Armoured Infantry

[jonPhillips]

I’ve been playing the CMFB campaign Courage Conquers and was wondering how you guys make best use of armoured infantry? Doctrine says to transport troops ‘close’ to the fighting and then the dismounted infantry continue the fight on foot.

So far so good. However, the US armoured infantry platoon loses a lot of potential firepower keeping the halftracks out of enemy LOS.

I’ve tried keeping the halftracks to 250-300m away from any enemy infantry, but the instant they ‘Open Up’ to allow them (and their passengers) to start dishing out the good news, they become total bullet magnets.

Within a turn or two, they’re reversing quicker than you can say ‘Italian tankette’, usually with multiple casualties on board, including  dead crew members. The exact same thing happens with the German Panzergrenadiers in their SdKfzs.

I often find situations where it’s absolutely necessary to have the extra MGs, but the halftracks regularly seem more vulnerable than their crew-served infantry equivalents.

So what’s the answer? How can you best use the additional firepower, especially when you don’t have enough other firepower to effectively suppress a range of mutually supporting defenders?

[Xorg_Xalargsky]

Can't say much about Allied halftracks due to a lack of experience, but I find German halftracks are best used to provide an immediate and debilitating amount of firepower on few targets, preferably one per vehicle. 

[StieliAlpha]

I admit, I did not solve this question myself. I have the impression, the theory of bringing the troops safely to the front, is out of the CM scale. I guess in most scenarios, the troops should disembark before they even reach the CM map.

Personally, I never had much luck with German halftracks.

But one of my PBEM opponents is pretty successful with US halftracks. He indeed leaves them normally veeeery far behind to provide covering fire with the Cal 50 (and, yes, quite often the gunner dies). Only when my  position is already very weak, he rushes troops in with the halftracks...

[IICptMillerII]

Check out this thread from a while back covering mechanized infantry tactics in the WWII titles:

 

[Kommissar]

In the Courage Conquers campaign, just have your tanks blast every building with one or two HE shells. It will dislodge or kill most of the defenders.  You want to make heavy use of your armour, because the Germans possess very little AT beyond 200m. 

I had the same problems with HTs during the campaign.  They were just steel coffins, particularly for whatever poor sap was mounting the MG.  I just dismounted infantry before there was any possibility of hostile contact and made sure the HTs stayed buttoned up to prevent casualties.  You are best to rely heavily on your tanks and only use the infantry to mop up.

[Erwin]

" in most scenarios, the troops should disembark before they even reach the CM map."

+1

One should keep halftracks 500m+ from enemy small arms.  Less than 300m from enemy in LOS is getting suicidal.

[General Jack Ripper]

Halftracks should be seen as nothing more than bulletproof trucks, asking for more out of them is asking for trouble.
Their job is to deliver your infantry to their jumping off point unharmed, providing some suppressive fires with their machineguns, allowing for rapid redeployment in between engagements, as well as providing an easy source of ammunition resupply.

Quote

I’ve tried keeping the halftracks to 250-300m away from any enemy infantry, but the instant they ‘Open Up’ to allow them (and their passengers) to start dishing out the good news, they become total bullet magnets.

You would be better off keeping them out to around 400-500 meters while firing, and only closing within that range specifically to disembark infantry, then withdrawing again.

 

One of Jeffrey Paulding's tactics videos features Armored Infantry (Time-Stamped to Relevant Portion):

 

My playtesting of Rinaldi's scenario 'Duel in the Mist' does show some armored infantry in action, if you want to have a look:
Of course, I possessed copious amounts of supporting weapons, so the actual tactical problem was one of time management, rather than the specific problem of employment.
 

 

 

 

 

I do have plans to make a tactics video specifically about Armored Infantry, but life and work have sapped my schedule quite a bit.
I hope this helps, and welcome to the forums, btw.

[jonPhillips]

On 26/10/2017 at 9:28 PM, IICptMillerII said:

Check out this thread from a while back covering mechanized infantry tactics in the WWII titles:

 

 

10 hours ago, SLIM said:

Halftracks should be seen as nothing more than bulletproof trucks, asking for more out of them is asking for trouble...

<snip>

...I hope this helps, and welcome to the forums, btw.

Many thanks for the great replies fellas, plenty of material to try out.

[JoMac]

On 10/26/2017 at 8:51 AM, jonPhillips said:

’Ive tried keeping the halftracks to 250-300m away from any enemy infantry, but the instant they ‘Open Up’ to allow them (and their passengers) to start dishing out the good news, they become total bullet magnets.

Yeah, you should be relatively safe at that range, but for some reason Battlefront still thinks this range is point blank , and your HT's become Bullet Magnets. 

Edited November 1, 2017 by JoMc67

[rocketman]

A while back I did extensive testing on why HT gunners seem to be bullet magnets and one conclusion was that the incoming fire is for some reason more concentrated on the HT than an infantry target in the open. Thus, the HT serves as a kind of "beacon". German HTs with gun shields have a much better chance of survival even at relative close range as long as the incoming fire is from the immediate front.

[c3k]

1 hour ago, rocketman said:

A while back I did extensive testing on why HT gunners seem to be bullet magnets and one conclusion was that the incoming fire is for some reason more concentrated on the HT than an infantry target in the open. Thus, the HT serves as a kind of "beacon". German HTs with gun shields have a much better chance of survival even at relative close range as long as the incoming fire is from the immediate front.

Yeah...but even so, you'd be well served to keep that gunner's head down or keep that 'track about 300-500m away from the enemy and just use them for suppressive fire, not point fire.

[rocketman]

1 hour ago, c3k said:

Yeah...but even so, you'd be well served to keep that gunner's head down or keep that 'track about 300-500m away from the enemy and just use them for suppressive fire, not point fire.

The tests I made was usually at 300 m or more, and all kills of gunners were upper body direct hits and not HT penetration shots. So, I maintain that my conclusion is valid but agrees that care is needed and using them up close is not wise. In a suppressive role with other units firing at the same target they can perform well despite their fragility.

[Erwin]

It is not easy to kill inf at 300m+ range.  Could there be some calculation re HT's that make the gunner more vulnerable if they are regularly getting KIA at 300m-500m range - a range that should be relatively safe for an inf man?

 

[Pete Wenman]

Quote

For ACMT Dismounted Close Combat:

1. Snap 400 m
Prone
9
rounds

2. Rapid/Snap 300 m
Prone
10
rounds

3. Snap 300 m
Fire Trench
5
rounds

4. Rapid 200 m
Prone
5
rounds

5. Snap 200 m
Kneeling
Supported
5
rounds

6. Snap 200 m
Standing
5
rounds

7. Snap 100 m
Kneeling
Unsupported
5
rounds

8. Snap/Rapid 100 m
Standing and
Kneeling
Unsupported/
Squatting/Prone
10
rounds

9. Rapid 100 m
Prone
5
rounds

10. Rapid 50 m
Standing
Unsupported
5
rounds

Pass Standards

400 m 33% 
300 m 60% 
200 m 75% 
100 m 75% 
50 m 80%

 

The British Army current annual test requires a 60% pass rate at 300 metres, that's getting on for two hits on target out of three shots

[Lille Fiskerby]

I use a 50 meter target arc both for the HT and the armored inf. inside so they hold their fire, then when you dismount give the inf. a face command towards the enemy.

Maybe use smoke rounds from the tanks to cover you, I think the tanks have limited ammo supply in this campaign, so use your machineguns all the time they have plenty of ammo.

[rocketman]

4 hours ago, Pete Wenman said:

The British Army current annual test requires a 60% pass rate at 300 metres, that's getting on for two hits on target out of three shots

That is good to know. I have no clue, but how much more accurate is a modern weapon compared to WWII bolt action rifle?

[Pete Wenman]

2 hours ago, rocketman said:

but how much more accurate is a modern weapon compared to WWII bolt action rifle?

I don't know either, but actual accuracy is not the whole issue. In simple terms for a combat setting, accuracy is a function of barrel length and bullet velocity, and most WWII rifles had a longer barrel than the current assault rifles and a more powerful cartridge. (The reason behind the bullpup arrangement on the SA-80 was to keep barrel length whilst reducing the overall weapon length).

Like others here I have shot both a rifle and assault rifle at the ranges being talked about - I my case being the 7.62mm SLR and the 5.56mm SA-80 which replaced it in service with the British Army. In terms of hitting targets at 300m it can be achieved without too much difficulty once the firer understands his windage and aim off for range. From experience the SLR shot pretty straight at 300m (I'm sure someone will recall the actual drop for range at 300m but something in the grey matter says 3-4 inches only). The SA-80 was not greatly different but the magnification on the sight made it much easier to see fall of shot allowing for easier and quicker adjustment onto a target. If you can't see your initial fall of shot it is very hard to adjust, but at 300m with a zeroed weapon you should still hit a man sized target without needing to aim off.

 P

Edited November 2, 2017 by Pete Wenman

[Erwin]

The topic addresses WW2 era accuracy vs inf compared to the gunner of a halftrack.  So aren't these comments about modern rifles a bit irrelevant.  Are there any halftracks in use in modern armies?

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Not since Yom Kippur (or thereabouts).

Edited November 2, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead

[transporter]

If the track has a 50 cal, I try to keep it at least 500 meters away from the enemy and use it for area suppressive fire.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

That's my preferred option too, those .50cals do the licks and if you keep them at range they don't suffer too badly from the return fire.....Once the ammo's mostly gone (& the drop off points are swiss-cheese) it's time to go in.

[c3k]

Part of it is, to me, the lack of survival behavior by the gunners. As rounds crack by or ping off the shield (if there), they stay on the gun. Now, as an offensive player (or, so I've been told by many who've left in a huff ), I like the gunners' dedication. However, a bit of duck and cover and then coming back up would be good. Or, if you're getting pinged by a rifleman off  to your 2 o'clock, swivel the damn gun and spray down the likely areas of cover rather than staying on your suppressive duty.

The other part is the ability to hit a tiny target behind a shield. It seems to be a bit over-represented in-game...imho.

So, a little too much accuracy and a lot too much of "stick to your gun". The solution? Keep the tracks back so the enemy accuracy falls off such that only a lucky shot hits the gunner.

[Erwin]

16 hours ago, transporter said:

If the track has a 50 cal, I try to keep it at least 500 meters away from the enemy and use it for area suppressive fire.

This is definitely the best tactic.  The challenge is that it's rare to have that sort of LOS in the European CM2 titles.  Most maps are not large enuff. 

CMSF is wonderful for featuring long range 1,000m+ LOS maps.    That and the lovely sunshine is a major reason (for me at least) that a WW2 North Africa CM2 title is sorely missed and why CMSF2 is being looked forward to with eager anticipation. 

 

[jtsjc1]

2 hours ago, c3k said:

Part of it is, to me, the lack of survival behavior by the gunners. As rounds crack by or ping off the shield (if there), they stay on the gun. Now, as an offensive player (or, so I've been told by many who've left in a huff ), I like the gunners' dedication. However, a bit of duck and cover and then coming back up would be good. Or, if you're getting pinged by a rifleman off  to your 2 o'clock, swivel the damn gun and spray down the likely areas of cover rather than staying on your suppressive duty.

The other part is the ability to hit a tiny target behind a shield. It seems to be a bit over-represented in-game...imho.

So, a little too much accuracy and a lot too much of "stick to your gun". The solution? Keep the tracks back so the enemy accuracy falls off such that only a lucky shot hits the gunner.

Thank you! An adjustment to the AI here would be great. I hate when gunners ignore incoming fire from 100m away to keep shooting downrange 500m at a target they have less chance of hitting. I don't mind my gunners being Manila John but use some common sense!

[danfrodo]

I agree.  It sure seems to be about gunner behavior and not accounting well for shielding, if present.  I would really like to find some accounts from veterans on this.