Strategy Thread

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Strategy Thread

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Modern] >> FlashPoint Germany >> Strategy Thread

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Strategy Thread - 2/5/2005 7:39:35 PM

Poliorcetes

Posts: 140
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline

I figured we need to move beyond what we WANT the game to do and start dealing with WHAT it actually does.

I'll start this off with what I've been able to glean from my games vs. AI.

Initial movement orders seem to very key in this game. You are much better off setting long distance movement orders. This is due to the command delay system. Changing a waypoint is much faster (game time) then switching from a standing stance to a movement stance (Assault defaults to dug in when you have completed your last movement). It then takes 30 minutes to switch to Assault mode again, PLUS the delay in sending that order.

Recon is vital. I haven't seen too many LOS more than 6 squares (3000m) so it is easy to wander past your opponents units on these big maps. This is probably key to success for the WP player, as dislocating Nato from their Dugouts is very important in winning.
Recon units, minefields, and helo's all work well. I've been putting my recon units on Stealth as WP and reducing their automatic firing range to help keep them hidden. Spotted units die fast around here, especially if you have a spotter hidden calling in air and arty.

Dislocating Nato units - I've started playing around with Chemical batteries, as this should force any units dug in there to move away. Gas dissapates quickly, so theoretically if you could time a rolling Chemical barrage you could force the Nato Units into movement modes when your Assault units arrive. And Nato dies very quickly in Move mode (as does any unit facing Dug in or Assault)

Frankly none of my games have lasted very long so I don't have a good handle on the fatigue or morale portions of the game yet. I tend to start off with all my combat forces in Assault mode and try to keep them in that situation (as WP), rather then Moving to an area and THEN switching to Assault mode.
Not wasting time switching modes is vital as the WP, given that Nato has a faster Order response time then you. Stationary WP units die quickly with Nato Arty and air assets, so keeping them moving with long Assault waypoints that you just move around to adjust their direction seems to be key.

Flanking of course is still key, given that if you can get behind someone's front units (and Nato usually doesn't have a lot of them), you run into Arty and HQ units first. Mobility is the WP advantage, as Nato tends to sneak around slowly. Taking the time to run to the other side of the map usually pays off, as even if Nato responds, they have to dislocate units to do so and you have a chance of meeting them while they are Moving rather than Dug in.

Artillary - I prefer to put all my offboard Arty units on Neutralize. I figure if I actually get a chance to shoot at something I better nail it hard. None of my games have been very long and the lethality of the weapon systems doesn't promote conservation of ammo for WP forces.
Putting Direct support on the HQ of your recon units or on your Helo's is fun. I once had a Helo unit with 5 batteries of support stumble upon 3 hexes of stacked Nato units. Even with the poor accuracy of WP it was still a massacre.

HQ units - I haven't had much success here. Turning the reports to never for everything except artillary seems to work ok, and turn off the damn "delayed" reporting too. Even with this I still draw a lot of fire on my HQ units. And Nato response times are so fast that even a moving HQ tends to get hit a lot. If I see a HQ that is drawing a lot of fire I have tried digging in at a city or forest square. That seems to work about as well as trying to move, although moving in a forest or city is also good. Of course with WP you need those HQ's close to your front to speed arty orders and keep up morale.

I'll have to start playing some PBEM games to see if any of these ideas work.

Post #: 1

RE: Strategy Thread - 2/5/2005 8:43:03 PM

AlvinS

Posts: 665
Joined: 12/2/2000
From: O'Fallon, Missouri
Status: offline

Very good post. I have been trying different strategies, with varied success. My big probelm is in too much radio traffic. The idea of setting long range orders and then moving waypoints as necessary seems to be a good idea. So far I have been playing NATO. What units really need to report back to HQ, and how often? I have my helecopters report back because I can move them around rather quickly to survey the area.

Great game. My hat is off to the designers.

_____________________________

"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." ---Mark Twain

Naval Warfare Simulations

AlvinS

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 2

RE: Strategy Thread - 2/12/2005 6:57:51 AM

Poliorcetes

Posts: 140
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline

Ok, here are some lessons I have learned from my first PBEM as WP.
Manuevering is key. You need to mass your forces without putting them in one hex. Then you have to hit one point in Nato's lines and keep on going. Don't stop, don't get bogged down for him to surround you with mines, just blow through and disappear into his rear areas.
Unlike traditional games their isn't much advantage in roaming around in the rear areas. No supply lines to cut, no facing advantages. Once the WP gets through the lines, you are better off finding a good place to hide and dig in. Seen units get arty and air attacks, but in the middle of the forest the only way Nato can find you is to sacrifice a unit. Nato's biggest losses came when he tried to root me out of a city I had gotten into.

Arty, arty, arty. I got into that city by putting the entire city in Chemicals. This often causes units to move, even occasionally kills one. It also disrupts his attempts to reinforce my breakthrough point. And once you get Nato moving his Orders go up, giving your counter-barrage a chance for revenge. If you happen to find Nato Unit, don't be afraid to spend a turn letting all your artillary drop on it. While you only hit <10% of the time, that can be 1/3 to 1/4 of his unit's force lost.

Now its incredibly hard to manuever with Staff rules on, especially when crossing rivers. So you really have to take the time to look at all your Way point times or else you end up all stacked up.

You have to plan about 5-10 moves ahead as WP, as you just don't have the luxury of changing your plans every turn. Too many plan changes and your units just end up endlessly sitting in place waiting for new orders as the artillary smashes down around them. Don't be afraid of minefields so long as you are moving fast through them. They are just like an artillary barrage.

Units alone tend to die alone. Moving units get wiped out if they wander into firing ranges, and entrenched units suffer from Nato's accurate Artillary fire if you can't nail the spotting unit quickly. Launch your screening force ahead of the main force, bypass any units you can (Nato is usually spread thin, 1 unit often controls a 5-6 square corridor) and dissappear as fast as you can.

We'll see what I learn from my 2nd game, once I start it.

Poliorcetes

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 3

RE: Strategy Thread - 2/12/2005 3:50:51 PM

Real and Simulated Wars

Posts: 768
Joined: 8/6/2003
Status: offline

Great thread and posts. Keep them coming.
Bump!

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 4

RE: Strategy Thread - 2/12/2005 6:55:12 PM

Mike_w

Posts: 54
Joined: 1/30/2005
Status: offline

As your opponent in this PBEM, I agree. The most effective attack was that which immediatly followed the artillery barrage. I didn't really move my units because they are NBC protected, but they WERE "suppressed" after your normal barrage following the chemical attack. Suppressed means that they fire less, fire last, and miss alot!. Yor units weren't and I payed for it. Reinforcemnts arrived to find your units on "hold" and under urban cover..I had no chance. I think your problem is that you lost too many units to my artillery on approach before you realized this strategy. You may win and you may not, but you definetly would have won had you been able to put that attack together with about 20% more units.

I think the lesson here is that if you can time your attack to follow right after a barrage has suppressed the enemy, fatigued him and lowered his moral, his inability to fight "well" will allow you to move him out and/or destroy him.

My mistake was to place my units in an obvious defensive position. Since you knew where I was, you could coordinate your attack. If I had kept moving, you would have wasted arty and unit energy on "assault" I should have kept a recon unit near the city so I knew when YOU were there.

At this point, you probably have one good assault left to take that sector...we'll see if you can push me out

< Message edited by Mike_w -- 2/12/2005 5:42:29 PM >

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 5

RE: Strategy Thread - 2/12/2005 7:11:44 PM

Poliorcetes

Posts: 140
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline

I agree. The only thing I would disagree about is that I made a huge mistake actually trying to take the city. I can win the scenario just by holding 1 square of farmland, as I don't think I actually have to clear the sector of every unit, just outnumber your Nato units. Once across the river I should have just gone straight through and found some nice places to hide in. I think I've done enough damage to you just to sit the last 5 turns out and still win based on total units in each quadrant.

Funny how these tactics are reminiscent of WWI, Rolling chemical barrages to avoid the entrenched guns, with huge advantages to the defender. Only the more accurate artillary and mobility of my units keeps this from being a WWI simulator :P

Poliorcetes

(in reply to Mike_w)

Post #: 6

RE: Strategy Thread - 2/12/2005 7:46:11 PM

Mike_w

Posts: 54
Joined: 1/30/2005
Status: offline

I dont think you made a mistake trying to take the city...I think it was a great move. Generally though, you get some points for "occupying" a sector if you have more troops, but you get many more points if you "clear" it. SOmetimes, NATO gets more points for unit destruction (b/c WP has more units available for destruction) than WP might get for merely "occupying" territory.

Realistic though, becuase if your goal is to prevent my use of a specific area, you may not have to destroy me, just occupy it yourself and deny me the use of it.

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 7

RE: Strategy Thread - 2/27/2005 6:20:22 AM

Poliorcetes

Posts: 140
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline

Having played a game with Helo's, I've seen some tactics that you should keep in mind. Helo's in the woods last a lot longer than helo's in the open
Helo's advancing in woods often have their SOP triggered upon an encounter, and in my game often never got off a shot before retreating.

Strategy update for version1.01

The new simultaneous fire of ambushed units makes Nato very vulnerable at close range. I've had multiple units wiped out by large WP units that assaulted into a wood square where I was dug in. While I got of the usual number of shots, the return fire was devestating (while in the past WP rarely got off any return fire). This makes woods much more dangerous for Nato than in the past.
I'd be interested in any other feedback on how to adapt to the new version.

Poliorcetes

(in reply to Mike_w)

Post #: 8

RE: Strategy Thread - 2/28/2005 8:41:27 PM

themattcurtis

Posts: 287
Joined: 2/9/2005
Status: offline

Since 1.01, short range engagements have become very dangerous for my NATO forces. That WP company just has too many guns and missiles shooting at me for my platoon to last.

For what it's worth, when on defense I've been putting Bradleys up front as a screen, with orders to keep at least 2,000m between them and the closest enemy unit. The stand-off distance between a T-80s effective gun range and a TOW platform is supposed to be around 2,000m right? The TOW can shoot a maximum of 3,750. The T-80 is effective at 2,000. So in real life, the stand-off is 1,750. In the game I have to round that up.

Just from the composition of WP units, this first exchange reduces the BMPs by a healthy margin. Then, as they continue to advance, the Bradleys fall back and we hit them with tanks.

It's reduced my No# of casualties.

My knowledge of helos is nada.

When on the offensive, I try and pin the units my forward (read recon) units have spotted with suppressive arty fire. The follow up armor hits them while the recon -- if they're still alive -- moves on. I don't use neutralize unless I've hit a major concentration of bad guys.

Matt

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 9

Helo Herding - 3/3/2005 10:00:37 PM

Poliorcetes

Posts: 140
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline

I found a way in one game to keep the WP Hinds under control since its pretty hard to actually kill one. Helo's got into the woods with me and traded fire, although poorly as everytime they got next to me (to see me) it triggered their SOP to stand off 1000m. Once I was able to force him to retreat into my forces, and now he's screwed. He tried to pull his helo back to refuel/rearm but ran into 1 of my units. So every turn I move my unit next to his helo, triggering his SOP to retreat (back into my lines), and screwing up any orders he has given. Using the SOP against him I herded his helo out into open plains and every turn give him a dose of artillary and advance again, triggering his retreat towards more of my forces. His Helos are now so fatigued, attrited by 50%, and out of ammo, that even with Auto Resupply on he can't hit me. And he can't break free as my move order gets their before his orders do.
This is probably a lesson to turn off the SOP on frontline units, as you can quickly end up being totally routed by SOP triggers if a Helo or other fast unit gets next to you.

Caveat - this is only what seems to be happening from my side of it, but I can see the "SOP triggered" event on his helo every turn.

Poliorcetes

(in reply to themattcurtis)

Post #: 10

German Nato units weak - 3/5/2005 4:55:24 AM

Poliorcetes

Posts: 140
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline

I have to say so far in my first German NATO game I found the IFV rather pathetic. I've had WP forces run parallel to me while I was entrenched in woods, charging across plains with beautiful LOS. 1 stinking hit from 2 different IFV units, which were then destroyed by return fire. Same result at close quarters, WP charged into entrenched wooded positions, lost 1 or 2 units and then annihilated my units with return fire at point blank range. Yet in other battles with US or British I was regularly nailing 4 or 5 WP tanks per volley (prior to 1.01).

Do the West Germans really suck this bad?

Poliorcetes

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 11

RE: German Nato units weak - 3/5/2005 5:45:15 AM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

I'm not too surprised. The WG MechIfn units are either in Luchs (truck w/lmg) or Marder (20mm cannon and dismounted RPG weapons). The UK forces aren't much better. Soviets have larger cannons on the BMP-2 (30mm) and a ATGM (AT-/AT-5) giving them longer range kill potential. The US is the best off with the M2/M3. Both have a good gun and TOW missles and I believe thermal sights too. I would suggest keeping Marder AT units with the Milan or JAG1's or 2's near by for the better standoff firepower or get them right up close and personal where your grunts can hit them hard.

My 2 cent worth.

S!

Cap'n D

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 12

RE: German Nato units weak - 3/5/2005 6:15:57 PM

Capitaine

Posts: 1043
Joined: 1/15/2002
Status: offline

I just completed and won the "Soviet Tank Rush" scn as the WP by using group waypoint movement -- keeping them on "assault" -- for entire battalions. Initially, I got the 3 tank battalions deployed at a jumping off point, and then just rolled forward toward suspected enemy positions, with my northernmost bn hoping to flank to British position. Not long after contact, the British line units were no more. Just too much concentrated firepower for the NATO platoons to handle. Truly a "tank rush".

For some reason, I even ignored artillery pretty much so I didn't get many, if any, art'y barrages on NATO positions. Had I done so, it might've been an even greater slaughter.

When using limited staff, there simply aren't enough movement orders to advance with speed and keep your battalions spread out. I felt the key was that I hit with everything simultaneously, even if I got caught in a few NATO barrages in the process.

I still had a lot of radio traffic though, which I suspect was due to the 1 hour reporting interval I had set. I note that others use much less frequent intervals, or even never, for their WP forces. I'll give this a try.

BTW, my Bn HQ units kept up with my combat units and participated in the actions. I lost one, I believe, compared to virtually all of them lost by NATO.

Anyone else using these group battalion assault moves w/ WP to bludgeon NATO? Perhaps it won't work in other scenarios, but it sure as heck avoided any piecemeal attack weakness that you otherwise see when trying to micromanage the WP...

_____________________________

(in reply to CapnDarwin)

Post #: 13

Kraut Fishing - 3/19/2005 5:57:30 PM

Poliorcetes

Posts: 140
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline

A little tidbit about the West Germans. Their infantry seem to be very susceptible to chemical attacks. I've had entire units (infantry and HQ) wiped out with a single attack.
My favorite tactic is to "fish" for infantry by gassing large areas. Any hits get follow up gas attacks until the unit ceases to exist.

Tank Rush - certainly large WP formations can cause havok. But I suspect you will find that taking an extra turn or 2 to spread out your attack rather than lump them up leads to less losses. Nothing makes me happier as Nato as to see 2 or 3 large units in 1 square. I can always get a couple of artillery and air attacks into that area, plus lay a carpet of mines in their direction of movement. My worst nightmare is those same units adjacent to each other, makes it really hard to concentrate firepower or block them with mines.

Poliorcetes

(in reply to Capitaine)

Post #: 14

wp defence - 3/26/2005 7:17:26 AM

Poliorcetes

Posts: 140
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline

Ok, I'm playing my first WP on defence scenario vs. Germans. Frankly I'm overwhelmed. Nato has very accurate arty, helos, more orders (playing a High EW setting), and what seems to be a 1:1 parity in tanks (german IFV's are a joke). Despite my opponnent making many mistakes such as isolated attacks and grouping, I am being overrun quite easily. Nato artillery is getting a 50% kill rate on my dug in troops in cities, while my Neutralizing Artillery attacks on his stack of 5 tank units (20 tanks) has a 0% hit rate (he's assaulting in a city hex). If it wasn't for a chemical attack that killed 2 tanks I would have fired 6 off board barrages directly on his units with no effect.
If I wait for him his longer range destroys me, if his artillery doesn't get me first. My only successes has been when he assaulted into a unit hidden inside a city. I stil got wiped out by his artillery but I was at least killing his units.

Anyone got any suggestions? I'm out of ideas and rapidly running out of units.

Poliorcetes

< Message edited by Poliorcetes -- 3/26/2005 7:25:42 AM >

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 15

RE: wp defence - 4/12/2005 6:42:56 PM

Poliorcetes

Posts: 140
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline

Still finding WP artillery to be useless except for gas attacks. I hit a stack of 4 US Tank groups (16 tanks) with 3 offboard Neutralize attacks in open terrain while they were assaulting. Not one hit . . .
On the other hand by randomly gassing large (3x3 swathes) of terrain, I wiped out 50% of a US IFV company (4 units).

Now granted, gassing tanks doesn't always work, but it works better than plain artillery if you are WP.

Nato of course is the king of artillery. My opponents random bombardment of my entrenched tank unit in a city netted 7 tanks killed, without an line of sight with a single barrage.

My current WP doctrine is to only use offboard arty for gas attacks, otherwise leave it on counter attack. On board arty is typically the useless mortars, also only good for quick gas attacks.

Poliorcetes

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 16

RE: wp defence - 4/13/2005 12:34:53 AM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

Poliorcetes,

I'll look into the Arty numbers and see if there is a data glitch. Some of the NATO Arty gets ICM's which are tank killing rounds (If NATO has any MLRS units you are in deep... ...trouble). I'll have to review data to see what the WP forces have for ICM equivalent capability. Standard arty will have a tough time getting armour kills against first line NATO armor. What your Arty can do is where down the units and cause them to get fatigued and lower morale. This will hamper their fighting capabilities.

S!

Cap'n D

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 17

wp tutorial - 4/13/2005 2:27:04 AM

wolfh2o

Posts: 5
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline

Thanks for sharing your above strategies & tactics all. It has helped me greatly cutting my teeth on FG.
After some fairly easy wins with NATO on a few scns I've gone over to WP and ramped up the realism settings. Going through the turorial again has been quite a different challenge than playing NATO.
After a few tries I'm still not able to get a victory in the first tut scn. My latest try I set a gnarly ambush for NATO, made full use of prime positions for LOS, then followed with a counter attack, wiping out atleast 65% of thier forces (and losing only a single vehicle of mine) but still ends in a draw. Is it possible to win?

(in reply to CapnDarwin)

Post #: 18

RE: wp tutorial - 4/13/2005 10:36:00 AM

Poliorcetes

Posts: 140
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline

Well actually I have managed to pull out a win almost everytime, despite my negative sounding posts. It is just frustrating to coordinate a great artillery barrage and to have it do zilch "damage." Now true, I did lower Nato's morale and after lots of gas he has retreated. But playing WP is very different than Nato, and the weakness of everything except air defense can be frustating. Not to say its not accurate, but it takes a huge mind shift to accept that losing only 2:1 odds is a "success."
Counterbattery is very fickle as WP, and all that onboard artillery looks tougher than it really is. Its a rare day that on board artillery responds to attacks as WP, just due to the poor command and control. These are just things you have to take into account as part of your strategy. But you can win.

Poliorcetes

(in reply to wolfh2o)

Post #: 19

RE: wp tutorial - 4/13/2005 1:15:55 PM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

Poliorcetes,

As WP, have you worked with the Direct Support command to attach Arty to your lead units? This really seems to help get fast response from the arty at your point of attack.

S!

Cap'n D

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 20

RE: wp tutorial - 4/14/2005 1:25:04 AM

Poliorcetes

Posts: 140
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline

Granted, Direct support is the only way you have a chance for your on board arty to do anything. But you still need to lower your expectations on what WP arty will do for you. Nato arty kills things, WP arty is like your mother in law visiting - nothing dies but your morale drops and you get fatigued ;p
The exception is of course when they use gas, which can actually kill Nato IFV's and the occasional tank.
And low morale can force Nato to retreat, giving you time to regroup.

Poliorcetes

(in reply to CapnDarwin)

Post #: 21

Minefield nightmare - 4/25/2005 12:16:55 AM

Poliorcetes

Posts: 140
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline

Ok I just found out the hard way that if you are on a minefield, and there is a traffic jam where your unit can't move, everytime they TRY to move it triggers a mine attack.

Poliorcetes

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 22

Bridging tips - 4/26/2005 7:38:47 AM

Poliorcetes

Posts: 140
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline

Important lesson with bridging. You need about 1 bridge for every 2-3 units. Anything less and you can get some terrible traffic jams unless your units are very far apart.

Poliorcetes

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 23

RE: Strategy Thread - 5/7/2005 1:24:21 AM

Burthold

Posts: 12
Joined: 5/6/2005
Status: offline

It has been my experience that being too decisive yeilds defeat. Take it slow, do not expoit, and DO NOT assault objectives with force. A successful assualt, when I am playing, on the main objective (where all of the enemy usually are) halts the game when they are down to 20% and gives me a loss because I did not have the foresight to occupy the 10000m around me...before I assulted.

Take those armored companies and spread them around. Do not keep them in a focused decisive combat unit untill you have taken all of the "victory areas" surrounding you. Then regroup them back to their starting position and assult your objective. You won't have have the pleasure of seeing your enemy routed BUT at least you will not get a draw as you are 1 step away from what would be a total victory.

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 24

RE: Strategy Thread - 5/15/2005 11:13:41 PM

Hammertime

Posts: 3
Joined: 5/8/2005
Status: offline

After a couple weeks of playing the game, I must say that I am extremely happy with my purchase of FPG. I can't wait to install the 103 patch! After reading this thread, I played "Soviet Punch" from both sides.

As NATO commander, result was a marginal victory. The overall strategy was to engage WP forces from as far as possible and keep them out of arms reach. Doctrine: Tanks keep 1500m away, Mech inf keep 1500m away.

1) Used mech. inf to scout along the north ridge down the valley. They didn't last long but enabled a few good air-strikes.
2) Called in air strikes at a maximum rate even if no units were spotted, setting the discretionary target area to "2". The pilots almost always found targets. Most air strikes yielded 2-4 kills each so I think this is what tipped the balance of power, as the WP had no air support and ineffective arty.
3) I bet on a WP frontal assault and sent 2/3 of armour along the ridge south of Westerbruck. This is exactly what the AI did and they paid the price for it. The Leopards were able to get in the first salvos and tear into the WP attack.
4) I ordered one company of tanks to dig in and guard the eastern side of the city in hexes with the longest LOS into the valley. They were mauled but they were able to hang on just long enough.
5) I left all arty on counter-battery expect for a couple rounds of mine-laying to slow down the WP.

The WP did not carry out many chemical attacks which enabled the Leopards to stay dug in. Also, the WP did not have any effective anti-air defense. Only 2 jets were shot down.

From the WP side, the result was a tactical victory. My strategy was to launch a 2 pronged attack, and get up-close and personal with the NATO forces. The Soviet Punch would come from the south immediately after a frontal feint from the east. Doctrine: Mech formations keep 0m away. HQ and SAMs keep 1000m away.

1) NATO EW levels were almost nil the entire game which told me that he likely wasn't moving. This was a big mistake because I had a lot of time to position my forces and even rest them for 2 turns before the final assault. NATO would have been better off if they patrolled their flanks and kept my forces off balance. Also, it would have increased their EW levels and perhaps caused me to worry about a flank attack or some sort of surprise.
2) I had the offboard arty gas Westerbruck each and every turn until the final assault, with 75% of the priority given to the southern and eastern regions of the city. Any hex with a hit were repeatedly bombarded. Several gas kills were scored, but no HE kills were ever scored.
3) I kept the SAMs, HW, and mortars within a few hexes of eachother and kept them no further than 2.5km from the mechanized companies.
4) I tried to keep my HQ moving the entire game, but after 5 turns it was being bombarded by NATO arty so much that it often wouldn't move. I was issuing an average of 15 orders per turn so perhaps I should have been more organized. 3 kills were scored on the HQ, but it didn't really seem to hamper my forces so NATO probably would have been better off laying some mines and launching chemical attacks.
5) one turn before the main assault I called in neutralizing fire (no gas) by all off board and on-board arty to prep to the assault. during the assault, I put my offboard arty onto direct support missions with my leading formations, and used the on-board arty for further neutralizing fire.

The NATO AI only called in 3 air strikes the entire game (one resulted in 2 jets shot down). Additionally, the only unit they moved out of the city was the artillary. So when my forces stormed Westerbruck from the East, South, and South-West, they were on top of almost all the NATO forces within 3 turns. Some of my larger formations didn't even get a chance to engage before the game was over. I finished with 79% of my forces while NATO was down below 20%.

Overall, I believe that was Poliocretes has said about the respective arty etc is quite useful. I would like to get more ideas on the doctrine settings for the various NATO forces and of course WP. In general, I seem to have more success when I have NATO stand off, and WP close as much as possible.

(in reply to Poliorcetes)

Post #: 25