web analytics

Talking Tactics, Part Four

Header 4“Concealment.-An outstanding lesson of the present war is that, if their positions are accurately located, defending troops at the point of attack will be neutralized by an overwhelming air, artillery, or mortar bombardment….

Concealment must be obtained by the careful sighting and design of individual posts. Defended localities will be chosen primarily for their facilities of concealment, rather than for their field of fire. Concealment must not be jeopardized in order to obtain the “perfect” fire plan.”

Deploying as a defender in Chain of Command presents slightly different challenges to those of the attacker. Sometimes the role of attacker and defender is determined by the scenario; sometimes it will be the choice of one player to assume a stance which is initially defensive, allowing the enemy to make the initial advance, before then assuming the offensive. The following comments apply to the early stages of either scenario.

Initial Deployment
In Part Two of Talking Tactics we looked at ideal deployment points for both the attacker and defender. In both cases we sought to maximise the deployment options, specifically with regards getting troops into the firing line. However, as the defender this is not always the primary importance. As we have seen above, the 1944 British Army manual stresses concealment above the perfect fire plan. So, let us look at how we can amend the original Jump-Off marker placement in order to maximise concealment.

In the following diagram we can see the two foremost Jump-Off points have been dropped back slightly by around 4”. In both cases this reduces the area where troops can deploy along the hedgerow facing the enemy’s line of approach. However, it still is sufficient to allow a whole squad to deploy in either forward position, as we see indicated below by the solid white arrows.

4DeploymentBy withdrawing the Jump-Off Points slightly we also find that the ability to deploy laterally, to move to the left or right is increased. What is more, these key points are better protected from a coup de main by the enemy who, with the initiative in his favour, may be inclined to rush forward to deny the defender their use. To do that now would involve significantly more movement and include the negotiation of obstacles. In this way, we have sacrificed slightly, but not significantly, our ability to deploy to the ideal firing position, but we have significantly improved our concealment as a result.

In Part Three of Talking Tactics we considered the attacker’s imperative to determine the defender’s position so that he could then best deploy his troops in order to achieve local superiority. We will look more at the importance of fire and movement to achieve this result in the next part of the series. For now, suffice to say that the defender should do all he can to retain as much of his force off-table, in reserve, until the attacker has shown his hand and committed his forces to the attack. By retaining a flexible reserve he may then direct these troops to the most advantageous point in order to block that move.

Let us look at what is possibly the defender’s worst scenario; facing an enemy deploying aggressive scouts probing towards the jump-off points. Here we see that with the map amended to show our better concealed Jump-Off Points:

4ScoutsBy deploying small scouting units the attacker is placing the defender in a position where he eventually must deploy troops, or he will lose one or more Jump-Off points. By altering our deployment, the defender has made it much less likely that a lucky dash forward can shut down the Jump-Off Point, but that does not remove the threat entirely. In this situation there are several key tactical rules which the defender should observe:

1. If you have a sniper with your force, deploy him as soon as possible to fire against the scouts. Scouts are particularly susceptible to sniper attacks. With no Leader present they cannot go onto Overwatch and, as a result cannot spot the sniper. With double Shock being inflicted and the enhanced ability to kill the sniper is the perfect weapon for use against scouts.

2. When deploying against Scouts, attempt to counter two enemy thrusts with a single parry of your own. In the above example, the two most northerly enemy Scouts teams could be dealt with by deploying just one squad to face them.

3. NEVER deploy troops to fire on Scouts at a range over 18”. If you are obliged to deploy, do so at the last practical moment when you are almost guaranteed to eliminate the threat, thereby damaging your opponent’s Force Morale. By delaying the deployment of your troops for as long as possible, you are inviting your opponent to deploy his own force too quickly, giving you the upper hand.

4. Never over-react by deploying your best support weapons against Scouts. They are very dangerous opponents, but their teams are very small and very brittle. Deploying mortars or a tripod mounted machine gun against them is both unnecessary and unwise.

Of course not all enemy forces will deploy Scouts; some nations are more likely to do so that others due to their tactical doctrine. Where no Scouts are deployed the attacker should stuill consider all of the points outlined above. Again, NEVER deploy troops to fire at a range over 18”. Allow the enemy to come as close to your positions as will allow you the best possible shot. In many cases, delaying will not only reduce the range, but will likely see your enemy further from friendly cover, and, therefore, less able to retreat to safety. If you open fire as soon as he crosses a hedge he will simply move back across it to regain cover. Allow him to move into an exposed position with no nearby cover before committing your hand. As we will see in the next part of Talking Tactics, firefights are very dangerous situations for both sides, so stack the odds in your favour as far as is possible.

Most important of all, never deploy units onto the table until the moment you require them to act decisively. Defending troops deploying onto the table should only do so at the moment when they open fire or when they are committed to a close combat counter-attack immediately adjacent to a Jump-Off point.

Deep Defence
In situations where an enemy has the advantage of firepower, be that mortars or tanks, the defender should avoid defending a perimeter which presents the enemy with an easy target. The best way to achieve that is to deploy as far as possible to your rear. The longer troops are in action, the less well-co-ordinated they become; the longer they advance without encountering an enemy, they more daring, or even reckless, they become. If we elect to deploy deeply, as shown on the following image, we are obliging them to advance almost the entire length of the table before we meet them with a co-ordinated response from close quarters.

4Deep DeploymentAs the enemy advance it is highly likely their cohesion will be reduced and they will not be able to respond with all of their firepower. We can see how, with short range firepower, the defenders are likely to cause maximum damage on the attacker. What is more, the selected deployment area means that at no point will enemy tanks have a direct line of sight to the defenders, and the attacking forces are too close to the defenders to call for supporting mortar fire, that is presuming that the Forward Observer is in a position to see the target, unlikely when they tend not to lead the advance!

It is vital to remember here that to defeat a force we are not seeking to kill every last man. As we saw in Part One of Talking Tactics:

“It is not necessary to kill or wound a man to defeat him. You can beat him equally well by destroying his morale, be removing his desire to go on fighting, by making him think he has been beaten.”

If the defender can amass sufficient firepower to hit the attacker’s morale hard, deploying deep can allow him to win whilst minimise his own casualties.

Of course the above doctrine does assume that, in most terrain, tanks are likely to allow the infantry to lead the way. However, if that is not the case then tanks are easy meat for infantry anti-tank weapons and their loss is a very effective way to lower your opponent’s Force Morale without damaging his core platoon. Either way, deploying in this manner does allow a weaker force to concentrate their resources whilst negating their opponent’s apparent superiority.

The Lesson
Concealment is the defender’s greatest weapon, especially when combined with well-sited defences and the ability to delay engaging the enemy until the most advantageous moment. Retention of reserves is, ultimately, key to holding the initiative at key moments in a battle which inherently favours your opponent in that respect. Remember:

“A highly trained enemy who can resist the temptation to blaze away whenever he sees a target, however, attractive, will be difficult to locate…careful control of fire in defence is vital”

In the next part of Talking Tactics we will look at fire and movement and why such tactics are at the heart of Chain of Command.

You may also like...

17 Responses

  1. Martin B says:

    What a pile of shite. If you need this much coaching for a game then it’s clearly too frigging complicated. Long love Bolt Action, the best WWII rules ever.

  2. Ed Leland says:

    Well done! I’m really enjoying how closely game tactics are aligning with historical tactics.

    @Martin B – if real world tactics are too complicated for you, then I’m glad you’ve found a game you enjoy, but I’m not sure they are actually count as WW2 rules

  3. Gary says:

    Where would the world be without comedians? 😀

    These articles are great, keep em coming.

  4. Emilio says:

    Habemus troll…

    This is not coaching, it is learning real tactics.
    Bolt action? Look at this:
    http://arlequinsworld.blogspot.com.es/2013/05/whats-wrong-with-bolt-action.html

  5. Troy says:

    Fascinating series, thank you!

  6. Brian English says:

    Martin B :
    What a pile of shite. If you need this much coaching for a game then it’s clearly too frigging complicated. Long love Bolt Action, the best WWII rules ever.

    Bolt Action = Candyland with 28mm figures. But to each his own, brother.

  7. Colin says:

    Martin, everyone finds his own level.

  8. Jason says:

    If Bolt Action is your thing then that’s fine, but why do you feel the need to come on here and knock an informative set of articles for a different set of rules?

  9. Laffe says:

    So Martin, there’s no point in using tactics with Bolt Action? I thought there were a ton of such videos and articles for that game too?

  10. oozeboss says:

    Firstly, to address the relevant: these are a sensational series of profound articles, and I’m actually copying and collating them as a primer for others who I’m introducing to the hobby.

    As for the digression: I actually play both games, and as has been said before here, to each their own. There is a similar CoC aficionado who regularly interjects on the other games’ threads on WargamerAU, and like our’s here, his contributions are infuriating irrelevancies. So let’s all just ignore the troll and focus on accentuating the positives.

  11. Schmitt says:

    Please don’t diss Candyland, I still love that game today. 🙂

    And , more on point, this is an excellent blog series, in support of the fantastic and sublime CoC.

    Thank you Rich.

  12. Truscott Trotter says:

    Personally I find Bolt Action as realistic as Snakes and ladders with Tanks
    The fire and combat mechanisms are a joke frankly
    CoC is a relatively simple but elegant set of rules where most things work as you would expect and real life tactics are rewarded.
    Keep the articles coming Rich

  13. Benito says:

    I have just read this. It seems we have some deep thinkers, argumentative and critic- constructive guys in the Forum. I wonder if they have even tested the rules.

    Anyway, thanks Rich for these four articles useful to keep on playing or better said enjoying Chain of Command. My gaming group has been playing now fir 15 months in a row without showing any sign of exhaustation!!

  14. Rene vd Assem says:

    Martin B :
    What a pile of shite. If you need this much coaching for a game then it’s clearly too frigging complicated. Long love Bolt Action, the best WWII rules ever.

    Now that is a well thought through and intelligent response.

  15. John Michael says:

    Really the best one so far, thank you.

    John

  16. Chris says:

    Bolt Action = Snakes & Ladders. Spot on Mr Trotter! 🙂

    Rich – excellent series of articles, thank you very much for posting.

  17. Rocky says:

    Martin B, if it is each to his own then don’t leave such stupid comments. I mean really dude. Bolt Action is 40k WW2, a great way of getting kids into more intelligently written games. CoC has some much more flexibility, originality, and tactical depth. Obviously if you like arming all your Germans with Stg44’s and using vague lists with little to no historical accuracy then stick with Bolt Action. This article is about explaining how to use your troops effective. It does not explain how to play the game.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *