Tebessa - They never saw it coming

Nody

Right, this is something KalleTank inspired along with Bruffio; I only take credits of my l33t MS Paint skills.


Basic tactic; no arty and full out push. The tanks needed are:
3 Base defenders (Maus/T95)
10 IS-7 (Push)
2 Top tier French tanks (Medium T9 or Heavy T10, both got same top speed)

IS-7s split in two groups of 5 going over via river and middle; they park under the ridge and kill anything they see that pushed for our side and then quickly move up. Once the middle is clear the two French tanks (who hang back at our base) push out and go in while the IS-7s push up at both north and south ramps to go into their arty lines and kill 'em.

Now why would this possibly work? Because we're going against all "normal" ways of doing it by completely skipping arty. Any time spent by their arty on counter arty is wasted and as we're betting it all in one go we should also have more tanks brought to bear on their front line in the first 5 min then normal (which should in turn translate towards overcoming their defenses) and more aggressively (no arty to support so no need to play picka boo for spots).

Note base defenders are only there to prevent a cap by shooting tanks on cap; not to defend the base (nothing to defend) or kill their push.

ZZR1100

i like it. if they river rush, we have the numbers. if they push middle , we also have the numbers. if they push north, we will be on their cap before they are on ours.
the only worry really is if they camp at base which is higly unlikely

phil3995

Sounds good if they do camp base the lack of arty will make things interesting but other than that it'll be interesting to try out

Dublin_Gunner

Lets give it a go tomorrow (today lol)

mercenary2

was this tried? how did it go ?? lokks good but when done afew times we should revert to other tactics to mix up our game plans so they dont expect it

Nody

mercenary2 wrote: »

was this tried? how did it go ?? lokks good but when done afew times we should revert to other tactics to mix up our game plans so they dont expect it

This has not been tried; it was something that came out after we lost Tebessa due to them rushing middle (Base 2 has ~15s shorter rush distance start to ramp) faster then us.

Arrawin

I too like it...but 10 IS 7's is a hard thing to mass, what would be the ones to put in the mix come a shortfall....meds ? or T30's for their speed and DPS.... thoughts plz.

Arrawin

While i am on this i remember once upon a time we had a great strat that we worked upon that involved e100's, t30s and a small number of is7's. it was effective and we won a few battles in a row from it but never built on it. it may be time to rethink things lads.

Nody

Arrawin wrote: »

I too like it...but 10 IS 7's is a hard thing to mass, what would be the ones to put in the mix come a shortfall....meds ? or T30's for their speed and DPS.... thoughts plz.

T30, JT or Obj. 704 comes to mind (due to speed + gun + front armor).

Arrawin

Excuses for the punctuation....... just in from the pub...... ciao

Arrawin

Would the TD's lack of manouverabilty not effect their ability to rush Dan ?

Nody

Arrawin wrote: »

Would the TD's lack of manouverabilty not effect their ability to rush Dan ?

Well the idea would be once they are aiming "up slope" it would have minimum impact

Karma

how did it go?

Nody

Karma wrote: »

how did it go?

Not tried it yet :P

BigEejit

Nody wrote: »

T30, JT or Obj. 704 comes to mind (due to speed + gun + front armor).

I dunno about TD's ... in a GWtiger I have many times one shotted JT's and several times one shotted 704's

Nody

All I can say is, we came, we saw, we conquered! We're land owners in Tebessa again, well played for all the people who played in the different games tonight!

phil3995

Tactic worked beautifully, made their arty practically useless. Oh and it was fun

Dublin_Gunner

A show of uncounterable force wins the day.

We must look at deploying similar tactics on other maps that it might suit.

Well done everyone tonight.

Nody

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

A show of uncounterable force wins the day.

We must look at deploying similar tactics on other maps that it might suit.

Well done everyone tonight.

I'm thinking Sand river honestly; 10 IS-7/T30, 2 Bat chat, 3 Maus. Push goes via north dunes (either direction) with the Mauses sitting at the cap. Game will be over in less then 5 min either way.

ZZR1100

Nody wrote: »

I'm thinking Sand river honestly; 10 IS-7/T30, 2 Bat chat, 3 Maus. Push goes via north dunes (either direction) with the Mauses sitting at the cap. Game will be over in less then 5 min either way.

Why north and not the fastest route down the road.
this without the arty.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056554610

Dublin_Gunner

ZZR1100 wrote: »

Why north and not the fastest route down the road.
this without the arty.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056554610

I would wholeheartedly agree that if a rush tactic is to be used, the quickest point between a and b should be the route used.

We actually got caught out badly going the north route the other day when the opposing team rushed pretty much every tank straight down the road.

Nody

ZZR1100 wrote: »

Why north and not the fastest route down the road.
this without the arty.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056554610

Mainly thinking spotting; if they put a Batchat (or similar) at the location Bruffio went to on the ridge overlooking the road they spot us very early; going north they will not as the Batchats are ahead stopping anything being there beyond ridge. This is from base 2; from base 1 I'd go road.

phil3995

Well as we know the tactic failed miserably last night. I've been having a few thoughts over how we could tweak the tactic to provide our rush with a bit of support and make sure that we don't get destroyed by the enemy rush.

Now I know from being in the middle rush our IS-7s got destroyed by both being shot from the ridge by T30s and in the arse by IS-7s. Not sure how the river rush went but I'm sure due to talks last night if we get a team which does the same the they are to hunker down under the ridge so they can shoot their rush form cover. So if that does happen I think the best plan for the middle rush should break off to avoid being shot from two sides, focusing on pushing to their base while the river group is hitting their push in the back. Also keeping the T30s on the ridge at the start might be a good idea then moving them when needed. Also might be worth putting in one arty (Obj 261 - believe this has the quickest reload).

ZZR1100

i was just thinking about it phil and after watching the replay., i dont think we should send anything to the river. even on the sucessfull occasions we played this tactic,. the river is7s always took a beating.
Last night we were hit from the ridge, from the river and they also had an E100 center.
they took us out first and the mopped up the center who were taking fire from their center rush from the start.
the way to avoid this is to send every1 center and take out anything that they send center on the way accross. it will be 10 tanks against 5.(its ok to stop briefly to shoot) any1 they send to the river wont have shots on us and any1 on their left ridge wont either.
when they are dead , half go up the back ramp and half up the center ramps.
Also drop the T30s in favour of IS7s. (sry t30s , but ye will have the T110 vsoon)

phil3995

Sounds good as I've never been in the river when running this tactic never noticed what happened down there. Just little tweaks which will help improve the tactic are always good at least we're going to learn from last night. As was also mentioned last night each tactic does have weaknesses but it's knowing what they are and how you can minimise them.

Nody

Last night we lost in a 13 vs. 13 scenario with 1 - 13. They had 2 arty that added nothing, we had 2 Maus on base defence adding nothing and their only loss was the Batchat that was chased down after it left base. If you want to talk about what failed I'd start there and not with the tactic itself (it failed, no question about it) but how come 11 heavies (9 IS-7s, 2 T30s) in two groups could not manage to kill a single tank between them vs. tanks that were out in the open (rushing over and then under our ramp/at water) in smaller groups over the duration of the rush. The only answer I can think off is lack of coordination of shooting at the same target and no matter what tactic we use if that's not sorted out we'll lose.

ZZR1100

Nody wrote: »

Last night we lost in a 13 vs. 13 scenario with 1 - 13. They had 2 arty that added nothing, we had 2 Maus on base defence adding nothing and their only loss was the Batchat that was chased down after it left base. If you want to talk about what failed I'd start there and not with the tactic itself (it failed, no question about it) but how come 11 heavies (9 IS-7s, 2 T30s) in two groups could not manage to kill a single tank between them vs. tanks that were out in the open (rushing over and then under our ramp/at water) in smaller groups over the duration of the rush. The only answer I can think off is lack of coordination of shooting at the same target and no matter what tactic we use if that's not sorted out we'll lose.

Its called crossfire dan. we were in it , they were not. the tactic was to bypass their tanks and make it to the other ridge. not pick targets and shoot at 1 until we reached the ridge and were out of arty fire. At this stage we were down 3 or 4 tanks and after that when they also had their base defenders coming into the battle, it was just a case of mop up.
i think we shouldn't give up on a tactic just because of a loss (even a bad1) .
that tactic worked something like 5 out 6 times(co ordination or not ). Although i would tweak it a bit as i have suggested above.

Dublin_Gunner

Nody wrote: »

Last night we lost in a 13 vs. 13 scenario with 1 - 13. They had 2 arty that added nothing, we had 2 Maus on base defence adding nothing and their only loss was the Batchat that was chased down after it left base. If you want to talk about what failed I'd start there and not with the tactic itself (it failed, no question about it) but how come 11 heavies (9 IS-7s, 2 T30s) in two groups could not manage to kill a single tank between them vs. tanks that were out in the open (rushing over and then under our ramp/at water) in smaller groups over the duration of the rush. The only answer I can think off is lack of coordination of shooting at the same target and no matter what tactic we use if that's not sorted out we'll lose.

It was utter chaos Dan, and we were caught in a crossfire - that's why we got pummeled so quickly. It was impossible to try co-ordinate shooting a single target for a couple of reasons.

1. There were multiple targets to shoot.

2. We were being shot from at least 2 sides.

3. Our tank groups should have formed up into 2 separate fire groups each (4 in total) each with a fire commander choosing targets.

When we have formed into fire groups, with 1 calling the targets - it worked extremely well before.

The tactic, while can work, needs to be co-ordinated a LOT better than the hap-hazard of rushing everyone and see what happens type of thing like last night.


The group going to the river mouth should have went down to the river, around H9. This would have given this group protection from the ridge, and taken heat off the other group by being able to fire back at the IS7's near our base.

Once their rush was mostly cleared, we could have made our move.

Oh, and against a team like that who supported their rush from the ridge, arty would have been a huge benefit.

But if we are to do a similar tactic again, I'd be enforcing what I stated above, plus ensuring our base defence tanks are supporting our attack from the ridge. They were basically left to do nothing at the start (through no fault of their own).

Nody

Give it ago and try a central rush or go back to base camping; I can predict the results of it right now but at this stage I'm going to give up on doing these tactics and leading because it's a waste of time.

Dublin_Gunner

Nody wrote: »

Give it ago and try a central rush or go back to base camping; I can predict the results of it right now but at this stage I'm going to give up on doing these tactics and leading because it's a waste of time.

Why? Because sometimes it doesn't work out??

We've all been there Dan, and now more than ever we need our experienced guys doing the business for us. This quite obviously includes you.

I haven't been doing much on the tactical front for a little while.

Its a PITA. When it works, you're everyones god, but get it wrong once and an hour of deliberation of why the tactic is crap ensues.

But you just gotta let it be water off a ducks back - its not gonna work every time, but people often can't see past the most recent result. This is what you have to realise.

Nody

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Why? Because sometimes it doesn't work out??

Execution (including me and everyone else) or rather lack of it. It's a waste to keep on thinking up new tactics as our execution is far to poor for the tactics to matter beyond the basic point of were tanks go (and even that still fails on a regular basis after people have been told multiple times were to go and what tactic we're trying to perform).