PzB Kursk 0705_01 SS Attack

[Dog Soldier]

Infantry only assaults against bunkers and pillboxes without supporting AT fire reap only casulaties if the defender occupies the position in strength.  Better to flank and winkle the defender out of such strong positions or bring up proper combined arms support if the position has to be taken.

It is a fool's errand in a historical context as well as in the PzB games to make frontal infantry only assualts against bunkers and pillboxes unless they are weakly held like in the Normandy Utah Beach scenario.

I would add some context to what ComradeP said about the recent game we played of the PzB Kursjk scenario 0705_01 II SS PzK - July 5: The SS Attack.

In my recent 5th of July game against Dog Soldier, Das Reich and Totenkopf both launched primarily infantry-centered assaults that went nowhere for high losses because the infantry just isn't capable of dealing with stacks of defenders. One of my bunker stacks also only fell on the final turn after being fired at for several hours.

https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards...922&page=3
Post#25

 One battalion each of Das Reich and Totenkopf both launched primarily infantry-centered assaults that were feints to tie down significant Soviet units that could otherwise have moved to the point of the LAH attack or harrased LAH from its flanks.  These were never intended to be secondary thrusts.  The feints worked as planned.

One thing to note is that total losses on both sides were about equal up to turn 22 including losses from the "primarily infantry-centered assaults".  After that turn the breakthrough phase began.  Soviet losses increased significantly even though they stayed tight in their bunkers except to move between them to reinforce or retreat.  Casualties for the Germans were not excessive as ComradeP remembers.

The premise of the game we played was an assertion in this forum by ComradeP that in a recent game with Gregor, he was unable to take the 100 VP location in Bykovka.  Gregor used a tactic of many small, reduced units and platoons up to the stacking limit in each VP location and strategic bunkers which left little time for the Germans to reduce a position so far from the start point.  Without that key VP location, a German win was near impossible.  I disagreed.  I do not think a bunker position, even the one at Bykovka with a supply point to prevent isolation can be held long enough by such tactics.  There are good tactics in the PzB game which I feel reward players using period tactics, None are bullet proof.  Just like in real war.  Even when you did everything right, fate can determine a hero or a dead man.

On the opening night turns I took two of the bunkers on Hill 228.6 with just the engineers that accompany the PzGr company moving at night to secure a foothold on the hill.  There are two engineer platoons at start with one company.  I sent them straight at the hill bypassing the Soviet outposts in my path.  These engineers each successfully assaulted the surprised SMG platoons holding two of the bunkers.  These were single engineer platoons taking on SMG platoons.  By morning (turn 10 7:30 AM) I had secured a third bunker which gave me a good base to bring up the ATG and armor that was either recently released or entered as reinforcements the turn before.  As these AT assets moved up, I conducted some probes on the bunkers remaining on Hill 228.6 as well as the bunkers below the east side of the hill.  ComradeP's Soviets died or fell back abandoning or leaving weak units to delay in some bunkers, while using the retreating units to stregthen a line in other bunkers to contain my advance.

Situation at end of German turn 10



Dog Soldier