AT teams as scouts?

[Lorak]

LOL OGSF.... yes I can laugh at my self.

He was nicely placed too, and had some backup too...well...until you blew up thier building.

I'll have to hand it to you. that was real nice the way you approched that.

Oh and your puma is starting to make my ass itch.. It is like a bad rash.

Lorak

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

Proud commander of the CCT's Chinchilla Commando Teams

[OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer!]

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

Oh and your puma is starting to make my ass itch.. It is like a bad rash.

Lorak

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm looking ahead to CM2 and trying out some Russian tactics I've read about. My Puma is just making sure your lads stay and fight!

Time will tell, but it looks like your boys are in more trouble than the early settlers. :^)

OGSF

[Lorak]

maybe... It doesn't look good.

But you'll find getting us out of this town harder than getting grease from under your fingernails.

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

Lorak

Proud commander of the CCT's! (Chinchilla Commando Teams)

[This message has been edited by Lorak (edited 09-01-2000).]

[OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer!]

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

But you'll find getting us out of this town harder than getting grease from under your fingernails.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

*snarkle* *cough* *kaff* *splutter* Sorry, I was drinking a Coke when I read this.

I see you have somewhat missed the point of the Puma .....I don't *want* your guys out of the town. I intend to bury them under it with my Self-Propelled "top hit, no serious damage" Gun! Can't do that if they run away, can I? And Mr Puma is there to make sure they stay and fight. ;~)

OGSF

[Seanachai]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Von Brizee:

I was just posting this because I was doing a PBEM and I put 2 schreck teams in forward positions on a hill in some woods. I killed a Greyhound, 2 Shermans, and a halftrack with them. He cried "Gamey" and ended the game right there.

I was just wondering what the people here have to say. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Initial setup? Or even moved to contact? I don't see this as gamey, I see this as an opponent who doesn't want to lose looking for reasons for being a baby. Unless Von Brizee is withholding info or misrepresenting (which I would never assume, but have to consider so as not to be unfair to his opponent), I call the behaviour of the person who quit as poor sportsmanship of the very worst calibre. Even if I felt something an opponent had done was 'gamey', I'd play it out, even if we disagreed. This sounds like gutless whinging, but without hearing both sides, I'm possibly being unfair. This may be an odd and potentially dangerous tactic, but it could just as well be described as a well executed ambush. But anyone who'd lost this kind of force because of superior enemy tactics, or by the stupidity of not screening their forces, and immediately cries 'gamey' and quits the game, is useless, and an opponent of no account.

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

After witnessing exceptional bravery from his Celtic mercenaries, Alexander the Great called them to him and asked if there was anything they feared. They told him nothing, except that the sky might fall on their heads.

[OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer!]

Oh, and..MWAHAHAHAHAHA!...for good measure.

OGSF

(Wanders off, expecting some travesty to befall his hapless Hamstertruppen none-the-less)

[Lorak]

well OGSF.. I'll quote matt here "BITE ME!"

Yes my guys are stuck in town... yes your armor survived my last mortar attack on it. Yes your puma is running around all willy-nilly behind my lines. Which brings me to my question

Whats your point?

You have managed to "surround" my entire force. Sadly You have forgotten that they were already sitting on all the VL's and we are dug in for defense anyway.

Your squad that charged my last poor surrounded squad in that house lasted what 10 sec? 15?

Come get some hamster boy!

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

Lorak

Proud commander of the CCT's! (Chinchilla Commando Teams)

[OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer!]

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

Whats your point?

Your squad that charged my last poor surrounded squad in that house lasted what 10 sec? 15?

Come get some hamster boy!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rats and curses! I see you are made of sterner stuff. I was hoping to demoralize you and have you surrender in despair. I see now that this is not going to happen any time soon. The mothers' of my slaughtered squad members are well aware of how vicious your hamster-whompers are.

So, Plan B it is then! Tonight, when it is dark,.......

OGSF

PS: Actually it was 7 seconds.

[Von Brizee]

I zipped my schrecks to the middle of the map in Kubelwagens

I didnt want them getting weary running there with the grunts.

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Von Brizee:

I zipped my schrecks to the middle of the map in Kubelwagens

I didnt want them getting weary running there with the grunts. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think after reading this I have to agree with Senility. Basically what you did was "the ultimate gamey tactic" in a meeting engagement (as Henri so aptly called it) if that's what it was. Sounds like your opponent tried to do the same by rushing armour without infantry support. He lost and is a cry-baby. Never mind, one less person to play, there are many others.

May I now point out that against a skilled opponent you would have lost both these teams for no gain. If you play a bit more 'realistically' (now there's an oxymoron) by not running towards the centre, you can even leave the centre to your opponent and then have a good game trying to dislodge him. I did that with Mark IV and thoroughly enjoyed it. You may not win, but it is, dare I say it, fun.

So from your description I don't think either of you has a right to complain.

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

Andreas

[Guest Michael emrys]

Once, a while back, I used a bazooka team to do a bit of scouting just to see what would happen. What happened was that they were instantly exterminated by the first squad they flushed. Cured me of the habit right then and there.

Michael

[Pacestick]

As a young pup it was always drummed into me that anti tank weapons are always sighted well forward ,in pairs and mutually supporting each other.

I now find that the consensus here is that the mech battalion I belonged to was "gamey"

[ironcross]

well i can just imagine a piat team being told ,go scout. 5 metres past their lines and they would be hidden in a hedge saying "sod this,for a game of soldiers".

I find it better to send my mobile kitchens forward with their hamster team, that way i can poison the enemy first

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

sorry, just cannot take this seriously

[Pacestick]

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

well i can just imagine a piat team being told ,go scout. 5 metres past their lines and they would be hidden in a hedge saying "sod this,for a game of soldiers".

I find it better to send my mobile kitchens forward with their hamster team, that way i can poison the enemy first<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

no problem iron cross

I did leave out that applies in the defence and withdrawal phases of war. In the advance, the tanks of the combat team lead but if I posted that people on this board would have had a stroke

[Kingfish]

I'm confused. Are we talking about AT teams on a recon mission or setting ambushes forward of the FLOT?

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

Charlie don't surf!

[Pacestick]

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

I'm confused. Are we talking about AT teams on a recon mission or setting ambushes forward of the FLOT?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The problem is that many think getting the AT teams forward is the gamey scouting bit, others think having the teams forward is the gamey bit. I think the whole problem stems from the fact that AT teams seem to be considered a high priority target by the tac AI and forces the unmasking of hidden troops prematurely and that ruins the best laid plans of men and mice and apparently, the odd hampster

[Major Tom]

Having AT teams move into forward positions during a defence isn't gamey. However, using them as advanced scouts in an attack IS gamey. There is no reason for an AT team to be ahead of the force when you are on an attack, as, most likely you will run into other AT teams and Infantry, with tanks a far ways away performing support for the infantry.

Now, using your tanks alone is not gamey, just dumb It is too tempting to send these vehicles high speed into your enemies camp, leaving the infantry far behind. But, what happens when you run into a company of infantry? You lose your tank very fast!

AT teams are pretty deadly if you use them right, on a defence they are usually just slightly ahead of my infantry, but still within their support range. On an attack, they are usually way behind, and only brought up when enemy armour appears (they don't last long against infantry!).

[Jarmo]

I really can't see anything gamey in sending the AT's up front.

In real life, if you'd be expecting to run into tanks, what

would you send to meet 'em? Half squads?

Now if you're not expecting to run into tanks, why would anyone

send screck forward in the game or in real life?

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

Now, would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of

our trenches and walking slowly towards the enemy sir?

[David Aitken]

Pacestick wrote:

> it was always drummed into me that anti tank weapons are always sighted well forward

Jarmo wrote:

> I really can't see anything gamey in sending the AT's up front.

The subject here is not sending AT teams forward, it's using them as scouts. Obviously AT teams are no use if they're not up front, but no-one is disputing that.

David

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

There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

[Jarmo]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken:

The subject here is not sending AT teams forward, it's using them as scouts. Obviously AT teams are no use if they're not up front, but no-one is disputing that.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Obviously scouts were not issued AT weapons during WWII.

However, if it had been a usual custom to send tanks on front

without supporting infantry it might have become a norm

to issue a bazooka for all scout parties.

I repeat my earlier point, if you are expecting to meet

a tank, it's appropriate to send a AT team to find it.

If you're expecting to meet infantry, you send infantry.

It's an unusual tactic to send AT teams in front, it's also

a stupid tactic, if your opponent plays logically.

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

Now, would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of

our trenches and walking slowly towards the enemy sir?

[Pacestick]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken:

Pacestick wrote:

> it was always drummed into me that anti tank weapons are always sighted well forward

Jarmo wrote:

> I really can't see anything gamey in sending the AT's up front.

The subject here is not sending AT teams forward, it's using them as scouts. Obviously AT teams are no use if they're not up front, but no-one is disputing that.

David

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The issue is that they do not materialise at the front, they have to be moved there in some way and thats where the cries of "gamey AT scouts comes from"

[Von Brizee]

Okay here goes:

I was sending up half squads to do scouting. I had them Run up forward for a long way off ahead of the platoons. I loaded up my Panzerschrecks in Kubelwagens. (because they lag behind) I sent them up into the positions where the infantry platoon was supposed to arrive 2 or 3 turns later maybe.

I bring them on foot about 20 meters in front of my positions that my platoon is gonna go in to. I always thought it was good to have AT weps forward and then pull back to safety after a shot or two. Also, I expected them to maybe get shot at and I didnt want my troops to be hurt by area fire. My opponent was rushing forward with several tanks and 2 platoons in halftracks and trucks. I wasted some vehicles

I have realized from this forum that what I did is normally a bad idea, but it was my first PBEM and I was doing what seemed good to me

[OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer!]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Von Brizee:

I have realized from this forum that what I did is normally a bad idea, but it was my first PBEM and I was doing what seemed good to me<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey VB,

I wouldn't sweat it if I were you. It's been said before but I'll say it again, it's still only a game. (It's very, very good game though). But it's helpful to keep things in perspective.

I guess some people were already up with tactics and stuff when they got the game, others like me had to learn the hard way (plus play a couple of tutorials). Seems you were doing what warriors have done since Adam was a boy, dream up tactical doctrine and see if it works. Seems the consensus is that you might not always be so lucky with the results.

But the only *bad* in my (truly humble) opinion is that your opponenet spat the dummy (pacifier for the Americans) and refused to play the game out.

You can run your AT teams forward against me anytime! :^)

OGSF

[tss]

Major Tom wrote:

Having AT teams move into forward positions during a defence isn't gamey.

I agree completely.

However, using them as advanced scouts in an attack IS gamey. There is no reason for an AT team to be ahead of the force when you are on an attack,

This I don't agree completely. I can think of situations where the first unit would be an AT team. For example, if the attackers knew that there were few tanks that could cover the main approach route with their fire, it would be logical to send in a couple of AT teams to sneak in and ambush the tanks before the main attack.

I just finished reading M.O. Matilainen's memoirs. He served as a squad leader in II/JR8's machine gun company but he also often fought as a SMG gunner with infantry (BTW, Väinö Linna who wrote "The Unknown Soldier" served in another MG company of the same regiment). The batallion's attack was once stopped by three Soviet tanks that could

cover the attack avenue. Just before the next attack started, Matilainen carried an AT rifle to an open cliff that was in front of Finnish positions and destroyed one tank with it (it took 4 hits: two hits to turret failed to penetrate the armor, one hit tracks, and the last penetrated lower hull). The rest tanks then withdrew and the main Finnish attack could start. Matilainen had to do that alone because the crew of the AT rifle refused to advance to the cliff because there was no cover at all.

Note that I'm not at claiming that AT teams were regularly used as scouts, as they weren't. In the example I gave above Finns already knew where the tanks were and I think that was true in nearly all cases where an AT team was sent in first. Also, Matilainen's feat was quite extraoridinary and it was perhaps the most important reason why he received a Mannerheim's Cross in May 1942.

- Tommi