Support Units - Fighting as Front Line Inf

[JoMac]

How do many of you use your Support Units ? Do you take your MG/Mortar, Bearers, Drivers, etc, Units and once out of Support Ammo ( or just because you can ) use them as if they are Front Line Inf for additional Small Arms, Assault Houses/Built-Up areas, etc...I know I do every chance I get.

I also wonder if you and opponent ( or if playing against the AI ) have any 'House Rules' that are used to make the above used as realistic as possible.

Joe

[A Canadian Cat]

Yeah that has happened on my battle field - towards the end of some games

I do have on opponent with which we have agreed that unhorsed tank crews should withdraw to the rear areas. With the exception of HQ team who are allowed to stick around and or mount up a radio equipped vehicle to resume command. For the most part I do that as my SOP now but every now and then when I'm desperate...

[Erwin]

I try to play "realistic" - or as realistic as I know how since I am not a WW2 vet. So, even vs AI I don't use support units in combat unless forced to (like in defense).

[MOS:96B2P]

How do many of you use your Support Units ? Do you take your MG/Mortar, Bearers, Drivers, etc, Units and once out of Support Ammo ( or just because you can ) use them as if they are Front Line Inf for additional Small Arms, Assault Houses/Built-Up areas, etc...I know I do every chance I get.

Joe

I just finished a PBEM game. I was closing on the objective and was running low on infantry. My mortars were out of ammo so I used the mortar crews as infantry. The objective was a village and I was concerned how they would perform in the likely house to house fighting. But my opponent surrendered before they had to do very much close in fighting. So it worked well. My impression was that the mortar crews tired out faster than normal infantry teams. I think it was because they carried the mortar tubes around with them.

[Holman]

I try to role-play what a real commander might do. While crews and support teams might be pulled in to form a desperate Alamo defense, I never send them forward to do a rifleman's job.

[Warts 'n' all]

I prefer to use them as medic teams for riflemen who have been left a long way behind during an attack. And I certainly wouldn't want to risk mortar teams getting killed if they are a core unit in a campaign.

[MOS:96B2P]

And I certainly wouldn't want to risk mortar teams getting killed if they are a core unit in a campaign.

That is a good point. I was playing a PBEM quick battle so I did not have to be concerned about using the mortar teams in the next battle. Maybe that's a bad habit to get into. I will have to re-think this tactic next time.

[Doug Williams]

If they carry any type of small arms, I consider them foot soldiers, once dismounted from whatever larger weapon/vehicle they were originally assigned to, and will use them as I see fit, since I am the commander of my troops.

"This is my rifle, there are many like it, but this one is mine."

[Michael Emrys]

That is a good point. I was playing a PBEM quick battle so I did not have to be concerned about using the mortar teams in the next battle. Maybe that's a bad habit to get into. I will have to re-think this tactic next time.

A personal house rule I try to follow is to not use units in ahistorical ways. So vehicle crews, heavy weapons crews that have run out of ammo, FO teams, etc. are either sent to the rear or if in safe locations, left there.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

If they carry any type of small arms, I consider them foot soldiers...

Except that during the war, almost everyone within the sound of the guns carried a personal weapon of some kind. But if they were specialized troops, that was just for their last ditch personal protection. They were explicitly discouraged from going off "coon hunting" because their special skills were too important to put at risk without compelling reason.

Michael

[c3k]

Crews are worth more points to the enemy.

[Warts 'n' all]

If they carry any type of small arms, I consider them foot soldiers... and will use them as I see fit....

I'm not sure that I would have wanted to serve under you Doug... haha

[Doug Williams]

@ Michael E Not arguing with your historical assessment, but if BFC wants to discourage me from occasionally using dismounted crews in an infantry capacity, they could (and have) let the game give more points to my opponent for my crew casualties, as c3k pointed out.

I actually rarely use crews for infantry combat, basically because they suck at it. But I don't just automatically run them deep into my side of the map either. They often make good "eyes & ears" and can occasionally be used to occupy undefended/lightly defended victory obejectives.

Long story short, I try to find something useful for them to do, without getting them killed (hopefully).

Edit: Although, as an anecdote, I was recently playing in a CMFI tournament, and the scenario we were playing (forget the name of it) had the Germans attacking an American held village. The German side got several Brumbars, the Americans got a few Shermans, and a Quad 50 cal. Well, my Quad 50 crew wasted most of it's ammo bouncing shells off the Brumbars, and finally ran out of ammo about halfway through the game. I had them dismount, because at that point they were sitting ducks. Not long after that, the Quad 50 was destroyed, but the crew was just fine. They had small arms and some grenades. The map was small, so I couldn't really run them away, so I sent them to cover. My opponent tried to flank me with a Brumbar and got near the dismounted Quad 50 crew. For some reason, the Brumbar got turned around with it's main gun pointing away from the village I was defending, so I had the crew close assault the Brumbar, which resulted in it being immobilized, rendering it completly useless with it's MG pointing away from the action. Medals were awarded, of course. :-)

[H1nd]

Desperate times call for desperate measures. I think it's a fair move to use every guy as frontline asset if the opponent insists on fighting to the last man. (I for one never like to fight till the bitter end and either I surrender or try to fall back, unless ofc the dudes i'm comanding are supposed to be fanatics.) Both are highly unrealistic methods so I think it's a fair game to use what ever it takes to win a game.

[Nelson 1812]

You could always use them to occupy terrain objectives...

[womble]

"Occupy" objective far from the fighting == vehicle park...

[Erwin]

Using em as medics is the only appropriate use - it's just one of the reasons that I much prefer campaigns - one has a motivation to keep crews alive, as well as preserve forces and ammo.

The trouble with single scenarios is the temptation to fight to the last man, which hardly ever happened.

[db_zero]

When things get desperate I don't hesitate to use them. If the situation is under control I keep them out of harms way. I was told that tank crews are expensive to lose. Don't know about mortarmen, gun crews and MG crews cost if they get killed.

Tank crews are quite effective with their sidearms. Even in RT. If they happen to have an SMG or 2 they can be very deadly.

I rarely surrender or call for a truce. Not historically accurate.

[ChappyCanuck]

MG crews, AT gun crews, onboard mortars and even the drivers of most infantry vehicles (ie halftracks, Bren carriers, etc) are infantry first. They were all trained as infantryman, yet were further trained in skills specific to weaponry, etc. and that is why they are now mortarmen, for example. So I have no problems using them as infantry once their ammo is expended, because they are in fact, first and foremost, infantry.

Tank crews, on the other hand, have little to no infantry training and would barely recognize their sidearms, let alone know how to use it (yes exaggerating a bit, but I think you know what I mean). If their tank gets shot out from under them, then I use them primarily in an observation or holding ground mode, relying on defence-only operations.

[Doug Williams]

Actually, in my previous anecdote, I had remembered incorrectly. It wasn't my dismounted Quad 50 team that disabled the Brumbar, it was my FO team! LOL! I found the video I posted on YouTube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiND2ZNXGZI

[Michael Emrys]

MG crews, AT gun crews, onboard mortars and even the drivers of most infantry vehicles (ie halftracks, Bren carriers, etc) are infantry first. They were all trained as infantryman, yet were further trained in skills specific to weaponry, etc. and that is why they are now mortarmen, for example. So I have no problems using them as infantry once their ammo is expended, because they are in fact, first and foremost, infantry.

In the context of WW II that may not be as true as you think. In the USMC everyone got thoroughly trained as a rifleman, but in most other armies the infantry training for specialists tended to be perfunctory and brief. They maybe received some training in handling their sidearms, but not the finer points of infantry tactics. The emphasis was to get them trained on their primary weapon and get them into a unit. If pressed into service as line infantry, they tended to be not very good at it. I suppose this could be modeled by having them lose an experience level, a leadership level, and maybe also a morale level when attempting to function as infantry. But that is up to BFC.

Michael

[kensal]

I do not use tank crews as infantry but I do think it is acceptable to dismount hanomag drivers and gunners that form part of a PzGr platoon as infantry because although they (at least the driver) are specialists, they are part of an infantry unit, in the same way that bren carrier crews that are part of a carrier platoon are part of an infantry unit.

[Michael Emrys]

I do not use tank crews as infantry but I do think it is acceptable to dismount hanomag drivers and gunners that form part of a PzGr platoon as infantry because although they (at least the driver) are specialists, they are part of an infantry unit, in the same way that bren carrier crews that are part of a carrier platoon are part of an infantry unit.

Yes, that is so. I would also extend that to crews of HMGs and maybe light mortars. Even if they didn't specifically receive all the training that riflemen get, they were usually attached to infantry platoons and went into battle with them and would have absorbed the lessons in that way.

Michael

[Rambler]

Tankless crews make excellent mine detectors. I use everyone else as front line infantry. If you can walk and have a gun, you're being thrown into the fire.

Edited to add: When the crews still had their awesome pistol skills, I used them as front line troops. They could actually hit their targets, unlike their foot soldier brethren who can't hit the broad side of a barn. Now that the crews are just as useless, to the minefields they go.

[ChappyCanuck]

Yes, that is so. I would also extend that to crews of HMGs and maybe light mortars. Even if they didn't specifically receive all the training that riflemen get, they were usually attached to infantry platoons and went into battle with them and would have absorbed the lessons in that way.

Michael

Funny, that is exactly what I was saying above In regimental systems, no matter if you were the cook, truck driver, mortarmen, etc, you were infantry first...maybe not as good as the frontline sections/platoons, but infantry first. There is no way that infantry raw recruits would be told: "oh yeah, go man that 6lb AT gun!" "The what?"