After-Action Report: Battle for the Flank: CPX Dec 20, 1997
		James Sterrett

Players:

NATO:
	Bill Jennings (CO)
	Robert Statius-Muller
	Scott Davies
	John McKinney

OPFOR:
	Jerry Hall (CO)
	Steve Althouse
	Steve Heaton
	Gary Wollbach (unable to play at last minute)
	Tim Harmon  (unable to play at last minute)

Umpire: James Sterrett

	This scenario was designed as a low-force-density meeting engagement.  To do this, several 
experiments were tried:

1) While map 01 was used, the players were put in a north-south confrontation instead of an east-west one.  
This gave each side a frontage of 15.5 kilometers, and sharply reduced the depth available as well.

2) Each side was left largely in the dark as to the enemy's force, mission, and possible intent - although all 
of this could be made clearer by choosing extra intel over extra forces.

Orders to each side:

==========

US Orders:

Format: Informal.

While the main elements of both sides clash to the west, your force has been detailed to screen in sector 
Map 01.  You are to prevent enemy movement through this sector to the north, and are to maintain our line 
as far south as possible - preferably moving it south of Map 01 if possible.  [In game terms: exit units south 
while preventing the enemy from doing the same to the north.  Units exited are counted by company.]

Your forces are deployed an any manner desired North of northing 05 and West of easting 07 on Map 01.  
(Units may deploy & maneuver by platoons.)

Your forces:

3 Companies of M-1 tanks

1 Company of M-2 Mech Inf

1 Air Defense Company (3 LAV-25 with 9 Stingers)

1 Anti-Tank Company (12x M-901)

2 155mm batteries off-map (25/5/5)

No air support.

You also have the option of having either more intel on the enemy, or more forces.  This chice must be 
made in your initial plan; the nature of the reinforcement or intel is not clear at this time (ie you must make 
your choice blind).

[They choose intel, and learned of the Opfor mission, initial deployment area, and Order of Battle.  Just 
before the game, they were told of Opfor's initial plan - to throw a screen defense across the map.  If they 
had chosen more forces, they would have gotten another 2 companies of M-1s.]

==========

Opfor Orders:

Format: Informal.

While the main elements of both sides clash to the west, your force has been detailed to screen in sector 
Map 01.  You are to prevent enemy movement through this sector to the south, and are to maintain our line 
as far north as possible - preferably moving it north of Map 01 if possible.  [In game terms: exit units north 
while preventing the enemy from doing the same to the south.  Units exited are counted by company.]

Your forces are deployed an any manner desired South of northing 015 and West of easting 07 on Map 01.  
(Units may deploy & maneuver by platoons.)

Your forces:

4 Companies of T-80U

1 Company of  BTR-90 Mech Inf

1 AD Platoon (3 BMP with 9 SA-16)

1 AT Battery of 3 sections (total 9 BRDM-AT and 12 125mm towed AT Guns)
		Towed 125mm AT are represented by a combination of a T-80U, and a truck carrying a 
small infantry team.  The tank may not fire when moving.  The tank is killed if the infantry are killed.

Offmap:

122mm MRL (5 HE/0 ICM /2 Smoke)

2 152mm Batteries (25/5/5)

No air support.

You also have the option of having either more intel on the enemy, or more forces.  This chice must be 
made in your initial plan; the nature of the reinforcement or intel is not clear at this time (ie you must make 
your choice blind).

[They chose intel, and learned NATO's OOB, mission, and initial deployment area.  Just before the game 
they were told that NATO planned to screen in the west and attack in the east.  A limited amount of 
changing of initial movement orders was permitted in response to this, but no force redeployment was 
permitted.  If they had chosen reinforcements, they would have had the option of 2 extra T-80U companies, 
or of upgrading 2 the current T-80U companies to have the ATGM.]

==========

Plans:

	NATO's basic plan called for a screening force to hold the western ridge with Zulu, composed of a 
few M-2 companies and a platoon of M-1 and a platoon of M-901, while the rest of the force charged east 
and then south.  Part of the eastern force, X-Ray, was to hold the eastern ridge and central valley area, 
while Yankee, with 2 reinforced companies of M-1s, was the main strike force, intended to move south at 
the far eastern end of the map.

	OPFOR planned a heavy screen in the west, with the AT guns concentrated in the far west, and the 
BTR company along the ridge.  A T-80 company was also in the far west initially, but this was given orders 
to drive east just before the beginning of the game.  OPFOR planned from the start an ambush up the 
central valley with its BRDM-AT force, driving them up to points where they could interdict movement 
east while hopefully taking little return fire.  Another two companies of tanks were headed east to complete 
the screen; OPFOR figured to blunt any NATO attack and then try to move forward itself.

        One oddity in planning was that neither side provided much in the way of intent; mostly I simply got 
initial positions and movement orders.

What happened:

Much of the progress of the game is difficult to relate in a coherent manner, as much of it took the form of 
short, sharp ambushes between platoons, and the sequencing of these often had little to do with the 
intentions of the two sides.  Realistic?  Yes.  Confusing the the players?  Yes.  Hard to write up?  Yes!  8)  
So please forgive a tendency to simplify the events slightly by focusing on the main actions.


	NATO's column headed east on the main road in the north.  As it did so, the OPFOR anti-tank 
ambush rolled into place.  As the head of the NATO column came into view, its scouting forces were 
blasted by the anti-tank ambush.  The BRDM-ATs then retreated through the town to escape return fire 
while NATO stopped its column to make sure all was secure.

	This pause gave OPFOR an edge in the race to the east, although NATO was able to deplete a 
little of OPFOR's forces with keyhole shots down the same corridor.  NATO moved forward with some 
caution, always placing overwatch platoons to cover its movements, while OPFOR rushed into position 
quite rapidly.  As a result, in the far easern section of the map, OPFOR had two platoons of tanks in place 
in the woods at 133030 when the NATO main force tried to cross the space at 127047.  OPFOR's tanks 
devastated the NATO tanks, losing one platoon in the process to NATO's overwatch.  With only one 
platoon escaping the ambush, NATO turned increasingly defensive in the east.

	In the center, in the meantime, sporadic fighting had left each side with bits of control of its side of 
the central plateau - enough to be able to watch what was going on, and not enough to be able to support an 
attack.  OPFOR was not yet sure it felt like attacking, and NATO still felt like a punch.  NATO therefore 
concentrated its reserves in the west near 015035.  While this was underway, OPFOR largely stripped what 
was left of its defenses there to try to form a spearhead in the east.

	As a result, when NATO's final attack company headed out, it met little opposition.  OPFOR 
sacrificed an anti-tank battery and a BTR platoon trying to stop it, and killed perhaps half of it, leaving half 
a company.  However, this half company, turning east at 035010, was able to proceed across half the map 
unmolested, and eventually came up and attacked an OPFOR position at 095027 from the rear.  This 
resulted in OPFOR losing a platoon of tanks, which alerted their infantry to look back....  and the infantry 
destroyed the remnants of NATO's attack force.

	While that occured, OPFOR slowly put together its attack in the east, and carefully ground it 
forward under cover of a lot of HE fire on unoccupied positions.  There was in fact little to oppose them in 
the area; mostly one tank platoon in the woods at 150053, facing out of the NW corner, and a tank platoon 
at 120042 which caused a few losses before retreating (and being sent northeast to try to head off OPFOR's 
drive.)

	OPFOR fared fairly well against both of these.  The NATO platoon at 150053 was caught napping 
and overrun when OPFOR changed its plans and drove a tank company into the woods for overwatch 
instead of simply driving north up the east edge of the map - an act that might have brought a rather 
different result.  The second NATO platoon in the area was caught on the move, traded losses at 1:1, and 
escaped with one tank.  OPFOR continued moving north and got a company and a half of T-80s and a 
platoon of BRDM-AT off of the north edge of the map for a marginal OPFOR win.  Had NATO chosen to 
send its second strike group south, off the map, instead of east ot take on more of OPFOR forces, this 
would likely have been considered a draw.  NATO chose the exciting option of attacking, while OPFOR 
took a "wait and beat them up first" attitude.  If the beat them up first force gets into place first, they tend to 
win, and that happened.

Loss statistics:

US

UNIT                 START   NOW     ELIM    EXITED

M1A2 Tank              42      6      36        0
M2 Bradley             13      0      13        0
Inf Team               13      7       6        0
Javelin ATGM            9      5       4        0
LAV 25 IFV              3      2       1        0
Stinger SAM             9      6       3        0
M901 ITV               12      9       3        0
HMMWV w LMG             1      1       0        0
Command Element [-]     1      1       0        0

Force Lethality Value, Start: 6966
Force Lethality Value, Now: 1864
Casualty percentage: 73
Force Lethality Ratio, Start: 1:1.1
Force Lethality Ratio, Now: 1:1.9


OPFOR

UNIT                 START   NOW     ELIM    EXITED

T80U Tank              56     11      32       13  [12 of these were AT guns]
BTR90 APC              14      4      10        0
Inf Squad               9      6       3        0
PKM MG Team             3      2       0        1
AGS17 Team              2      1       1        0
AT7 ATGM Saxhorn        3      1       2        0
AT4 ATGM Spigot         2      2       0        0
BMP2 IFV                3      1       2        0
SA16 SAM                9      9       0        0
BRDM2 AT                9      0       5        4
Truck [OP]             16     10       6        0
Inf Team RPG           16     13       3        0

Force Lethality Value, Start: 7460
Force Lethality Value, Now: 3531
Casualty percentage: 52
Force Lethality Ratio, Start: 1.1:1
Force Lethality Ratio, Now: 1.9:1

==========

Lessons Learned:


One of the striking things about this game as compared to many others was the lower levels of overall 
losses.  Many CPXes result in the near-total destruction of both side's forces.  As a result of the caution 
displayed on both sides, born perhaps in part because of the requirement to defend as attack, both sides kept 
significant forces in a defensive role.

In addition, the fighting did often develop the (intended) character of a deadly game of hide-and-go-seek.  
At least one of the larger of the sporadic firefights in the central portion of the map was launched when a 
NATO platoon probed forward.  It was spotted by some OPFOR tanks which opened up and destroyed it.  
They were spotted by other NATO forces, which opened up on them, sparking a wave of firing which died 
down once the firers were suppressed, destroyed, or ran out of spotted targets.

This is also one of the few CPXes in which overwatch forces have been used with great enough care to be a 
significant factor.  In particular, NATO's overwatch platoon in the east reduced the impact of OPFOR's big 
ambush there.  The key is to keep the overwatch force unspotted until in position, wait for it to be ready 
before other forces drive on, and to ensure that it has a field of fire that will enable it to respond to threats 
to the main force.  Obvious enough, perhaps, but rarely enough done.  I was impressed in particular by 
Scott's handling of his force; he got blown away, but that's what ambushes are about....  Half the ambushing 
force was destroyed in the process.

Players seem to like the intel/forces tradeoff; I'm open to input on how it has been handled and if it is a 
good idea, but unless I run into a storm of protest it is something I will keep in mind for possible inclusion 
in future games.

For a variety of reasons, the scenario ran at a good pace.  This is partly because I worked to force the pace; 
partly because the low unit density and hide&seek nature of the battle lent itself to a lot of 'you moved, 
nothing else happened' stretches of time - which always go by quickly; and partly because the players had 
few troubles with sitreps.  In the end, it wound up with a real:game time ratio of 2.76:1 - a record for one of 
these CPXes.

Finally, everyone said they had a good time & that it was a fun scenario.  As always, I'm intrigued to know 
why - what specifically about the pace, or the scenario, was especially worthwhile?

One thing that I should have considered in the scenario balance was the nature of the central valley.  Jerry 
Hall (OPFOR CO) noted that the terrain slightly favored OPFOR, and this is where I feel it did so most; 
OPFOR had an easier time emplacing forces to cover that axis than NATO did.  I am not sure how to solve 
that problem, though - a few more forces for NATO perhaps?