Player AARs

 

I've broken this blurb into 2 sections: 1) planning v's in game decisions etc and 2) CPX mechanics.

 1) Planning & Game

 My plans (tracked and trackless) were both aimed (somewhat ironically, Mike ;) at stopping the approach that Mike R has questioned why it wasn't used.

 I expected BlueFOR in mutual support formations charging for their brothers dieing in the streets. I think the big factor here was the bridge. Maybe normal town (with no river split) might have rewarded the more direct approach?

 As it was, the river crossing was a very nice touch. Caught me completely off guard. Also unexpectedly made me move my HQ unit. Now I didn't expect to drive into the downed helo fire fight and get killed! Same move seemed OK 2nd time around though...

 In the mech version the ADA wasn't going to do us any good against the armor so we used it for the AH's. Worked well... even better than expected when an infantry squad mid-town downed the first Apache!

 In the trackless version we planned to use them against the LAV's. As it was, the much wiser BlueFOR use of the AH's pretty much negated any long/medium range LAV kills.

 3) CPX mechanics

 With Luca pulling out, the whole OPFOR was controlled by Tom and I (2 players). This was actually manageable! A big part, I suspect, was not having to manage any indirect fire assets.

 BlueFOR had 4 players. There were times when Tom and I were twiddling our thumbs. No big deal - just a bit boring. Not much to be done about it either...

 Summary

I *really* enjoyed the mech game. Largely due to the better OPFOR outcome.

 The re-run was OK. I must admit that I missed the significance of the "body snatcher" victory condition. Oh well. More caffeine? BlueFOR also learnt their lessons well = less fun for OPFOR ;)

 

Tracked v's Trackless? Hmmm. From my limited understanding one of the key points for trackless was more strategic than tactical. ie. forces get to theatre faster (LAV's easier to transport than M1's). IMHO this CPX seemed to indicate that once the M1's are on the scene - they get the job done more efficiently... So it seems a question of (arguably) getting *to* the job faster... but depending on the situation, taking longer to resolve the "issue" -  including higher potential losses with Trackless.

 Here's an unsolicited observation: Everyone see the news footage of KFOR trying to keep the Albanians and Serbs apart this week? Lots of *very* angry civilians v's LMG Hummers. Seeing a poor gunner getting pelted with *large* rocks... stand and cock the action on the LMG... but then duck back into the vehicle.

 Is even "trackless" the right answer to this kind of increasingly popular role for the military? ie. civilian control v's shoot to kill.  

I don't envy those soldiers one little bit.

 SteveH

 

 The following AAR is written from my perspective as BluFor CO, and does not therefore contain much detail on the activities of the individual teams, which is best left to their respective commanders. Consequently, any errors here are solely mine. The overall mission orders, victory conditions and orbat have been detailed by James in his umpires report.

This AAR with therefore confine itself to providing specific details of BluFor planning, a brief overview and a lessons learned section. The latter will include comments on the scenario and the Trackless idea.  

 1. Planning>

  After consultation with BluFor players, it was decided to divide BluFor into three parts:

 - Team ROMEO (for Rescue), commanded by Chuck LeBlanc

 - Team SIERRA (for Security), originally commanded by Gary Heverly, but taken over by Brian Rock due to the reschedules date

 - Team ECHO (for Extraction), commanded by Orval Darrow  

The plan was for Team ROMEO to sweep wide around the town, in order to relieve/reinforce the downed helo people.  Team SIERRA was to advance into the town, clear a corridor including the bridge to the helo crash site and hold it open for Team ECHO. Team ECHO was to move through this corridor, load up personnel and casualties at the crash site, and then evacuate them back to the East and safety. With these bare bones established, I left it to the team leaders to work out their own plans, with the proviso that particular attention was paid to seizing the bridge in the centre of town. As I pointed out during the planning discussions, no bridge = no evacuation, which meant the mission failed.

Provision was allowed for a helicopter evacuation of personnel and casualties, but I felt it better to work from a worst case perspective, and plan for a ground extraction; hence my preoccupation with seizing the bridge. For those interested in such things, I have included my orders below - either no-one picked up the fact that I originally mislabeled Echo as Sierra in the Mech portion, or they were too kind to mention it ;-) The orders include instructions for Team Echo because I was originally wearing the Echo hat as well as the BluFor one, until Orval came onboard - thank the Lord!

 TEAM TRACKLESS CPX

 BLUFOR ORDERS

 GROUND - Map 03: see separate graphic for code-names, phase lines etc

 SITUATION - As per Op Order

 MISSION - as per Op Order

 EXECUTION -

 1. BLUFOR will be split into three teams for both scenarios:

 - Rescue Team [ROMEO]

- Security Team [SIERRA]

- Extraction Team [ECHO]

 2. ORBATS -

 i. MECH Scenario:

 ROMEO:

2 x M1

1 x M2 Platoon [4 x M2, 4 x Inf, 3 x Javelin ATGM]

1 x FISTV

2 x M1060

 SIERRA:

2 x M1

1 x M2 Platoon [4 x M2, 4 x Inf, 3 x Javelin ATGM]

2 x M1060

 ECHO:

1 x M2 Platoon [4 x M2, 4 x Inf, 3 x Javelin ATGM]

1 x M2 w 1 x Inf

8 x Trucks

2 x AH64 GP

 ii. LAV Scenario:

 ROMEO:

2 x LAV AG

1 x LAV Platoon [4 x LAV 25, 1 x HQ, 3 x Inf, 4 x Javelin ATGM]

1 x LAV 25 w FO Team

2 x LAV Mortars

 SIERRA:

2 x LAV AG

1 x LAV Platoon [4 x LAV 25, 1 x HQ, 3 x Inf, 4 x Javelin ATGM]

2 x LAV Mortars

 ECHO:

LAV Coy HQ [2 x LAV 25, 2 x HQ-, 1 x Javelin ATGM]

1 x LAV Platoon [4 x LAV 25, 1 x HQ, 3 x Inf, 4 x Javelin ATGM]

8 x Trucks

2 x AH64 GP

 3. Orders:

 ROMEO & SIERRA Orders to follow separately

 ECHO Orders -

 Ground Elements Start Point - GR 060021

Formation -

1 x LAV on road

2 x LAV echelon to N & S 50m back from lead, 25m off road.

8 x Trucks on road, 100m back from lead LAV, 50m spacings

2 x LAV [HQ] parallel rear truck, 50m N & S from road

 

All ECHO ground elements remain stationary until ROMEO & SIERRA reach PL APRIL EXCEPT - 1 x LAV - move NW, onto high ground at GR 056022 - unload, set up overwatch to N, thru W to S

Once PL APRIL reached, ECHO main body move along road to GR 045020, then halt and overwatch. Detached LAV then load, move to GR 043022, unload again & set up overwatch N thru W to S

 ECHO then await further orders

 SOP Settings - if fired on, pop smoke [if able], retreat 100m

 4. AH64 SECTION -

 - Adopt trail formation, 2000m spacing. Ships to orbit in figure of eight pattern pivotting on GR 040020. Pattern to be approx 3000 E & W of pivot, 2000m N & S [ie fitted in a rectangle 6000m x 4000m centered on GR 040020]. Altitude to alternate randomly between NOE and Medium. - helos may engage targets of opportunity, but main mission is to provide eyes for ground elements, and fire support on call. Priority given to ROMEO until link up with target, then to SIERRA in order to maintain clear corridor for withdrawal.

 5. 155 BATTERY - priority with ROMEO until link up with target, than revert to SIERRA for maintenance and exfil

 COMMAND -

 CO will travel in HQ LAV with ECHO 2 i/c will be OC ROMEO

 2. Execution.

  So what happened? The Mech scenario was run first, and ran into trouble almost immediately. Team ROMEO got caught up in the shrubbery, which slowed it down to the extent that the helo crash site was overrun before ROMEO could arrive to lend assistance. This was due largely to my mistaken order for the helo crash survivors to attempt to break contact - I had missed/forgotten the fact that they were occupying entrenchments, or I would have left them alone. More seriously, I managed to lose both AH64s due to incompetent management, which severely limited our ability to keep track of Opfor units not in contact, as well as robbing us of their fire support. Losing the AH64s also made us leery of attempting a helicopter extraction. Predictably, SIERRA became bogged down in the built-up approaches to the bridge, which was only seized after deploying an M1 to soak up the small arms fire. SIERRA was aided in this by the arrival of Team ROMEO's M1s, which Chuck sent N into the town once they had accomplished their overwatch mission for Team ROMEO's water crossing. The law of diminishing returns also made an unwelcome appearance, insofar as the constant addition of new friendly casualties complicated and drew out the evacuation phase of the operation. Despite the umpire's verdict of a marginal draw, I consider BluFor failed in this scenario, for killing the enemy leader was i. more accident than design, and ii. did not offset the failure to reach the downed helo crew or the proportion of casualties suffered in the attempt.  

 The Trackless scenario went better. Team ROMEO moved much faster, and reached the helo crash site in time to prevent them being wiped out. ROMEO evacuated them to a safe LZ to the SW of town, where they were picked up by UH60s. I managed not to lose the AH64s, which proved to be well worth their weight in gold. Not only did they deal effectively with several enemy heavy weapons and provide valuable observation of Opfor, but also scouted the route for the transport helos and escorted them in and out. This allowed us to extract the helo site survivors and the bulk of friendly casualties from W of the river in one fell swoop. This was soured to some extent by Opfor overrunning ROMEO's security elements at the helo crash site, although ROMEO succeeded in recovering the bodies  when Opfor failed to recognise their advantage and reoccupy the site in strength. An attempt by ECHO to infiltrate around the town to the N was stopped when the unit involved's LAV was knocked out, I think by an SPG9 which was subsequently knocked out by AH64.

SIERRA again became bogged down fighting for the bridge, and this time did not succeed in clearing a corridor to the helo crash site. However, using the helo extraction option made this less crucial - we were considering withdrawing Team ROMEO by means of another water crossing at Endex, for example. BluFor therefore succeeded in accomplishing it's mission second time round, although the umpire called Endex while we still had ROMEO W of the river, which could have still proved problematic.

 3. Observations/Lessons learned

 - take as much care in deploying your helos as with ground units. I had not used helos in a CPX before, ignored this rule, and paid the price. The importance of the AH64s was clearly illustrated by the course of the Trackless scenario, with Opfor being unable to manoeuvre or use heavy weapons without being spotted and probably destroyed

 - on a similar vein, keep track of your orders and make sure you make your intentions crystal clear to the umpire. ROMEO running into the shrubbery in the Mech scenario was a case in point, as was moving the downed helo people out of their entrenchments

 - never take vehicles into urban areas without infantry leading on foot. It may be slow, but failure to do so is virtually guaranteed to end in the loss of the vehicles and their dismounts

 - keep your victory conditions in mind - BluFor almost blew it when one of the teams almost called mortar fire down on the town in the heat of the action. I think it was Rocky who picked up on this before I did, and prevented disaster!

 - the importance of pre-CPX planning as a group effort. I made at least two relatively major revisions in BluFor planning and organization in light of feedback/suggestions from the team leaders. I feel this paid dividends during the game. Because everyone had at least a rough idea of what and where the other teams were attempting to do. Chuck's suggestion that his M1s be dispatched N to assist SIERRA once their overwatch mission was over is a case in point. May I also say that in my admittedly limited experience of being CPX CO, BluFor players acted in an exemplary manner before and during the game. From my perspective, this was apparent in the speed and accuracy with which my orders were carried through during the game, despite the fact that my instructions were minimal, and by the fact that team leaders were passing suggestions up the line rather than waiting passively for instructions. This made being CO much much less difficult than it could be. The fact that BluFor contained a first and second time CPX player also shows that it is application rather than CPX experience which counts (and maybe a little real-life military experience too!).

 - similarly, having a coded map graphic took a lot of the work out of issuing orders and having them understood. It is so much more efficient to be able to refer to a codeword rather than having to work out a grid ref in the heat of the action...although I felt that using characters from the Simpsons as code-names was surreal when the orders were flying back and forth! All credit here is due to Gary Heverly, who put the graphic together and modified it in light of suggestions from the rest of the team. It is a real shame he could not participate, and I look forward to rectifying this asap.

 4. Observations on the scenario and Trackless concept

  First, the scenario. As James has already quoted me as saying, the scenario was a real pig from BluFor's perpective, although that made it interesting too! Becoming bogged down in street fighting was inevitable, and the bridge was such an obvious choke point that the enemy couldn't miss it. On the other hand, I was surprised when we managed to use the transport helos successfully for the evacuation in the Trackless run - I'm afraid I have little faith in their survivability in the face of a competent enemy, and have yet to see any evidence to change my view.

  In response to Mike Robel's professional observations, I would justify our plan on two grounds. First, from a game perspective it was necessary for player satisfaction to give everyone something to do, and using BluFor in one lump did not really justify the use of four players - one would have done. More importantly, I feel the dispatch of a platoon as a rapid relief force was a legitimate gamble, which a commander on the ground would be likely to take whatever the book might say about concentrating firepower etc. When people are hurting, their comrades will go to extraordinary lenghts to help them. In this specific instance, it can be justified by the fact that ROMEO managed to reach the helo crash site twice with minimal interference. The fact that BluFor appeared to have several entry points is an illusion generated by the action, for the remaining two-thirds of BluFor were intended to be committed along SIERRA's axis of advance. The decision to separate the trucks from SIERRA with their own protection force was mine - I had visions of small enemy ambush teams lurking in the forests to the N and S of the E-W road, and loss of the trucks would likely have meant failure for BluFor. Incidentally, I would be willing to participate in a re-run of the scenario using orders drawn up by Mike, if this would be considered a more realistic test of the Trackless concept.  

  With regard to the Trackless concept, I feel that the idea is a valid one. A LAV unit on the ground in some third world trouble spot is worth three conventional mech units en-route by sea. I also feel that the wish for an M1 during the Trackless run is something of a red herring, and for the following reasons. First, I would be very surprised if any armour commander would allow his tanks to be used in the way they were in the game. Tanks and built up areas do not mix, unless there is plenty of infantry on hand to suppress anti-tank weapons systems, and more infantry in the scenario would arguably have rendered the wish for an M1 during the bridge fight superfluous. I feel it may also have been motivated by the success of the M1 in forcing the bridge in the Mech run. In real life urban terrain, tanks would get just as lost as the Hummers did in Mogadishu, they would be screened with crowds of women and kids, they would be festooned in burning tires dropped from the upper stories of buildings, and would have to stay buttoned up in the face of "snipers". Neither is it necessary to knock out a tank in these circumstances - immobilizing or blinding it is enough, and the Hungarian experience in 1956 shows this is eminently possible. I wonder, for example, how an M1 would fare with a few gallons of paint poured over its optics by women and children? And a blinded tank crushing shanties is a media own goal as much as leveling them with an F16 or 155 fire.

This is why the British Army has never deployed tracked vehicles in Northern Ireland, despite the higher level of survivability this would entail for the troops being carried over that of "armoured" Land Rovers.

 Consequently, I feel that Orval's comment during the game that we needed an observation helicopter was more valid than the wish for an M1. The different outcomes of the runs with and without AH64s supports this. The importance of eyes cannot be overstated, and armed eyes are a bonus. For me, the real lesson of the CPX was to reinforce the need for lots of trained infantry, with armour of some description with heavier weapons for back-up. Although it may not be politically correct to say so, military missions along the lines of that in Somalia, or even in Kosovo, are merely variations on the colonial theme common in the 19th and early 20th centuries. The lesson from these operations, even as late as the 1920s and 30s, is that technology has very strict limitations. This may not sit well with an army schooled in the use of systems rather than personnel, but in this type of operation there is no substitute for the humble foot soldier. All else is subsidiary rather than substitute, and ignoring this fact will get you a Mogadishu every time.

  - I should point out that the above is purely the opinion of the author, and that no animals were harmed in the formulation of these opinions :)

 Bill Buckingham

 

From Chuck LeBlanc

The initial planning had us dividing the force into 3 equal teams. One team responsible for moving to and securing the crash site, one team concentrating on opening a route to the crash site in case we had to use the trucks to evacuate, and one team moving on the opened route with the trucks and evacuating the helo team.

 My initial thinking was that most of the action and opfor resources would be concentrated on holding the bridge. As the firefight took place at the helo site and the tms were killed off, I thought that there would have been only a minimal force remining with the bodies. My thought was to move to the helo site and secure it at the same time as I secured the LZ.

 Two things went wrong.. Although I think my assumption about opfor at the helo site was correct, I did not give clear instructions to enter the city dismounted. this cost me 1/2 of my platoon.

 Secondly, I gave in to the temptation for a quick end to things by splitting my forces. Since there was little resistance on the West side of the river, I assumed (ASS-U-ME) that I could quickly reach the bodies and then help open the road from the LZ to the west end of the bridge.

 Lesson Learned: Plan you work and work you plan. It's easy to give into temptation in the heat of battle. Be patient, trust your plan and stick with it unless you have no choice.

 On the Second scenario, I kept the platoon in tact and was much more successful in achieving my mission objectives.

 A point well made (and taken) As I review the scenario now, I can see that if we had crossed the river with most of a company or even the entire company, there would have been sufficient resources to convince the opfor that we were coming thru town to affect the rescue, as well a much stronger force to secure the helo site and conduct evacuation operations.

 Here is  my AAR for the CPX  -- Its long, I know

 Tm Romeo (blufor) AAR for Team Trackless CPX 10 Feb 2000

 Tm CO: Chuck LeBlanc

 Orders & Plans:

 The scenario was played on Map 03. It was run twice Once with a Mech/Armor Tm and once with a Trackless  Combat Tm.

 A US heliborne unit has been forced down at the crossroads at approx . 021010. It is under attack from local militias and needs assistance.

 You have a 155mm artillery unit in support alont with the mortar battery. However if you fire HE or ICM into the city, the best level of victory you can attain is a draw (the locals militias will videotape it as an atrocity).

 Missions:

 -Rescue the downed unit.

 -You have the option of conducting this rescue on ground vehicles or on helos. The helos cannot be used for any purpose other than eztraction; the will fly to the extraction site and then off map.

 -Recover all bodies (leaving an empty truck in an area with wrecks for 5 minutes, in which it does not take fire, recovers the bodies in that area. If you clear and secure the entire area all bodies are automatically recovered.)

 -Keep losses down

 Tm Romeo Specific Mission, Organization and Plan

 Mission:

 -Cross the river to the south of the town, move west, secure the LZ Vic 018022

 -Proceed to the downed helo unit and and secure that site.

-Clear the road West of the bridge and like up with with elements securing the bridge.

 Tm Organization

 Mech /Armor Tm

2 x M1

1x M2 Platoon [4 x M2, 4 x Inf, 3 x Javelin ATGM]

2 x M1060

1 x FISTV

 Trackless Team

2 x LAV AG

1 x LAV Platoon [4 x LAV 25, 1 x HQ, 3 x Inf, 4 x Javelin ATGM]

1 x LAV25 w FO Team

2 x LAV Mortars

 Mech/Armor Team Plan

 To move the team along the tree line to the south of the town, using the tanks to provide over watch of the southern edge of the town. 

 

As the Mech Platoon and the FISTV crossed the river the Tank section provided overwatch, Mortars provided Smoke on town on the east side of the river. ARTY Smoke on the southern edge of the town west of the river.  

 Once the Mech Platoon and FIST crossed they moved to a hasty assembly area in the wood line to the south of the town VIC 015015. At that time the platoon split into two sections with two vehicles moving to the LZ, to secure it, then proceeding east ,  along the road, dismounting troops  with the M2s moving behind in support .

 Two M2s move into the town from the south, dismounting troops (an order I failed to make clear at the time )moving to secure the helo site. FISV and 1 ATGM  Tm remained in AA to provide observation/support.

 After the Crossing unit was safely across, 1 M1 remained in overwatch over the river  Orienting on the LZ. The 2nd  M1 moved along the road into the town from the south to assist with securing the bridge.

 Once the east west road was clear, the Mech Platoon was to widen the corridor and hold it open for the evac vehicles.

 Trackless Scenario Plan

 The basic plan for the Trackless Scenario was the same as the Mech/Armor Team plan. The one modification that was made prior to beginning the scenario was to abandon moving in to the town from the south on the western side of the river.

 I decided to keep the platoon together and move it intact to the LZ. Once at the LZ, I left the Platoon HQ , LAV25 – FO, and an ATGM Tm at the LZ , with AN LAV-AT in overwatch of the LZ site from the AA.

 One LAV-AT on the east side of the River moved north into the town to support the attack on the bridge. As I moved it back south to support re-crossing the river it was ambushed and killed.

 As I moved the Platoon  East into the Town I dismounted the Inf and moved them ahead of the LAV approx 200m. LAVS in Support.

 Mortars supported the move into town  by firing smoke into town in  the vic of the Helo site, (smoke into town was approved by the good umpire) masking movement.

 After the Inf Tms cleared the Helo site, They moved East toward the Bridge and established blocking positions.

 

The LAVs moved to the helo site and were used to evac the bodies to the LZ. In order to be evacuated by air.

 

While the LAVS were evacuating the bodies, the Infantry Tms were overrun and killed. I moved the LAVS with the ATGM tms dismounted in advance back to the helo site and recovered the bodies .

 

 Lessons Learned:

 

No matter how clear you think your plans are to you, make sure the umpire knows just what your intent is:

 -When I submitted my movement plan my intent for my movement to the crossing site, was to skirt the wood line, ducking inside for cover if needed. I did not convey this intent clearly and my unit became a logging company using tracks and chain saws to open a new road through the woods. This delayed my crossing far longer then I was comfortable with. (I thought I would never get into the open).

 -When I entered the town from the south In the Mech/Armor scenario, I forget to give specific instructions to the umpire to dismount my troops and support with the Bradleys. My Vehicles simple charged up the road and were quickly killed of in an ambush.

 Mout/Fibua Isn’t Easy (as I discovered twice):

 - Sending Troops into a town mounted (whether intentional or not) is certain suicide. You need to use your heavy weapons to support your dismounted troops in Urban areas. There are a million places for the enemy to hide and using a slow deliberate approach to clear areas  with heavier weapons acting as a supporting force, gives you  better survivability.

 - During the Trackless Scenario, whe I chose to leave the infantry in blocking positions without a LAV in support, I probably insure that they were killed. Whenever you have a choice you need to support the lighter weapons with heavier ones.

 Never move a unit without a clear understanding of why you do it!:

 - In the trackless scenario when I moved my LAV-AT south out of town, I ran it into an ambush and got it killed. I had wanted it to overwatch the return crossing. It was more useful in the town blocking opfors move south out of town.. I could have used my other LAV-AT to overwatch the crossing. Moving without forethought cost me the vehicle

 The better you pre-plan the easier it is to deal with the inevitable disruptions.:

 - I tried to be as detailed in my planning as I could . It helped me to react when units got killed off . Once things get heated, unless you have a thorough concept of what you’re trying to accomplish its easy to  concentrate on the immediate problem at hand, sometimes to the expense of your overall plan.

 - This happened to the Blufor  in the Mech  Scenario when we lost our Apache’s early on.. We abandoned the planned air evacuation because we couldn’t fix the location of their AA. We  might have had a contingency plan in place which would have accounted for the loss of the Apaches.

 As a new participant in the CPX process (2nd CPX) I found the process more comfortable and easier to play this time around. With an understanding of how it was conducted I was able to concentrate on my tactics rather than worrying

about the mechanics of the game.

 The confusion over IRC servers was the one glitch which we might avoid  by preplanning a primary and secondary server for the exercise. I discovered the server change when I logged on to the Starlink server only to find that I was the only one there. After a quick check of my watch and the calendar,  I jumped to the Tacops list and found that James had to change the server because he couldn’t connect.. Perhaps when we issue the initial orders or plans, we migh include a SIGNAL paragraph identifying date/time/server and back up server.

 Chuck  LeBlanc

 

From:   Tom Schaub

A few lessons from the Red perspective:

1) use all available planning time. specifically (a) we could have used the additional time caused by the umpire's illness to fill in the wholes in our planning. James was right on re our failure to plan 2nd phase of ambushes in Trackless version.

(b) we had originally tested what force could wipe out the downed helo troops quickly, but we didn't regame it after the umpire increased the number of downed troops and gave them an entrenchment. We hadn't even asked the James how large the downed force had become. Our troops assigned weren't up to the task. We should have beefed these troops up. Only a foolish attempt by Blue to bug out saved us in the first scenario. This gave us unwarranted confidence in the 2nd go.

2) prepare for enemy capabilities, but don't base your actions on 2nd guessing his plan. I had heard that our umpire likes asymmetrical victory conditions, so when we spotted  trucks I jumped to the conclusion that Blue had a convoy he had to escort across the bridge. I spent too much time thinking about how to nail this mythical convoy. In trackless scenario I suggested Steve pull back after wiping out downed helo troops, in part at least, hoping to ambush the convoy. Big lost opportunity in 2nd scenario.

3) take advantage of any political restrictions on your opponent. A major factor in such success as we had was deploying mostly in the city which was a sanctuary from Blue arty. Clearing a city without arty support made a bad situation even worse for Blue.