Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just ignore them. Any vehicle which cannot withstand them is useless. They are so cheap -even the German ones- that wasting precious HE ammo on then is, well, waste. If you have to deal with them in a scenario, you could perhaps try and guess were they are, judging terrain and which part of your vehicle is hit. Then send infantry, from maybe 150m you might spot them. A skilled opponent, however, might use their range and hide them in spots were you'll barely find them, maybe on the flanks, where no "real" ighting takes place.

If you're a Russian in 1941, no problem: Choose T-34s and KVs instead of T-26s and BT-7s (which you'll do anyway). If you're a German, well, bad luck. Nothing you could do to for your PSWs and SPWs.

Greetings

Krautman

Link to post
Share on other sites

Krautman hit the nail on the head, and I have to agree with him.

If you have armor that can't withstand AT rifle fire, then it isn't true armor. It is because of AT rifles that many debates have been argured as to the effectiveness of HT's. Really, light armor can't be used until the mopping up phase, after the AT network has been smashed. If you want to use light armor at the front line though, keyhole it if possible. Some light vehicles (with at least 15mm frontal plates I think) will not be hurt by AT rifle fire as long as you keep their frontal armor towards the fire.

Area firing is a waste, since they are only two man teams, which you are unlikey to hit with HE even, and are only an annoyance. AT rifles have never won battles on their own, unless if someone is stupid enought to just buy HT's and charge at sound contacts I guess. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Krautman:

Just ignore them. Any vehicle which cannot withstand them is useless.

I wouldn't call Marder's & SU-76's useless. And even a T-26 can be better than no AFV at all (there is even the chance that your enemy has no ATR's/ATG's - especially with Barbarossa era Soviets - unlikely in Quick Battles, but historical scenarios anything can happen).
Link to post
Share on other sites

If as 1941 Soviets one must try and fight against likely Axis ATRs with T-26 tin cans, then I suggest buying T-26Es which incidentally even give early light Axis Armour a run for their money. ;)

Actually IMHO ATRs force players to handle their vehicles in a more realistic fasion, prevents them charging with the light stuff as though it were all as thickly armoured as Infantry Tanks, while also hopefully ensuring that SPs such as Marders & SU-76s are used appropriately.

OTOH if a player is determined to try and deal with pesky ATRs then the best method that I've found is primarily though a large amount of area fire from HMGs including vehicle mounted as well as from lots of advancing Infantry Squads and HQs. Of course this mothod requires mass or a great advantage in strength oveer your opponent with those ATRs that you are trying to suppress. This attempt to empoly fire dominance againt enemy ATRs should be thought of as coverring all likely small arms opposition including enemy HMGs, Infantry Squads, Snipers, HQs and even spotters. Eventually your Infantry will hopefully get close enough to either spot or completely route them ATRs out along with everything else out. Easy!

tongue.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

A German gun halftrack is not useless. A PzIV, which is vulnerable from the rear, is not useless. Veteran or better ATR teams can be a real pain. The only cure is to flush them with infantry or area fire likely hiding spots. Even then a savvy opponent will anticipate this and keep them moving. Play Abbotts "Breajout" scenario as the Germans and you will see what I mean.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Sergei:

I wouldn't call Marder's & SU-76's useless. And even a T-26 can be better than no AFV at all (there is even the chance that your enemy has no ATR's/ATG's - especially with Barbarossa era Soviets - unlikely in Quick Battles, but historical scenarios anything can happen).

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but i think Marders, at least the later models, and SU-76s can withstand an AT rifle, from the front. Which is why i should correct my statement to "Any vehicle which cannot withstand an ATR from the front is useless".

Greetings

Krautman

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Marder III late is actually the thinnest one. The thick ones are Marder III early and Marder III (no added comments). The early has the 76mm, the middle one a German 75. Both have 50mm front, enough to withstand not only ATR fire but 45mm fire as well, at most battle ranges. Very useful. The IIs and late III models are thinner.

As for the amount of armor you want vs. an ATR, 30mm is enough most of the time. Very flat shots at 100m or so might get in anyway, but they are spotted at those ranges and the behind armor effect is small, so kills that way are very rare. In the German light armor, that means look for the later PSWs, with 30mm front, rather than the early ones or the halftracks. The 15mm front on the SPWs is not enough to keep them out.

Area fire is a waste against them, I'd be happy as a clam to see them soak some of that up as well as buttoning things. If the vehicle doesn't have armor sufficient to keep them out, it has to fast move to a covered location as soon as they start firing. Hits being occasional and most of them doing "no significant damage" even if they happen to penetrate, you will generally make it. What you can't do is stand in the open for minute on end letting them hit you. 3 shots no problem - 30 are a problem. Unless you have 30mm.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by JasonC:

In the German light armor, that means look for the later PSWs, with 30mm front, rather than the early ones or the halftracks.

Yes, but the later PSWs have 30mm only partially on their front. I think it was the upper hull which is still very vulnerable. That's why I'd include the late PSWs in the "useless" category.

Greetings

Krautman

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...