Question on Importance of Armor in 1941

[laxx]

Hi, I have a question, assuming you are playing a combined arms scenario against a human opponent, how important is Armor to you ? Do you feel the game is lost once you lose your armor ?

Case in Point, CMBB version of Chance Encounter. Do you surrender if all your T-34s are lost, while the opponent's StuGs are still alive and kicking ?

In other words, how much of the game is "lost" if you lose all your armor ?

The reason I ask this question is because assuming I use the tank rules from SCIPIO or Redwolf and apply to pre-1942, the Russians (t-26, BTs)really do not stand a chance against the III, IVs or even the Somua tank. That being the case, does it mean, it would be better to buy Russian ATGs & Tank Hunters than AFVs in pre-1942 ?

I tried several homemade scenarios over the week-end, 1941 Oct Axis attack with 10 x III & IVs and Russians with only 5xATRs, 5xSShooters, 5xFT, 5xTHunters, 3 xAnti-tank Mine, 3xRoadBlock. No ATG, no armor. the points came to 900 (axis) vs 500 (Allied). I won the game but I suspect that this works only under pure armor and only in Defense. If it were Axis Combined Arms and a Meeting Engagement, I do not think the russians would stand a chance.

So back to the original question, how do you fight in 1941 as Russians without T-34s/KVs ?

[ July 22, 2003, 12:16 AM: Message edited by: laxx ]

[tabpub]

deep in the woods...

[Nippy]

Originally posted by tabpub:

deep in the woods...

Late at night with SMG squads.

[Redwolf]

Well, I don't understand the issue. Under my rules your 45mm guns can kill any allowed Axis vehicle from the front at 500m. Why do you say the Russians don't stand a chance?

In addition, the speed of the BT tanks is vastly superiour to the allowed Pz IIIs. The 45mm is also substancially better than the Axis 37mm against infantry. The BT artillery tank with its 76mm gun has no equivalent on the German side.

So, as long as you don't go duelling with the autocannons you should be just fine.

In general, I wouldn't be afraid to continue a fight without armor against a bunch of StuGs. The limited ammo, no MGs to speak of and the CMBB turn rate limit their infantry stopping capability severely.

[MikeyD]

I think the no-armor problem spikes significantly by mid 1942, but for the first year of the war I'd say as long as you're facing 37mm/45mm pop-gun tanks and not stuck in the open there's still hope.

Of course it all depends on your opponent, too. If your force ducks behind a ridge for cover your opponent could either come foolishly chasing after you or he might be content sitting at stand-off ranges on a distant ridge for the remainder of the game. Dull, but effective.

[ July 22, 2003, 12:38 PM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

[demoss]

The BTs are actually only marginally faster than the Pz III in CM - you may be thinking of ASL where they can really rip around the battlefield. And the 45, though certainly more powerful than the German 37 against infantry, somehow tends to lose in a straight-up armor battle (this could be a crew quality issue). Add the inevitable massive command delays when they button up to fire, and you need to really know what you're doing to get much mileage out of BTs in a mobile fight (IMO, that command delay issue makes them SLOWER than Pz IIIs for most practical purposes). I'd take the 38t OR the Pz III over the BT any day of the week, with the radio/turret issue being the deciding factor.

Success can be had with BTs, but it ain't easy. A well-coordinated flanking maneuver with BTs is something to write home about when you pull it off.

As for the BT-7A and T-26A, the Pz IV D is reasonably comparable; the IV E is much better due to the addition of passable armor. Don't get me wrong, I like the artillery variants, but they're not going to win any awards.

[laxx]

hi all,

Thanks for all your comments.

I played several Meeting Engagement last nite (42 to 43) to simulate the challenge of allied fighting superior Axis tanks without any T-34 or KVs.

I resisted buying more AFVs and instead concentrated on buying more Anti-tank weapons.

I limited myself to 2 green T-70 whilst the rest were allocated either Anti-tank weapons (atg, ampulomet, tank hunters, etc) plus one green platoon. For the Germans, I chose 1xStuG, 1xPz38(a), 1xPzIV shortnose + 1 Platoon. Points were 300 (Allied) vs. 500+ (Axis).

At this level, alot of hidding, crawling and positioning needed, and all the teams (tanks, troops, support) must work together.

I had mixed results with the ampulomets, generally good but unreliable. The Tank Hunter was a challenge to stay alive up close to the enemy tanks. The T-70 is very good but has to be flank/rear against the StuG/PzIV.

In Another game same Allied configuration, my amulomets disabled a Tiger while my T-70s rushed from the Rear and pinged the Tiger to death.

Any suggestion for a pre-april 42 equilvalent of the T-70 ? maybe a BT-7 series ?

[JasonC]

Russian tank hunters stink, and the early war ones are the worst. Nothing better than molotovs, which you get with ordinary squads and don't work. Ampulets aren't effective - they tend to get hits but do nothing with them, then get spotted and die. ATRs are fine for annoyance but have trouble actually killing anything above a halftrack - and need minutes against those. Take a few (2-4) to keep the German player honest in his HE chucker purchases, but do not expect them to hold off all his armor.

The best Russian infantry AT are the pioneers with their demo charges. Those need to get within 30m but if they do they will get the job done. A full squad is much more robust under fire than a 2 man TH, too. Pioneers come in any size grouping, with the 2 squad+HQ platoon and 6 squad+3 HQ company particularly useful. Leadership helps, and 2 of them can cover a meaningful width, with a better chance one can throw even if another is being shot, etc.

For serious AT ability, towed guns are the best thing the Russians have. The 76mm guns have enough punch to deal with anything the armor rules allow, even at long range. They also have a useful HE punch and plenty of ammo. The ZIS-3 is low rarity and can be towed by a jeep. 45mm ATGs are dirt cheap, less effective when all armor types are allowed, but useful when they are restricted. At long range they won't be fully IDed, and inside ID range they can kill the types allowed.

Compared to the early light tanks, the towed guns can use cover and are harder to spot. The 45s are half the price of the tanks. The 76s cost about as much as the tanks do but kill at longer ranges and mess up infantry in cover with their more powerful HE. Obviously the tanks are better at getting around (but a couple of jeeps can help a lot if you use them right). They also have MGs, very useful for holding open ground areas against infantry.

So, my "recipe" for Russian AT ability early on is (1) buy guns e.g. 4x45mm or 2x76mm ZIS-3 or both (2) buy a jeep for every 2 guns you take, (3) buy a pioneer company plus 2-4 ATRs if you want to rely on infantry AT. Hidden AT mines are also useful if the terrain isn't wide open. Guns cover open areas, pioneers closed ones, AT mines a few of the "bypass" routes between.

Then you can think about whether you want and can afford a BT platoon in addition (by far the best of the early lights).

I hope this helps.

[laxx]

JasonC,

Thanks for the reply. Never really considered the Pioneer troops before. Something to experiment with now.

To summarize some of the comments made above, Pre-April 1942, good AT would be:

* ATGs

* Pioneers (if you can get close enuff)

* BT-7s

* Other infantry ATs like TH, AMP, Mines

Will try to work out a 1941 Russian Force mix against Axis Combined Arms Meeting Engagement, 300, 500 points. And post results.

cheers!