Countering infantry in wooded areas

[112TYR]

I've been pondering which formations and methods of advance would best be suited within the platoon in a wooded environment. I'm mainly concerned about the real-life techniques here, but SB-oriented techniques will be of value as well.

Let's for instance say that a 4-tank platoon is set to advance along a "path" through the woods. The wood is pretty dense on either side, and the path is some 50 metres wide. The only threat is enemy infantry, and they are armed with RPGs of different models.

Seems to me that the best way to counter this would be traveling overwatch, with the distance between the secions being several hundred metres, or just within visual range if field of fire is very short. The enemy needs a decent field of fire, and he probably can't get that from within the woods, so he needs to wait in the woods till the first tanks have passed him, then pop out and get them from behind. Travelling overwatch means the last section will see him when he pops out, and hose him down with the coax before he can fire. If he waits for the last section, he'll probably be too far behind our lines to get out in a safe manner.

Problem with this technique is that as soon as you get an open flank, the first section must either wait for the second, or blow right past it without proper control.

Other scenarios could include a more lightly wooded terrain, with more open flanks.

I need comments, suggestions and experiences regarding this....especially other scenarios.

[Cobra2]

going into woods is not my forte. i generally avoid doing that, but with some maps it cannot be avoided. i normally move in sections and not in full platoon. with the leo i get lazy and move in platoons. formation is always column. this is to avoid contact. if a fire fight is what you want, then pop smoke on contact and revese into some trees to give youeself a clear view on 12. this works best. arty works wonders too.

[DrDevice]

The question of infantry is a matter of what tools are available at the time of the engagement.

The first choice vs. infantry is arty: it’s quickly devastating to them and offers no chance for them to counter-damage a vehicle. The trouble there is availability and timing the strike to hit a moving infantry target. As the 3/3ID BCT Commander said: “Prep with steel, lead with lead, count the dead.”

If you have your own infantry to counter, then you have a couple of options. First, you can move slow, using the infantry to escort the vehicles. This is tough in SB, as it seems to me that the infantry squad to fire first usually wins the engagement, and the movers tend to get caught off guard a lot. IRL, it’s SOP to use the close coordination of infantry and armor.

The other option is to “pre sweep” the woods in question and allow the vehicles to pass through the protected are at high speed. This requires that you have access and the infantry in place ahead of time. This isn’t always an option in fast-moving scenarios.

Assuming we have unescorted tanks, speed is your friend. If the infantry is armed only with RPGs of an unguided variety, range and speed are fairly effective at preventing the hit in the first place. (Guided ATGMs are best in the open, so our wooded example might prove tough for them.)

In your example, you mention the overwatch by section, which will help prevent the attacks from behind. However, remember that in SB, that lead tank should be human-controlled to maximize its speed and responsiveness. That means 2 players for that platoon during the traverse of the woods.

The key is to keep moving. The troops cannot keep up with your rate of advance, giving them only a few opportunities to fire is a safe bet. Slowing to fight them with coax is playing to their strength and your weakness.

Infantry will seek opportunities to deny armor the chance for a long range detection or engagement, so stay out of the woods if you can. If you detect them early and at range, you have the advantage.

In most SB MP games, on of the infantry’s most powerful aspect is its eyes. You can be sure that the time it takes to gun down a 6-man squad is shorter than the time it will take the other team to get a tank in LOS position to do harm to your tank. So again, speed is your friend. If you can’t take the squad in a quick fashion, break contact and keep moving.

[112TYR]

If you have your own infantry to counter, then you have a couple of options. First, you can move slow, using the infantry to escort the vehicles. This is tough in SB, as it seems to me that the infantry squad to fire first usually wins the engagement, and the movers tend to get caught off guard a lot. IRL, it’s SOP to use the close coordination of infantry and armor.


Yes, this would be the best. I'm primarily concerned with the lone tank platoon vs infantry, though. Not because this is a praticularly realistic scenario, but because I'd like to have a look at what techniques vehicles can employ to defeat infantry.


Assuming we have unescorted tanks, speed is your friend. If the infantry is armed only with RPGs of an unguided variety, range and speed are fairly effective at preventing the hit in the first place. (Guided ATGMs are best in the open, so our wooded example might prove tough for them.)


Two problems with this:

1) Infantry may not be dependent on open flanks, they can lie concealed just inside the woods, and pop out as soon as the tanks have gone past. A tank going at 40 km/h isn't a very difficult target to hit as long as you get the shot directly from behind......

2) Blowing past at high speed means you probably won't have adequate control. If the wooded section is long enough, you can suddenly find yourself in an environment with threats 360 degrees around you. If you then reach an open area, or a particularly dangerous flank, your platoon will be at an extreme risk. Even worse, if you encounter a mine field, chances are you'll lose your entire platoon


In your example, you mention the overwatch by section, which will help prevent the attacks from behind. However, remember that in SB, that lead tank should be human-controlled to maximize its speed and responsiveness. That means 2 players for that platoon during the traverse of the woods.


Well, I'm mainly concerned with RL-techniques. What works and doesn't work in SB isn't as important, though it's interesting to know. In addition, new terrain and harder target aquisition in SB PRO might mean tactics have to change....


The key is to keep moving. The troops cannot keep up with your rate of advance, giving them only a few opportunities to fire is a safe bet. Slowing to fight them with coax is playing to their strength and your weakness.


This is especially true in defence.....staying still will either invite an arty strike or an infantry squad in your rear. In offence, this might lead to nasty surprises, such as suddenly finding yourself inside a kill sack, with 2 of your tanks inside a mine field....

[DrDevice]

If you then reach an open area, or a particularly dangerous flank, your platoon will be at an extreme risk. Even worse, if you encounter a mine field, chances are you'll lose your entire platoon

OK...then the issue here is that fact that you are leading with tanks into a potentially mined or ambush area. That's a job for the scouts, not your armor. Under such conditions, almost everything we've mentioned is a bad idea. Sometimes unavoidable, but a bad idea anyway.

So for IRL - don't do it. If you don't have the artillery, or don't have the infantry support, you probably shouldn't be there in the first place. That's why combined arms is so important! :) Tanks don't DO this task well alone. If mines are even a remote risk, caution in the advance is key. And route recon is the job of scouts, preferably on foot. This is why God invented Mech Infantry. :mrgreen:

I agree that good cover and overwatch can mitigate some of the potential risk. The critical point here is not afterI contact, though. Your safety relies on the ability to detect and counter first. Unfortunately, infantry is pretty good at remaining unseen. So again: catch 22.

Well, I'm mainly concerned with RL-techniques. What works and doesn't work in SB isn't as important, though it's interesting to know.
My main point here was this: IRL, you don't have to worry so much about tanks doing stupid things. Some, but not as much.

In SB - manned tanks are a commodity that must be managed. Putting 2 bodies in one platoon means one less player elsewhere. Depending on the amount of vehicles per player, this means you might be weak somewhere else while the humans conduct the passage of the danger area. IRL, your platoon has 4 trained TCs to deal with the situation.

[112TYR]

OK...then the issue here is that fact that you are leading with tanks into a potentially mined or ambush area. That's a job for the scouts, not your armor. Under such conditions, almost everything we've mentioned is a bad idea. Sometimes unavoidable, but a bad idea anyway.

As I've said, this is a hypothetical discussion to determine whether an all-vehicle-platoon can employ techniques that will help them defeat infantry. I agree that a combined task force with infantry will deal with this problem better than tanks, but even this fact does not mean that a tank platoon will NEVER encounter infantry unescorted. Sometimes other factors means you can't dismount, and you'll have to face infantry with an all-vehicle combat team in the initial contact.



So for IRL - don't do it. If you don't have the artillery, or don't have the infantry support, you probably shouldn't be there in the first place. That's why combined arms is so important! :) Tanks don't DO this task well alone. If mines are even a remote risk, caution in the advance is key. And route recon is the job of scouts, preferably on foot. This is why God invented Mech Infantry. :mrgreen:

The aim of the discussion is to determine whether there are techniques that can be employed with some success against infantry. Tanks aren't the best tool available for this task, but there may still be techniques that gives them a fighting chance. Discussing such techniques might give us a better idea of the tanks advantages vs infantry, which is all for the better.....after all, established "truths" about tanks also used to include "don't go into cities", but we've seen that happen....


I agree that good cover and overwatch can mitigate some of the potential risk. The critical point here is not afterI contact, though. Your safety relies on the ability to detect and counter first. Unfortunately, infantry is pretty good at remaining unseen. So again: catch 22.

Fortunately, many infantry ATWs are still dependent on having a specific field of fire, whereas a coax-MG does not. This also presents the infantry squad with disadvantages, and their lack of mobility also means that their choice of battle positions are limited, unless the loss of that squad is an acceptable price to pay for the destruction of 1 tank. In addition, in Real-Life you have the option of having some of your loaders scan the terrain in the flanks and behind your platoon.

[DrDevice]

The aim of the discussion is to determine whether there are techniques that can be employed with some success against infantry.
I understood the hypothetical. I just don't see that any "new" techniques are being mentioned. Yes...overwatch is good. Yes...speed in the advance minimizes the risk. (Reference "Thunder Run" for a proof of concept for that) But the "how tanks defeat infantry" seems pretty straightforward.

Your example pre-negates most of the armor's advantage. You are really asking "how can a tank defeat infantry that already has the tank right where they want them?" I think that's a much different problem.

Let's for instance say that a 4-tank platoon is set to advance along a "path" through the woods. The wood is pretty dense on either side, and the path is some 50 metres wide. The only threat is enemy infantry, and they are armed with RPGs of different models.

If this is the situation, the tank platoon is in a BAD place. To minimize risk, they should get out of the situation as quickly as possible. If they are fast, they minimize risk for the ambush. If they use a bounding overwatch, they have to hope that an element doesn’t stop right where the infantry wants them.

If you then reach an open area, or a particularly dangerous flank, your platoon will be at an extreme risk.

I disagree. The open area is by far the tank’s better arena. The platoon can deal with threats there. You’ve already stated that infantry is the only threat. If so, the open is where the armor is at the advantage…not the woods. If not, this is a different hypothetical. A 360-degree threat already exists by being in a position that favors the infantry.

Even worse, if you encounter a mine field, chances are you'll lose your entire platoon

If you add mines into the hypothetical, the platoon is screwed either way. Detection is only going to happen by contact with a mine, and by that point it is too late. An unguarded minefield is merely a nuisance – a guarded one is deep trouble.

We can keep adding “what ifs” to the example, but it changes the dynamic. I think you should save that for a second example, because the reactions by the platoon to a mine encounter or suspected ambush are different than driving down a wooded road and making contact with infantry.

If the tanks are attacked in the position you describe, the best course of action is to break contact. Forward or back, depending on the location. Minimize the opportunity to get a clean shot on a critical location by an unguided rocket. Get to a position to engage what you can with your armor oriented toward the threat. Even if it means driving down the road 200m and returning along the path with your strong side forward and looking for the threat.

You example of the infantry coming out to shoot the tank in the rear depends on them not being detected first, (a very real possibility) and the last tank not practicing good cover arc discipline and orienting its turret to the rear. If the tank in the last position is smart, the threat is minimized. Not gone, but minimized.

I think that the “loss of control” for quick movement is less of a threat than moving slowly through an area that denies a tank its advantages.

This also presents the infantry squad with disadvantages, and their lack of mobility also means that their choice of battle positions are limited, unless the loss of that squad is an acceptable price to pay for the destruction of 1 tank.

I think that if the infantry plays smart and gets the one rear tank, they are going to disappear into the dense woods and consider it a win. They should not stay around long enough for the other tanks to matter. I also think that attacking 4 tanks with 1 squad of 6-9 guys is unrealistic. A whole platoon is a better force ratio, and ensures that the infantry can do more damage. But the amount of infantry wasn’t specified in the hypothetical.

Overall, I agree that the overwatch is a good idea. But the action on contact should be to get the hell out of a weak position, rather than attempt to stay and fight on ground of the infantry’s choosing.

All of this applies IRL. In SB, problems are magnified by AI tanks and inept infantry, so techniques may vary.

[112TYR]

I understood the hypothetical. I just don't see that any "new" techniques are being mentioned.

Hence the comment "I need new suggestions and experiences" in my first post....I'm interested in new inputs here.


If this is the situation, the tank platoon is in a BAD place. To minimize risk, they should get out of the situation as quickly as possible. If they are fast, they minimize risk for the ambush. If they use a bounding overwatch, they have to hope that an element doesn’t stop right where the infantry wants them.

I never said bounding overwatch, I said traveling, so there is no need to stop. This doesn't steal away a whole lot of speed, as long as there aren't very many areas where the entire platoons firepower is needed at once. (open flanks...)

I am assuming that the infantry will not be able to find positions with sufficient FoF from within the woods in this specific scenario, and that they need to expose themselves to the last section in order to get that FoF. If they wait for the entire platoon to pass by, they will have a pretty long extraction march ahead of them.


I disagree. The open area is by far the tank’s better arena. The platoon can deal with threats there. You’ve already stated that infantry is the only threat. If so, the open is where the armor is at the advantage…not the woods. If not, this is a different hypothetical. A 360-degree threat already exists by being in a position that favors the infantry.

Remember that this was IF the platoon was using traveling overwatch - which means a single section must deal with a lot of ground itself before the second section can catch up.(or stop, which might prove equally dangerous) If the first section suddenly faces an open flank, it'll need to cope with the front sector as well as the flank - and the section WILL be in a very dangerous situation.


We can keep adding “what ifs” to the example, but it changes the dynamic. I think you should save that for a second example, because the reactions by the platoon to a mine encounter or suspected ambush are different than driving down a wooded road and making contact with infantry.

All right, we'll say there is no known capacity to lay mines. My intention was to illustrate weaknesses of the "speedy" approach. A moving tank isn't very hard to hit as long as you get the shot from behind, and a speedy approach through an open path in a wood means you can pass by grunts without noticing, then have them pop out and get the platoon from behind. That's not a very difficult shot, and even if they miss, that faces the platoon with an interesting problem: they KNOW there's an enemy squad or more in their rear, but they can't let go of the front, since they don't know whether there are more threats there....


If the tanks are attacked in the position you describe, the best course of action is to break contact. Forward or back, depending on the location. Minimize the opportunity to get a clean shot on a critical location by an unguided rocket. Get to a position to engage what you can with your armor oriented toward the threat. Even if it means driving down the road 200m and returning along the path with your strong side forward and looking for the threat.

Copy. You have the option of shifting the front of the entire plt towards the threat, and hosing down the woodline, hoping to suppress the enemy squad and establishing fire superiority, THEN pulling out. Of course, pulling out can be done in bounds or continuously.


I think that the “loss of control” for quick movement is less of a threat than moving slowly through an area that denies a tank its advantages.


In the isolated scenario, yes. But you do face several interesting problems if you rush forward and find yourself with an enemy infantry squad + in your rear, and not yet having established sufficient control in the position you are currently occupying....


I think that if the infantry plays smart and gets the one rear tank, they are going to disappear into the dense woods and consider it a win. They should not stay around long enough for the other tanks to matter. I also think that attacking 4 tanks with 1 squad of 6-9 guys is unrealistic. A whole platoon is a better force ratio, and ensures that the infantry can do more damage. But the amount of infantry wasn’t specified in the hypothetical.

They still face a long extraction march, especially if the first platoon rushes past them. They can get one tank, but if the platoon SOP has the rest of the platoon rushing by them, they may find extraction pretty difficult. It's hard to tell without looking at a specific scenario, but they face a very real risk of being overrun.

I didn't specify amount of infantry; feel free to specify this yourself in different scenarios.


Overall, I agree that the overwatch is a good idea. But the action on contact should be to get the hell out of a weak position, rather than attempt to stay and fight on ground of the infantry’s choosing.

I'm mainly talking about traveling overwatch, as I don't like the idea of staying still in the kind of environment I'm describing here...I agree that the tanks should seek favourable positions ASAP, and go as far as needed to find those positions. But in some cases, establishing fire superiority first might be crucial. Hence target aquisition becomes extremely important, and this might mean that having the loaders on you flank tanks unbuttoned to scan for infantry might be a good idea. Even if they don't spot the infantry before it's too late, they might spot the muzzle flashes, and guide the rest of the platoon on to them.

[DrDevice]

I agree that rushing into the unknown may be dangerous. I just think it's the least crappy choice from a selection of crappy choices to be made by that platoon leader. Leaving a squad of infantry behind may be bad, but a contact report for follow-on forces may be the best option. Max effective range for an RPGvs. moving targets is listed as 300m, so I think that you don’t have to go far (maybe 500m) to make the ambush much less effective. Certainly not far enough that the platoon loses cohesion, or that the second section cannot get to the aid of the first one within 60 seconds.

Another option is good tactical driving. If our example has a 50m maneuver space, not driving in a straight line is good SOP. Don’t let the RPG team have the easy shot.

What about firepower options? We aren't being tank-system specific, but things like the Galix have countermeasures for close infantry attack. I'm a big believer in HE vs. simple lead. A 40mm grenade has a much better effect than a 7.62mm round and isn't limited to direct LOS due to area effect. (I’m an advocate for putting MK19s on the loader’s station)

An active approach may be acceptable if ammo is readily available and subtlety is not called for. Hose down suspect areas prior to passing. Good ambush spots are not terribly hard to ID. If contact is a foregone conclusion, you may be able to suppress the infantry long enough to pass. The key there is whether the platoon has follow-on assets.

Another good non-subtle tactic may be your smoke generators. If you are worried about the rear-shot, infantry has little capacity for thermal imagery, as their night vision is usually image-mag. Hence, smoke from the platoon moving at traveling overwatch makes the shot a lot more difficult. (This works in SB too…)

I also agree that being unbuttoned would be an important choice. Having the loaders out really helps SA, and their ability to quickly suppress with MG fire would be very helpful when getting the main gun online may take critical seconds the crew does not have. (It’s a sad thing, not having this option in SB.)

From the infantry side, the “shoot and scoot” option is their best bet for survival. Get one, get gone, and lather-rinse-repeat at another location. Getting back to friendly lines may be tougher if the tanks roll by, but it also depends on the overall situation, as you mention. The troops may have a long, but uneventful walk, or they might be playing E&E games for days.

[112TYR]

Cheers. That brought up a couple of things I wasn't aware of. I assume MK 19s are claymores?

[DrDevice]

The Mk19 (Seen here on an M109A6) (http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/Gulf_War_2_US_Forces_Training_Exercises_Buildup_in _Kuwait/kuwait2) is a 40mm automatic grenade launcher. It is mounted on some vehicles, like the HMMWV and M109A6, but was not deemed a requirement for the fully armed M1/2/3s.

Mk 19 Variants (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/mk19-variants.htm)

Basically, I feel an HE weapon offers the crew a more rounded option than the “all direct” weapon systems offered now. Lead is good for sustained suppression, but the coax can supply that. A 40mm HEDP round can be useful against troops and vehicles and has great suppression effects.

The Mk19 isn’t actually as flexible as I would like, since the mount is geared toward longer-range fires. I’m not sure of the practicality of making a flex mount for one. It would be nice, though!

[112TYR]

I see.....that WOULD be nice.

[TopKick]

How I usually did it and lived to tell about it:

Moving along a 50 meter wide route in a forest is a luxury. Move as a unit with all vehicles on the move. Fast is Good. Offset or staggered column is best. Infantry tracks should be intermingled with the tanks with defined sectors of fire for the infantry and infantry vehicle. All vehicles, carriers, and mounted infantry should recon by fire with crew served and individual weapons in assigned sectors as you move. If you are ambushed, go into a herringbone formation and stop and fire all weapons in 360 degree circle for 1 full minute establishing fire superiority. Cease-fire after the initial mad minute and determine if you are still taking fire. If you are, determine direction and engage for 1 more mad minute. If not sure of direction of enemy fire, another 360 degree mad minute is in order. Start moving again and resume recon by fire. In other words THUNDER RUN IT.

If initial enemy fire is light and sporadic, conduct the mad minute while on the move and get out of the area as soon as you can. Heavy enemy fire from dug in enemy in foxholes or spider holes in an ambush normally requires stopping as above. Dismount infantry after the initial mad minute if needed. They should provide grazing fire inches above the terrain and progressively work outward.

Main gun Battlesight ammo should be canister or beehive if available, or your best anti-personnel round. Fire three of these from every tank gun during initial contact in a forested area or in heavy vegetation. Never fire canister, beehive or sabot over the heads of friendly troops. Firing high explosive ammunition of any kind in a forested area is dangerous because limbs, twigs, brush and other flora can cause this ammunition to detonate where you least want it. Fire only if you are sure the flight path is clear of obstacles.

If you suspect the route is mined, break out your mine detectors and sweep the route as you proceed, with dismounted providing flank and rear security.

If a vehicle is disabled, secure it and establish a base of fire around it. Evacuate the wounded if necessary and continue the mission.

Use indirect fire weapons against known or suspected enemy positions prior to start of the mission. Danger close calls in a forested area are bad news for all.

Make sure your insurance is paid up and that you have a will. Good luck!

[ShotMagnet]

Advice from an expert, works for me.


Shot

[112TYR]

Great input, TK. Cheers.

[TopKick]

Hmmm? I expected to get picked apart by the experts on that. What you do is mission oriented and dependant. I can think of many scenarios where nothing works. Your unit should have a standard SOP covering movement through wooded areas. SOPs generally need updated and modified to fit the mission at hand.

[112TYR]

Well, this was a pretty specific scenario, with a more or less defined enemy.

[TopKick]

The trouble with recon by fire is that it makes your commanders nervous and they get antsy and hyperventilate. The one thing needed is SB is for a platoon leader to be able issue a platoon recon by fire command. That would liven thing up a bit.

[DrDevice]

TK, I think the issue with SB recon-by-fire commands is the ability to teach the AI to shoot at nothing intelligently. It's hard enough to make it realize legitimate targets. Getting them to do any meaningful coordination with shooting the right fire arcs, eleveation, or suspect enemy postiions is tough. None of those items have a value in the game that you can use as a trigger to the computer gunner. Sure, you could turn the gun on, but the fire would be undirected and largely useless.

[TopKick]

I know, but I was thinking of a key combo where the platoon leader designates the area to be taken under fire. Such as - shift/laze/R and a sweep of the area with the joystick. Or a menu command and shift/laze with a sweep of the designated area with the stick. The idea is to get the enemy to divulge their positions or keep them pinned down as you move about or recon the area. In the B:N campaign, I did a little recon by fire and other players got nervous when they heard the firing and didn't know if it was friendly or not.

[DrDevice]

Gotcha - so it would be a player-designated area, rather than a simple "shoot now in 360" command. Makes sense.

[Grenny]

Great input TK!!
"Blei-in-die-Heide" tactic ;-)

But you see:It is good to have grunts with you. The more barrels the better! Even small arms fire will keep the RPG gunners head down.
So having the loader behind the Fla-MG is a good idea.

One lone tank platoon meeting an inf. platoon in the woods is...dead meat.
You hear them...put Ri-Mis on the road side...wait till the lead tank is hit than light up the rest with ATWs .
I wouldn't go to the wood edge for that...make shure that you have overlappinfg FOF from at least 10m inside the woods(makes you harder to spot.)
If iyou are a lone squad and a tank platoon is comming...report them and keep your head down :roll:

[Newbie-Olle]

I'd consider using a less obvious route straight through the woods way off to either side, if possible.
Going where tanks "can't" go will allow you to avoid any planned ambushes. Then the remaining threats are enemies that only expect to engage your infantry or that prepared to ambush you elsewhere but now have to relocate for a less prepared ambush.

Cheers
Olle

[taskforce-panther]

well in real life...............................

[taskforce-panther]

if were true events yad pop smoke ht the gen and then back the hell up or over run but on here thats suicide. but smoke blinds em i use it on here quite abit i dontgo foward i back up use tis and coax the hell out of em or pop a heat in there. i stash tanks in woods to keep from being seenbut i dont trave thru em if i can avoid. :3starsk2:

[colin]

Can’t really comment on real life, but it seems you got good advice there already. For SB in “Blind Elephants, M1” I hold back 2 tanks approx 300m from the wood line and use the thermals to spot infantry. The other tanks begin to probe the entrance to the woods hoping to spot the enemy or cause them to move or fire. Next I have two tanks move onto the road with one on each side, using the road raise to protect the hull and give a better view into the woods. Each tank moves in slow bounds. The tank on the left looks right the tank on the right looks left, this improves your view. The tanks further back protects the rear of the forward tanks.