spreading thinly. Use it as a balancing tool if you like getting the job done with what makes it a fun game. It speeds up play as cover more area & if disaster strikes gives good practice for regrouping.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Thanks for the compliment Imp.

I must admit I haven't played much against the AI for several years, and when I do I don't take it too seriously. Having far too much fun PBEM.

Human opponents start to get predictable. I don't mean in boring way, no not at all, but predictable in a fascinating way. It reminds me of what I've often read in WWII books about how experienced troops could often tell what the enemies response was likely to be.

For example: In my current battle I placed an anti-tank gun in a building with a good field of fire towards a likely enemy approach. Sure enough a scout vehicle trundles towards the ATG and gets brewed up with one shot.

Now I'm quite sure my opponent didn't 'spot' my ATG, but I'm also quite sure that he's guessed what building it's in, and I figured his likely response would be an artillery stonk.

So I quickly loaded up the ATG to its nearby carrier and moved it down the road a few hundred yards to set up somewhere else. Sure enough, a couple of turns later and 12cm rounds are falling all over the vacated building. :D

Am I worried he may read this post? Not really, he may figure it's deliberate mis-information and I'm just trying to get him to prematurely call of his artillery strike. ;)

Love this game.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

In SPWAW I sometimes used a mixture of BT-7s and motorcycle infantry against the AI to raid the enemy rear. A motorcyle platoon would probe the front to see if the area I had chosen for the crossing was not too heavily defended, looking for ATGs in particular. Then if positive I would rush in the tanks and the remaining motorcycles. Once in the rear the motorcycles would look for artillery and such, which the tanks would then blast into oblivion. Tanks would also help the motorcycles against MGs and such they ran into.
Great fun, though probably not cost effective at all.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

For those of that are interested in military tactic and history the "Schwerpunkt" are the way I do it.

Punch a hole in the enemy line and poor through with your units.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

From a defensive standpoint, this is where the 'second line of defense' comes in. This was often built around anti-tank guns, which is the problem that the OP is running into.

It sounds like Andy has programmed the AI to use this defense so some extent.

The idea is that your second line of defense will hold up the breakthrough long enough to allow you to bring in reinforcements to contain the problem.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Quite a lot actually make the rookie mistake of chasing running units at your peril. You need to scout & give chase not just charge as running into range of a group of 6-10 guns is not uncommon meaning you can lose much more than you gain.
Can be more problamatic than most humans as they tend to commit everything forgetting about defence in depth.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

The AI is willing to have defensive units deployed and leave them there, whereas a human often cannot stop himself moving things about for the sake of it. Soon, everything is committed or at least out of place.

It is therefore vital to have an uncommitted reserve, especially in PBEM games against another human.

This one is already in the "Military Quotations" section of the GG, which every player should read from time to time, since there are pearls of wisdom in those:

Andy

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

I must admit Andy having not played the AI for quite a while the routines you have set up for deployment tend to be very good. Reckless charging about will get you killed, it occasionaly deploys tanks or fortifications without adequate covering forces but this is not the norm. Generaly it manages to set up some good little killing "nests" & the odd little surprise, top marks.

You are right about humans I am prone to it on occasion moving something thats waiting to spring a surprise because its just sitting there. Normally to find 2 turns later I am rushing it back but of course its to late now so it spends the rest of the game chasing its tail.
Makes me laugh when I do it as imagine them swearing at their inept commander issuing new orders every 5 minutes.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

Once the surprise has been sprung, moving is probably a good idea unless the unit is actively engaged. The steel rain won't be too far off in the future. You just don't want it loaded when the arty starts. I usually won't pick it up unless I can move it a couple hexes from the hex it fired from that turn. This is rough with big guns, but most stuff 75mm and under can be loaded and moved away in one turn.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

You hit the nail on the head Imp. This was the whole reason for this thread. Bravo to Andy and Don for building a fantastic game that does a great job of driving the players up the wall and then bringing them back for more.:clap:

To sum up a few of the comments below, having a mobile reserve is key to both attacking and defending. When attacking the reserve can be used to exploit gaps or be applied to difficult defensive positions. In defence it should be used to provide reinforcement to buckling defenses or to deal with break throughs. In my current battle, I've set up (as an experiment) a reserve of an entire company of infantry, a platoon of tanks and a section of TDs. The Infantry are loaded in trucks (as HT are not available to me yet) and I'm am trying really, really hard not to move them until at least turn 10 to keep from jumping on a brush fire with a fire truck when the blaze is happening somewhere else.

Somethign else I'm trying in this battle is sending a AO with a scout team (the carrier section had three units and I didn't want to waste the ride.) I hope that I'm able to get them through (or at least up to) enemy lines and reak some havoc with the artillary.

I'll try to keep you updated on the success of these elements in the battle. My main goal in this battle is not to go losing everything to the 2nd line of defense.

Re: Unsupported tanks behind enemy lines
 

This is a personal thing but even before the arty changes I push my FOOs forward as I feel the gains outweigh the risk.
For a battalion size force I often have 2-3 FOOs, if I lose one then one wiil fall back to safety but otherwise they follow the main force often having a platoon tasked with looking after them. They even fill in with scout duties as well at times in open terrain but generally if follow slightly back they can call fire down effectivly on anything that turns up. My thought is if I have spent points on arty you may as well use it to full effect which only tends to happens if you can see what you are hitting.