DLC 42-43 West: German Strategy for Salerno?

[Douaumont]

Hello all,

I'm playing the Salerno scenario in DLC 42-43 at General level and keep getting hammered.

My force (at max # for core):
Air: 4 x Fw190a, 1 x Me-410
AAA: 1 x 128mm, 1 x 88mm
Armor: 2 x SS Tigers, 1 x SS Panther A, 1 x Panther A
Infantry: 5 x '43 Grenadiers, 1 x 43' FJ
Artillery: 2 x 21cm Morse, 1 x SiG 33 II, 1 x Wurfrahmen

I've tried deploying a small force in south, and two battlegroups in north to protect the objective hexes and northern airfield. That didn't work. So I massed everything I had in the north around Solofra and the airfield. Killed more, but still got overrun. I built two of the Grenadiers for this latest attempt, but now I'm thinking I would have been better off to build another Tiger instead?

Any advice on force structure and/or deployment would be most welcome!

[robman]

This scenario ends when the last Italian unit leaves the board or dies. My guess is that one or two of your Italians is not doing either for too many turns. I replayed this scenario recently and it ended at turn seven, if memory serves. I found it relatively easy to extract the Italians on the eastern side of the map, by opening the corridor to Salerno, preventing landings along the northeastern coast, and using my forces to cover the Italians' withdrawal. The Italian units in the center died. Remember, they have to either escape or die--you don't want to leave an Italian unit hiding somewhere, alive but unable to reach an exit hex. As the last Italians retreat, withdraw your own forces through the exit hexes.

[Douaumont]

Thanks, but I think you are talking about the Syracuse scenario? There are no Italians, or evacuations of, in Salerno.

[captainjack]

I've just finished West 42/43 but went the other path, but I saved just before the choice and am planning to try the Salerno route soon. It looks like one that involves hiding some defensively tough units in the hills with good artillery and AA support and resisting the urge to counter attack. I guess I'll find out pretty soon.

[Douaumont]

I *wished* I had saved at the choice stage. They ain't fooling when they say Salerno is difficult. I will be interested in hearing how your attempt/s pan out. The good news is that even if you lose Salerno, you still get to continue with the Italian campaign.

[ThvN]

I do not have much experience with Salerno, but yes it is quite difficult, although it was made easier during the beta. (BTW, during Messina it is possible to get two bonus 'reward' units, a Do335 and a Ta152H, these help a lot during the rest of the campaign).

I have the most problems with the overwhelming Allied airforce, and during Salerno I could not effectively use tactical or level bombers without massive fighter support. Your core is hard to judge without knowing the experience/heroes they have, this will matter a lot.

I try to funnel the attack routes into some good defensive close terrain occupied by infantry. The AI will push hard, but if you make your defensive pockets too small and stationary it will start outflanking you. And if you only defend a small area, the AI will quickly conquer the rest and throw everything at you up North. If this happens, sometimes it's better to just weaken the enemy to exploit the AI (the damaged units will block fresh ones and won't attack because of poor odds).

During this kind of scenario (Volturno line is similar), I resist the urge to attack; it is better to keep units fresh by rotating them and reinforcing them if necessary. Everything needs some cover from air, your core looks good enough to supply that. Ammo will need to be kept high, so I generally do not use my artillery offensively but reload as often as possible. Which brings me to to a small point of critique on your core: to me, your artillery seems a little on the weak side. The units you use all have low ammo and are air attack magnets. This can be a good thing: it can be exploited by keeping covering anti-air/fighter units just out of sight of the AI to bait them in attacking your artillery.

But the SiG 33 II is a bit puzzling to me? The Hummel is cheaper, and the SiG 38(t) is slighty more expensive but a lot tougher, and they both have slightly higher Rate of Fire. The SiG and the 21cm are only good vs. units with very high defense, they are not as efficient when using them against weak targets, so if you are facing a lot of attacking infantry something cheaper might be better, like Nebelwerfers, Wespes or the 17cm. The Wurfrahmen is always excellent, good choice. Have you tried the StuH42 yet? It is a switchable unit that is tough, has a lot of ammo and decent stats. It looks weak because of the lower attack stats and range but the RoF is high. Some long range units are always useful but a StuH42 might help here?

[Douaumont]

Thanks for the advice ThvN! The critique of my artillery is especially useful. The SiG 33 II is in the initial force assigned at the opening of the 42/43 West campaign. I kept it b/c of its 12-9 attack factors, and b/c the Wespe and Hummel looked like (expensive) lateral upgrades. Clearly a mistake by me, as I now clearly see that for a little coin I can provide a dramatic improvement in defense factor by making it a SiG 38(t) M. The StuH42 looks intriguing, but I have never been a big fan of the 1- range arty as it just seemed expensive and of limited value. However, that was based on my prior German blitzkrieg campaigns. Now that I am fighting to defend the Fatherland against the American/British/Russian hordes, I can definitely see their value.

What are your thoughts on anti-tank guns? The towed models are cheap and apparently hit hard, but don't seem able to stand up well. I have found the later Nashorn and Elefants have their place, albeit a small one. Again, they seem like a pricey (for the SPs) purchase with money better spent on a Tiger or Panther.

Well, after much thought and reflection, I am going to re-start the 42/43 West campaign, as I planned to take this core into the 1944 and 1945 campaigns in the West so want to get it right at beginning. I'm not nearly as familiar with the Western Allies b/c I almost exclusively campaigned on the Eastern Front in the past. I have found that the Western Front is a very different experience, and the Brits and Amis are much tougher than I initially thought.

[Ursulet]

The AT towed guns are rarely polular, hard to place and use. But if you look at deducter's videos, you will get a good hint at how to use them'properly. And now that they get a +2 hard attack for eachlevel of experience, they get very good in 1942 when you have a 3 stars pak 40 gun that has 14 HA as a base + 6 bonus so that is 20 HA before even OS.

I'm playing in karkov42 right now(i cant go west, i always have to fights the ruskis, i cant help) and my 3* AT pak40 with a +3 attack bonus is regularly taking 8-9 HP from KV1B/KV1C. None of my tanks can do that, the best they do is sometimes 5 HP at most. Right now it has over 400 kills although i often leave it in the reserve. I cant wait to get the next version with HA 24.

Annd it is fairly cheap to reinforce a d good for the prestige cap.

The nashorn is quite ok, i dont like the elfant, too slow and too expensive. My favorites SPAT are the jagdPanzer IV cheap and fairly effective with a good hero and experience.

[captainjack]

The plan of staying in the mountains worked reasonably well, as the enemy aircraft come in ones and twos and you are out of range of the naval attack.

I put one tank with two infantry and an artillery unit in the city to the north east near the airfield. The rest of the tanks and my SE units in the NorthWest, along with my 88 and 128 AA. The airforce was the Ta152 and Do335, Rudel in a Me410, the D4 I2 hero FW190 and the hero FW190 from Sedan. I basically sat and waited until enemy units came into reach. There were a few minor crises - I'd left one of the mountain paths unguarded and an infantry unit sneaked into the North West city while I was defending just south of it, but it didn't last long once Rudel and the Dornier had a go at it. The eastern units had a bit of a tough time - the infantry was only 1* and the arty was +2A but newly reformed with no experience, but 4* Rondorf in a Panzer IVH managed the Shermans and any exposed infantry. The Wolverine made the mistake of entering the forest next to the city so didn't last long. I managed a last-turn DV. This would have been easier if I had not sat and waited a bit too long after driving off the attack in the West.

My towed artillery is currently 2x105 (one with a move hero, one with +2A) and a +1 range 21cm nebelwerfer, plus two Stug 3 and a Stug IV (passable AT, but switch to good armoured artillery with 2 range). All have Rate of Fire 100 or 110%, so do excellent suppressions against soft targets and most armoured units except Churchills. Most also have a lot of ammo, which means less risk of running out when on defensive duty, and more time spent firing. The Stug 3 took me a while to use well, but they are cheap, have 110% RoF, provide good defensive fire, make a useful emergency gap filler. The best was having two with +1 range heroes in 42 East a while ago!

I have one Elefant for the decent armour (with +3defence hero) and excellent HA. I used towed AT for a while, but got fed up with the difficulty of getting them into action. My top tip for developing AT late war: Once the Stug Iv is available, use it as artillery to gain experience. Once it's about 2*, the +4HA makes it useful as AT.

Overall, if you can sit and wait it out, you should be able to get MV fairly easily, but I agree DV is a challenge.
.

[ThvN]

Thanks for the advice ThvN! The critique of my artillery is especially useful. The SiG 33 II is in the initial force assigned at the opening of the 42/43 West campaign. I kept it b/c of its 12-9 attack factors, and b/c the Wespe and Hummel looked like (expensive) lateral upgrades. Clearly a mistake by me, as I now clearly see that for a little coin I can provide a dramatic improvement in defense factor by making it a SiG 38(t) M. The StuH42 looks intriguing, but I have never been a big fan of the 1- range arty as it just seemed expensive and of limited value. However, that was based on my prior German blitzkrieg campaigns. Now that I am fighting to defend the Fatherland against the American/British/Russian hordes, I can definitely see their value.

Your're welcome! I was away for the weekend, so my reply is a bit late. The SiG 33 II you start out with belongs in the same upgrade 'family' together with the SiG38(t), Wespe and Hummel (and the early Sturmpanzer). While in reality these units were all very vulnerable the game gives some of them very high defenses. The SiG38(t) is a bit slow, but much more durable, as you discovered.

I avoided the 1-range arty in the beginning, but when used skillfully they can be very good. You can place them behind other units and they will still provide defensive covering fire over a 2-hex range, and are hard to supress. It might not look as if they are doing much, because they won't kill a lot, but they will prevent casualties and are tough enough to survive mistakes or bad luck. On the attack they are more difficult to use, but they are good in closely following units and protecting them against counter attack. They also deal extra damage to structures (forts, strongpoints, etc.). So I often park it next to a target where it covers the units that are next to it, and support the assault gun with extra artillery behind it . Next turn, fire the support first at the structure, than the assault gun, which often leaves them easy targets for the other units.

A more risky tactic is moving two units (preferably Fj or Pioniere, which get the same bonus vs. structures) next to the target, with the assault gun behind them. This will usually keep the infantry alive or safe against counter attack. Than, in the next turn, move one infantry aside but still in contact with the target, and put the assault gun in between and attack the target with all units. First with the assault gun, than the unit that has moved already and then the unit that hasn't moved yet. If the target is completely destroyed, either move the last unit into the hex and put something in its place (now you have a wedge which is covered by the assault gun in the middle) or move another unit from behind in the spot of the ex-target. It depends heavily on the situation, of course.

What are your thoughts on anti-tank guns? The towed models are cheap and apparently hit hard, but don't seem able to stand up well. I have found the later Nashorn and Elefants have their place, albeit a small one. Again, they seem like a pricey (for the SPs) purchase with money better spent on a Tiger or Panther.

The towed ones have a very specific disadvantage: they are actually relatively expensive. If you are playing with the 1.20 rules, the soft cap is limiting your prestige income if your units are expensive. (Currently it is a bit buggy, it starts limiting income too early).

I'll try to give a very specific example, but I will cheat a little bit and use the (relatively) worst towed AT gun available, the 7.5cm PaK 40. For purely defensive work, a 7.5cm (towed) PaK 40 with a truck is decent value (235pr), but mobility of the self-propelled tracked units is much better. Most scenarios require advancing and the PaK needs better mobility than the tracked units to compensate for its basic 1-hex movement, otherwise it will lag behind and spend too much time being a truck (=target) in stead of a fighting unit. And if we add the basic halftrack for the towed gun, this brings the total cost to 285pr. When the PaK is first introduced, the other choices are basically the Marder IIA (262pr) and the StuG IIIF (299pr), the still-available Panzerjäger I (210pr) is obsolete at this point. Let's see how they stack up compared to the PaK with a halftrack (which gives it about the same mobility with much higher fuel).

Marder IIA: equal attack/initiative/ammo, slighty worse air defense (AD=8) but better ground defense (GD=10).

StuG IIIF: lower ini/attack (all by just 1 point), but much higher defense (AD=13, GD=14).

Both are 'hard' targets which is not always an advantage, but the PaK has a very distinct disadvantage which makes comparing defensive values difficult: if the PaK gets caught in truck mode it will be lucky to survive, no matter how tough the actual gun is. And especially on the Western front the chances of being attacked by air units are not something to trivialize. Also, towed guns are difficult to withdraw quickly (some call it 'tactical repositioning'), and have a higher chance of holding up support units or ending up in unfavourable terrain, unless you use the truck mode, but this takes the unit out of the fight for another turn.

I really want to like them and use them, I always try to include some towed guns, if they get a move hero they become actually fun to use! But as standard, the 5cm PaK is a bit difficult to use and the 7.5cm is not much of an upgrade. The 8.8cm is actually decent value, it has very high attack and has a relatively cheap transport (the SdKfz 7 is only 70pr but equal to the standard halftrack which costs 100pr), for 340pr you get a nice cost/performance package, the same cost as a StuG IIIF/8. For about 120pr more you have a Nashorn, which is equally fragile as the towed gun, so the towed gun is good value I think. There is however a big elephant in the room (no, not that one... ), the switchable 8.8cm FlaK 36, which is also good value, and already availabe when the best AT gun is the 3.7cm. So the best towed AT gun for most of the war is actually an anti-aircraft unit!

When they fix the soft cap, AT units should become more profitable because they are cheaper than tanks, but right now there are only a few worth recommending. One of the best units in terms of cost vs. performance late in the war I've seen is the StuG IV (it is introduced at the beginning of 1944), which is switchable into a 2-range artillery unit. In artillery mode, it gains experience very quickly, and it can be switched to help pick off tanks. The stats look a bit average, but at 347pr I've found them surprisingly effective.

[jules_slith]

That is interesting. I also restarted my first DCL on colonel level 1.20 in the West at Salerno.

What I did the first time: I followed the “natural gaming instinct” and imported my best heroes to St. Nazaire. After St. Nazaire I saw this little prestige. So I went to the prestige cap gamble and disbanded my two SE Inf. to rebuild with SE tanks. At Salerno I had so many casualties that my prestige was gone.

Then I rethought my playstyle. The second time I imported only my best and experienced infantry and tanks plus a fighter and the “Rudel” Tac bomber. I also kept one SE Inf. and disbanded only one after St. Nazaire. Now things went more smoothly. I did not take that many casualties and could even use Pz IV in the 45 DLC. I have not yet finished the 45 DLC but when I would come back to the start of DLC 43/43 I would even leave “Rudel” behind and take another good fighter instead. The losses for the inexperienced fighters are just too high for me in terms of prestige; I use mass attack to get better initiative ratings in combat but the allied fighters just attack my inexperienced forces by themselves and reduce it. So the “force mulitplier” of “Rudel” seems not so important to me because I would accept the ground casualties leaving it out of my core which seem far less expensive to replace then the air losses.

I played the East DLC before the West and for me it plays just different. Not even one “heavy” artillery more than 155 mm. No towed AT (which I use very successfully in the East an AK) because there are just no open terrain flanks to protect (these units have 0 close defence which I find more dangerous than transport mode). I always prefer the unit with low level AA attack rating instead of zero air attack which excludes for example the mentioned Elefant from my core. I changed some Pz III to Pz IV because I looked for the better soft and not hard attack.

In the end I think it depends on finding an individual play style; for me it is another then in the East DLC and I think the West design has more replay value. Still the East DLC is more addictive to me.

[robman]

Thanks, but I think you are talking about the Syracuse scenario? There are no Italians, or evacuations of, in Salerno.

Oh, you mean the OTHER Salerno. I guess I was out sick in kindergarten the day we covered Italian cities beggining with "S."

Anyhow, I just finished Salerno with a DV. I'm sure there are many viable strategies, but here's the one I used:

(1) I left my bombers at home, and concentrated on force protection (3 fighters + 2 AA).

(2) I divided my units into three roughly equal groups (2 infantry, 2 tank, 1 artillery), two in the north and one in the south. I reinforced the southern group with +1 infantry and +1 artillery.

(3) Deployment in the south: two infantry + 1 artillery next to the southern objective, the others in the central plain. None in the southeasternmost deployment zone.

(4) In north and south, I moved slightly forward to meet the enemy on advantageous terrain. Then it was back and forth: I took a step back when threatened with envelopment, and pressed forward again when the danger passed. The objective in the central plain changed hands three times and the southern objective changed hands five times.

[proline]

When they fix the soft cap

Speaking of which, now that the Sealion update is out and you can play it, does it look like the prestige bug is fixed?

[ThvN]

I have no idea if it's still there, the change list for 1.24 doesn't mention it. I think I will have to dust off my special mod sometime to check it out.