Military tactics

C

Chinaman

Active member
Um.. every general in any country has different tactics, abilities and experience when it comes to war

Heres my basic offensive tactic( if im a general):

1) scout scout scout
2) set up defensive networks ( never too sure if you will retreat)
3) concentrate weaker army units into an area where the enemy is the weakest
4) have your best units close to you, dont use it until later
5) allow diversion force to attack the enemy's main supply line, after thundering bombardment in the most obvious places of bombardment
6) slowly, retreat and save as many of the diversion force as possible
7)attack enemy weak area, turn the attack into a hook and build trenches and fix positions.

8) allow one elite army unit and invade to meet up with the concentrated weaker army to allow a pocket.

9) fight defensively as enemy tries to break open pocket

10) airborne units deploys for another enemy weak area, main elite untis ready for battle

11) after bomabrdment, invade and create another bigger pocket. use field armies to create a path

12) first encirclement should ending and enemy units inthere elimited, weaker concentrated army grouup attacks to join up with elite units

13) field units probe enemy surroundings and create havoic,

14) attack and eliminate enemy


lol, thats my image of how i would fight a war, give some opinions on my tactics, share some if you will :p
 
if i were a general i'd have to say i'd use this stuff a lot

-Artilleries in the back with constant (if small) barrages to keep the enemy down and unable to attack without heavy losses
-scouts and "quiet troopers" to give me on-the-ground feedback on what the enemy is doing
-immediate Airstrikes against an enemy advance
-urban fighting i would use snipers to their most
-send small skirmish squads of snipers and veteran/elite soldiers to disrupt the enemy, reduce morale, and keep them jumpy.
--psych warfare, have a boom box and blare Metallica at high power directed at their camp,
-use flashbangs and/or colored flashes to make recruits wake up with a start and maybe shoot everywhere and cause confusion.
- diversion advances to the rear, being as quiet as they can while a paratrooper drop is called near the front and the main body of my forces attacks a flank. (i belive this is called a Trident?)

anyway... i'm not a general so USA is still safe :p
 
Avoid MOUT at all costs. Completely surround any city so no one can get in or out. Use large numbers of UAVs to keep constant view on the city. Have artillery and air power on site to deliver munitions to any portion in the city within minutes of a UAV call for it. Just hammer any suspected insurgent positions and make life a living hell for everyone in the city.
 
um.... it seems the most diffcult kind of battles occur with the fight aginist gurella warefare and city sieges.

give some insights on how to defeat the two

heres my thought:

for gurella warefare: try not to have it, its a pain in the ass, keep supply lines well defended and short, get the local people in support, roam area with mass infantry patrols and the use of heat-seekers as to dig out gurellas


for urban sieges: avoid battle, just bombard it back to the stone ages and encircle it, a year later everything living there is dead and the city is conquered.
 
Well are we talking about takeing a city or a country?
Or just how you would wage war?

If the city one then get as many snipers as possible and set up a sniper circle around the city and slowly reduce the circle.

Any enemy trooper wanting to sneak out isnt going to last long.

Give the snipers tank escorts say 100 metres behind them.

Get the fly boys of the air core to acheive air superiority and support the snipers with heli's.

Once at the city gates send in small 3 man sections, sniper,rifleman,antitank man. Use SF along with regular forces , makeing sure they are used to thier fullest.

Oh and place several drones over the city to get constant info.
 
It would be a very very poor idea to give snipers tanks 100m behind them.

1) Very bad to keep a tank stationary, especially in a city.
2) People tend to notice a tank in their front yard, snipers want to stay unnoticed
3) Tanks produce noise pollution that can be heard from a long way away, especially in MOUT.
 
lol, id still stick to my besdiged to the deaths strategy, it however takes along itme to run the enemy out of strength
 
All within 24 hrs.

-Do UAV scout
-Have SF and sniper scout teams scout out 10 miles form base
-Setup arty
-Setup AA
-Setup base defences (ex. claymores, concentina, ect...)
-Have SF teams with unarmored hummers armed with 240's scout 20 miles from base.
-Have heavy armor on standby
-Have Air Support on standby
-Have light Cav. and Mech. Inf. scout and secure suronding area and scout out 5 miles from base
-Have f-18's scout out 30-40 miles from base
-Have E-Vac on standby
-HAve 50,000 troops in reserve in a port 90 miles away


Enemy have red dots on them.

plan.jpg
 
Whispering Death said:
It would be a very very poor idea to give snipers tanks 100m behind them.

1) Very bad to keep a tank stationary, especially in a city.
2) People tend to notice a tank in their front yard, snipers want to stay unnoticed
3) Tanks produce noise pollution that can be heard from a long way away, especially in MOUT.
Click to expand...

Yeah mabye some artillery support instead or just infantry.
 
For MOUT always a good idea to have a large support firing base... M1A1 Abrams work great (optical sights with computer corrected aim to compensate for distance wind speed temperature bar. pressure... etc...) at long ranges and from short (depending on terrain). Smaller groups of infantry advancing with cover from air as always... MOUT is easy if you have the right support structure and training. I'm afraid, though, until the US or any 'superpower' decides to go into a ground war with another well trained military machine, MOUT is simply used for smaller operations (Hue City Somalia Bosnia Kosovo type operations) not large-scale wars. I'm also quite sure that with the technology now employed to the militaries of the world, large-scale ground wars are going to be more and more scarce, as technology replaces manpower with a more lethal substitute; i.e. Cruise Missiles, Smart Bombs, and the ubiquitous nuclear tipped warhead. As far as military strategy, there's always the trustworthy shelling and air-strike to prep. for ground assault. Then roll in en-force with a defensive base and a reliable system of support for ground and air units. A very general tactic, but then again non-specific tactics often work the best, allowing the commanders on the ground adjust the plan according to terrain, unit strength, weather, or whatever other factor could possible effect a ground mission (which could be just about anything). But anyhow I'm rambling now thanks for reading :-D cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top