Half tracks and AT Rifles

[Der Alte Fritz]

This has probably been discussed before but how do you use HT effectively with so many AT rifles about? All mine seem to die pretty quickly unless they dash from cover to cover,

[JasonC]

(1) you dash from cover to cover.

(2) you only use them to reposition heavy weapons teams, in full defilade, to the back side of the cover the teams intend to use.

(3) the speed moving the teams, or the ability to move guns, in the only real point. The armor is insurance against a sniper or sound located MG with LOS to the movement path

(4) as for bringing them out to use their weapons, they only do it late, after the AT grid is smashed, and then they "keyhole", to isolate on only the target they intend to shoot. Nothing else should be able to see them.

(5) take more real tanks and fewer thin tin cans. It isn't a razzle dazzle derby. Debus. Fighting vehicles should be thick enough to fight.

(6) the Russian method of more medium tanks with riders and without halftracks, is superior to the German method of expensive tracks for the mounted infantry. Yes the men on back can be shot. But then the tanks can kill what shoots them. The men inside a 'track can't kill the unlocated ATR after it kills their ride.

[DavidFields]

Or, as a similar take:

Seldom use them as front-line, early in a scenario, transport within a scenario units.

They, in essence, and as a reality, moved your infantry to this battle, minimizing sniper damage and maximizing speed of movement in a strategic sense. If they are essential in the scenario, that is probably ahistoric. In CM, using them as late-scenario, mop-up, mobile machine gun units are usually their most useful function.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Der Alte Fritz]

Thanks, I thought it was just me!

[John Kettler]

Der Alte Fritz,

They're fine for a ruptured defense environment against a fleeing foe, and can, under certain conditions, actually be used as you'd like to use them, for I've done it. You need a localized target, tank support to smash up and silence anything that fires, and smoke to screen the halftracks. In my case, it was a hamlet with infantry in buildings protected by tanks. An attempt to "bounce" the place merely got some infantry cut up, so I put together a hasty attack

with Panzer IV/Js as the spearhead and infantry and HMGs trailing in 251s. I killed the T-34s, shelled the MGs into temporary silence, fired a bunch of smoke, whereupon, the 251s raced in guns blazing and dropped the occupants. The infantry fanned out ahead, supported by the 251s MGs, and my HMGs set up shop. It was a hard fight, but I took the place, only to get my nose bloodied when I tried to move from there to the edge of the nearby woods. Hornet's nest! 251 lumps in the coordinated attack? Two x crew casualties = 2 251s with no teeth. These spent the rest of the fight hauling unhorsed Panzer crews and ammo spent teams to the rear.

If you can't keep a terrain feature, fog or smoke between you and the shooters, I'd say the general advice you got is excellent, for the ATR was designed to kill something twice as thick, easily, as your 251, an early war tank!

Regards,

John Kettler

[r000]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=WjyJCQa5sac

probably a official training movie for "wehrmachts"-officers...involving halftrack mounted grenadiers...

i always thought they would leave their halftracks well beyond the actual "fighting zone"... but in this movie series they are actually dashing right inside the enemy positions...

thought it would be interesting to post the link...in regards to the halftrack question...

[John Kettler]

r000,

Watched the entire set--amazing! 251/16 is a haltracked two-headed dragon! Three if you count the special hose unit for dismounted work from in cover. If the "Russians" were actually played by Wehrmacht, imagine the trust it took to be that close to those flame spouting monsters. First footage I've ever seen the 251/17, and the Jagdpanzer IV stuff was great from both the outside and the inside. You should've seen the raging debates we had on the Forums about German optics, the true capabilities of scissor optics (normal viewing vs. stereoscopic rangefinder), etc.

As for your comment, the 251s are attacking through a foe caught on the hop, pounded with direct and indirect fires, and on the move. It would've been insane to do this if the Russians had even half an hour to dig in and consolidate.

There was also the little matter of the Jagdpanzer IVs on the ridge to keep any Russian armor at bay

and that the 251s are operating on the German side of the battlefield.

Presume you're familiar with the Men Against Tanks and the Pioneer series?

Regards,

John Kettler

[Der Alte Fritz]

None the less it is an interesting point - how far did AT riflemen stray from their parent unit, My feeling is that they stayed pretty close, whereas in many scenarios, mine included they are placed all over the board to dominate the ground. Perhaps I will make it a house rule ATRs do not move too far from their infantry positions.

cheers

[r000]

@john kettler...

glad you found the series interesting. it did (as i told) surprise me a little bit. granted they are using the surprise element on their side in this example - and as always with such material it is somewhat over-hyped/idealized... like do that and then this and it will surely work ... probably arranged for the target audience to boost confidence. some rather unlikely events where shown (imho)...most striking for me was that they of course did id the anti-tank position on the run (!)... and of course managed to supress/destroy this position before they could take out some of the approaching halftracks...

nevertheless interesting footage... and quite interesting to the see the assembled formations. 1944 equals defensive tank-hunter like tanks instead of pzIVs or bigger turreted tanks.

@deraltefritz

maybe a psychological aspect. strip the infantry of anti-tank assets and they will loose quite a bit of their "morale" if they suspect that enemy tanks will be probably operating in their area.

i remember dimly that in one youtube movie series the commentator said that when e.g. stugs where resupplied they would withdraw to their supply point, but would always leave a couple of stugs on line back with the fighting infantry.

obviously to not strip the frontline from anti-armor and heavy firing power...but also because the remaining infantry would be somewhat shaken if their heavy support would withdraw all at once. i can imagine that infantry would likely become somewhat "insecure" if stripped from small anti-tank assets?

and in comparism to combat mission and how to setup anti tank positions... well we enjoy some luxuries that the field commanders back in the day didn´t have. like almost complete battlefield-awareness. in a way we are probably modelling somewhat idealized/best case scenario setups and plans for our little pixel troops on the ground *lol*

think about how amazing/difficult a game of combat mission would become if we had some kind of full fog of war for our own side (a bit like shockforce). watching a company of american airborne troops march towards a crossroad... just to find out (some moves later) that they were advancing towards a different road junction...and instead of being in good shape were already somewhat reduced by heavy combat...

[John Kettler]

Der Alte Fritz,

Here's how it was supposed to be done, per the manual.

http://www.battlefield.ru/content/view/280/123/lang,en/

For an example in the prepared defense, see particularly the diagram on page 115 of Caidin's THE TIGERS ARE BURNING, which shows the composition and layout of a typical strongpoint at Kursk.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Der Alte Fritz]

Hi John

Not much mention of killing Hts but that is their main preoccupation in CMBB. Also engagement ranges are 300m not the 1500++m in the game. Perhaps there is an element of over modelling in the game otherwise SPWs would have died in droves historically.

[John Kettler]

Der Alte Fritz,

The only real problem with killing a halftrack is hitting it in a vital spot, for piercing it isn't a problem, generally speaking. There are, though, many places hittable which produce little more than additional ventilation but won't slow or stop, let alone destroy outright a 250 or 251.

The Germans started hanging additional barriers on the obvious instant stop location, the glacis plate protecting the engine, but you don't see applique armor and whatnot appear, likely because the chassis couldn't hack the weight. The 251 Ausf., D improved things somewhat via better armor layout, including the sides of the engine compartment, as did the 250 Neuer Art., but the real solution lay in route sanitization before committing the halftracks. This meant sending heavier armor through first and/or giving the ground a good working over with direct and indirect fire as a prelude to bringing in the vulnerable 250 or 251s. At Kursk, for example, they were in the rear of the Panzer Glocke formations, with lots of armor out front and to the sides.

Regards,

John Kettler