CM AntiTank Mortars, Too Accurate?

[kump]

After playing with the 1.05 for twenty scenarios, I've continued to notice the lethality of on-map mortars against armored vehicles. I think the accuracy of these things versus armored vehicles is a bit too much. That's my opinion, not experience.

In one scenario, the British airborne infantry took out three armored vehicles with a single 2 inch mortar, all within five turns. One of these vehicles was a Mark IV tank! Luck? This may be an extreme example, but there is no denying the CM mortar's anti-tank capability.

When controlling armored forces, I have more fear of small mortars then I do of enemy Infantry AT weapons. This seems odd to me. I've started to apply the same trick with my own mortars.

I have no problems with off map artillery. Its those small caliber ON-MAP mortars that have me scratching my noggin.

ADDITION:

In case someone thinks me ungrateful, this is the best wargame, nah, best computer game I've ever had grace my hard drive. I'll be playing this one for years.

[This message has been edited by kump (edited 10-21-2000).]

[Guest ckoharik]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kump:

After playing with the 1.05 for twenty scenarios, I've continued to notice the lethality of on-map mortars against armored vehicles. I think the accuracy of these things versus armored vehicles is a bit too much. That's my opinion, not experience.

In one scenario, the British airborne infantry took out three armored vehicles with a single 2 inch mortar, all within five turns. One of these vehicles was a Mark IV tank! Luck? This may be an extreme example, but there is no denying the CM mortar's anti-tank capability.

When controlling armored forces, I have more fear of small mortars then I do of enemy Infantry AT weapons. This seems odd to me. I've started to apply the same trick with my own mortars.

I have no problems with off map artillery. Its those small caliber ON-MAP mortars that have me scratching my noggin. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

While I have seen similar happenings to what you describe I must also say I've seen tanks get hit repeatedly by on-board mortars without taking any damage whatsoever. As for fearing them more than infantry AT teams I'd disagree. In one of my latest scenarios I had a PIAT team take two takes out at just under 200m with their first shot on each. Boy, was I pissed.

[kump]

ckoharik,

I usually avoid such nasty surprises by entering all buildings and suspected hiding places with infantry in front. I never put armor up front. I sit them way back. So yes, I fear AT teams as well, they force me to play with a slow infantry advance. I love this game, infantry plays such a key role! I really do fear Infantry AT weapons, I play to avoid them. But I don't know how to counter small mortars.

The issue I have with SMALL mortars is that they seem to hit often against vehicles and it seems to often take them out. Its the accuracy, the number of hits they score, that has me scratching my noggin.

[Guest *Captain Foobar*]

I agree, in that I have also noticed this insane accuracy.

I have killed a sherman with an onboard 81mm mortar, without even haviing direct LOS! I was relaying orders back through a Company CO. After about 1 minute of firing, I had brewed up the Sherman.

Another scenario had me firing at a Puma with a US Mortar vehicle, from 1000 meters.

After 3 minutes of firing, the Puma was no more. My opponent , Jibbers, who is a vet was totally incredulous. I am sure that this has probably been discussed to death,but I dont remember seeing an official comment from BTS on this issue.

How about it guys?

[Sten]

The recent discussion on arty effectiveness vs. tanks would probably be applicable here as well.

------------------

Sten

Keep your whisky on the rocks and your tanks on the roll.

[Maximus]

*** SPOILER ***

I played the "Going to Town" scenario, the Alpha AAR one, as the Americans, I totally destroyed the German armored column (minus some tanks) in a small bottle neck area between some trees with an initial bombardment of "spotted" 81mm mortars. I think I destroyed at least four SPW251/1 halftracks in one turn with those mortars. So if you're complaining about losing open topped armored vehicles or cars with mortars, well yeah, it's gonna happen.

------------------

Coming soon to a web near you...

The Maximus CM Mod HQ

This site will be host to a plethera of mods from myself and others.

Please send questions and comments to: davem@shawneelink.net

[kump]

This thread was not on "lethality" of mortars. That has been discussed a plenty, with velocity and shell size and etc, etc.

My comment is on on-board mortar ACCURACY. Its very reliable. I did not know it was so accurate. I thought mortars were built to allow a spread over an area. If they hit the same spot repeatedly, then they are considered ill designed. If they disperse as they should, being primarily intended to use against infantry, then how can they be so accurate at taking out a targeted vehicle? Not saying it can't, it just seems to happen a little too easily and often.

As for open vs closed top vehicles, I returned to my scenario that was in progress and immediately I lost another Mark IV tank to the same 2 inch mortar. It was having no problems knocking out buttoned up tanks.

The trick is to keep my armor moving every turn. But this almost reminds me of my battle front games, where my troops would move back and forth between two hexes to avoid the artillery barrages. Not near that bad, but it made me think of it. CM handles artillery far, far better then anything previously done.

Without starting up another debate about if a 2 inch mortar shell should be able to penetrate top armor of a buttoned up tank, I just observed that on-board mortars tend to be pretty accurate at hitting their vehicle targets. Just seems a little too high.

Mortar crews should not be targeting a platoon of buttoned up tanks when a full company of infantry is fast approaching. Yet, due to accuracy and lethality, it becomes an irresistible habit. I have no idea and no practical experience, but it doesn't 'feel right'.

Hey, what do I know? Not much, except CM is my game dream come true. Just making an observation.

[Schugger]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kump:

...The trick is to keep my armor moving every turn...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think that is exactly the way armour should be handled.

My experiances with mortars against tanks are the opposite of yours. When I order them to target a tank, I'm happy if the shoot at all and if they do, they very rarly hit as their shots landed wide. Perhaps they are geting nervous and their shots are inaccurate because of this. Even area fire is more accurate than their fire against tanks.

[Jarmo]

Mortar accuracy has already been toned down a lot. For this exact reason.

Maybe they still are too accurate. Maybe not.

I have no real life experience with 'em.

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Schugger:

I think that is exactly the way armour should be handled. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I have found they are deadly weapons in indirect fire against stationary armor. E.g. a Stug III in ambush position. Nothing the other player could do about it, because in the round the mortar started firing, it killed the Stug. So if you suggest moving your armour around, that will impose a huge disadvantage on defending German players if they want to put SP guns into ambush positions. I don't know whether it is realistic or not, but it sure seems to happen often (BTW, I have little doubt that a 3in or 8mm mortar round can take out a tank when it hits). I posted a first-hand account in the arty and tanks thread about tanks desperately maneuvering when under mortar fire. They don't do that in CM, they just sit there and take it. And get killed, in my experience.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maximus:

So if you're complaining about losing open topped armored vehicles or cars with mortars, well yeah, it's gonna happen.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Interesting opinion Maximus, but the point here is whether it should happen.

------------------

Andreas

[Guest *Captain Foobar*]

I think I am going to run a couple on-board mortar tests. My experiences may be coincidental, but it seems that I am always able to score direct hits on AFV's, whether or not it destroys the thing.

[LuckyStrike]

In a recent game vs the AI my single 81mm on-map mortar took out a M8, a M3 and a Sherman in the space of 4 turns...2 of those were by 'spotted' fire through a HQ unit. This seems extreme.

[Colin]

I really don't think it's a matter of mortar accuracy. The problem is that tanks that can be knocked out by mortars don't seem them as a threat because they are not being directly targeted.

------------------

And if we abandon any platform, I can assure you it will not be the Macintosh.

-Steve

My website!

[kump]

Tale of the 2in Mortar Blaster...

Well, well, I finally found that 2 inch mortar. It was almost out of ammo when I stumbled on it (on other side of river).

Since the 2in mortar had taken out six vehicles, about 75% of my armor, I was excited to get my revenge! I gleefully moved a surviving 251/9 to slam it with a 75mm round when BAMMM!!!

A hidden 6pdr AT gun beside the mortar opened up and my 251/9 went up in a catastrophic giant fire ball! I fell out of my seat grasping my chest. Fortunately, the sounds of battle ceased as I wreathed on the floor. Remembering it was just a game, I finally got up.

Now I can take an ambush from a hidden AT gun, that's fair. But that 2in mortar with six vehicle kills can not survive this fight. NO! I'll send all the guys to their doom if need be, but I won't let that evil tank busting 2in mortar survive!

Woops, my soldiers found the mortar to be flanked by infantry squads and my troops are now kissing bridge. That blasted mortar is going to live....NOOOOOOoooooo....

[Schugger]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy:

Interesting opinion Maximus, but the point here is whether it should happen.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I had no idea that mortars could be so effective in destoying tanks before I read this thread.

In all games I've made so far I'd never killed a tank with a mortar, the reason behind this is maybe that I rarly tried to use them in this role, but I also could not remember one of my tanks taken out by a mortar.

Only against HTs were my mortars of some success, ehh... or enemy mortars were of some success against my HTs.

Concerning the tanks in ambush positions:

Well, if your tank can be fired at ( wether directly or indirectly) your ambush is spoiled anyway as your opponent is now aware of your tank lurking there.

I don't know how tanks should react to mortar fire in CM, but if the TacAI moves them out of the harms way ( possibly in the way of a big enemy gun) players would not be satisfied by this solution too.

I would like to see Foobar's test results and make some of my own and post them in this thread.

------------------

Then god watched two historians having an argument. So he abandoned all hopes for mankind, turned his back to it and wept bitterly.

[Schugger]

Schwuppdiwupp!

It is sunday and I have waaay to much time at my hands, so I made some testings with mortars against tanks.

I set up various german tanks, namly a Pz IV, StugIII, a Wespe, Panther A and a Tiger late, took away all their ammo and let them dig in ( hehe, nix moving).

Against that formidable armour force I set up three 2" mortars, three 60mm mortars, a 75mm and a 80mm mortar in some woods at a distance of approximatly 300 meters away from their targets.

Direkt fire with the mortars was a disaster; all their shots went wide and they were gunned down with tank MG fire.

Indirect fire prooved to be very accurate, after two spotting rounds were fired, all shots landed very close and I scored so many hits, that the " top hit - no serious damage" marker was shown through the whole turn.

The 2" mortars had no problem dispatching the Wespe - first hit equals first kill. All other tanks ( except the Tiger) were taken out by "top weak spot hits", no matter which calibre the mortar were. I made this testing for three times with nearly the same results.

My conclusion to this is, that direct mortar fire against tanks seems not to be very effective as they do not hold their target.

Indirect fire, though accurate, is not very deadly ( unless a weak spot hit is scored).

As it takes a mortar team approximatly 15 to 20 seconds ( they were all regulars in my testings) to zero in on their targets, there is enough time to move your tanks out of the harms way. So if you order an exposed tank to move to a different position at the start of a turn ( when your opponent makes his indirect firing orders), your tanks are not only safe from the mortar threat but your opponent wastes also a great bunch of his mortar shells as the mortars stick to their area target order for the whole turn.

Well, I know that my few testing runs will not proove any point but at least the tactic of moving your armour works fine for me so far.

[kump]

Another observation, which may lead some to believe that mortars are deadly when in fact it is something else....

Hidden AT infantry may fire at vehicles and not reveal their location. When this happens, no shell is seen. You just get the explosion near your vehicle. It can be mistaken as mortar rounds, when in fact, it is AT fire. I lost one vehicle from a top hit, sure it was a mortar. Turned out to be a PIAT on a second floor building about 120m away.

One way to validate is go visit on the map all the dead and living after the battle and bring up their kill stats. You can find out exactly who was responsible for the vehicle kills. You may be surprised.

[kump]

Schugger,

Nice test, but your evaluation on direct fire mortars is lacking one important aspect. The tanks had nothing else to grab their attention. If it is an actual battle with mortars playing a support role, the tanks would be too busy firing at other threats to worry about your direct fire mortars which are stationed much further away.

Your test does show accuracy to be high with mortars against vehicles. It seems to me that the mortars are a bit too accurate for targeting vehicles. Only an opinion from a guy who doesn't know better.

[Schugger]

Good point kump, I hadn't considered "real" CM battlefield conditions in my tests.

Perhaps I should increase the distance from mortar team to the tank and see how they perform if they do not receive return fire.

But this is not going to happen before tomorrow.

[seal7]

I was playing "South of Sword" as the British against the AI and getting my butt kicked. Read this thread about the mortars, restarted, moved my 3" mortars to the 3 houses toward the center and hid them behind the buildings. Put Company CO upstairs where he had decent observation of the area where the German armour is concentrated. No other infantry weapons except a few MG's were in firing range.

During the course of the game, my 4 mortars using indirect fire killed approx. 20 German armoured vehicles to include "open topped" AC's, HT's, Stugs, and Pz4's...and still had about 10 rounds apiece left to use on infantry. The mortars were the major killers of AT gun armed units, and I didn't commit my tanks until the mortars had greased most of the German AT gun armed units. Basically, my armor was only used to kill the leftover HT's and provide fire support for the infantry.

To say the least, this is pretty "gamey". As is, I'd take an onboard mortar firing indirect fire over a dedicated tank destroyer anyday, let alone a AT gun. The German units would move to escape, but the first round was usually a hit. Direct fire against a tank usually ineffective...no kills noted. I haven't graduated to PBEM games yet, but since the it's often "one shot, one kill", it'd probably be effective there as well.

[This message has been edited by seal7 (edited 11-01-2000).]

[BK6583]

I've stayed away from this post but I've seen enough from my own game experience to strongly believe that on-board mortars are waaaay too effective against armored vehicles. I'll avoid describing endless examples, but suffice it to say that I've seen tanks and HTs get knocked out repeatedly by on-board mortars in CM. I really feel that BTS should take a look at this.

[CavScout]

IMO, the effectivness of mortars in CM is a result of vehicles not reacting to the in-direct fire. If the TacAI reacter to incomming more effectivly, by not sitting through a minute of strikes, mortars would be less effective.

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Schugger:

As it takes a mortar team approximatly 15 to 20 seconds ( they were all regulars in my testings) to zero in on their targets, there is enough time to move your tanks out of the harms way. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for testing Schugger, I am just afraid you are jumping to conclusions here. Let me elaborate on the previous example. Night-time battle, Stug in ambush. I get a sound contact with a Coy HQ. The Stug is waiting in some woods behind a hillock. I let the HQ crawl around the hillock and hide. At the end of the turn I get LOS to the Stug, and the HQ is in C&C range of a 3in mortar. I order fire. Since my opponent never spotted the HQ (which was hiding and continued to do so), the Stug got wasted. I do believe that in Real Life the Stug TC would have been out of that position as soon as the 3in rounds start dropping. Not just because they might kill him, but also because something else might be creeping up on him (a PIAT maybe, or some suicidal engineers). But, as you point out, it took my mortar 15-20 secs to acquire target, and before the end of the turn, the Stug was a goner. Top penetration and brew-up. Nothing my opponent could do, nothing he did wrong, IMO. I am sure he would have ordered a move after the turn, but he never got the chance. So I think there is a case for some defensive movement/smoke dropping. The tanks do it when they meet other, superior tanks, and players don't complain a lot about that. This is a deadly threat, and I can not see any reasoning why something should not be done about it. Note, I believe it is materially different to putting your guys in houses and then complaining when these collapse on them. The answer to that is still that houses were considered bad places to be in. Stugs and TDs in ambush positions were not considered stupid ideas.

------------------

Andreas

<a href="http://www.geocities.com/greg_mudry/sturm.html">Der Kessel</a >

Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission.

[This message has been edited by Germanboy (edited 11-01-2000).]

[Bruno Weiss]

Well I can only speak from what I have seen, but my mortar fire really hasn't accomplished much yet against vehicles. Scrared the hell out of some US infantry with it, but most of the time if I use "target-wide", I find they weren't kidding. It's like Mulligan's mortars from Kelly's Heros or something. I once asked for a target wide smoke screen, and darn near the entire map was hit. My troops and my opponents were both lost. Shells were dropping everywhere. Something on the order of Dante's Inferno. Had to turn on the fog lights on me Sherman's.

------------------

"Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses

open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth."

-Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916)

[This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 11-01-2000).]

[Disaster@work]

I find mortar fire to be very accurate as well but not so much lethality. I've 'wasted' the ammo of many mortar crews who are pinging away on tanks. All it seems to do for me is either disable them or suppress them for a few turns.

------------------

----

To download my scenarios: go to

http://www3.telus.net/pop_n_fresh/combatmiss/index.htm