18/06/2015 at 23:14 #26323
It’s 0830 on 1 Feb 1990, and B Company, 1st Airborne Battalion has set up a road block on the main east-west artery (#11), just east of the bridge seized by A Company earlier in the morning (#3). The goal of B Company is to defend the road block to protect the western landing site, and they are being attacked by elements of the regime’s 28th Infantry Company, 3rd Infantry Battalion.
So far we’ve had:
1) B Squadron SOF destroyed a radar site in support of amphibious landings at Playa Colorada (5). B Sqdn then egressed and linked up with CLA rotary wing assets for their follow-on mission in Havana (6).
2) C Squadron SOF destroyed a the Cuban military’s communications center.
3) 1st Para Battalion dropped in and seized a bridge to screen the landings at Playa Colorada (5).
4) 2nd Para battalion dropped in and eliminated a Castro-regime garrison to screen the landings at the Bay of Pigs (just west of (4).
5) 1st Marine Company, 3rd Infantry Battalion, made an amphibious assault at Playa Colorada.
6) A Squadron SOF attacked a Castro-regime SAM site near Havana, which failed to clear the way for B Squadron’s helo assault into Havana.
7) 2nd Marine Company, 6th Infantry Battalion, landed at the Bay of Pigs then turned east and ran into a strong enemy force, which it handily defeated.
8) B Company of the UWG pursued and destroyed an enemy garrison in the Escambray Mountains.
9) B Squadron SOF conducted an aerial insertion into Havana to seize a radio station and broadcast news of the invasion.
10) 10th Popular Force Battalion seized and blew the bridge at Pedroso to protect the Bay of Pigs landing site from the Matanzas garrison.
11) 1st Airborne Battalion defended a roadblock from regime counterattack to protect the western landing site (at Playa Colorada).
The opposing forces, with Castro-regime troops on the left and CLA on the right. CLA are Pendraken Brits from the Falklands range, while Castro forces are Pendraken Argentinians from the Falklands range supported by BTR-60s from Minifigs.
The CLA force, with a Command Stand, five airborne rifle teams, a MILAN ATGM team, an 81mm mortar team, and a single leader figure representing their battalion commander. The regime force, with a Command Stand, seven rifle teams, two BTR-60s, and a .30 cal. MG team.
Overview, north is up, with CLA forces situated in a village at the crossroads on the left (west), while regime forces are on foot in the top right (northeast) and in BTRs in the bottom right (southeast).
The CLA paras find themselves being flanked on the right, and a furious firefight breaks out (that’s Sgt Villagrosa’s team at center, amidst the regime mechanized force).
To see the whole battle report, please visit the blog at:
Another great fight, with things looking dim, then… Well, you’ll just have to read it 😉
Jack18/06/2015 at 23:29 #26324
Stop. I can’t keep up! I haven’t had the time to read CL10 and you’re posting #11 already. It’s Poland all over again, sigh, whimper, sniffle.
Take a break Jack!
Cheers and no more gaming for you!
The Wargame Soup Nazi.19/06/2015 at 00:33 #26325
Post more and often Just Jack !!!! Er why are the BTR-60’s green and pink ????19/06/2015 at 02:22 #26326
Rod – Read faster and quit your whining 😉
Old Man – What the hell are you talking about? Pink?
Is anyone else seeing pink? They’re actually painted a light-ish, medium green, and a sand color that is a bit too white for me, wish it was more yellowish. But pink? I’m guessing it must be something with your computer settings?
Jack19/06/2015 at 03:29 #26327irishserbParticipant
Pink?? KB gotta stop spray painting in the tornado shelter. Getting hazy in there.
Another great batrep, but I think the Castros may need to find a boat to Florida in about a another week.19/06/2015 at 03:40 #26328
They look green and pink to me…..19/06/2015 at 03:45 #26329
Irish – “…I think the Castros may need to find a boat…” I sure hope so!
Kyote – I know why you’re seeing pink, ya old hippie bastid! 😉
Not sure what that’s about Old Man, it’s almost white on my screen (and in real life).
Jack19/06/2015 at 04:28 #26330
I guess it’s my old eyes or my computer .19/06/2015 at 13:16 #26343
Ah, no Kyoteblue:
The BTR’s appear powder-puff pink and a light neutral green on both my I-Pad and desk-top computers too, so it’s not your eyes. It is subliminal conditioning done by the CLA psy-ops (A.K.A. Jack) to remind us that the Cubans are “commie pinko’s” and therefore the bad guys. That or Jack is clearly going through his “Rose Period” as an artist.
Cheers and good gaming.
Rod Robertson.19/06/2015 at 14:37 #26350Norm SParticipant
Hi Jack. love those pipe cleaner missile effects, they really help with the story.
I am seeing pink too.
But I am also seeing HINTS of pink in your hills, along the tops of the walls around the buildings and on the roof of the the little extension to one of the two buildings.
I don’t know enough to say but I am wondering whether your white balance is slightly out on the camera settings for the type of shooting and any artificial light that may be in the room …. though if it was, I would expect that you would also see the pink on your monitor.
If you are using camera flash, manually change the white balance to ‘flash’ as some cameras do not automatically do this (but remember to turn it back to auto afterwards) – here is a link about WB – scroll down to the flash section, which you will find quickly by looking for the images of Coffee mugs …. though by time you have read the article you may not care whether you ruffty tufty troops are pink, blue or screaming bright red 🙂19/06/2015 at 15:43 #26353
So it’s not just me.19/06/2015 at 18:28 #26361
Pink, eh? So maybe I’m color blind. They don’t look pink to me, the pics just look dull and fuzzy; I’m using an IPhone, and it’s certainly not as good as my trusty old camera, but I’m afraid it will have to do as I’m not about to go drop cash on a camera that could be used on more toys 😉
Hurry up with your reading, next one will be up this evening. I hope all are being entertained, pink BTRs or not.
Jack19/06/2015 at 19:02 #26363
Looking forward to it Just Jack.27/06/2015 at 04:15 #26786
An interesting fight but it is clear from reading CLA10 and now 11 that the Cuban Regime forces do not know how to use their AFV’s effectively and are just throwing them away. The infantry component of the battles is good. The BTR’s should have gone turret down or hull down and peppered the enemy forces with supporting fire while the infantry close assaulted; not the other way around as seems to have happened. The Castro regime troops have to learn to counter attack by fire rather than by movement. Range is your friend when you have the heavier weapons.
This was a very good Bat. Rep. and a good narrative nonetheless. Great stuff Jack.
Cheers and good gaming.
Rod Robertson.27/06/2015 at 14:47 #26808
1. “….the Cuban Regime forces do not know how to use their AFV’s effectively and are just throwing them away.”
I disagree, please see my comments on the previous post about the extremely short ranges.
2. The BTR’s should have gone turret down or hull down and peppered the enemy forces with supporting fire while the infantry close assaulted; not the other way around as seems to have happened.
Oh, don’t get so angry because the Castros are getting beat, it should have worked but for some incredibly lucky dice rolling for the CLA.
In any case, going hull- or turret-down is not a good idea at a couple hundred yards when being stared at by an ATGM, with emphasis on the “G”-part of the acronym. Those BTRs would have been dead meet in a minute should they have chosen to stand off. Additionally, they’re 14.5mm HMGs weren’t doing much against the CLA forces in the stone villas; some of that is luck, but some is fortification.
As it was, the CLA’s defense was oriented to the north, and the regime commander enacted a bold, and tactically sound, battle plan. He deployed a covering force in the north, enough to keep the CLA largely fixed, then rushed the two BTRs (laden with infantry) south to the CLA’s vulnerable flank. There the infantry de-bussed and should have rolled up the CLA’s right flank, with the BTRs in support.
But once again luck played a major role: the BTRs opened up with their HMGs as they were disgorging their troops, and they didn’t get much done. Then the CLA mortars went into action with devastating effect, which bought time for some rifles and the ATGM to shift south. With the regime infantry dead or cowering from the mortar fire and Sgt Villagrosa’s heroics (more fantastic die rolls), it was only a matter of time before the ATGM put the BTRs out, unless they managed to get a very lucky shot in. They didn’t…
To tell the truth, I was really quite surprised this fight didn’t go the regime’s way; the simple turn of luck with the mortar and Sgt Villagrosa’s mad rush turned the whole fight on a dime. As I mentioned in the other thread, razor-thin margins.
I count myself as being very lucky in this campaign (at least to date); the fights generally follow this format: the game starts with the two forces closing on each other, there’s a furious bout of fire where one side gains advantage via a particularly devastating fire event. After that, there may be a temporary reverse or two, but mostly it’s just mopping up. So far I’ve been lucky that the ‘particularly devastating event’ has gone my way.
Thanks man, I appreciate your commentary, I love talking tactics.
Jack27/06/2015 at 16:27 #26809
The BTR’s were well within the minimum range of Milan so the threat was from RPG’s and HMG’s.
Cheers and good gaming.
Rod Robertson.27/06/2015 at 16:54 #26810
You’re killing me…
1) I’ve addressed the minimum range issues of ATGMs, mortars, and even the proper use of tripod-mounted MGs already. To reiterate, yes, the whole board is within minimum range for ATGMs and mortars, and the close range effectively negates the proper usage of tripod-mounted machine guns. But I am playing a historically representative game, not a simulation, and am definitely more on the Hollywood side than real life, ergo all the close combat with bayonets and grenades, as opposed to the ‘sit back at 900 meters and pound with supporting arms’ so commonly seen in 1) militaries with overwhelming firepower/technology, and 2) Third World militaries without properly trained and motivated infantry.
So, to get the game I wanted I had to flex on some things, and minimum ranges for supporting elements were one of them, for no other reason than I wanted to be able to deploy them on table. Part of this was wargamer syndrome, i.e., I painted it so I want it on the table, the other was to make it a part of the command activation system and put it at risk of enemy action. To me it’s not any fun (in this campaign, I’ve done it in others) to have the anti-armor weapons and mortars off table, so they’re on table.
2) For that matter, the BTRs were inside the minimum range of RPGs, though there were no RPGs or HMGs on the board. So if the enemy could have taken out the lone ATGM team the CLA’s only recourse would have been to use rifle teams to close assault the enemy vehicles, or withdraw. I probably would have tried a close assault, and if it failed withdrew the rest of the force. Those were the tactical decisions that drove what happened on the tabletop.
Jack27/06/2015 at 17:05 #26811
Oh, sorry about that; I forgot you had addressed these issues. Actually, I have no recollection of this but I am too burned out right now to do my research. But by Monday I’ll be fit to comment intelligently on this. Please forgive my adled brain. Well it’s off to paint some new HUMVEE’s and to assemble Soviet era BTR-60’s and BMP-1’s. The Commies are coming and they’re coming in force!
Cheers and good gaming.
Rod Robertson.27/06/2015 at 20:02 #26813
No sweat man, and no research necessary. I don’t expect you to recollect everything I’ve ever written… Unless you’re trying to tell me I’m doing it wrong 😉
Good luck regarding the painting.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.