Hans Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 I've seen several threads on best AFV and Infantry types but what is the least used (and useless) piece of Allied or Axis equipment? You'd never buy it and if the computer selects it for you you groan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cybeq Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Mortar halftracks and M7 Priest. Both for basically the same reason. You can't use them for indirect fire and when you bring 'em out into the open to get off a shot they go up in flames. Why you can't use these units like a mortar team is beyond me. I never pick them. If I'm playing a scenerio with them I can make do but they are still my least favorite unit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wisbech_lad Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 I find everything normally has a use, depending on the situation. But an Archer on the attack is VERY annoying Otherwise: groans come from Churchill VI - if you are going to be slow, at least have the armour Wespe - where's the ammo? Mortar carriers - no indirect spotting. M10 - A US TD without a fast turret? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sturmtiger101 Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 My humble opinion is that the Nashorn is not very desirable due to its open top, large silhouette, low speed/maneuverability, weak armour, its' only redeeming feature, the very excellent L71/88mm gun, isn't fully realized due to the typical 500 meter and less engagement ranges in CMBO. I've not yet been able to successfully use this vehicle in either defense or attack scenarios. Same goes for all the thinly armored SPGs, i.e. Wespe, Marder, Hummel, etc. Might have a nice main armament but by this period in the war are way to vulnerable to justify cost in the CM environment. ------------------ " They're acting as if they have already won the war! " B. Woll " We will prove them wrong. " M. Whitman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Petersson Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 I think all units can be put to use, one way or another. Some units I'd never purchase for a QB since I don't think of them as cost effective, but if I get them I'll try to use them. The real problem arise when you get too many of these crappy stuff, and nothing good to back them up. (Those half dozen elite Jeeps that someone mentioned a couple of months ago come to mind, and I've experienced a computer pick for me like this: Armored, Allied, ~1000pts; 2 British rifle companies, 1 low end Sherman, 5 Humber scout. This force is good for long range recon, but not much else...) Cheers Olle ------------------ Webmaster of Combat Mission för svensktalande, a CM site in Swedish. Norwegians, Finns, Danes and Icelanders are also welcome as members, others can still enjoy pictures and downloads. Strategy is the art of avoiding a fair fight... Detta har kånntrollerats av Majkråsofft späll-tjäcker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head Mahone Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 I enjoy everything I receive on the battlefield, and make good use of it. If I had to pick though, I guess it would be the jeep. Although every time I do get one I'm happy in the end. There’s nothing like getting an artillery spotter to the other side of the map in 10 seconds. Only to get an incredible view of where you didn't expect the enemy to be, and bring hell down on em. -Head ------------------ "No man ever won a war by dieing for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." -General George S. Patton, Jr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Flamethrower teams: low ammo, painfully slow, high on the TacAI's targeting priority list, rarely useful for anything but roasting marshmallows around the campfire. ------------------ New to Combat Mission? Visit CM Boot Camp at Combat Missions for tips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS_PanzerLeader Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 I find flamethrower teams quite useful in certain scenarios.. try using htem in a wooded area on hide/ambush that you expect to be traveled adn give them a little support... You will be suprised how effective the little bastards can be ------------------ SS_PanzerLeader.......out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croda Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Trucks and Roadblocks. The Trucks are usually never used again after dropping off their passengers. The Roadblocks always seem to end up being a non-factor, maybe just my poor placement. ------------------ The New CessPool WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! - THIS SIG FILE BELONGS TO A COMPLETE FOO. MR T WOULDN'T BE SO KIND AS TO WRINKLE AN EYEBROW AT THIS UNFORTUNATE BEING. PLEASE OFFER HIS PARENTS AND COHABITANTS ALL SYMPATHY POSSIBLE. MAY BE CONTAGIOUS. CONTAINS ARTIFICIAL SWEETNER, INTELLIGENCE AND WIT. STAND WELL CLEAR AND LIGHT WICK. BY ORDER PETERNZ Damn Croda. That is one funny sig!!! must suck to be you - Hiram Sedai Croda, you rock! - Meeks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 The question would have to be about price, because any unit can become useful if it's cheap enough. I would vote for the flamethrower. It is slow and easily identified, has very short range and little ammo. And it doesn't even catch its target on fire consistently. (My tests show 3-4 shots to ignite a building or patch of woods.) If FTs were to cost 10-15 points, they would be worthwhile. But at about 35 points, you're giving up 1.5 panzerfausts or HMGs, or half of a small tank killer. An awful deal, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vergeltungswaffe Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Gotta be the Hotchkiss H-39 light tank. It was a piece of crap in 1940, much less 1944. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StellarRat Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Originally posted by Leonidas: I would vote for the flamethrower. It is slow and easily identified, has very short range and little ammo. And it doesn't even catch its target on fire consistently. (My tests show 3-4 shots to ignite a building or patch of woods.) If FTs were to cost 10-15 points, they would be worthwhile. But at about 35 points, you're giving up 1.5 panzerfausts or HMGs, or half of a small tank killer. An awful deal, IMHO. I'll have to disagree with this one. I think flamethrowers are very useful when properly employed. They are really nasty when used as an ambush from a building. I had one team single-handedly destroy three squads of infantry this way. [This message has been edited by StellarRat (edited 02-09-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illo Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Nashorn (not RL). Marders are just excellent in CM environment (great for ambushes). Any way Nashorn isnt designed for close encounters + at 2000m range Stuarts will kick its ass because it cant hit a thing. (Stuarts will hit firs due to high ROF) I have allways been big fan of Nashorns, but in CM they just cant be used as intended (maybe because its excellent accuracy isnt well modelled)... Thats why i NEVER buy Nashorns to QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Compassion Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Originally posted by Croda: Trucks and Roadblocks. The Trucks are usually never used again after dropping off their passengers. I use trucks constantly throughout some scenarios. But then I have also been playing very large map 5000 point 60 turn assaults. I find them very effective when playing on the defense for moving guns around when you set up for an all around defense and find that your opponent is knifing in on a narrow front (and vice versa). Also helps to move troops that are apread too far out to make it to the party in time under these circumstances. You do have to be careful how you use them, though as the crews will abandon if you so much as throw rocks at them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
109 Gustav Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Nashorns can sometimes be useful. If your opponent gets churchills or sherm jumbos, then you can stand off at long range and blast away. Their low velocity guns won't be able to hit you for a few shots, and by then the 88 has found its range and knocked them out. Otherwise, you can use them to overwatch tanks moving forward. ------------------ Well my skiff's a twenty dollar boat, And I hope to God she stays afloat. But if somehow my skiff goes down, I'll freeze to death before I drown. And pray my body will be found, Alaska salmon fishing, boys, Alaska salmon fishing. -Commercial fishing in Kodiak, Alaska Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen. Sosaboski Posted February 10, 2001 Share Posted February 10, 2001 I simply cannot use the Archer. I had three of them (vets) get taken out by 2 MkIVGs once. They're just too annoying to use with the gun at the rear. Cromwells as well are quite easy to brew up, even the 95mm one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted February 10, 2001 Share Posted February 10, 2001 It's gotta be the Hotchkiss H39 tankette. Looks crappy, sounds crappy, crew's crappy... SURPRISE, SURPRISE... is crappy! Regards Jim R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow 1st Hussars Posted February 10, 2001 Share Posted February 10, 2001 Originally posted by Vergeltungswaffe: Gotta be the Hotchkiss H-39 light tank. It was a piece of crap in 1940, much less 1944. Oh, how I disagree. A buttoned H-39 can bring hell on earth to stuarts and infantry. It's got enough armour that a MG can't shoot it in half, and it's got a half decent gun. I always have them buttoned, after all, there are only 2 crew members...... ------------------ Charlie don't Surf shadow@jagdtiger.de http://www.orbitonline.ca/~Shadow/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow 1st Hussars Posted February 10, 2001 Share Posted February 10, 2001 Originally posted by Kanonier Reichmann: It's gotta be the Hotchkiss H39 tankette. Looks crappy, sounds crappy, crew's crappy... SURPRISE, SURPRISE... is crappy! Regards Jim R. See above. It's all about how it's employed. ------------------ Charlie don't Surf shadow@jagdtiger.de http://www.orbitonline.ca/~Shadow/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted February 10, 2001 Share Posted February 10, 2001 Funny how the opinions differ. I like Priests and Wespes. And Archer is redeemed by the low price and the lethal gun. I hate german MG halftracks, useless and overly expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted February 10, 2001 Share Posted February 10, 2001 I would agree with Shadow. I've also used the H-39 effectively as a fast moving and lethal counter to infantry. The German HT's I use mainly to shuttle reserves, or carry FO's and Company HQ's. I hold them back as I do my armor while things develop, when the heat is on and I have figured out the enemy's positions, then I can use them to provide reserves to any needed hot spot. Neither unit can stand up to any close quarter fight, but can be used as a part of combined arms. Now, what I find useless myself, is the blasted little Kublewagen. What the devil am I supposed to do with that. Only thing I can figure out is to race the lil critter down a road at full tilt to see what take a pot shot at it, which I have complained about as being a gamey tactic. Never have figured out what to effectively use it for. ------------------ "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) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow 1st Hussars Posted February 10, 2001 Share Posted February 10, 2001 Originally posted by Bruno Weiss: Now, what I find useless myself, is the blasted little Kublewagen. What the devil am I supposed to do with that. Only thing I can figure out is to race the lil critter down a road at full tilt to see what take a pot shot at it, which I have complained about as being a gamey tactic. Never have figured out what to effectively use it for. I run MG42's around in them, disembark them ahead of my infantry to cover incase the situation should get hairy. ------------------ Charlie don't Surf shadow@jagdtiger.de http://www.orbitonline.ca/~Shadow/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hans Posted February 10, 2001 Author Share Posted February 10, 2001 An excellent selection of answers! Kubelwagens-ok for draging around 75mm inf guns! What about Bunkers, Pillboxes, mines and wire ...useful or groaning material? For those who commented before what price would you place on the unit that you consider useless to make it sparkle once again.....2 Archers for the price of one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robeek Posted February 10, 2001 Share Posted February 10, 2001 Well, personally... I despise the Jeep/Truck/Kubelwagon units. Pretty much the usual argument: No armor, a rock thrown at them tends to knock them out. I'd rather spend the few extra points and get a halftrack/light tank with a bit more armor and an MG or 20mm gun... As for the follow-up question about mines/pillboxes/bunkers/wire.... I definately value all of them. Mines deny territory (especially human players, compared to the AI)... Barbed wire does the same, or keeps infantry in one place while MG's rake them. I liked pillboxes/bunkers BEFORE the newest patch which made them harder to hit, and even more now. If you put them in ambush positions away from the front line, and aim for flanking shots, they tear the opposition to pieces. And the reason why I favor them (sometimes) over regular ATG's, is that after the first shot they won't be lost to mortar/artillary fire. That's what the difference between bunkers and ATG's are to me: ATG's are real attrition units, they get a shot off and kill something, the trade off in points is great and they're knocked out in a turn or so; while a Bunker completely denies territory (if placed correctly), kills something, survives any sort of indirect means of destroying it, and defends a keyhole position which prevents any armor from crossing it's FOV. Anyway, great thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Havermeyer- Posted February 10, 2001 Share Posted February 10, 2001 Jagdpanther. That thing is a piece. I've done some silly tests with tanks-- and that guano is ALWAYS the first one to die. I have also employed it for standoff on a huge map-- and it died within a turn of unmasking. NEVER BUY IT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts