How to fight AT guns?

[Bowcaster]

Hello all,

I've played CM:SF and CM:A and I just purchased FI. I'm on the second mission of the Conrath's Counterattack campaign and I am having some trouble. My infantry keeps getting pummeled by American AT guns. Machine gun fire seems useless and getting my armor involved before the AT guns are destroyed is suicide. There are too many guns and too spread out for artillery to be effective. What's your strategy for taking out AT guns?

[womble]

First off, I'll say that people who've played Conrath's Counterattack have reported that it's a bit of a tricky sequence.

But generally, indirect HE is the ideal answer for ATGs. If you haven't got enough mortars, you have to unpick the defense carefully with your tanks and infantry. Get close enough by sneaking through covered approaches for infantry to get some suppression on an ATG, then use direct HE from your tanks to break the ATG's position from a location that's not under any other guns.

Alternatively you can organise popup attacks from multiple vectors, again being careful to only show your armour to one gun at a time, and only briefly enough so they can't get a bead while you area-HE their asses.

Smoke can be useful. Smoke is very powerful and good use of it can make life much easier.

[Bowcaster]

Thank you, I ended up using my mortars to take em out. But of course the downside is I had fewer mortars to use against the enemy infantry and the ones I did have missed their mark so my infantry took a pretty good beating from enemies in entrenched positions. Once I made sure all their AT guns were destroyed, I rushed in with my tanks alleviating my broken infantry and decimating the remaining resistance. It also seems that the bazookas American infantry carry are wildly inaccurate, they fired quite a few of them at my Panzers, but I don't think any of them hit, and certainly no kills.

[womble]

Yeah, mortars are the "Rock" to ATG's "Scissors"...

It sounds a little bit (to me, with very incomplete info) like you might be trying to rush things a bit much. Was it necessary to commit your infantry before the ATGs were dealt with (perhaps in order to get spotter LOS)? I can see if you're up against a time constraint, you might need to push with the infantry before their clanking, snorting friends can come and help, but usually taking your time will pay off in increased speed once you do get a-movin'.

The AI tends to use all its Tube Guys at ineffectively long ranges if it gets the option. Zooks and Shrecks have a notional range of 250m or so, but I would call a 100m shot the absolute maximum at which I'd consider opeining up with either. The AI takes the "paper" number though, as its effective range.

[dieseltaylor]

US RL report was that the bazooka effectiveness diminished beyond 100 yards as the warhead was not striking at right angles . This would diminish the effect of the HEAT charge.

[Childress]

First off, I'll say that people who've played Conrath's Counterattack have reported that it's a bit of a tricky sequence.

Some of us were expecting 'sticky wicket', Womble...

[Andrew H.]

Yeah, mortars are the "Rock" to ATG's "Scissors"...

It sounds a little bit (to me, with very incomplete info) like you might be trying to rush things a bit much. Was it necessary to commit your infantry before the ATGs were dealt with (perhaps in order to get spotter LOS)? I can see if you're up against a time constraint, you might need to push with the infantry before their clanking, snorting friends can come and help, but usually taking your time will pay off in increased speed once you do get a-movin'.

I think this is good advice.

I also think that using ATGs is one of the things that the AI is best at - it tends to pick good starting positions if the map is good...and it doesn't need to worry about maneuvering them in response to something the player does...which it is less good at, anyway.

And IMO ATGs are hardest to fight in "probe" type situations, where you don't have the overwhelming force you might have in an attack or assault situation.

But the best advice for dealing with ATGs is to advance with infantry slowly and then call in mortars if you do find them. Although you probably won't find them until after they've fired.

[Bowcaster]

Yeah, mortars are the "Rock" to ATG's "Scissors"...

It sounds a little bit (to me, with very incomplete info) like you might be trying to rush things a bit much. Was it necessary to commit your infantry before the ATGs were dealt with (perhaps in order to get spotter LOS)? I can see if you're up against a time constraint, you might need to push with the infantry before their clanking, snorting friends can come and help, but usually taking your time will pay off in increased speed once you do get a-movin'.

The AI tends to use all its Tube Guys at ineffectively long ranges if it gets the option. Zooks and Shrecks have a notional range of 250m or so, but I would call a 100m shot the absolute maximum at which I'd consider opeining up with either. The AI takes the "paper" number though, as its effective range.

One side of the map was full of trees and buildings, so that is where I used infantry instead of tanks. I smoked the area and then advanced my infantry. When the smoke cleared, to my surprise there was much more enemy resistance than I anticipated, which is why I took heavy losses. I realized later that after taking out the AT guns I probably could have completed the mission without even using my infantry.

[dieseltaylor]

Guess camouflage could be pretty good. A detail that does not discuss what happened to the ATG!

During the morning the Tp Sgts tank of 5 Tp B Sqn was knocked out by a dug In 7.5 cm ak 40 at about 20 yds. Four of the crew are missing and one was rescued.

http://freepages.military.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~attwood/8thkri/war_diary.htm

[MikeyD]

Whenever I've found myself facing too many (x) along a broad front I've has some luck focusing on capturing a flank, then 'turning the front' so instead of facing an array of guns I get to move up his line dealing with the guns one at a time. Sort'a reminds me of an old battleship formation tactic, 'crossing the T', the battle of Jutland.

[Michael Emrys]

Whenever I've found myself facing too many (x) along a broad front I've has some luck focusing on capturing a flank, then 'turning the front' so instead of facing an array of guns I get to move up his line dealing with the guns one at a time.

Usually a good practice even without the ATGs.

Sort'a reminds me of an old battleship formation tactic, 'crossing the T', the battle of Jutland.

Did that happen at Jutland? If it did, I think it may have failed there as the battle was indecisive. On the other hand, applied in the Battle of Surigao Strait it worked magnificently with only a Japanese destroyer escaping destruction.

Michael

[dieseltaylor]

I like my battles like Lepanto. A ruse to gain a local advantage.

BTW a tactic in CMx1 which I experimented and used on assaults was smoke barrages to screen off sections of the battlefield. On one map I decide on five sequenced barrages to allow me to move my mobile troops into the enemy back area. I did lose some to mines but I think it ended up an honourable draw.

The map was such that any other attack looked a loser but this offered the chance of victory. Smoke was very popular in WW2 for a reason. Getting the right weather is a consideration. In a club situation I would give the attacker the choice of time of attack ! And the weather conditions.

[womble]

...smoke barrages to screen off sections of the battlefield...Smoke was very popular in WW2 for a reason...

Anything that allows you to control the battlefield situation is a massive force multiplier. Need some dead ground? Drop some smoke. Similarly, engineers in congested terrain. Both systems are perhaps somewhat overpowered even, in CM, since (wrt smoke) only pre-existing area fires will continue through a barrage, where in real life, defenders could, ammunition status permitting, at least attempt to suppress movement across the newly-invisible area, and (wrt engineers) blasting gaps in things is somewhat trivialised, though there are some things engineers can't do in-game with their Acme "Blow-it-all" demo charges that they perhaps should be able to.

The combination of smoke and engineers makes FIBUA much more survivable as the attacker; you can cross ambush sacks safely and create your own "ambushes" from unanticipated (at least during planning) directions with explosive entry.