Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

Tanks Better Than Infantry?

Chris Cline
 Share

Recommended Posts

Fred Senior Member

Fred

Posted
Posted

hmm,

first of all, you pay A LOT more points for a tank company then for a inf company.

Second, it dependes on the terrain and the weather.

If it is night or fog, your advantage in range is not this important. If it is muddy, (and no roads to speak of) your tanks will have a hard time of moving around.

And if you have to go to town, better take some grunts with you, or else your tanks will be toasted.

A combined arms force is usually FAR superior than any tank-only force.

Fred

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cos Senior Member

Cos

Posted
Posted

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chris Cline:

Zooks and schreks don't really have the range or punch to compete. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh I don't know about that. I've seen some rather nice shots in the range of 70m take out a Tiger or Firefly with handheld weapons.

All you need is multiple infantry targets and a few anti-tank teams (even in the open) and the tank will be dead in a turn or two. Tank will have too many targets to choose from to defeat them all before some shot kills it. That's why they need infantry support to supress the threats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ParaBellum Senior Member

ParaBellum

Posted
Posted

I once (looong time ago) set up an axis tank force aginst a US combined arms defense.

I thought (Hey, Tigers against GIs, that's gonna be fun!) it would be an easy game for me.

Result:

Tanks CANNOT conquer victory locations in bad terrain!

Tanks CANNOT conquer victory locations in towns/villages.

So, tanks are great for tank busting/inf. support but you`ll need infantry (and PAK/FLAK) to hold VLs and to fight in difficult terrain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abbott Senior Member

Abbott

Posted
Posted

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Capt Canuck:

I wouldn't dash the zook, just a few days ago, I had a Regular Bazzoka Team with only one ammo left, target a Tiger at 187 metres, one shot, one kill, upper front hull penetration. Bam!

Dave<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nice shot! My best to date is 175 meters with a PIAT taking out a 251. 157 meters with a bazooka taking out a MKIVh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Username Senior Member

Username

Posted
Posted

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chris Cline:

Discounting AT guns, it seems like an all-armor company would annihilate an infantry unit of the same size. Zooks and schreks don't really have the range or punch to compete. Am I full of it, or is it always better to go with more tank for the buck?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The games spotting makes the tanks overly aware of whats going on around them. In reality, a tank only force (if its sitting on an objective) can be buttoned up (by small arms) and infiltrated by LATW infantry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CombinedArms Senior Member

CombinedArms

Posted
Posted

SPOILER ALERT: Augen Zu! Force balances revealed!

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

If you want to try out the scenario Augen Zu!, which I just brought up in the scenario forum, you can find a scenario where 18 Panthers, plus a battalion of infantry, can lose to a zook, AT, infantry team with just 4 Hellcats. It all depends on terrain and visibility--plus tactics and luck....

[ 04-22-2001: Message edited by: CombinedArms ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Warmaker Senior Member

Warmaker

Posted
Posted

The points cost for a company of tanks/panzers is quite high compared to an infantry company. There are roughly 12-16 tanks in most military organizations that I am familiar with. The size of an infantry company varies, depending on the service and type of unit. Some may be as small as 120 men while others can reach into the 2-300's.

In CMBO, a July '44 German Heer Rifle Company costs 372 pts(regulars). Now a Panzer Company of Panthers on the other hand I believe will cost 2880 pts(regular, same time frame)-->2880 for 3 Panzer platoons of 4 Panthers G's in each. Keep in mind I'm not quite exact on WWII Panzer organization so expect this number to be higher.

As you can see, if you're fielding a panzer/tank company you're investing alot of points. Sure, a company of tanks can easily wipe out a company of infantry, especially if you know how to use them. But if you're roughly playing an equal points game, your opponent can field a battalion of infantry for that cost... that's lots of guys to shoot at, and get shot by. There's a flip side to every coin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Fetus Junior Member

The Fetus

Posted
Posted

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Capt Canuck:

I had a Regular Bazzoka Team with only one ammo left, target a Tiger at 187 metres, one shot, one kill, upper front hull penetration. Bam!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pretty damn good. My best so far is a regular bazooka team taking out a King Tiger at 200m, side turret penetration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stacheldraht Senior Member

Stacheldraht

Posted
Posted

I've seen both Tigers and Pershings get knocked out at around 200m on (rare) occassion by zooks and schrecks. Don't understimate portable AT weapons.

The scale and terrain of most maps in CM means that an all-tank force would rarely be very effective. Tanks are generally most effective at distances far beyond those at which they typically engage the enemy in CM. And as someone said, tanks can't really take and hold VL's--imagine trying to occupy a town with them--bye bye armor smile.gif

[ 04-22-2001: Message edited by: Stacheldraht ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Panther131 Senior Member

Panther131

Posted
Posted

Quoted by 109 Gustav: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If you want to try an all tank vs. all infantry game, meet me on CMHQ chat tonight. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey Gustav! I would like to give that a whirl. I would like to see what kind of position that will put me in. Post here again and we can get down to the details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jgdpzr Senior Member

jgdpzr

Posted
Posted

I second CombinedArms' appeal to try out AugenZu! I just completed that battle in a pbem against a highly skilled opponent and was able to defeat the hordes of Panthers and come out with the win. Thanks largely to the 'zooks.

One more thing, if a person does command an all tank force against an all-infantry force, you'll probably wish your guys were driving Shermans. If I am to fight such a battle, give me lots of Shermans over most of the Germans tanks ('course, the Tiger is outstanding in such a role). The abundance of effective HE in the Sherman would be really appreciated in such an encounter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abbott Senior Member

Abbott

Posted
Posted

I recently played "Hitdorf on the Rhine" a converted SL scenario as the Allies. it was very enjoyable. I won a but it was tough going You may want to give it a try. I will send it along to anyone interested. Try playing it blind as the Allies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GriffinCheng+ Senior Member

GriffinCheng+

Posted
Posted

CA, next time, put spoiler alert when you mention specific scenario/operation. Henri and I are having a double-blind game on this scenario. AND NOW you have blown all the "covers"!!! Great! :D

Thank you very much.

Griffin.

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

If you want to try out the scenario Augen Zu!, which I just brought up in the scenario forum, you can find a scenario where 18 Panthers, plus a battalion of infantry, can lose to a zook, AT, infantry team with just 4 Hellcats. It all depends on terrain and visibility--plus tactics and luck....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JasonC Senior Member

JasonC

Posted
Posted

"Discounting AT guns"

Others have talked about some of the other obvious points, but I stopped right here. Why am I supposed to discount AT guns?

Defending infantry uses guns instead of tanks for its long-range and heavy firepower. Sandbags and shoveled earth stand in for armor plate. The guns are sorta cheaper than the whole metal beast.

The big advantages of tanks in my book, by the way, is not their power against infantry - that match up turns on terrain (tanks don't do the inside of woods, etc). It is their near invunerability to artillery fire. Especially on the attack that is priceless.

Foxholes and stone buildings and dispersed placement can partially counter artillery on defense. But attackers lack such cover and usually can't afford to spread thin either, or they don't punch through anywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cos Senior Member

Cos

Posted
Posted

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

"Discounting AT guns"

Others have talked about some of the other obvious points, but I stopped right here. Why am I supposed to discount AT guns?

Defending infantry uses guns instead of tanks for its long-range and heavy firepower. Sandbags and shoveled earth stand in for armor plate. The guns are sorta cheaper than the whole metal beast.

The big advantages of tanks in my book, by the way, is not their power against infantry - that match up turns on terrain (tanks don't do the inside of woods, etc). It is their near invunerability to artillery fire. Especially on the attack that is priceless.

Foxholes and stone buildings and dispersed placement can partially counter artillery on defense. But attackers lack such cover and usually can't afford to spread thin either, or they don't punch through anywhere.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh I wish tanks were invunerable to arty. I can of a rainy/wet scene with a Sherman on overwatch and two cromwell's advancing either side of the Sherm on the road's edge to keep from getting bogged down. As the 3 of them are in a trinagle a German shell lands right in the middle of them. Gun damage on the Sherm and both Crom's take track hits and that's it for them

:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...