[DS2] Complex 15 Assault: AAR (long)

7 posts ยท Nov 9 2001 to Nov 12 2001

From: Noel Weer <noel.weer@v...>

Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 19:32:09 -0600

Subject: [DS2] Complex 15 Assault: AAR (long)

This was the first serious playtest of a scenario I am working on.

The intent was for a scenario that could fit in a standard 4 hour con format
without being a straight meeting engagement. I wanted a mission, with
objectives, etc.... I also wanted it to feel more fluid, and like a story. To
do this I added "cards" that the defender had to turn in to activate calls for
support and reinforcements. Each of these triggered die rolls for how long
they had to wait, and got them another "card" that represented the radio
message exchange for their request.

We simply designated 3 buildings in the facility for the operation. The
scenario has an optional random, blind choice option. We also designated the
facility as a urban environment - which is not necessary.

I will be publishing a more flexible version of this for others to download
and try, soon (pdf with the cards etc. included).

[BTW: for those that remember the recent Genetic Engineered Infantry
debate, this was the first serious combat test of their design. I removed the
controversial extra arty observation ability but left them at 5 to kill.]

RAIDER Objective
=========
Intelligence has indicated that a significant threat is developing within the
opposing force. Enemy research efforts are reaching towards a breakthrough
that could unbalance the current military situation. Unfortunately, full
details on the status of this research have eluded intelligence gathering
efforts.

Your mission is to escort and defend a force of engineers and intelligence
elements. The priorities for this mission are to gather physical evidence of
the current enemy research efforts and to destroy designated key portions of
the facility. (There is more: essentially, the 33rd was to land first and
clear the path. Then it was to set up blocking positions to secure the flanks
and provide cover for later withdrawal. The 16th infantry was to provide the
immediate escort and security for the engineers.)

Force
=====
33rd Armored Company 2 armor platoons (B2, O3), each with:
** 4 T-BT-8b "Cavalier" type MBT (class 3, slow GEV, DFFGx5)
2 armor platoons (O2, B1), each with:
** 4 T-CL-2 "Claymore" type MBT (class 3, fast GEV, HELx5)

16th Infantry Company 4 infantry platoons (O2, O1, B1, B3), each with: ** 3
line infantry elements
** 2 GMS/L teams (enhanced FCS)
** 1 APSW team ** 2 power armor elements
** 3 I-CL-3a "Inverness" type IFV (Class 3, fast GEV, HELx1)
** 1 I-CL-2 "Chimera" type IFV (Class 4, fast GEV, HELx1)
** 1 C-CL-2 "Kentron" type command (Class 2, fast GEV, RFACx1)
2 armor support elements (attached from 6th Lancers) (O2, B1), each with:
** 4 D-CL-3 "Hellion" type combat cars (Class 3, fast GEV, 3 DFFGx2)

3rd Engineering Cohort (ad-hoc)
1 transport platoon (attached from 23rd support battalion) (B2), with:
** 5 H-CL-1 "Freshman" type trucks (Class 4, low mobility-wheeled, no
armament) 2 engineering teams (B2, O3)
2 Intel Team (not represented on the combat board - consider them
integral to the engineering teams)

Fire Support The mission does have access to supporting fire from a heavy
orbital platform. This platform's current fuel supply has not allowed it to
achieve a stationary orbit. This limits its availability to single fire
missions once an hour (4 turn intervals: Turns 1,5,9,13,17,etc., counts as 2
heavy arty guns).

DEFENDER Objective
=========
Technicians and scientists of the government are reported to be nearing
significant breakthroughs that will greatly enhance our military capabilities.
Our enemies will surely attempt to steal or destroy the knowledge that our
researchers have garnered.

(The air support, artillery, 8th armor, 11th infantry, and local militia were
all random arrivals.)

Force
=====
Research Complex 15 Security Detail 1 infantry platoon (B1), with: ** 5 line
infantry elements 2 armored platoons, each with: ** 4 Vampire Mk I BT (B2,B3)
(Class 3, slow tracked, HVCx3) 3 AT elements, each with: ** 1 Buttress Mk I At
Gun (Class 2, towed, HVCx4)

Akeoga Volunteer Militia (G2) 2 elements of militia infantry

11th Infantry Company 3 platoons of infantry (B2, B1, G1), each with: ** 6
line infantry elements
** 2 GMS/L teams (superior FCS)
** 4 Beatle Mk Ia APCS (Class 3, fast GEV, no armament) 1 platoon of GE
infantry (O1), with: ** 6 line infantry elements
** 2 GMS/L teams (superior FCS)
** 4 Beatle Mk Ia APCS (Class 3, fast GEV, no armament)

8th Armored Company 4 platoons of MBT (B2, B3, O2, B1), each with:
** 5 T-EC-1 "Yergecheffe" type MBT (Class 3, slow GEV, MDCx5)
2 platoons of heavy tanks (B2, B1), each with:
** 4 T-BT-3a "Dragonne" type heavy tank (Class 5, slow GEV, DFFGx4)

Air Support 3rd Wing, 2nd Air Force, with:
** 2 GAF-5-A type ground attack fighters (Class 2, aerospace, RFACx1,
DFOx2)

Fire Support 18th Artillery, with: ** 3 Daemon Mk II SPG (Class 4, Grav, med.
arty)

(This was some days ago, so it may not be 100% accurate but the essence of the
events is here)

Turn 0
=====
The scenario lays out a defense outpost near a likely insertion site and
approach towards the facility. The starting infantry for the defense was
positioned there. The defending players were taken out of the room and
notified of the loss of their forward position one of the "radio messages".
This started the battle.

Turn 1
======
The raider armored company began moving towards the facility -
2 platoons on each flank around the central forest. The defenders exercised
their option to call for their air support and advanced their two armored
platoons (one to each flank) to harass the enemy's advance.

Turn 2
======
A brief exchange of fire on the southern flank produced 1 tank kill on each
side. Initial exchange on the North produced no losses. The defenders placed
their call for artillery support.

Turn 3
======
The raider infantry company landed and began moving out.

On the Southern flank the raider's completely eliminated the remaining
opposing tanks (3), at a cost of one tank.

Fire exchanged in the North eliminated 2 defender tanks. Then the defender air
support arrived. It dropped its MAK DFO upon the 2 Southern flank raider tank
platoons. These tanks had been channeled by the terrain and were
slightly bunched... the damage was severe - 6 tanks lost, effectively
eliminating the two platoons (1 tank left).

Turn 4
======
On the Southern flank, the raiders cleaned out the opposing AT gun position.

In the North, the defenders called down their artillery on a hillside occupied
by an
raider tank platoon. The platoon moved to avoid the strike - charging
the AT gun positions and eliminated both of them. Then the defender's northern
tank platoon
exchanged fire with the other raider platoon on that flank - 2 defenders
were lost at no cost to the raiders.

Then the defender air support made its run with its HEF DFO ordinance. This
was
remarkably less dramatic - the first strike hit a tank platoon
immobilizing 1 tank, the other strike hit an platoon of APC mounted infantry
with no damage inflicted.

Turn 5
======
The engineers arrived, with their light armored support and moved towards the
facility. The last northern defenders were killed off. The defenders called
for their infantry support.

Turns 6-13
==========
The raiders rushed their infantry forward - taking up dismounted
positions within the facility, along its western edge, to block any approach
to the working engineers.

The engineers also entered the facility, beginning their work on 2 of the
structures. The combat cars arrayed themselves along the road passing through
the facility.

The defenders held the arrival of their infantry company in Turn 13 to join in
one
rush with the armor reinforcements - that had been called when the
facility was
entered - and to avoid the raider orbital artillery that was available
during Turn 13.

Turn 14
=======
The defenders had the 11th infantry and 8th armor arrive. Initial fire
exchanges were
light - one combat car & 1 APC (raiders),  2 tanks & 1 APC (defender).
(GE Playtesting Note: GE infantry die on board APCs just like norms.) The GE
infantry then dismounted.

The engineers finished their work on 2 of the buildings and moved to take care
of the third structure. We marked full building smoke across the facility for
the 2 demolished buildings. This eliminated visibility down the road...

Turn 15
=======
The GE infantry close assaulted into the smoke. They encountered elements of 2
raider
infantry platoons - 1 fell back, 1 held. Of the elements that held, 2
were PA (so
excitement was high for the first GE-PA fight), losses were light and
the second raider platoon fell back. (GE Playtesting Note: 1 GE unit had 4
valid hits drawn against it fighting the PA.) The defender did not
pursue -
concerned about over extending the GE force.

On the Southern flank, the defenders recognized how lightly defended the
raider was due to the DFO losses early on. 3 platoons began hooking up the
large hill around the woods South of the facility.

Fire exchange on the Northern flank heated up with 2-3 defender tanks
lost, and some raider infantry elements falling.

Turn 16
=======
The defender launched a close assault directly into the Western edge of the
facility. Almost a full infantry platoon slammed into 4 raider infantry
elements and an APC. The raider held to face the charge. Each side lost 2
elements. Each side held on the Reaction Checks, and in the second round of
the fight each side lost another element. The raider forces held on their
Reaction Check, but the defenders (tho still numerically superior) failed
their check and fell back. (It was one of those cool dramatic moments that
make gaming fun.)

All the raider elements that could opened fire upon the defender forces
flanking
to the South. The impact from this was negligible - only 1 (or 2) tanks
destroyed. Then the defender opened fire. Two vehicles had LOS upon one of the
engineering trucks -
the one carrying the engineer element that had finished its task and was
trying to
withdrawal. The DFFGx4 hit the target - and failed to destroy the armor
1,
flanked, soft top truck.... It was amazing. So many 0's... Then a little class
1 HEL fired on the same truck... hit... and burned it to a crisp. The
engineers failed to bail.

There was some more shooting, but it was anti-climatic.

Turn 17
=======
Did not materialize. We stopped and analyzed the situation. We agreed that
there was slim hope that the remaining engineer could evac successfully. The
freedom of the defenders to flank the raider force due to the depleted armor
(from the air support) was what turned the tide against the raid.

The remaining fighting in the facility would be quite high in casualties, but
escape could easily be sealed off by the flanking force.

We declared it a defender victory - but fun for both sides as the issue
was not obvious until Turn 15 or so.

Conclusions
===========
We decided that the facility was too close to the Western map edge. The
reinforcements for the defense should have had to advance under fire rather
than reach the facility for attacks almost immediately.

The attackers had no air defense - LAD or ADS. This proved to be serious
flaw in the raider force structure.

Some of the players wished that the initial orbital salvo would not have
guaranteed the outpost died. They were willing to wave the issue of interface
landers coming in close to enemy positions for a cool fire fight.

The random arrivals and radio messages seemed to add a lot for the defenders.
They felt it added flavor and brought the scenario alive. I was pretty happy
about this and plan to add a few of these features for the raiders.

The battle ran about 5 hours or so. Too long for the time limit goal, but it
had gone quite rapidly up until the infantry started engaging in the facility
(I am pretty sure there was more firing and what not that I left out above).
This part is fairly important to the operational plan, so I am not sure what
to do about it.

The GE forces seemed OK, but didn't get enough action to fully evaluate due

From: Jeremey Claridge <jeremy.claridge@k...>

Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:23:31 +0000 ()

Subject: Re: [DS2] Complex 15 Assault: AAR (long)

Hi Noel

Thanks for the AAR I always like to read how other people play DS.

Just a few questions though about the vehicle designs. Mainly about the size
of your guns (yes I suffer from gun size envy:) You have guns 2 sizes larger
than the vehicle size. Now was this a scenario element because I thought you
couldn't mount guns higher than 1 size difference. Also if tanks had turrets
that doesn't leave any space for other systems.

This is what I was looking at:

> ** 4 T-BT-8b "Cavalier" type MBT (class 3, slow GEV, DFFGx5)

Unless of course it was just a typo (or I'm wrong about the rules)

From: Noel Weer <noel.weer@v...>

Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:19:26 -0600

Subject: Re: [DS2] Complex 15 Assault: AAR (long)

Not a typo, and interestingly enough I had the same challenge and discussion
with one of our players. Technically, the 1 size over class is not a "rule"
but a "recommendation" (top left column of page 12, in bold).

I have 3 of my personal designs (all part of the engagement) that violate the
recommendation: size 3 vehicles with class 5 guns. In each case though, I have
tried to justify it with a design consideration.

In one case, the Yergecheffe, it is a fixed weapon. I figured that limitation
tends to balance it some, so it fits the design.

The other two are technically part of a unit that is designed intentionally
with large barrels on smaller tanks with a methodology of hard to hit
platforms (more of a theory really, that has not played out real well -
I am still not sure) are better than large platforms. What isn't obvious from
this AAR is those tanks are expensive, _really_ expensive due to high
ECM and Stealth. The cost of the design somewhat balances the weapon
discrepancy. To put it in perspective, those successfully bombing runs wiped
out about 2300 points of tanks. I hardly consider that to be worth it, and
wish the design was larger - with the armor to protect those guns - in
this instance.

I agree with the intent of the recommendation, but it really should not be
hard and fast, because it makes sense in some situations. I hardly recommend
it for all designs, though. Just what fits your force's style and methodology.

[quoted original message omitted]

From: Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@j...>

Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 18:38:03 EST

Subject: Re: [DS2] Complex 15 Assault: AAR (long)

The one size larger is a *recommended* rule. Even I *usually* use it as
recommended. But it's not required, per se.

Gracias,
Glenn/Triphibious@juno.com
This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.
Historical - Warbeads@juno.com
Fantasy and 6mm - dwarf_warrior@juno.com

On Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:23:31 +0000 () Jeremey Claridge
> <jeremy.claridge@kcl.ac.uk> writes:

From: Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@j...>

Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 18:41:53 EST

Subject: Re: [DS2] Complex 15 Assault: AAR (long)

On Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:19:26 -0600 "Noel Weer" <noel.weer@verizon.net>
writes: <snip>
> I agree with the intent of the recommendation, but it really should

Design the nation/race/group then design the FT ships and DS2
vehicles/units and SG2 squads to reflect the 'philosophy' of that group.

 But then I am a 'white box D&D' infected ex-DM myself....

Gracias,

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 08:36:44 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: [DS2] Complex 15 Assault: AAR (long)

> --- Noel Weer <noel.weer@verizon.net> wrote:

> with one of our players. Technically, the 1 size

This is the only case where violation of that rule is worth your time. Yes,
you can do it with fixed weapons at almost any size class. But the
restrictions on fixed-forward weapons are such that
those vehicles are pretty much raw meat against real tanks.

And the problem with a size 5 main gun on a size 3 vehicle is that it doesn't
leave room for anything
else.  If you opponent brings nothing but gun-armed
tanks to the fight, all is good. Combined arms tactics will take that force to
the mat but quick.

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:58:06 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: [DS2] Complex 15 Assault: AAR (long)

> --- Noel Weer <noel.weer@verizon.net> wrote:

Hrkl? If you're going in against a predominately infantry force, you need some
PDS.

> We decided that the facility was too close to the

As a side note, a "logical" map edge would help--a
significant terrain feature that restricts movement and LOS.

> The attackers had no air defense - LAD or ADS. This

That, and no counterbattery assets. But then, I'm heavily into the Deep Battle
concept. Attackers
should also have had some fire support--say 4-6 guns
with a 25/25/50% HEF/MAK/SMK loadout.  The smoke is to
cover their withdrawl in face of superior firepower. Also, sounds like they
weren't briefed on the chance of Red Air. Otherwise they wouldn't have bunched
up like that.

> Some of the players wished that the initial orbital

Yeah. Right up until they had to actually do it. I don't like attacking a
defensive position with no fire support.

It also doesn't sound like your defender used his opportunity fire options has
heavily as he could have. It's something all my opponents hate.

Another option you might incorporate would be a couple of sensor stations. If
they are not neutralized by initial artillery barrage by attacker, then the
defenders don't have to worry about radio messages or anything like that, they
see the enemy coming. This allows you to keep the orbital bombardment option
without allowing the attacker to destroy the facility on the first turn. Make
him use those rounds on some
other high-value immobile target.