Am I using tanks wrong?

[womble]

Or, to put it another way, what was the rationale for "proper" tanks having an even split of AP and HE rounds in their ammo loadout? I doubt there were many Sherman 75 crews who went through one issue if AP rounds (used for their intended purposes, rather than as makeshift HE) before their mount got creamed by the armour they were facing to need to use those AP, let alone before resupply. Yet every time I use them, they run low or out of HE. Same goes for German tanks. On the flipside, those high velocity tank-killing-tanks (Sherman 76 and Firefly, and, to a lesser extent because it's often the only HE-delivery system available, where the Sherman variants march alongside their infantry support brethren, the Panther) almost might as well not have an HE round and make room for more AP.

It seems to me that a 20/70 AP/HE split, or even 30/60 (for the Sherman; similar for the PzIV), would be a more reasonable loadout. I can understand that the brass wanted their tankers to feel like they could engage enemy armour, but even the greenest horn would hopefully rate their own marksmanship the equal of making it to the next resupply without running out of AP... 30 rounds ought to be enough to get to be a tank ace, and they didn't often qualify from no kills in one battle, I reckon.

Was there a deeper reason than the psychological? Am I using too much HE (shurely shum mishtake! - Ed)? Are CM scenarios heavier on the infantry targets and lighter on the armoured targets than the general run of combat for armoured formations?

[Bulletpoint]

Hmm.. some thoughts from a non-expert, just to be taken as ideas to consider:

1) Tank engagements in real life probably took place at longer ranges than in the game. Leading to more shots being necessary to put a round on target.

2) In real life, tankers probably kept shooting some rounds at the enemy tank even after it was knocked out, just to be sure. At long range, it may be difficult to tell if the target is destroyed, unless it visibly explodes or catches fire. And you really need to be 100% sure.

3) Possibly, lighter armoured vehicles are extra vulnerable in this game as compared to reality, again because of the short engagement distances. This leads to AP rounds being saved, as the infantry can usually knock out the lighter vehicles on their own.

4) 75mm HE seems to need a good couple of decent hits on a hedgerow squad before they start to take real casualties. Possibly, in real life, a single decent hit would have been enough, conserving HE ammo.

[A Canadian Cat]

2) In real life, tankers probably kept shooting some rounds at the enemy tank even after it was knocked out, just to be sure. At long range, it may be difficult to tell if the target is destroyed, unless it visibly explodes or catches fire. And you really need to be 100% sure.

I believe the Tac AI already does this. At long ranges I frequently see many additional hits happening even after the crew bails. Yes, I know the tank crew some times bail on an OK tank but if you leave your tanks to it they will just pummel the enemy tank a long range. It even happens at closer ranges when visibility is an issue. I once reported what I though was a defect because my Sherman kept blasting a PzIV that was very close. I though "how on earth is the PzIV surviving all these close range hits, it has to be some weird close range bug" Turns out the first hit caused lots of damage and the crew to bail, the second it destroyed it. The other 5 or 7 (I forget how may) were because the Sherman crew could not tell it was toast. They were in heavy woods so visibility was poor.

[Bulletpoint]

You may be right (Ian), but in my experience they keep firing only till the tank is "knocked out", then cease fire immediately. Some shots may still be in the air though, and strike in the following second. Who knows, visibility and crew experience levels might also play a part..

Edit: Thinking a bit more about this, once you as the player see the "KNOCKED OUT" indication, then that means that your troops have positively identified that the enemy tank is for sure knocked out. So of course they would always stop firing at that point.

Before that happens, maybe you as the player only see the "penetration!" sign, and the tank might actually very well be knocked out at that point, but your troops will keep firing until it can be identified as knocked out.

I used to imagine that when a shot caused penetration, and the crew bailed out, then the tank was not knoced out yet, and the crew had merely panicked.

[Childress]

4) 75mm HE seems to need a good couple of decent hits on a hedgerow squad before they start to take real casualties.

And many more hits on enemy AT guns and teams. Based on anecdotal observation, these have become implausibly resistant to direct HE fire. I don't believe this was the case several updates ago.

[Oddball_E8]

In real life battles and engagements lasted far longer than in CM and resupply was not a guarantee between engagements.

So while your tank might not run out of AP ammo, I'm pretty sure those real life tankers would rather have too much AP ammo lying around in case they ran in to an enemy tank in their fourth engagement of the day than to have an excess of HE ammo when said tank appears...

[Bulletpoint]

Another thing is that it seems AP ammo is actually pretty effective at taking out entrenched infantry.

I recently played "Razorback Ridge", where I cursed that I was only given tank destroyers without much HE ammo. But after spending the HE, I found that they were decent against infantry with their armour piercing shots too.

I don't have the knowledge to really say if that's realistic or not.

[Bulletpoint]

5) When you play WeGo, you need to 'gamble' when targeting a place where you know enemy troops are hiding, but that the tank has not yet spotted.

If you "Target" the spot, you might risk the first shot taking out the enemy squad, but the tank will keep firing HE at the hedgerow for a full minute, wasting ammo.

On the other hand, if you "Target Briefly", then maybe the first 1-2 shots won't cause any damage, and then the tank will just be sitting there for the rest of your minute, while that machinegun position strafes your lads.

[A Canadian Cat]

If you "Target" the spot, you might risk the first shot taking out the enemy squad, but the tank will keep firing HE at the hedgerow for a full minute, wasting ammo.

Sounds like a job for Target Briefly. This is one way I use it regularly.

[A Canadian Cat]

Thinking a bit more about this, once you as the player see the "KNOCKED OUT" indication, then that means that your troops have positively identified that the enemy tank is for sure knocked out. So of course they would always stop firing at that point.

correct

Before that happens, maybe you as the player only see the "penetration!" sign, and the tank might actually very well be knocked out at that point, but your troops will keep firing until it can be identified as knocked out.

correct again

I used to imagine that when a shot caused penetration, and the crew bailed out, then the tank was not knoced out yet, and the crew had merely panicked.

Sometimes they bail on a tank in, reasonably, good shape and some times they are bailing on a destroyed tank and your guys don't know it yet. Due to FOW you will never know (unless your opponent is chatty:-)

[Bulletpoint]

Sounds like a job for Target Briefly. This is one way I use it regularly.

I meant "Target Briefly"... leading to the potential problem of not neutralising the enemy, wasting time and keeping your men under fire..

The same goes for mortars, playing WeGo you need to gamble that the target will be killed by the mission you order, playing real-time you can keep firing at a low ROF and just cancel/retarget the mission once you see the rounds take effect.

Just to clarify, I actually enjoy playing WeGo, it's just something to take into account, both for the time you have to complete the mission and also your ammo count for mortars and tanks.

[Skwabie]

It could be the game difficulty setting no?

I used to play with basic training and the tank ceases fire immediately after enemy's knocked out. Now I'm using warrior and yep the pummeling continues until crew bails or there's an ammo explosion.

[PhilM]

Another thing is that it seems AP ammo is actually pretty effective at taking out entrenched infantry.

I recently played "Razorback Ridge", where I cursed that I was only given tank destroyers without much HE ammo. But after spending the HE, I found that they were decent against infantry with their armour piercing shots too.

I don't have the knowledge to really say if that's realistic or not.

Without wanting to seem to doubt your word or experience, I'm surprised at that.

Apart from possibly a few HEAT (i.e. explosive) rounds, aren't all (?) AP rounds as modelled in the game solid shot, with no explosive power at all?

Given that, though I wouldn't want to prove the point by becoming a target for them IRL (!), do AP rounds have much effect on infantry targets other than perhaps some suppression?

Unless the round actually hits an individual, even a near miss will not produce any casualities?

But I've never tried it out: will do so at the next opportunity and see what happens ...

[Vanir Ausf B]

Apart from possibly a few HEAT (i.e. explosive) rounds, aren't all (?) AP rounds as modelled in the game solid shot, with no explosive power at all?

No. Most late war armor piercing ammo (German, Soviet and U.S.) was APHE with a high explosive burster charge. The size of this charge varied but IIRC was typically around that of a hand grenade. Presently, the lethality of this burster charge is over-modeled in the game, at least on rounds that ricochet.

The exception to this was the British, who did use solid shot almost exclusivity.

[Vanir Ausf B]

German doctrine was to keep hitting an enemy tank until it burned so that it couldn't be recovered and repaired.

Soviet tanks, at least, typically do have larger HE loads than AP, often around 2 to 1. Their assault guns are even more HE oriented, perhaps in part because they have no machine guns.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Ammunition expenditure of Panzer Battalion 116, Panzer Grenadier Division 16, July 1 1943 - January 31 1944

4687 75mm KwK 40 L/48 HE

1798 75mm KwK 40 L/48 AP

1237 75mm KwK 40 L/48 HEAT

99 75mm KwK 37 L/24 HEAT

39 75mm KwK 37 L/24 HE

5700 50mm KwK 39 L/60 HE

2845 50mm KwK 39 L/60 AP

219,140 machine gun rounds

[YankeeDog]

IIRC, the main gun ammo mixes in CM are based on primary source info so I don't think you're going to get far arguing for changes unless you can find something which shows that the ammo mix actually carried historically was different than what's in CM right now.

But I do agree that tanks do seem to run out of HE rather readily in a CM battle. Then again, I have read of this being an issue IRL in hot engagements, so it's not necessarily unrealistic.

Regardless, it is my opinion that the AFV AI may use HE a little too readily in CM. I think there are at least some situations where a tank should prefer MG fire over HE fire where it presently does not. However, I'm not expecting any improvements in this area anytime soon as this is probably a very difficult thing for the Tac AI to "know" on its own. Obviously, immediate threat targets like AT guns should get HE, but it's hard for the AI to know when e.g., an infantry unit that is not an immediate threat is a "high priority target", and is worth spending HE on, and when it's not. The Tac AI in the game tends to err on the side of "shoot it if you got it," which is probably a good thing overall is if it erred the other way it would probably hamstring the computer player considerably.

I personally tend to make heavy use of Target Light to conserve scarce AFV HE. As long as the range isn't too long, against infantry in anything less than very heavy buildings or bunkers, MG fire will usually achieve the same effect as HE, it just takes a little longer. And for most tanks, MG ammo is functionally unlimited for CM purposes. Often, I'll use Target Briefly to hit an infantry position with 1-2 rounds of HE, and then follow up with MG fire via Target Light to "maintain the pin." This helps stretch my HE in long battles.

[Michael Emrys]

Another thing is that it seems AP ammo is actually pretty effective at taking out entrenched infantry.

I recently played "Razorback Ridge", where I cursed that I was only given tank destroyers without much HE ammo. But after spending the HE, I found that they were decent against infantry with their armour piercing shots too.

I don't have the knowledge to really say if that's realistic or not.

At least one article I read would support the use of AP against certain kinds of entrenched targets. According to it, in Italy it was noticed that the Germans were placing ATGs and other heavy weapons behind sandbag walls and similar fortifications and that HE was having little or no effect. However, it was found that AP rounds could often achieve penetrations, even if it took several hits to finally get through, and cause at least suppression and sometimes even destruction of the target.

Michael

[A Canadian Cat]

And for most tanks, MG ammo is functionally unlimited for CM purposes.

Indeed. I do have a couple of tanks in Frosty Welcome that are totally out of ammo - no AP, HE or MG ammo left. First time that has ever happened.

Often, I'll use Target Briefly to hit an infantry position with 1-2 rounds of HE, and then follow up with MG fire via Target Light to "maintain the pin." This helps stretch my HE in long battles.

Now that sounds like a good tip.

[womble]

IIRC, the main gun ammo mixes in CM are based on primary source info so I don't think you're going to get far arguing for changes unless you can find something which shows that the ammo mix actually carried historically was different than what's in CM right now.

No worries on that front. It was more a question of why the historical numbers were that way when, if CM is as realistic as we hope it is, HE is precious and AP of reduced utility.

But I do agree that tanks do seem to run out of HE rather readily in a CM battle. Then again, I have read of this being an issue IRL in hot engagements, so it's not necessarily unrealistic.

Well, it's good to hear that I'm having the same problem tankers actually did. Just makes me wonder more about why the loadouts were stipulated the way they were.

Regardless, it is my opinion that the AFV AI may use HE a little too readily in CM. I think there are at least some situations where a tank should prefer MG fire over HE fire where it presently does not. However, I'm not expecting any improvements in this area anytime soon as this is probably a very difficult thing for the Tac AI to "know" on its own. Obviously, immediate threat targets like AT guns should get HE, but it's hard for the AI to know when e.g., an infantry unit that is not an immediate threat is a "high priority target", and is worth spending HE on, and when it's not. The Tac AI in the game tends to err on the side of "shoot it if you got it," which is probably a good thing overall is if it erred the other way it would probably hamstring the computer player considerably.

I do tend to wince when my tanks use an HE shell when they can only see one infantryman, especially when the shell neatly decapitates the target at the waist (perhaps an oxymoron) and doesn't detonate anywhere that it might have been useful if there were any of that trooper's squadmates left breathing.

I personally tend to make heavy use of Target Light to conserve scarce AFV HE...Often, I'll use Target Briefly to hit an infantry position with 1-2 rounds of HE, and then follow up with MG fire via Target Light to "maintain the pin." This helps stretch my HE in long battles.

I do the exact same thing, often. Or have one of a brace of tanks Target Briefly, and the other just Target Light, if I can't or can't be bothered to move them to allow a chained Target Light after the 15s of Brief HE.

[womble]

Ammunition expenditure of Panzer Battalion 116, Panzer Grenadier Division 16, July 1 1943 - January 31 1944

Those are really interesting numbers...

4687 75mm KwK 40 L/48 HE

1798 75mm KwK 40 L/48 AP

1237 75mm KwK 40 L/48 HEAT

These suggest the Panzer IVs (?and PaK40s?) were taking on as much anti-armour work as anti-infantry, though I'd not noticed any HEAT rounds in the few FI games I've played that had IVs. Was that Battalion in service in the East, and what monster graced that period of battlefield that needed a 75mm HEAT to punch through?

99 75mm KwK 37 L/24 HEAT

39 75mm KwK 37 L/24 HE

This is a surprise. I'd guess this was mostly being carried by Stummels by late '43, not PzIVs? Or the support PzIIIN? Which I'd've also thought would have mostly been fighting infantry, by choice. Not that there were so many used, but that looks like "stop-gap tank destroyer" employment.

5700 50mm KwK 39 L/60 HE

2845 50mm KwK 39 L/60 AP

That's more the usage I've come to expect... I guess the IIIJ was still a mainstay, but a bit more relegated to following up after the armour threat had been beaten back a bit by the IVs...?

219,140 machine gun rounds

That seems light to me In a couple of hours fighting with the Irish Guards, I'm starting to scrape around for more bullets, and that force has about 80000 MG rounds; I expect to be running low across the board at the end of the day (3 engagements with that force) if there's no resupply... I guess there's less use for MGs against other armour; is this another indicator of the job that Battalion had to do in that period?

[Vanir Ausf B]

These suggest the Panzer IVs (?and PaK40s?) were taking on as much anti-armour work as anti-infantry, though I'd not noticed any HEAT rounds in the few FI games I've played that had IVs. Was that Battalion in service in the East, and what monster graced that period of battlefield that needed a 75mm HEAT to punch through?

I have a suspicion that the HEAT round may have been used as the typical "ready round" given that it is good against both hard and soft targets (albeit not ideal for either). The armor penetration of 75mm HEAT was lower than that of the APCBC round at ranges less than 900-1000 meters or so. EDIT: Yes, the battalion was in the East during this time.

This is a surprise. I'd guess this was mostly being carried by Stummels by late '43, not PzIVs? Or the support PzIIIN?

This particular unit did have 1 PzIIIN.

[Michael Emrys]

I do tend to wince when my tanks use an HE shell when they can only see one infantryman...

This bugs me too. The tanks in the game far too often use HE to snipe a single man when a burst of MG would probably work even better and be more historically accurate as well.

Michael

[Vanir Ausf B]

I have often wished there was an SOP setting you could toggle that would instruct the TacAI for a particular vehicle to favor machine guns over HE for soft targets it does not consider an imminent threat.

[Childress]

How about a Target Light Cover Arc?