American Tank Destoyers?

[weapon2010]

Any thoughts on the most effective ones against German heavy tanks?Ill be defending a large Town.

[Rinaldi]

If you're playing static, I suppose M10s would be superior, but if you have room to manouver then there's no reason not to take the M18s. They're cheaper in overall points but generally far more rare. 

[Bulletpoint]

If you're playing static, then why bother with tank destroyers, just buy yourself some AT guns..

[RockinHarry]

I´d select the SP ones, preferably the one fastest on ground and turret traverse speed. The rest is tactics (get the german heavies attention on one flank and nail it from the side from the other one). If it´s a large town to be defended, then I´d anyway think more about general force composition, which should then contain a good number of infantry with Zooks. If the attacking germans also have some mortars/Arty, then I wouldn´t choose any the open topped armor and some 76mm Shermans would do better.

[c3k]

Mobile beats towed every time. I don't know the cost and rarity factors, but as soon as a towed gun is spotted, it dies. They cannot packup and move in any tactically meaningful way. If the enemy outflanks them, they are worthless and they die. Enemy infantry can suppress and destroy them. Enemy tanks can use HE to destroy them with near misses.

Mobile AT assets can hide behind buildings, move 10m, pause for 30sec while shooting/cover arcing, then retreat back. Mobile AT assets can rapidly shift to meet the enemy's attack. Mobile AT can relocate if arty comes down. Etc.

The only reason I'd use towed assets were if I wanted to recreate a historical use; if I had a preponderance of points while on defense and wanted a deep, zone, coverage; if the oppo requested it; if my points did not allow any other AT purchase.

That's my .02.

 

[womble]

Mobile beats towed every time.

 

Not every time. If you've got a suitable map, ATGs are significantly cheaper than tanks, and harder to spot. If you expect the attacker to have an armour advantage, and there are places to put ATGs in concealment and with keyholed FoF, they'll get more than one shot off before being spotted. With a numbers advantage, the attacker might well be able to trade 1 for 1 in the armour fight in order to make sure they can operate the survivors with only reasonable (rather than infinite) care. It does depend on the map, though, and for urban combat, ATGs are probably not going to achieve a kill ratio of greater than unity.

[Bulletpoint]

Mobile beats towed every time. I don't know the cost and rarity factors,

And a Tiger beats a Sherman every time  that's why Germany won the war.. no, wait...

(not to be snarky. as you said, it's also about points cost)

Edited November 12, 2015 by Bulletpoint

[MikeyD]

I recall TD crew training was much more in-depth than mere tankers during the war. So really go heavy on reconnoiter and maneuver. Tank destroyers are single-use tools so don't get distracted, you're not a tank. I recall reading somewhere that American tank destroyers (or was it just the Hellcat?) had a 10-to-1 favorable exchange rate versus German armor. They didn't get that simply by standing there and trying to slug it out. Maneuver-maneuver-maneuver! 

Edited November 13, 2015 by MikeyD

[Sublime]

Lol i think its the absolute reverse for my US TD crews compared to their brethren in the regular armor corps and with respect to the kill rate. And yea I try to use them in ambushes and maneuver attacks. Its odd some tanks I just seem to have universally bad luck with.  For example Cromwells. Always do verrry poorly with them.  US tds? Gonna die without kills. Russian T72s in BS? Keep everyone away from the explosion thats ineviteable.

That said you have to be careful of the German mortars and really any artillery with them including your own. It helps a lot to not rely on one TD either even in ambush. When you have at least pairs ideally in oppsite directions ambushing the enemy the chances of a kill go up quite a bit.

Question: Why is the 76mm referred to as a 3inch gun for the TD but not the Sherman? Is it because it was a higher velocity AA cannon (iirc..?) ?

[Vanir Ausf B]

Question: Why is the 76mm referred to as a 3inch gun for the TD but not the Sherman? Is it because it was a higher velocity AA cannon (iirc..?) ?

IIRC the ammunition for the two cannons was incompatible so they had to maintain different designations.

[MikeyD]

Three inch gun shell casings were longer, 76mm were shorter,more bottle-shaped. But I believe performance specs were identical. Or at least close enough for rock-n-roll. I recall stories of M10 TDs Normandy timeframe obtaining purloined(?) Navy three inch star shells to use as erzats WP rounds. If nothing else they were spectacular to watch.

[c3k]

Lol i think its the absolute reverse for my US TD crews compared to their brethren in the regular armor corps and with respect to the kill rate. And yea I try to use them in ambushes and maneuver attacks. Its odd some tanks I just seem to have universally bad luck with.  For example Cromwells. Always do verrry poorly with them.  US tds? Gonna die without kills. Russian T72s in BS? Keep everyone away from the explosion thats ineviteable.

That said you have to be careful of the German mortars and really any artillery with them including your own. It helps a lot to not rely on one TD either even in ambush. When you have at least pairs ideally in oppsite directions ambushing the enemy the chances of a kill go up quite a bit.

Question: Why is the 76mm referred to as a 3inch gun for the TD but not the Sherman? Is it because it was a higher velocity AA cannon (iirc..?) ?

Well, my experience was that you do damn well with Churchills! Ow.

As mentioned, the 76mm and 3 inch had different chambers, ammo, and purpose. The 3 inch started out as a triple-A weapon. It was the only immediately available high velocity weapon which they could stuff in a Sherman chassis, so that's how it got used for anti-tank purposes. Similar to (copy?) the German 88. The 76mm was purpose-built as a high-velocity weapon to correct the anti-tank shortfalls of the medium velocity 75mm. The 3 inch was a stopgap.

A lot of barrels have the same size because that's what the manufacturing is set up for. Different barrel lengths, chamber sizes, etc., make the ballistic differences. (Cool story: the Soviets used the Mosin-Nagant barrels cut in half for SMG barrels. I'm sure they thought about 1/3 length to triple production! But, cutting a rifle barrel in half means that you just focus on one run. You divert some finished product to one more step, and everyone's happy. Is it perfect for the bullet weight, muzzle velocity, etc.? No. But not so much that it really matters.)

[Duckman]

I recall TD crew training was much more in-depth than mere tankers during the war. 

I also get the impression that they were.....perhaps not elite, but kind of special. They were supposed to go out there and win the battle with speed and dazzling maneuver. Of course reality turned out a bit different, but they still have some advantages compared to "mere" tankers and I like to think that stuff like better visibility and optics (?) are modelled in the game.

I've probably had the most success with US TDs in semi-covered overwatch positions quite far back where they can use their long range skillz. If the enemy is doing something else you have a good chance of spotting first and getting side shots. A semi-concealed position that lets you shoot through a gap between trees, the saddle of a hill, or something like that is good.

[Pak40]

Three inch gun shell casings were longer, 76mm were shorter,more bottle-shaped. But I believe performance specs were identical. Or at least close enough for rock-n-roll. I recall stories of M10 TDs Normandy timeframe obtaining purloined(?) Navy three inch star shells to use as erzats WP rounds. If nothing else they were spectacular to watch.

This old post of mine pretty much sums up the differences between the 76mm and 3 inch guns. In short, some of the actual projectiles were compatible between the two guns but the casing itself was not.

[GhostRider3/3]

I am starting to like ATG's more and more.. very difficult to spot and if you control their cover arc so they don't give their position away and are in Hide.. you can do some good damage.. depending on how you set them up of course.  The only downside is if the enemy has a FO... and any Arty... Mobile is great however, I am just really appreciating the difficulty in spotting ATG's.  They usually get the first 3 shots off before you even see them sometimes.

[Bulletpoint]

Main thing is - if you pay the extra points for the mobility of a tank destroyer, you better use that mobility. If you're just letting it sit in a nice keyholed position, you might as well save the points and get an AT gun. As long as you trade guns for enemy tanks 1 to 1, you're winning.