db_zero Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 I had a situation where I was facing a Mark IV in hedgerows and defended the area with 3 sections of men hiding each armed with bazookas. 2 shots got off. 1 missed and 1 hit but the armored skirt prevented damage. All the men died or surrendered. I realize the bazooka isn't the most effective AT weapon in 44. I just need to figure out the best way to employ them. The German Panzerfausts and Panzerschrecks on the other hand appear to have no problems with allied tanks. If you put your infantry on Hide I'm not sure if they will fire at an enemy tank that comes into range and it seems if you don't hide them enemy tanks have little problems spotting them-this is alluded to in another thread. I thought there was an "Ambush" command in CM1. Is there a way to issue commands to recreate that? How effective are bazookas against MKIV-with and with out armored skirts. I assume Panthers and Tigers is pretty much useless against the front and barely effective against the sides and the backside is the best angle-but just how much I don't know. If you fire from a higher elevation-especially from the rear I assume you'll get the best results as your aiming the the top part of the engine compartment. The other German tanks such as the STUG 3, IV I assume the same rules as the Mark IV apply. All in all it appears that most of the time taking on German tanks with bazookas is a death wish-which may be pretty accurate. I assume you can't pick up the German stuff and use it. Also from what I've seen any solid hit with the German stuff pretty much destroys Allied armor no matter what the angle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 "I thought there was an "Ambush" command in CM1." Yes, and many wish CM2 had one too. But, the usual crowd say it's not needed... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 I had a situation where I was facing a Mark IV in hedgerows and defended the area with 3 sections of men hiding each armed with bazookas. 2 shots got off. 1 missed and 1 hit but the armored skirt prevented damage. All the men died or surrendered. Your problem might well have been that you had them "Hide". Panzerfausts and Panzerschrecks on the other hand appear to have no problems with allied tanks. While both have significantly larger warheads than the 66mm zook, Shrecks are certainly not "one shot tank murderers"; sometimes appearances can be deceptive. If you put your infantry on Hide I'm not sure if they will fire at an enemy tank that comes into range... They may well not. Hiding prioritises staying unseen and that includes suppressing any desire to shoot. ...and it seems if you don't hide them enemy tanks have little problems spotting them-this is alluded to in another thread. All depends what you think counts as concealment. Tanks probably do spot a bit too fast and easy, but it's entirely possible to ambush them. How effective are bazookas against MKIV-with and with out armored skirts. Fairly. I'm surprised three tubes didn't geek it, if they were in good concealment. If you fire from a higher elevation-especially from the rear I assume you'll get the best results as your aiming the the top part of the engine compartment. You'll certainly have a chance of hitting "Top" armour locations which will be thinner and leave more penetration energy over for behind armour effects. The other German tanks such as the STUG 3, IV I assume the same rules as the Mark IV apply. I think the StuGs have tougher fronts than the PzIV, so you may well be better trying for flank shots on those too. Flank shots are better anyway, because even with the tanks spotting too well, they spot relatively less well to their flanks and rear. I assume you can't pick up the German stuff and use it. You're quite correct. Also from what I've seen any solid hit with the German stuff pretty much destroys Allied armor no matter what the angle. Have a read of the 20000pt battle where ian.leslie is giving the Axis AAR if you want a slightly larger sample which includes a lot of unsuccessful Shreck hits (I don't think there have been any Faust hits yet). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 @womble is spot on. The only thing I would add is that taking on tanks from the front is not usually a successful strategy. The trouble with taking tanks on from the front, even from concealment, is that you only get one shot before you are spotted. The trouble with these tube weapons is they often take two or even three shots to score a hit. Given that you need to take care to get flanking or rear attacks. Case in point in this AAR you can see two of my Shrek teams are pinned down facing three Stuart tanks. They were spotted very quickly and have been under fire for many turns now. Occasionally they have rallied and managed to take a shot but none have connected. I think they have fired 8-10 rounds and missed them all. www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=110644 Have a read of the 20000pt battle where ian.leslie is giving the Axis AAR if you want a slightly larger sample which includes a lot of unsuccessful Shreck hits (I don't think there have been any Faust hits yet). Correct my Grenadier Battalion has very few Fausts - lots of Shreks. I have an armoured company that has no Shreks but lots of Fausts. Earlier in the fight they were too far away from the enemy. Some of them are just now arriving in the town I am working to clear so perhaps we will see some Faust action. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=105660 Most recent post - in this case a successful Shrek hit is #365 http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1467539&postcount=365 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nelson 1812 Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 db_Zero here is a piat having a good day... but has some help. http://youtu.be/A2EWFPvE0tc 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 "I thought there was an "Ambush" command in CM1." Yes, and many wish CM2 had one too. But, the usual crowd say it's not needed... Your recollection is not completely correct. The Ambush command only existed in CMBO; this functionality was replaced by Cover Arcs in CMBB and CMAK. When the CMBO Ambush command worked, it was great, but it was actually very tricky to use because it was based on a limited target circle. So if an enemy unit took a path just a little outside the ambush target point, the ambush wouldn't be sprung. Cover Arcs worked just fine for ambushes in CMBB and CMAK, mostly because of Borg Spotting. Since enemy contact information was instantaneously shared between all units, you could put a Cover Arc on your ambush unit(s) and tell them to hide, and then have another unit somewhere else stay "up" to keep a lookout for enemy approach. As soon as any one of your units spotted enemy in the Cover Arc(s), all of the ambushing units would know about it instantaneously, unhide and open fire. We have pretty much the same Cover Arc functionality now in CMx2. The difference is that now we have Relative Spotting, and as a result it's hard to coordinate an ambush in WEGO because hiding units are spectacularly craptastic at spotting. IMHO, what's really needed for CMx2 is a way to link in-C2 units so that you can have a small, well concealed "lookout" that watches for enemy approach, and other units that stay hidden until the lookout "tells" them to uncover and open fire. We can call this an "Ambush" command, but functionally this is nothing like CMBO's Ambush Circles. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinnart Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 I agree with what the other veteran players have said here with their advice. One can make good ambushes with the cover arcs, only WITHOUT combining with HIDE. The key is always in concealment, and making sure the arc is wide, unless there is a very specific area you want covered. I like to use 180 degree for the most part. Also, you can make them men go prone manually by giving a slow order even in the same action square. This will improve their concealment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 Thanks for the correction YD. The HIDE + covered arc system worked very well as an ambush technique in CM1. Many of miss it in CM2 as having units on HIDE in CM2 when in close proximity to enemy troops is almost suicide. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oddball_E8 Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 Bazookas - best way to use them? Point the correct end at the enemy and pull trigger. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 IMHO, what's really needed for CMx2 is a way to link in-C2 units so that you can have a small, well concealed "lookout" that watches for enemy approach, and other units that stay hidden until the lookout "tells" them to uncover and open fire. +1. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 Thanks for the correction YD. The HIDE + covered arc system worked very well as an ambush technique in CM1. Many of miss it in CM2 as having units on HIDE in CM2 when in close proximity to enemy troops is almost suicide. Yep; it's definitely an area where there could be some improvement. I just think it's important to recognize that the issue here is actually a negative side effect of the (overall very positive) switch from Borg to Relative Spotting, not the lack of an CMBO-style "Ambush" command as such. The good news is that I think the tools to fix this issue are mostly already in the engine, and in fact here is potential to far surpass anything CMx1 could to wrt ambushes by leveraging CMx2's much more refined C2 system. But I have no idea when, or even if, BFC will get to this. IIRC Steve did make some comments a while back that he's aware of this issue and has some ideas for how he'd like to fix it. But I have no idea when we're likely to see any improvements in this area. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 db_zero, The bazooka can kill a Mark IV head on. Unfortunately, head on comes complete with a 75mm, a co-ax and a bow MG. If fitted with full skirts, there's precious little that can be done from the side, leaving only the rear. Missing skirt panels are exploitable, though, for I have seen a bazooka hit in such a gap in a side shot on one of Bil's Mark IVs (CMGL AAR). I wish we had direct control of bazookas, Panzerschrecks and Panzerfausts. That was a good feature of the CMx1 games. I see no good reason why an antitank ambush shouldn't be under direct player control. Sure, such weapons might still jump the gun, but it's hard to believe that an NCO or officer wouldn't either issue specific orders or personally direct the commencement of antiarmor fires. "Don't fire until the tank reaches X and be sure you aim for the Y. You riflemen, you are not to fire until the (insert AT weapon here) opens up. button that tank and keep it buttoned. Clear?" Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 The bazooka can kill a Mark IV head on. Unfortunately, head on comes complete with a 75mm, a co-ax and a bow MG. Yep, not a good place to be for sure. :eek: I wish we had direct control of bazookas, Panzerschrecks and Panzerfausts. That was a good feature of the CMx1 games. I see no good reason why an antitank ambush shouldn't be under direct player control. Nahhh, I like it this way. Less micro managing is A Good Thing . We just need some refinement. Sure, such weapons might still jump the gun, but it's hard to believe that an NCO or officer wouldn't either issue specific orders or personally direct the commencement of antiarmor fires. "Don't fire until the tank reaches X Cover Armour arc and be sure you aim for the Y. You riflemen, you are not to fire until the (insert AT weapon here) opens up. button that tank and keep it buttoned. Clear?" John you bad NCO you - contradictory orders. Either you want me to keep the tank buttoned by firing my MG or you want me to wait for the AT asset to start the ambush. Make up you mind man. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 ian.leslie, Re cover armor arc. guess I still have PTSD from watching my bazooka teams get butchered in the CMBN Demo. Regarding my contradictory order, you are the MG, and I clearly forgot to tell you what to do and when to do it. Shall have to fix that--if you survive. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
db_zero Posted September 13, 2013 Author Share Posted September 13, 2013 Bazookas - best way to use them? Point the correct end at the enemy and pull trigger. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5blBzHha9_U 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
db_zero Posted September 13, 2013 Author Share Posted September 13, 2013 Good info in the responses and I could use many of the suggestions. For the firing arcs I'm thinking to limit the bazooka and Shreick to 40-50 yards and Fausts to 25 yards. I would like to see something such as a fire to disable to simulate deliberate aiming at the treads or sprockets of a tank. I'm sure many soldiers knew the bazooka was not effective against the armor of some tanks, but aiming to disable them was useful. Wouldn't a tank moving at speed that was hit in the sprocket, track or bogie wheel and threw a tread swerve to one direction? That would give time for the AT team to make some sort of escape if facing just a tank or 2. Some sort of "shoot and scoot" or as someone mentioned "peek and shoot" seems like a very valid tactic and make infantry more effective and put the fear of urban or areas with cover into tankers which some feel is currently lacking. Even when on the road when I look out my car which has excellent visibility the trees, shrubs and other cover combined with the shadows and if its sunny the lighting makes spotting someone who is hiding difficult. A tank it would seem-especially if buttoned up would have a hard time spotting a hidden AT team and an AT team using shoot and scoot or peek and shoot would have what would seem to be a decent chance of being able to shoot and get away. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A co Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 A couple of anecdotal contributions- A bazooka can definitely kill a Stug from the front with one hit; It worked for me the one time I was able to try it. A U.S. rifle grenade (which can be fired from inside a building) can penetrate the front turret of a Pz IV, and cause the crew to bail out; it happened to me once. So use 'em if ya got 'em. I find the Panzerschreck to be worth using within 70 metres. That is, I can safely expect a hit. Naturally a shorter covered arc gives you something closer to a guaranteed hit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
db_zero Posted September 13, 2013 Author Share Posted September 13, 2013 A couple of anecdotal contributions- A U.S. rifle grenade (which can be fired from inside a building) can penetrate the front turret of a Pz IV, and cause the crew to bail out; it happened to me once. So use 'em if ya got 'em. I was wondering about the rifle grenades. I figured they would be useful against half tracks and some of the armored support vehicles that were open topped or had light armor. I'm now wondering that if fired at the 2 or 3 level at the rear top armor that covered the engines could it disable or destroy a Panther or Tiger. The Panther had a gasoline engine that tended to burn. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A co Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 If you ever do get a chance for a shot like that, the potential payoff certainly makes it worth taking. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 Would a "shoot and scoot" order be usful for infantry AT work? Currently, it's hard to predict how long it will take for a unit to aim and fire (a bazooka) if you want to plot them to run to another location immediately after firing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 Would a "shoot and scoot" order be usful for infantry AT work? Currently, it's hard to predict how long it will take for a unit to aim and fire (a bazooka) if you want to plot them to run to another location immediately after firing. Yeah it is a bit of a mixed bag and it also matters which member of the team arrives at the way point first. If the tube guy does he will have time to aim and fire with just a way point. Otherwise a pause would be needed. So for a shoot and scoot I usually add a 5s pause. If they are just running across open ground from cover to cover then I don't and the tube guy usually pauses himself and takes a shot. There are several examples of my trying to get a Shrek team to fire at a Churchill tank in my 20 000 point Quick battle thread: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=105660 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
db_zero Posted September 13, 2013 Author Share Posted September 13, 2013 Gotta love you-tube. Never seen this training film before. Kinda long but interesting-even if part propaganda. The part about using the bazooka as an IED against tanks is very interesting-maybe this could be implemented at some point? It would make the homely bazooka a real Panther/Tiger killer as the bottom armor is pretty thin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oddball_E8 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5blBzHha9_U well done 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 db_zero, The improved bazooka rocket, the M6A3, and the improved AT rifle grenade, M9A1, are effectively identical warheads. M6A3 http://world.guns.ru/grenade/usa/bazooka-m1-m1a1-m9-m9a1-e.html M6A3 penetration figure (quoted fm Saxon Cross's July 11, 2011, 0013 post) http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=113&t=178697 "2. Characteristic and test data for the 2.36-inch HEAT round were obtained from file documents dated 1943-1944, 1952, and 1953. Additional detailed schematics of the rocket and components were reviewed from ordnance manuals. The HEAT round is composed of a shape charge with the following characteristics: explosive filler – 0.5 pounds of Pentolite, steel cone of 78.7 grams weight, 48 mm diameter at open end, 68 mm in length and a 2.5 mm wall thickness. The nose cone standoff distance to the shape charge is approximately 4 inches. Expected penetration of the shape charge is approximately 3.5 to 4 inches of hardened armor plate." M9A1 Exterior http://www.inert-ord.net/usa03a/usarg/rg/ Interior http://robroy.dyndns.info/targetkites/Detonator/m9a1.jpg This collector's site lists penetration as 4 inches at normal. http://www.popernack.com/library/library.php?aID=10&xID=1 Given the above, I submit that U.S. units having AT rifle grenades should be thought of as having short range bazookas and be handled accordingly. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.