Scenario War of the Fleas: the Blue Hills

Grant1pa · #1 June 2nd, 2015, 02:45 PM

The following is a scenario set hypothetically in April, 2016 involving a Russian Assault of prepared Estonian positions west of Narva (in the Blue Hills of Siminae). This same area was the site of a large battle between German and Soviet forces in 1944.

Russian Forces began assaults on Norway and Finland in 2015. Both offensives bogged down. Now Russia looks to the Baltic States to pressure the rear of the Finnish Line.

Russian MRB's have broken through the Narva frontier and a single Motorized Rifle Brigade is quickly advancing towards prepared Estonian positions in the Blue Hills. The Estonians have no armor. However, NATO has provided ATGM support, and NATO air has for the moment suppressed Russian Air and Artillery.

This scenario is designed to play as the Estonian forces (Green units) and units have had their reaction range reduced to increase effectiveness of their ATGM and anti-tank capacity.

As the Estonian commander, you must hold the three hills comprising the Blue Hills (Tower Hill, Grenadier Hill, and Orphanage Hill), a key topographic feature in the otherwise flat topography of Eastern Estonia.

Both sides are limited to only mortar supporting fire. Estonian reinforcements are limited. The Russian assault force is large.

I've played this scenario eight times before publishing it, and even knowing where the thrusts are coming from, the AI makes you work to stay alive.

Luck

Tom

shahadi · #2 June 2nd, 2015, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grant1pa

The following is a scenario set hypothetically in April, 2016 involving a Russian Assault of prepared Estonian positions west of Narva (in the Blue Hills of Siminae). This same area was the site of a large battle between German and Soviet forces in 1944.

This scenario is designed to play as the Estonian forces (Green units) and units have had their reaction range reduced to increase effectiveness of their ATGM and anti-tank capacity.

Yes. I'm eager to open this guy and see what's in store. It sounds interesting. The ATGM units have their Op-fire filtered and ranged, is that what you're saying by what I've highlighted in "red." If so, a good move, I would have done that immediately upon reviewing the force.

Thank you Grant1pa
----

Grant1pa · #3 June 2nd, 2015, 08:08 PM

Yes. I'm eager to open this guy and see what's in store. It sounds interesting. The ATGM units have their Op-fire filtered and ranged, is that what you're saying by what I've highlighted in "red." If so, a good move, I would have done that immediately upon reviewing the force.

Thank you Grant1pa
----[/quote]

Yes. That's the way I playtest this as I develop it. It just makes it a one-way scenario. If you want to play it from the Russian side, you have to load it into the editor and remove the settings (which I've done to my delight!).

Tom

shahadi · #4 June 3rd, 2015, 08:30 PM

My first impressions were dismal for the Estonians. The map is favorable to Russian mech and mtr rifle companies. Fain an assault in the center, with remaining forces flanking to strike Estonians from the south and rear were my initial inclination. Then I reviewed the Estonians:

I did not find any AT units Op-fire filtered. So, I would definitely spend time doing that, and also other units especially APC's and rifle units.

I found only one mech inf company. The remaining 11 platoons did not have a hq unit. I would at least form a mtr inf co and a rifle company. I would attach scouts, AT units, & snipers to those now three companies. Lastly, I like units to stay together rather than mixed with other units and/or spread over large areas on the map. I found too many units with direct reports to the A0 unit.

I did not look at the Russian side. Is the Russian side with way-points to objectives for each formation since it is AI controlled.

-----

Grant1pa · #5 June 4th, 2015, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

My first impressions were dismal for the Estonians. The map is favorable to Russian mech and mtr rifle companies. Fain an assault in the center, with remaining forces flanking to strike Estonians from the south and rear were my initial inclination. Then I reviewed the Estonians:

I did not find any AT units Op-fire filtered. So, I would definitely spend time doing that, and also other units especially APC's and rifle units.

I found only one mech inf company. The remaining 11 platoons did not have a hq unit. I would at least form a mtr inf co and a rifle company. I would attach scouts, AT units, & snipers to those now three companies. Lastly, I like units to stay together rather than mixed with other units and/or spread over large areas on the map. I found too many units with direct reports to the A0 unit.

I did not look at the Russian side. Is the Russian side with way-points to objectives for each formation since it is AI controlled.

-----

Thanks for the input. I had problems with waypoints for this scenario. I'm not sure if it was my own stupidity or a problem with my initial setup, but my initial waypoint flew off the map and caused issues. I'll work on correcting that as I agree that I want the units to be cohesive in the Russian Assault.

As for the OPFIRE, I thought I had that adjusted correctly but I'll take a second look at it.

The Hq matter was an error. I spent over 3 weeks working on the map and between work and other duties, it got passed me.

Truly appreciate the input to make this one better. I have a series of five more scenarios that I've done the basic research on that I want to follow this one so the input definitely helps me. I'll work on this in the coming week. I have leave time to take and it will take my mind off of the real world for awhile.

Thanks!

Tom

shahadi · #6 June 4th, 2015, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grant1pa

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

My first impressions were dismal for the Estonians. The map is favorable to Russian mech and mtr rifle companies. Fain an assault in the center, with remaining forces flanking to strike Estonians from the south and rear were my initial inclination. Then I reviewed the Estonians:

I did not find any AT units Op-fire filtered. So, I would definitely spend time doing that, and also other units especially APC's and rifle units.

I found only one mech inf company. The remaining 11 platoons did not have a hq unit. I would at least form a mtr inf co and a rifle company. I would attach scouts, AT units, & snipers to those now three companies. Lastly, I like units to stay together rather than mixed with other units and/or spread over large areas on the map. I found too many units with direct reports to the A0 unit.

I did not look at the Russian side. Is the Russian side with way-points to objectives for each formation since it is AI controlled.

-----

Thanks for the input. I had problems with waypoints for this scenario. I'm not sure if it was my own stupidity or a problem with my initial setup, but my initial waypoint flew off the map and caused issues. I'll work on correcting that as I agree that I want the units to be cohesive in the Russian Assault.

As for the OPFIRE, I thought I had that adjusted correctly but I'll take a second look at it.

The Hq matter was an error. I spent over 3 weeks working on the map and between work and other duties, it got passed me.

Truly appreciate the input to make this one better. I have a series of five more scenarios that I've done the basic research on that I want to follow this one so the input definitely helps me. I'll work on this in the coming week. I have leave time to take and it will take my mind off of the real world for awhile.

Thanks!

Tom

Okay... well, thanks for putting this and the other scenarios together. I'll take a look at the Russian side and report back here what if anything I find significant, otherwise, I'll wait for your update.

----

shahadi · #7 June 5th, 2015, 08:46 PM

Looking at the Russian side, not for TO&E aspects, but simply within the gameplay. I found that the mtr rifle companies were purchased with their vehicles, this may explain why when you set waypoint for the hq unit you're taken to the far left corner of the map. So, to overcome this, you may dismount the force hq unit and each mounted hq unit before setting waypoint for the formation. You'll find each platoon will accept a waypoint, but the co hq will behave erratically.

I have played with AI controlled mech inf assaults and have found them difficult to control. So, what has been accepted is to purchase the vehicles separate, set their speed lower than the supporting infantry unit and place them behind the infantry say 150 m. Set waypoints for the infantry and the vehicles. You'll find the inf won't dismount where you'd like, so it maybe better to have them at a reinforcement turn at the spot where you want them, dismounted. Set waypoints.

See Tomas for Russian tactics. I'm thinking the Russians would have a platoon of Sp Mortar with each company. Normally, the Bde would have, depending on the number of battalions 2-3 batteries of SPA. They would mass fires at the point of assault, there is a counter, but that's another discussion.

------

Suhiir · #8 June 6th, 2015, 09:22 AM

I had all kinds of fun creating the "Cuban Crisis" scenario. Open it with editor and take a look ... all infantry and vehicles in separate units, some vehicle speeds reduced, a zillion waypoints. And it's still far from perfect.

Grant1pa · #9 June 6th, 2015, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

Looking at the Russian side, not for TO&E aspects, but simply within the gameplay. I found that the mtr rifle companies were purchased with their vehicles, this may explain why when you set waypoint for the hq unit you're taken to the far left corner of the map. So, to overcome this, you may dismount the force hq unit and each mounted hq unit before setting waypoint for the formation. You'll find each platoon will accept a waypoint, but the co hq will behave erratically.

I have played with AI controlled mech inf assaults and have found them difficult to control. So, what has been accepted is to purchase the vehicles separate, set their speed lower than the supporting infantry unit and place them behind the infantry say 150 m. Set waypoints for the infantry and the vehicles. You'll find the inf won't dismount where you'd like, so it maybe better to have them at a reinforcement turn at the spot where you want them, dismounted. Set waypoints.

See Tomas for Russian tactics. I'm thinking the Russians would have a platoon of Sp Mortar with each company. Normally, the Bde would have, depending on the number of battalions 2-3 batteries of SPA. They would mass fires at the point of assault, there is a counter, but that's another discussion.

------

That's it! Thanks. I was resetting the waypoints yesterday and had no problem with the two tank companies or the bde hq, but did with the MR companies. I didn't see that issue in the game manual and must have missed it.

I'll check through my FM's to adjust the Russian Mortar element and then adjust the scenario to utilize them more wisely.

Just a side issue here. I received a new manual a few weeks ago which I've found to be an excellent reference for Russian (Red Team) tactics. It's compact and saves you looking through the older field manuals for composition and tactics for Russian/Soviet/Soviet bloc forces. Lightning Press publishes it, and it's called OPFOR Smartbook - Red Team Army. The only thing I don't like about it is that it is flat bound rather than a spiral binding like their other manuals. But it also comes as a digital download with/reader. Well worth the price.

Thanks again for the input. I'm on leave and want to get this scenario put to bed. I appreciate you and others help.

Tom

Grant1pa · #10 June 6th, 2015, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suhiir

I had all kinds of fun creating the "Cuban Crisis" scenario. Open it with editor and take a look ... all infantry and vehicles in separate units, some vehicle speeds reduced, a zillion waypoints. And it's still far from perfect.

Yeah, I can understand that. The topography in this one makes the assault difficult and waypoints to direct the units is imperative. Somehow the version I published got screwed up but with the help you guys have given me, I think I can resurrect it well.

I really liked this scenario and did a fair amount of research into the 44 battles there.

Thanks for the help gentlemen!

Tom