TanK Close Assault..

[wodin]

Just read this in Jason Marks latest book Into Oblivion. This shows what APOS needs ot be able to do abit better..

The book I'm reading is about 305th Pioneer Battalion. During a a preliminary attack on the 24th June 1942 A message came through "Pioneers to the front", a T34 was blocking the column path behind the lines in a fores near Zavodnyi, the anti tank guns couldn't get a good angle to get a shot off so it was  down to the Pioneers to take it out..the Platoon set off with 3kg demo charges and anti tank mines..Greifter Schingitz sprinted upto the Tank to blow the tracks  with the demo charge but it didn't cause any real damage so  he fetched a second demo charge and got close enough again and this time it only blew and twisted the drive wheel. Lt Beigel then raced up and placed a anti tank mine with an igniter fuse on the armoured deck close to the turret but it failed to detonate so Unteroffizer Bub grabbed another 3kg demo charge  ontop of the anti tank mine and ignited it. This charge combined with the anti tank mine cracked the armour plating and ripped the turret out of it's housing. Flame erupted from the Tank. All the way through this the Tank had been firing both it's main gun and it's MGs. Soon the crew tried to ge tout but where cut down by the waiting Pioneers. Friefter Steinacker was fatally wounded during this close combat after a burst of MG fire hit him in the stomach, fatally wounding him. Griefter Frank was slightly wounded in the right foot by shrapnel and Felwebel Emil Grassel was wounded in the right arm by a shell splinter.

[Aces]

Yes, that would be great. As things stand when enemy armour turns up the best tactic for the poor infantry is to run away as fast as their legs can carry them before they get decimated.

[Dane49]

Didn't you get the memo Wodin?

Only the Russians know how to close assault tanks and are brave enough to attempt it.
The Germans would only shit their pants and scream "We're all going to die" whenever a Soviet tank made an appearence.

[Tanker]

Didn't you get the memo Wodin?

Only the Russians know how to close assault tanks and are brave enough to attempt it.
The Germans would only shit their pants and scream "We're all going to die" whenever a Soviet tank made an appearence.

LOL.  Andrey considers it statistically irrelevent and not worth modelling.  I disagree.  It becomes relevent when all you have is high explosive and mines.  Old argument though.

[andrey12345]

Let me remind you for Germans, just in case 


In some rare cases Last chance is used as AT, yes.

Other for fantasy movies like this

[Aces]

Hi Andrey,

I know that the Germans have hand-held AT devices such as stick grenade bundles, mines, sticky boms and stachel charges but they don't appear to use them very often.

Regards

Aces

[Xambrium]

german Tank Close Combat Practise Movie
1943 - OKH - Lehrfilm Nr. 451 - Panzernahbekämpfung
Part1


Part2

[andrey12345]

Good to deal with the tanks that are not shooting and stop at the right time  .

[Tanker]

I'm not sure about others but in some of my battles the Russian tanks stop right outside the window of a building or right next to an occupied trench.  A stationary tank, not covered by a fellow tank or infantry is terribly vulnerable Andrey.  The visibilty is very limited and once a person is right beside the tank he can't be seen from a buttoned tank.  I agree that it is a last chance attack and that no one with an AT gun would crawl up to a tank with explosives but those situations do occur in game, but I don't see the German troops even attempt it in game.

[Aces]

That's what I've observed also.

[andrey12345]

A stationary tank, not covered by a fellow tank or infantry is terribly vulnerable Andrey. 

Yes, But, unfortunately, the soldiers even more and more vulnerable, especially one that runs on a tank with a grenade.


Always, absolutely in all armies are trying to destroy targets (and tanks to) from a distance. This allows to maneuver the fire - a mandatory component of any effective weapons. For grenades and mines such a maneuver is practically impossible. Therefore, they are particularly ineffective at moving targets, such as tanks.

but I don't see the German troops even attempt it in game.

Germans do it just as well as all the other troops. Two conditions: 1 target (tank/SPG/APC) at close distance and AT weapon in use.
Only it must be remembered that the German soldiers have AT weapons in platoon leader's team not in regular squads. And use it accordingly.

[Dane49]

Germans do it just as well as all the other troops. Two conditions: 1 target (tank/SPG/APC) at close distance and AT weapon in use.
Only it must be remembered that the German soldiers have AT weapons in platoon leader's team not in regular squads. And use it accordingly.

Is this new and when was this implemented?
Is the Platoon HQ squad(team) considered a specially trained AT assault team?

If so I like this idea.
I never tried to use them as Tank Hunters before.

[andrey12345]

Is this new and when was this implemented?

Yes, new. From first game version (or even from APK43) 

Is the Platoon HQ squad(team) considered a specially trained AT assault team?

No, cmd team have AT mine.

I never tried to use them as Tank Hunters before.

And do not try is automatically feature, in practice, the effect of this is not enough.

In Russian community is a heated discussion, now they even use the statistics.
I do not want to disappoint the fans of infantry fighters with tanks, and even fausts very questionable means, all inf AT weapons is 1-2% of all killed tanks.
Game still need to reduce effeciency for inf AT weapons  .

[Dane49]

I don't really expect the infantry to destroy the tanks,but I would at least like them to be able with some determined effort to maybe force the tank to retreat away from the area if it is not accompanied by supporting infantry instead of sitting there and butchering the infantry.

And if the tank is immobilized I would think the infantry squads chances of destroying the tank would be greatly enhanced.
Understandably with great risk and possibly heavy casualties to the assaulting infantry.

[Dane49]

Game still need to reduce effeciency for inf AT weapons.

For who?
The Russians or the Germans?

[andrey12345]

Game still need to reduce effeciency for inf AT weapons.

For who?
The Russians or the Germans?

For both, but of course especially for Germans 

[Dane49]

Quote

Game still need to reduce effeciency for inf AT weapons.

For who?
The Russians or the Germans?
For both, but of course especially for Germans

Doubt you'll need to do much work on the German capability seeing as how they are already useless in this game in any type AT assault role.

[chashka17]

Xambrium - nice Lehrfilm.  Puts Hollywood to shame! 


Whilst I'm not defending Andreys assertions 100% I think his rationale is sound.
 
This is interesting as an overview of German squad methodology & supports Andreys' choice of game mechnaics (or lack of!)
http://www.cons.org/redwolf/infantry-toe.html

The availability of specific arms at any given moment bears examination & that then needs to be cross-referenced with the prevalent German doctrine.

The weapons normally available to a German rifle infantry squad aren't always useful versus armor.  (Unless you can John Wayne a grenade into an open hatch...)
It is interesting to note that despite the movies, regular frags are unlikely to damage a tank or its' tracks.  Those old episodes of Combat! http://www.tvrage.com/shows/id-3115 can be quite painful to watch in light of actual effectiveness of ordnance. 

IIRC at the start of the conflict German troops generally didn't have an effective anti-tank grenade.  Bundling hand-grenades was possible but placement is critical with that kind of device especially vs armor. 

Composition doctrine + weaponry management vs weapon availability supports a reduction in the number of infantry vs armor actions seen with German troops.

[Good resource on German grenades - ]
http://www.lexpev.nl/grenades/europe/germany/index.html


There was a discussion at BFC over the inclusion of certain weapons in the WW2 Normandy product.  The question led the BFC Gods to state that certain weapons would not be included because BFC in-house research did not show them as being present in reality at the time.
I recall being somewhat amused by the comment of a German player to the effect that a relative had been there & he had been issued with one of the weapons in question.  That however was rejected as not being a sufficiently 'hard-fact'. 

I can see that given the extra programming involved & the new models/animations etc, one might preclude the item from a work vs release date POV.  That would make for a more 'sensible' response in my book.  To say 'I haven't read it so it didn't happen...' is a bit less logical.
That said the %s & the work required to produce a game that is balanced enough to play & yet still contain all the coding necessary for a simulator has to make in-roads on what can be done with the available resources.

This is interesting as a means of interpreting close assault by infantry on armor within the mechanics of a game: -
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/article/ah20030818a
I also think that this logic is not without flaws - it makes sense in-game but isn't entirely frag-proof in real conditions.

[andrey12345]

There was a discussion at BFC over the inclusion of certain weapons in the WW2 Normandy product.  The question led the BFC Gods to state that certain weapons would not be included because BFC in-house research did not show them as being present in reality at the time.
I recall being somewhat amused by the comment of a German player to the effect that a relative had been there & he had been issued with one of the weapons in question.  That however was rejected as not being a sufficiently 'hard-fact'. 

If it present is good, but, in real world gamedevs cant make absoulutely all weapons and features from real life, and always have a choice what to do, what not. Therefore, if the weapon was, but its effectiveness was very low or questionable, such as most "AT" infantry weapons, then we need to spend resources on it, it is an open question and the correct answer in most cases is - no.

The same thing is when we can not eavluate the effectiveness - not available data.

[chashka17]

There was a discussion at BFC over the inclusion of certain weapons in the WW2 Normandy product.  The question led the BFC Gods to state that certain weapons would not be included because BFC in-house research did not show them as being present in reality at the time.
I recall being somewhat amused by the comment of a German player to the effect that a relative had been there & he had been issued with one of the weapons in question.  That however was rejected as not being a sufficiently 'hard-fact'. 

If it present is good, but, in real world gamedevs cant make absoulutely all weapons and features from real life, and always have a choice what to do, what not. Therefore, if the weapon was, but its effectiveness was very low or questionable, such as most "AT" infantry weapons, then we need to spend resources on it, it is an open question and the correct answer in most cases is - no.

The same thing is when we can not eavluate the effectiveness - not available data.

That was what I concluded with the available evidence.