The eyes of the company (+) -sized combat team I am commanding: and M3A2 (a cavalry infantry-fighting vehicle) at the very hot edge of our sector. |
Please right-click and open in a new window or tab if you want to read this. OPORD is in, listen up! |
Please right-click and open in a new window or tab if you want to read this. These are designer's notes. |
Below is a screenshot of my sector as I received it.
An 8 km wide, 10 deep sector of beautiful German country side. Note the phase-lines: I will be referencing to them on occasion. |
- I want to concentrate my tank force ...
- ... on small-sized enemy teams ...
- ... taking advantage of the slight edge the M1A1 has over the T72-B in terms of range and target acquisition
Remember the article I mentioned in the previous entry? I don't feel that the mission, the size and terrain of the sector or the the enemy force lend themselves to an ambush approach. The enemy may choke up here and there, but he will be still racing towards our rear with other elements elsewhere. So, a series of engagements with the so-called "aimed fire" will be the thing.
Let's take a look at the terrain. I've divided the width of my sector in four chunks, and I will show you images of each starting from north to south.
Moving a couple of kilometers south from the previous valley, the terrain is a bit broken with many patches of woods. This view looking east, towards the enemy's approach. |
This is the center of our sector just behind phase line Knight. I can't imagine better tank terrain than this glorious plain. This view looking east, towards the enemy's approach. |
Regarding the enemy's probable course of action, I am guessing the enemy will prefer the center and south approaches, as they offer better terrain and fields of fire for their tanks. But I will have to provide the means to maintain the north flank watched upon and eventually just in case.
As for my forces, there is simply no way to be everywhere if I want to concentrate forces. So I chose to concentrate my two tank platoons in a series of battle stations at my south flank, nearby phase line Knight. Depending on the findings of my scouts across the width of the sector, on order they will engage the enemy sequentially from south to north. That's my company's main effort. The supporting effort will be my 3rd platoon (mechanized infantry) deployed in a defensive position at my center with fields of fire over that superb tank terrain that I showed above. They are tasked with delaying or at least maintain contact with an enemy thrust through the center of my sector.
You may wonder why I didn't chose to concentrate my forces at the center plain that looks so appealing. I declined from such a thing because I am wary of the enemy having so much real state to deploy an outrageous amount of tanks. Keep in mind I have only 2 platoons of tanks and that the enemy has one battalion of them. Attrition can catch up with you really fast after a couple of untimely tank losses ... That's what I read in that article.
That's pretty much it and I hope it works.
I don't want to give you the impression that I left the scouts at the front at the mercy of the enemy. I spent as much time planning for their mission as I did with the main effort. The least thing I want is to go blind in the north flank of my sector.
The view from an scout battle position at the north of the sector. This time a bit more hull down-ish. Still, a great field of view. |
Great reading stuff! Love to buy the game but pricing and strange installing holds me of.
ReplyDeleteAny chance it will become more commercial / cheaper?
Tnx,
Harold
Harold: No, there's no chance that it will be commercialized in the model propagated by computer games. It is not a computer game, it is a simulation, and the developers are offering SB Pro PE as a civilianized (classified information removed) training supplement for soldiers off duty or for enthusiasts. There is a lot of content for the sim and the mission editor is about as good as the Operation Flashpoint/Armed Assault series' editor, which has kept that series going for 12 years now.
ReplyDeleteThe installation isn't strange. There is a USB dongle that one must use to run the simulation, this is identical to having the disk in the drive to play. No problems there.
If you have any interest in modern armoured combat either from a crew station up to about regimental level, then I recommend SB Pro PE. It also happens to be the only choice in this category; other 'sims' lack critical features.
I'm interested to see how this plays out. I find that it's absolutely essential to plot battle positions and routes prior to the engagement. Not doing so has always resulted in a defeat for me.
ReplyDeleteTo me, this is the major differing factor between this sim and so many other "games;" the planning is made explicit and essential. I wish more simulation/game engine were capable of handling the mission planning function as SBPro.
Harold, I agree with JC here- no chance of commercialization, and there just isn't a choice when it comes to armor sims. If you want the real deal SBPro is it.
Tnx both!
ReplyDeleteFor know i stick with Combat Mission & Command Ops. Did ask a demo license today.
Best,
Harold
Hello, folks.
ReplyDeleteGood move there Harold with the demo license. That will allow you to know before you invest in this simulator.
Doug,
Yes. When I started with Steel Beasts I was not too fond of pre-plotted stuff, but in the frantic world of mechanized combat we should not shy away from an opportunity to have something under control! :)
Cheers,
Hello JC,
ReplyDeleteA though battle is awaiting you, I'm afraid.
Be prepared !
:-)
Looking forward to the outcome, always a pleasure to read your vignettes.
Put on a link on the SB-forum to this site.
Rgds, Koen
Hi Koen and it's always great to have you around here.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the referral. I hope that I can write this one up pretty soon.
Cheers,
FYI, there were no T-72's in the GSFG. The only T-72's one would encounter early on in such a conflict would be the NVA. In this scenario you should use T-80's if representing 8th Guards Army near Fulda.
ReplyDeleteThough the T80U is far too advanced ~ a T80B is less protected ~ it has less base armour and earlier ERA than the T80U that came after it.
ReplyDeleteWhile incorrect, the T72B is probably a 'better' analogue (in SB no ERA, but heavier armour), or perhaps the T72M1/T72A, representing the T80 'base' protection level reasonably well.
You should add the GLATGM (4 per vehicle) to reflect the capabilities of the T64 and T80 vehicles, even though these wouldn't be found on most/all T72A vehicles.
"FYI, there were no T-72's in the GSFG. The only T-72's one would encounter early on in such a conflict would be the NVA. In this scenario you should use T-80's if representing 8th Guards Army near Fulda."
ReplyDeleteThe T-72Bs represent an approximation to what is available in SB. There are three versions of the scenario, even one against T-80s and another against T-62s I think, which represent different time periods or realities, who knows. It doesn't really matter now does it? Or are we just trying to snipe? (yeah probably).
Anyway, the vehicle stable in SB is constantly expanding, so who knows, maybe more T tanks are in order to allow different situations (I sure hope so!).