Why does US infantry fire underbarreled grenades at MBT's?

[alexg6464]

AL HAWL SF2 played in turn-based mode.

The boys are moving building to building pushing back, eliminating or neutralizing Syrian squads that belong to the Guards Armored Division.

Eventually I get my soldiers eliminated slowly by a very careless group of T-72s with ERA plates.

As the battle is winding down I get what's left of my soldiers into anti-tank hunting setup, as most of my Stryker MGS' have been taken out. This includes arming on-foot crewmen of downed Strykers, headquarter units and all squads, with anti-tank weapons from the still-operational APCs that haven't been taken out.

The problem arises when I move my soldiers into good angles to kill the tanks. Sometimes a 'Fast' movement order with an anti-armor target arc in the general area of the tank will make the first man to enter the building I designated as firing position think that he is single-handedly able to kill a T-72 from the side with an underbarrel grenade launcher, thus effectively being a door-knocker for the tank to turn around and blast back with a shell full of HE. This usually terrifies the surviving soldiers, along with any potential AT-carrier that didn't get blown to dust, and they run away. Quite frustrating.

I had something similar happen only slightly later in the same scenario, in a situation with a squad loaded with M136's, and this one made me quit out of frustration:
One of the remaining squads that was very intact was laying in ambush around a building for a T-72 that had carelessly blasted through my line somehow. The tank rolls up, gets in sight of the squad as I prepare to see the satisfying "HIT: Side: PENETRATED" message pop up. But instead, John Smartass, laying on the ground, places his booger hook on the trigger of his underbarreled grenade launcher and lets one rip into the side of the T-72. Sure, I get a "HIT" message, but as with what I described earlier, the tank simply turns it's big scary turret towards the soldier and, without further retaliation, kills 80% of the squad with a well-placed HE shell. I then quit the match in frustration and shut the game down to write this. (Then I forgot my password and it is now 16 hours later.

Did the soldiers think it was smart to detonate the ERA plates with underbarrel grenades to give an anti-tank man a bigger chance to penetrate? I would be able to understand if it was the BMP2's we were fighting in the same mission, since they're easy as pie to knock out with flank shots, or grenade launching Strykers.

[Grey_Fox]

Could be that they are trying to damage subsystem?

Maybe you could try splitting teams more, or using anti-tank teams?

[MikeyD]

40x46mm M433 HEDP (dual purpose) round is a HE round with a HEAT function. The 40x53mm M430 HEDP can penetrate 51mm of steel plate, the M430A1 cam penetrate 76mm. Which round does the M203 grenade launcher chamber? ...That would be the M433 round.

[alexg6464]

1 hour ago, Grey_Fox said:

Could be that they are trying to damage subsystem?

Maybe you could try splitting teams more, or using anti-tank teams?

That's an idea I'll try taking into account.

I get fatigued from the micromanaging a little fast compared to other people, so I tend to go sloppy towards the end of missions just to get them finished.

49 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

40x46mm M433 HEDP (dual purpose) round is a HE round with a HEAT function. The 40x53mm M430 HEDP can penetrate 51mm of steel plate, the M430A1 cam penetrate 76mm. Which round does the M203 grenade launcher chamber? ...That would be the M433 round.

But as far as my limited knowledge of T-72 armor from other video games is concerned, even a T-55A should be capable of withstanding 76mm of penetration power from the side.

I don't know how an export T-72 would fare compared to that, but I imagine better.

[DerKommissar]

The softest part of a T-72 is its crew. Imagine you're the 5-minute wonder, sitting as TC. You are fighting relatively well-equipped and experienced enemy infantry. A HEAT explosion rocks your side. Pop quiz: what do you do?

Your situational awareness is limited: all you know is that someone, somewhere is lobbing some sort of explosives at your flank. You could reverse. You could bail out. You certainly are going to stop, make sure that your tank isn't on fire.

Wouldn't you have a better day without being shot at by potentially damaging weaponry? Keep all your digits, maybe? It certainly would be easier to concentrate on shooting yanks.

Using suppressive fire to button a tank is very common practice. While the outcome isn't guaranteed success, it's some sort of mitigation. Remember a non-penetrating hit was enough to make Tiger 131 an exhibit in Bovington.

[MikeyD]

Tanks are usually designed to take a hit from the front along an arc about 45 degrees to either side. Once you're outside that zone their vulnerability spikes dramatically. Lobbing 40mm rounds at a tank might hit the fuel tanks or the gunner's sight, the rear, the commander's cupola or engine deck. If you inf are close enough to be firing 40mm at a tank they're already in a desperate situation.

[alexg6464]

9 hours ago, MikeyD said:

Tanks are usually designed to take a hit from the front along an arc about 45 degrees to either side. Once you're outside that zone their vulnerability spikes dramatically. Lobbing 40mm rounds at a tank might hit the fuel tanks or the gunner's sight, the rear, the commander's cupola or engine deck. If you inf are close enough to be firing 40mm at a tank they're already in a desperate situation.

As much as that makes sense, it pains me that I equip 2-3 men with M136's for antitank purposes, and the infantry still decides the smartest course of action is lobbing 40mm grenades at the tanks, instead of just letting the anti-tank in the same squad handle it.

I suppose the answer is still that I could split off the anti-tank section of a squad and try to use them for tank-hunting instead of the entire squad.

[37mm]

People might be able to remember that in the original release of CMSF basically everyone fired at everything whether they could penetrate or not (it was kinda cool, AKM fire couldn't penetrate a Stryker but it could, over time, degrade all the subsystems & tires... I still recall the limping Strykers & massive wall of Syrian fire at that Airfield battle).

I suspect this "firing grenades at an MBT" behaviour might be something still left over from the original tac AI.