Re: CCCP vs NATO long campaign (1948-1991)
Hi,
ANALYSIS:
UK forces were better organized than others.
They had:
- RECCE elements;
- Good and mordern armored force (Centurion MK2);
- Infantry support;
- Artillery support (3 inches mortars, 40mm AA guns);
Their strategy was not bad et well executed.
The combination tank-infantry-mortars caused most of my losses early in the game.
Their reserve forces (Churchills) was an unpleasant surprise ...
Their Centurion are better than our T-34/85. They are practically invulnerable from the front while our tanks cant resist to their main gun. This is a real problem... I want to change them, but by what... IS-3? I have important choices to do for the next battle.
Their infantry was not bad but inferior to our. 1 SMG section per platoon was a good idea. Unfortunatly they all died. We can say that our infantry saved us by destroying many tanks with RPG-6 AT genades, satchel charges and flamethrower. The addition of the RPG-2 in 1949 will be much appreciated. Our enginneers were very brave and effective. The problem of coordination between tanks and infantry remains. I think I should carry some units on the tanks to be have them on the front at the right time. Is it a good idea? Until we get BTRs, I see no better choice.
Our Regimental 152mm D-1 worked very well; they eliminated 2 of 3 mortars in CB fire. I realised that our 76mm Zis-3 FG are not enought powerfull. I'll probably change them for the 122mm M-30. Untill now, I am satisfied with my mortars.
I think adding a reserve platoon to liberate my regular forces...
Despite my modest losses, the battle was difficult.
Thank you,
-Luc
|
Threaded Mode