Jump to content

Rolling Thunder 16 - AARs


Gibsonm

Recommended Posts

I liked all the missions. 

That bring said I have voiced my thoughts and years of RW training on facing a enemy head on. Now some will say it was the mission design, not quite and Mark can correct me here. It will always be in your interest to be on the flanking side even, within a fire team all the way up to a SQN when defending against the enemy. For some reason (and I've yet to see a good answer) why when we play we don't get on their flanks. In mission 2, I did from the slopes and did get some hits, but due to terrain it was not all the effective, but I did survive a bit longer. My point is, if we play this again in 4.0 we should try to flank the enemy. With the time period ammo frontal hits are not going to do the damage we would expect , but side hits on a T-90, well thats where I want to be impacting for the flying turrets. :)

This is not a gripe on the mission, just why no flank defense at the tactical level.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well as the Designer, there was no requirement for frontal, glacis plate to glacis plate, engagements.

 

Blue was given a zone and how Blue used the ground was up to them.

 

In Mission 1 the frontage was approx 3 - 4km throughout and perhaps the ground didn't lend itself to flanking shots, but it certainly looked like most opted for the strength on strength approach (frontal shots) instead of strength on weakeness (flanking shots), esp. after working out that the Leos weren't going to slice through the T-90s frontally like butter.

 

In Mission 2 the AAs varied in width (part of the reason why the AH-64s were held rather than trying to fly them, and their Hellfires, up winding valleys).

 

There was nothing stopping a skirmish line defence to hit red with arty / TOW and fall back, etc. until MAULER could hit them where the ground suited us. As it turned out the Cav Troop on the left was decisively engaged and neutralised early, forcing the piecemeal commtiment of the C-ATK forces (Mauler and the Helos).

 

In Mission 3, I think some thought Area Defence means the Alamo with tanks in between buildings, etc.

 

Certainly there was nothing stopping ATGMs to be deployed on the flanks and used with the Tanks to inflict long range damage, displace, rinse and repeat until a decisive counterstroke. There were bits of terrain that could have served as Tank hides for them to use to breakout on different routes as required, or they (say one Sqn) could have been delpoyed forward to engage at range and then fall back.

 

As it was, from Red's view it seemed the towns were defended as fixed positions (a bit like Infantry squares at Waterloo) and Red armour just flowed around them and pressed on West.

 

But as I mentioned at the start I just provided a sandbox. A different plan with different weather, or kit, might well have generated different results. After that's the whole purpose of this software to develop and test plans without the Butcher's Bill of "suck it and see".

 

Edited by Gibsonm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, 12Alfa said:

Well I'll step up to CO a SQN to try my training in the way we do a defensive mission if that alright.

I'll spin the 1CAD up as well on the SOP's as in the past to see if we can make some difference in the mission.

 

Ack and agree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rotareneg said:

Just curious, what did the red ARVs that spawned in behind our lines during mission 2 represent?

 

They were there to help OPFOR "manage" the Red units.

 

Testing revealed that "in game" there was a need for recovery vehicles to drag vehicles back onto roads, off slopes, out of mountain swamps at -3, etc.

 

e.g. First run some 40+ points where more than one vehicle was "hung up". Four of those locations were where the group was from Platoon to Company+ size.

 

We "fixed" those and the next run there were 50+ locations as the groups progressed down the map.

 

Eventually I fixed all the Platoon to Company sized ones and we decided on ARVs to manage the smaller "clumps".

 

They were set to spawn when the lead elements of Red reached certain locations (so the Red player didn't need to "drive" them forward in real time and maybe get hung up themselves).

 

It just happened that some spawned in LOS of Blue (just a small risk when you don't know exactly where Blue will be at any given time).

 

As it was Red was able to succeed even with reasonable number hung up on routes, buildings, etc. with little help from the ARVs.

 

If you look at the AAR with Red Units showing you'll see "stuff" stopped at various spots for no apparent reason.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...