TanK Close Assault..

[FB_AGA]

Can any one provide screenshots or better a video of useless german pioneeres compare to russian engineers?

Ps. russian infantry has a RPG-40 and bottles. Their number per squad is known.
German infantry had only grenade bundles in 1942. According to handbook of german army there were around 60 grenades per platoon. So, it is about 12 grenades per squad. 1 bundle is 7 grenades.
Well, german infantry should also have bottles, but are you sure it would help them? (explosives and T-mines are weapons of pioneers).

I guess the problem in ammo.

[andrey12345]

  It needs infantry accompanying the armor to do so.  The game seems wrong in that aspect when one or two tanks wander alone about the battlefield and wipe out entrenched infantry. 

Please examples with screens - alone tanks that wipe out infantry (not from Quick Battle with only tanks in one side)?

It should also be remembered that the soldiers (especially crawling) seen much closer than tanks. And tanks in attack mode detached from the infantry (as was often the case in reality).

[andrey12345]

I have no problems getting the Russian infantry to attack tanks in this game.
I don't even have to order the Russian infantry squads to assault tanks in this game.
They do it willingly!
But the Germans do nothing but sit around like zombies waiting to die.

I already told why this is so. I'll tell you one more time, in the Soviet infantry AT tools "smeared" around the squad (except the machine-gunners and ATR teams). This is done essentially forced out of the overall weakness of the normal AT tools. Small ammount of AT guns, no AT SPGs, etc. It also forced the infantry to saturate the ersatz AT.
For the Germans (before the middle of the war) this problem not been so relevant  - were normal ATs in amount. There was no such of catastrophic need for any questionable AT tools. Therefore, as result in game - an effective AT tools is only at the platoon commander!


P.S. If for example we were doing the initial period of the war - summer 1941 that the Red Army would have the same "problem", no ATRs, bottles and other rubbish, only 107, 76, 57 and 45 mm guns .

[Tanker]

  It needs infantry accompanying the armor to do so.  The game seems wrong in that aspect when one or two tanks wander alone about the battlefield and wipe out entrenched infantry. 

Please examples with screens - alone tanks that wipe out infantry (not from Quick Battle with only tanks in one side)?

It should also be remembered that the soldiers (especially crawling) seen much closer than tanks. And tanks in attack mode detached from the infantry (as was often the case in reality).

Why exempt Quick Battle?  I'm surprised that you or your team mates have not observed it.

If I can catch it during a campaign battle I'll be happy to post a video.

I've seen it happen with entrenched troops being killed in their trenches by tanks and panicking and leaving the trench. I question whether experienced troops would leave the safety of the trench unless the tank was not facing them.  There is not much a solitary tank can do to men in a trench.  MG fire is ineffective.  High explosive may get a few with a direct hit, although it would be hard to target a trench.  Crushing the trench or fox hole is always a possibility, depending on the soil etc.

In reality tanks in attack mode did not bother to hunt soldiers in their trenches.  They broke through the lines and went into the rear areas to disrupt command and control and help with encirclement.

[andrey12345]

Why exempt Quick Battle?  I'm surprised that you or your team mates have not observed it.

In quick battle, you have the ability to get any combination of the troops in the most strange and bizarre combinations and setup for it strange tasks. For examle one side with only tanks, other with only infantry. And rightly outraged that tanks without infantry destroy other infantry w/o AT weapons. It is possible and a little strange

If I can catch it during a campaign battle I'll be happy to post a video.

In most campaigns you have AT weapons (AT guns or SPGs). Yes you can do scenario: "enemy tanks vs your clear infantry", but its your mistake as commander.

I've seen it happen with entrenched troops being killed in their trenches by tanks and panicking and leaving the trench. I question whether experienced troops would leave the safety of the trench unless the tank was not facing them.  There is not much a solitary tank can do to men in a trench.  MG fire is ineffective.  High explosive may get a few with a direct hit, although it would be hard to target a trench.  Crushing the trench or fox hole is always a possibility, depending on the soil etc.

You look at this things exceptionally at low level. In most cases, tanks will sooner or later kill infantry (destroy trenches or wipe out infantry or desorganise it), it is inevitable.
In real life too. If somthing do not get in the way (for example AT guns or other tanks), and they will have enough ammunition. Its may be long time but is inevitable. In quick battle is all over and, as ammunition in the start is 100%, and that will be at next battle not interest us. And obviously that's the problem of a simulation as "separate missions" (in all wargames it is, not only in this game). Missing the most important part - logistics. Therefore, better things are seen in operation when these tanks in the next battle will have nothing to shoot. And even some not so good situations are not as critical - you lost infantry platoon in 1st battle but dont lose AT battery and APCs in next.

In reality tanks in attack mode did not bother to hunt soldiers in their trenches.  They broke through the lines and went into the rear areas to disrupt command and control and help with encirclement.

In our game too, if you (or AI) dont send it to trenches directly, but as in real life they shoot at targets if its possible.

But I see we have strayed from the main topic, and you do not think that the infantry can destroy tanks by hands?
Only that the tanks do not have to kill infantry quickly?

[Aces]

Hi Andrey.

I think that a lot of players, myself included, do look at things at low level. IMHO the strategy component is very important but many players like to play/view the game "down in the dirt" and these things are far more apparent than when dashing around the map moving troops about and giving orders. I notice them because my main interest is in movie making and therefore I view the game a lot close up and at ground level as that's where one can enjoy the beautiful graphical detail of the game and the action. I'll happily try and capture some video in a campaign if I can. I'm fitting a new capture card at the weekend and so will have a bit more time.

Kind regards

Aces

[andrey12345]

I think that a lot of players, myself included, do look at things at low level. IMHO the strategy component is very important but many players like to play/view the game "down in the dirt" and these things are far more apparent than when dashing around the map moving troops about and giving orders.

Then it is better to play chess, or at least games with balance like Starcraft 
Low level is result of all other, if you do somthing wrong at high level (or skip it) - you get "wrong results" like infantry vs enemy tanks.
We do not make the balance because is the opposite of realism. But in gameplay terms balance is better.

[Aces]

I think there's some confusion between your usage of "low-level" and mine . I meant down low at ground level where one can observe the action close up

Regards

Aces

Edit:

What about the usage of AT grenades with the German Rifle Grenade Launcher?. This weapon was introduced in part to replace the 50mm mortar at squad level and also to provide a degree of AT capability. I don't think that I've seen this weapon used for either HE or, particualrly AT in-game.There were a large number of both grenade attachments and ammunition produced for them : http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DS8O%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official&rurl=translate.google.co.uk&sl=de&u=http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Waffen/gewehrgranatgerat.htm&usg=ALkJrhjDW2UZ1nRePmaFLPy8MQXKR-tvFQ

and some more info on rifle grenades here:

http://www.lonesentry.com/manuals/german-grenades/

[wodin]

This forum does make me chuckle as I see replies from Andrey that don't make sense or seems to go off on a tangent  but really it's language translation issues

[Tanker]

Yes, it is a language barrier.  But at least andrey keeps talking to us, even if we can't understand each other.   It might be easier if we could sit down and talk face to face.  But it would also be easier to choke each other.

[Tanker]

Andrey we are talking about what happens with the game at what you call "low level" and what we call a tactical level.  This game is primarily a tactical one with a strategic overlay.  A single tank that swans about the battlefield hunting entrenched soldiers, at night, while buttoned up is a tactical event that is unrealistic.  You can believe us or not but it does happen and it is infuriating.  It does not matter if it happens in a qb or a campaign battle.  It is a game mechanic.  I've had campaign battles where all I had left was German infantry, with no ATGs or armor left.  The Soviet side did not advance their remaining infantry (not very much left) but the AI did send tanks one at a time to wander about until finding German infantry, hiding in trenches and blast them out.  All this at night mind you.

As I see it, there's 2 seperate issues:

A. Infantry (especially German) do not close assault tanks when the tanks are stationary and vulnerable.

 1.Andrey feels that this happened so rarely that it is not worth modelling, and if it happens in game it is because of bad decisions at the strategic level.

 2. I disagree.  I feel that the situation of a lone tank hunting infantry in woods, a village and or in their trenches arises often enough in the game that some reaction to it should be modelled.  Either that or stop the tanks from doing this behavior.

B. Closely associated with A. above is the ability of buttoned tanks and their action to find and target infantry, in trenches, woods and villages, even at night.

 1. From a closed tank it would be very difficult to see hiding infantry during the day, let alone at night.  You would never hear them over engine and track noise.  Additonally, high velocity tank rounds would be very difficult to target men hiding in trenches with unless the tank was at a higher elevation.  The flat trajectory would make it difficult to target the trench.

2. What I feel would be reasonable is that a closed tank would not see men in trenches or in woods at all, UNLESS accompanied by infantry.  This is especially true at night.

[andrey12345]

I think there's some confusion between your usage of "low-level" and mine . I meant down low at ground level where one can observe the action close up

Oh

What about the usage of AT grenades with the German Rifle Grenade Launcher?. This weapon was introduced in part to replace the 50mm mortar at squad level and also to provide a degree of AT capability. I don't think that I've seen this weapon used for either HE or, particualrly AT in-game.There were a large number of both grenade attachments and ammunition produced for them : http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DS8O%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official&rurl=translate.google.co.uk&sl=de&u=http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Waffen/gewehrgranatgerat.htm&usg=ALkJrhjDW2UZ1nRePmaFLPy8MQXKR-tvFQ

This weapon present in game and Pzb.39 too and even rifle grenades. But, how you think, what a chance to hit (not kill) a moving target (like tank) when firing slowly flying grenade fired on parabolic (i dont know right terms for howitizer/mortar type trajectory in English) trajectory? AT caps is proportional to this chance 

[andrey12345]

This forum does make me chuckle as I see replies from Andrey that don't make sense or seems to go off on a tangent  but really it's language translation issues

Yes, it happens. Unfortunately I do not polyglot, not all understand precisely enough. But google translations in most cases very strange too. Sorry.

[andrey12345]

Andrey we are talking about what happens with the game at what you call "low level" and what we call a tactical level.
  This game is primarily a tactical one with a strategic overlay. 

Not quite agree. In game present only tactical level (and some aspects of operational-tactical level), no strategic or operational alone.
In tactical battle is pure tactical, in operational phase (in game terms) it is tactical + some aspects of operational. "Low level" is better to clarify for tactical combat (in game terms).

A single tank that swans about the battlefield hunting entrenched soldiers, at night, while buttoned up is a tactical event that is unrealistic. 

"Night" this is a very blurry term. In some nights full Moon+clear sky+snow - contrast and legibility of objects almost as cloudy day, and I see no reason why tank can't kills infantry in trenches. FB_AGA found a computed coefficients for WWII for object recognition in "night time", very enlightening.

As I see it, there's 2 seperate issues:

A. Infantry (especially German) do not close assault tanks when the tanks are stationary and vulnerable.

 1.Andrey feels that this happened so rarely that it is not worth modelling, and if it happens in game it is because of bad decisions at the strategic level.

 2. I disagree.  I feel that the situation of a lone tank hunting infantry in woods, a village and or in their trenches arises often enough in the game that some reaction to it should be modelled.  Either that or stop the tanks from doing this behavior.

 

Its modelled as well as for any other side infantry no diffirence. The problem is that the German infantry in general, there is dont have erzatz AT tools in mass (in this time period 1942-1943). It is not clear what kind of reaction do you expect? Kill tanks from rifle or MGs? Yes its possible (and present now) for light tanks like T-26/T60. Throw grenades to tanks - yes is possible (and present) but Germans have 1-2 bundle per squad and 1 HHl3 in platoon cmd team both with very limited radius. Shot from ATR (if present) or GrB.39 or rifle grenade (one per squad) - yes its modelled too.
But all this AT tools practically not effective against the main tank T-34.

B. Closely associated with A. above is the ability of buttoned tanks and their action to find and target infantry, in trenches, woods and villages, even at night.
 

Yes, I agree, it probably is not worked out very well (it is hard problem dont have a good solution). May be its main problem, but A is not a problem at all, but cast shadow to B.

1. From a closed tank it would be very difficult to see hiding infantry during the day, let alone at night.   

If it not shooting or moving, yes. In game the same. if you block shoting for infantry and set ambush mode. For tanks is to hard found infantry even at day in forest and in high grass.

You would never hear them over engine and track noise. 

Yes of course. Even if tank buttoned but not moved and engine is off.

Additonally, high velocity tank rounds would be very difficult to target men hiding in trenches with unless the tank was at a higher elevation.  The flat trajectory would make it difficult to target the trench.

Yes but. Shrapnel rounds (in soviet tanks with 76,2 mm guns is main AT round since 1941-early 43 due to lack of AP rounds) and fuse switch on HE rounds for OF-350A shell, all of this reduce problems. And AI used this options may be more often than in reality.

2. What I feel would be reasonable is that a closed tank would not see men in trenches or in woods at all, UNLESS accompanied by infantry.  This is especially true at night.
 

"Closed" is tank which is located close to trenches? I.e dead zone? If yes its improved in last patch.
If closed is buttoned is not right - tanks see very good (better than infantry) due to optics, but in small sector at one moment. Its lead to difficults for fast recognition but in common terms is better than infantry.

[Schuck]

I always play at low level with squad lock, much more imersive, and i love it!
If it ever stops, i will take up Starcraft! 
To be honest i sort of agree with most views on this, Andreys because German Infantry Squad AT capabilities were limited in 42-43, although they must have used something, even if it just damaged a track and immobilised it?
And everybody elses views on the "Roaming killer Tank" syndrome.
Id like to see the ability to retreat, maybe giving up ground (squares in the game) and none mobile equipment,(damaged vehicles, etc)
in order to preserve my sanity, and to stop me having to watch a single solitary tank chase my men around the map for a couple of hours!
The Cease Fire option just doesnt work in this instance.

[andrey12345]

To be honest i sort of agree with most views on this, Andreys because German Infantry Squad AT capabilities were limited in 42-43, although they must have used something, even if it just damaged a track and immobilised it?

Yes, they have used AT guns, SPGs, etc 

Id like to see the ability to retreat, maybe giving up ground (squares in the game) and none mobile equipment,(damaged vehicles, etc)
in order to preserve my sanity, and to stop me having to watch a single solitary tank chase my men around the map for a couple of hours!

Now you can retreat with disabled platoons after this, or retreat before battle (press MMB on attacked platoon if it possible - they retreat) - this options work immediately 

[Fritz]

First of all please forgive my poor english ;-)

Looks like not all understanding difference between russian (RKKA) and germany weapons system, russans have many    
handheld close-range AT weapons much more effective than germans tools, but in most case don't have effective long range weapons, lets look simply:

RPG-40 vs M-24x4
RPG-40 have contact detonator and 1kg TXT, not so little.
M-24 non contact detonator and few separate charges, who can detonate not all at once, at my look in game this AT weapons works much better, than in real life, because works like contact detonate.

PTR/PTRD vs Pzgr.39
penetration 30-35mm/100m vs 35-50mm/any distance (good number for germans)
BUT T-34 side 45mm/60 and PzIII side some about 30-35mm/90

Try germans ATR(or even mortars 98K) vs T-26/60/70 you will see soviet tanks will burn like flame-torch, they penetrated at any side, but yes T-34, matilda, Valentane or KV much harder.

Try play Hooper, take any tanks and go closer to infantry - RKG-3 will burn any your tank at once, because this is powerful AT weapon, it's means that just germans, and soviets too, troops at this 1942-43 didn't had good AT tools in mass.

So now lets look at long-range weapons: Pak38, Pak40 what same have soviets? No thing not ZiS-3 not 45mm gun, of course, do not stand close to german guns, they can't penetrate germany main tanks (pzIIIL, PzVI) not only at front, but even at side. And Pak38 or especial Pak40 can destroy most of any russian tank at 1-2 shots.
 
All this I write only because I see, that for western community game problems looks opposite than for russian side

I hope you will understand what I trying to say

[Aces]

Hi,

Thanks for posting. I don't think that we are expecting a T-34 or KV-1 to be destroyed easily or frequently using hand-held weapons. More the case that as things stand the German infantry hardly seem to use what little AT weapons they have and that there doesn't seem to be a realistic chance of disabling the tanks and the tanks themselves seem very happy to attack and pursue entrenched infantry, without friendly infantry support, in pretty much any terrain or lighting conditions. I agree that up to 1943 (pre the gradual introduction of panzerfausts and panzershrecks) the Germans didn't possess purpose-made very powerful, numerous or effective hand-held anti-tank weapons, I'd settle for more realistic behaviour by attacking tanks when unaccompanied by friendly infantry and usage of whatever hand-held weapons that the defending infantry have. I agree with Andrey that AT rifle-grenades probably were a very hit and miss affair but I've never seen this weapon used for this purpose in-game. Each squad has such a weapon but I've not observed it being used for HE and certainly not for AP. As for the number of hand grenades issued to a squad I think that if the infantry were in prepared positions and knew of the possibility of attack by armour they would prepare grenade bundles or "aquire" other weapons such as T.mines as both were produced in extremely large quantities throughout the war. I don't think that in entrenched conditions one stick grenade bundle per squad and a rifle grenade launcher that doesn't attempt to fire any AT ammunition is a very realistic situation.

Kind regards

Aces

Edit: I just wanted to add that it is always a pleasure to post here and the opportunity to discuss such matters with Andrey and his colleagues. In this respect Graviteam really do support their customers and their product and that fact is very much appreciated.

[Bayonet]

Edit: I just wanted to add that it is always a pleasure to post here and the opportunity to discuss such matters with Andrey and his colleagues. In this respect Graviteam really do support their customers and their product and that fact is very much appreciated.

+1

[lavish]

Now you can retreat with disabled platoons after this, or retreat before battle (press MMB on attacked platoon if it possible - they retreat) - this options work immediately 

What are the rules for MMB retreat? It doesn't always work.

p.s. Thanks for the tip!!!!  I didn't know this.