Help support TMP

"Stryker Rifle Platoon Hasty Attack" Topic

7 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Solo Wargamers Message Board

Back to the Ultramodern Gaming (2008-present) Message Board

Back to the Modern Battle Reports Message Board

1,057 hits since 23 Oct 2017
©1994-2018 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Jozis Tin Man23 Oct 2017 2:46 p.m. PST


See above, feel free to comment here or on my blog.
- What do you think about the platoon leader's initial plan and execution?

- What would you have done differently?

- What would the outcome have been if there had been ATGM's in the position?


Lion in the Stars23 Oct 2017 7:08 p.m. PST

Considering that the Stryker Company has a pair of 120mm mortars, I would have called fire onto the hill at the start. This should have reduced the fire hitting the platoon, and probably would have kept 3rd squad combat-effective.

I'm also assuming that you aren't fielding the MGS platoon in the company, since those guns have had all the issues. If you are including the MGS platoon, one of the usual options was to attach one MGS truck to each infantry platoon when the platoons were operating separately.

With an MGS available, I would have also had it put HE fire onto the hilltop position in addition to the mortars.

Jozis Tin Man24 Oct 2017 4:00 a.m. PST

Thank, Lion. I did this as a simple Hasty Attack, just to exercise basic fire and movement tactics, sort of like a tactical decision game.

Next, I'll start stepping it back up and add the company mortars, maybe a couple of BMP's to the mix (I have not painted up my BTR-82A's yet) or a SPRUT AT Gun

It was easy to leverage the superior mobility over a dismounted force when I was not worried about getting nailed by an ATGM…

I need to paint up my Bradley's too and run the same scenario.

Jozis Tin Man24 Oct 2017 7:05 a.m. PST

Oh, I have also finally updated the theme on my blog so you can actually read my responses to comments!

Apparently dark grey on black is pretty unreadable…

UshCha13 Nov 2017 2:35 p.m. PST

I suspect you may have a rules problem. The MG 240 should be able to engage out at least to 1500 m on a tripod. This would effectively put most of the enemy squad out of range. None the less as you stated you needed the strikers and other teams to suppress the enemy while the MG set up to be safe.

The AGS 30 can fire over terrain so could have been placed where it could not be engaged by direct fire. Admittedly this would effectively mean it could not hit the strikers while moving but would have slowed the attacking infantry down and be less vulnerable.

Enemy would have been better set up as a cross fire from the rear of the woods. This would have forced the strikers to get closer and hence at more risk from RPG,S. The squads covering each other front. While no mention of ground scale the woods cannot be more than about 250m apart. If they were, Courts Marshal the enemy commander for incompetence. Spread too thin and you are no threat at all.

Another option for the Srykers may have been to smoke the main team on the left and then attack the team on the left before the enemy can respond by moving out of the existing positions because of the smoke. Wargamers seem to use much less smoke than real troops for some reason. Learned this from a real platoon commander.

Sorry to be so late but needed time to think and plan.

Fundametaly the Srykers did not use their fire supremacy from the outset. Shoot everything that can suppress to get fire superiority then assult.

The enemy could guess they would face mobile forces so should have deployed to minimise the impact of the vehicles bu deploying to the rear of the obstacle.

Hope this helps Brian


Jozis Tin Man17 Nov 2017 8:24 a.m. PST

Thanks! I did pick up a copy of your rules from Wargames Vault and will give them a shot. Thanks!

UshCha17 Nov 2017 10:29 a.m. PST

While I am flatterd about you buying the rules, that was not my intention. I strongly suggest you download our free stuff first to get a look at what it involves. You play with small figures. This may be an issue, we have played we with 6 mm but to get the best you need to be able to turn at least primary weapons to face in the desired direction. Not sure your models can do this. Obviously there are ways round this but it means more markers.

Our rules will not tell you how to fight like above, they will allow you to fight correctly. They will not teach tactics. I would suggest you use your rules and see if they can do the job. If they don't have smoke or have logarithmic weapon ranges then change will be necessary.
Try the scenario again and look at how it plays. If it gives a better result then the issue is tactics, not rules(regardless of who wins).

Solo wargames is something I have not done much of. What I have done was with the objective was to check weapon factors. You are going further.

I think that were I to do solo the interest would be in setting up defences and then having to attack them. The fun would be in the planning.

I would guess that the Russians are not that far from the US and carry about 6 Claymore type mines for use use by a platoon in defence. This would also help the Russians a bit.

Also can I suggest that you Google an area of the type you are going to play on. Typicaly there is more terrain than you use. This makes the game better with any rules.

Most of all have fun and I am more than happy to chat about tactics as to me it's what it's about.

One advantage of your scale maybe you can play bigger more complex games on a small table. These need even more planning. You become the general both sides have to wait and see if there plans work.

Above all have fun and keep us informed.


Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.