Russian AT

[Locksley]

Hi

Have relatively recently got CMBB and have up until now mostly played as the Germans. I have in the last few weeks got more into playing as the Russians but I always seem to come up against two problems that I could use some advice from you BB veterans out there on.

The first is with the Russian tanks, I know they generally won confrontations due to superiority of numbers, but I problem I have is whenever I come up against anything better than a Mark IV my T-34s just immediately start reversing or if I manage to persuade them to fight they nearly always loose. Even with KVs and IS-1s I struggle in confrontations with the heavier German tanks.

Another problem I am having is again against armour. As a CMBO player and having payed as the Germans on CMBB I always liked to try and have a few panzershreks (spelling?), PIATS or bazookas just to back up my infantry against any enemy armour. However, as the Russians I find myself without any real equivilant. I've tried using AT rifles and AT teams but they just don't hit the mark. So what I was wondering was if anyone had any tips on taking out tanks with infantry fom the Soviet point of view.

Thanks very much

Tom

[GS_Guderian]

...panzershreks (spelling?)... [/QB]

Panzerschreck

...

and yes it is a little harder with the Russian Infantry men. I never saw any lend-lease Bazooka yet and the ATR are only good enough to make real tanks nervous. The Molotov Cokctails seem to be inferior to normal grenades, at least most times when I kill a tank with Russian Inf they first threw the "Molli" without any bigger effect and then finished the tank off with a normal grenade.

In the tank vs. tank issue I suffer similar trouble. Even my SU-152s lost vs. Pz IVH recently. But make sure you get the tank from the flank, I know this is the standard answer, but most German tanks really have trouble with sideshots. If you have superior numbers get them in LOS at the same time from various angles. It´s enough if the tank turns it´s turret just a little bit to get a quick sideshot from the other edge of your attacking force.

In a one on one situation, like Panther vs. T-34...don´t attack

PS: JS-2 and SU-100 can do one hell of a job, even vs. Kingtigers.

[coe]

I think you'll find that most tanks have trouble with receiving shots on the flank. the funny thing I remember though is that a 37mm PAK sometimes has a harder time penetrating the rear of a T-34 than the front or side... fancy that.

Anyone know why the 57mm ATG (russian) seems to be more effective than their 76mm or their 85mm guns?

Conan

[Sergei]

Higher velocity. However, also more expensive to produce, so they weren't common.

[tar]

You really want to try to backup the Russian infantry with AT guns if you can. The 45mm isn't the greatest, but it is cheap and if you can get side or rear shots you can actually do some damage.

[JasonC]

The Russians had a set of reasonable but vanilla weapons that did their job. In BB, they are dumbed down slightly, with the result that each of them just fails to do its job in the ordinary Russian scheme. You have to adapt to this fact by bumping everyone up a notch in the tactical responsibility "pecking order". If you do, then everything works again.

Half track style light armor was the responsibility of ATRs. In BB these have very limited behind armor effect (which is realistic) and often fail to penetrate 30mm fronts on armored cars and such even from close range (which is less so - side angle is typically the culprit). Their big edge in BB is they are quite stealthy - the enemy is unlikely to spot them even when they are firing, at ranges down to 250m.

You need 2 of these for their tactical effect, which is just to keep halftracks behind cover. Do not bother firing them at full armor from the front hoping to damage things - it won't happen. The hope of the flat flank shot at close range is vain if they have skirts. Marders and such mebe. Don't consider them serious anti-armor weapons. They are eyes and button things up,and keep HTs honest - no more. One sharpshooter can also help do this, and is more likely to bag a TC.

The main Russian light ATG was the 45mm. As the German vehicles got thicker, they improved their ammo and MV. It was about as capable as a 2 pdr. Against the Germans it faced, it needed a flank shot out to medium range, or a close range shot with sub-caliber ammo against the vanilla types. The way they actually used these was a a first belt of AT nests and the flanks of kill sacks. They opened fire from a flank at range, or from as little as 100m if directly approached.

In CM, they are underpowered and I don't recommend them. They need pretty flat angles against even 30mm sides at 500m. The BHE is not stellar, so you often need 2-3 full penetrations to hurt anything - and those are rare even against 30mm armor with side angle taken into account.

A better choice if you want a very cheap gun is the 76mm mountain gun. It has roughly equivalent AT ability, marginally better - and HE ability as good as a 76mm infantry gun. (Don't be fooled by the lower point blank number. The "money" entry in the table is 30 degree slope at 500m - that is the kind of side shot you actually get in practice. The 45s need T ammo to do what the little mountain gun does, at that range and angle).

The main heavy duty Russian gun in reality was the 76mm ZIS-3 divisional field piece - which was also the most common gun in their independent AT regiments. Those were used to stiffen the AT defense of any infantry division that expected armor opposite. Tactically, these formed a second line behind 45s and formed the base of kill sacks.

In the real deal, these easily penetrated anything but a Tiger from the side, and the vanilla German types at 500m from the front. In BB they can't kill StuGs from the front, a serious drawback. At long range and with side angle, the Panther side even presents problems (though a flat enough shot - 30 degrees from dead on is good enough - will still work).

The overall idea was, the German tanks come into the defense somewhere, or the line holds. If they come in, they either run right over a 45mm nest, or they come between 2 of them. If they run right over a 45mm nest, the 76mm back on the next line - staggered between them - could hit them from long range for right front or left front. They wouldn't be pointed straight at the 76s. Meanwhile, the 45s hit directly would hold their fire until nearly point blank range.

The 76s might be 800m behind the 45s. The result was an engagement with 45s firing any subcaliber ammo they had at very short ranges with high hit chance for their limited rounds of the stuff. While the 76s tossed in 1 km shots from the (partial) side, whoever had the better angle. There could be significant side angle for the 76 shots, but 30mm sides won't stop 76mm fire even with decent side angle thrown in. Meanwhile, if the 45s die and the Germans turn to face the 76s firing at them, they turn almost 90 degrees from the next set of 76s up the line.

------TT------

45----45----45

---76----76---

If on the other hand the Germans came between 2 nests of 45s, they'd be pointed right at a nest of 76s. Let them get as far as level with the 45s or a bit farther. Then the 45s they are closest to open up with flank shots. And the 76s can hit them if they are in effective range, or when they turn to face the 45s.

--------------

45-TT-45----45

---76----76---

Historically they often used nests of 4 guns for this, with 2 able to face either direction at any one time. In CM, one usually can't afford that and the tie in positions on the flanks are often missing. So often you wind up using just 1-2 instead of a whole nest.

Also, as mentioned, the guns are a bit underpowered. You can get around this at some expense by just putting 1 76 in the up positions, and a 57 in the back one.

--------------

--76------76--

------57------

Quality where they really used quantity, because the BB quantity items don't have quite the quality they really had in the real deal.

As for infantry AT, the RPG weapons are OK infantry AT at point blank. But you can't be sure you will get them. Early, they aren't available at all. Late, some tank hunters have them but some just come with molotovs - which are practically useless against any vehicle with a roof (and not all that effective against vehicles without).

Instead, take pioneers. They have 2 demo charges per squad, and will throw them reliably at tanks that come within 30m - as long as they aren't pinned themselves. And a DC will immobilize or kill any tank it hits, even a Tiger.

The other main weapon the Russian infantry formations had against German tanks was the AT mine. Those work, though in QBs you typically can't set them as far forward as you'd like. They work best on forested maps, where they can plug the passages between impassible banks of woods. Avoid them in towns, though - the hidden type can't be placed on pavement and the daisy chain variety is easily avoided. Take roadblocks if you want to stop tank movement in a town fight.

Another great Russian AT weapon is the IL-2 Sturmovik. Seriously, I mean it. If he brings Panthers, you want to be packing fighter-bomber, and this one in particular (the standard 23mm cannon varieties are the ones to take). Don't be thrown by the high cost. It is no more expensive than an ubertank.

The bombs and rockets generally miss, and hurt surrounding infantry or thin skinned vehicles (and occasionally an exposed TC), but don't kill tanks. But the strafing is nasty. They can break treads on any tank, and get top hit penetrations or even side penetrations on most (not the side of Tigers, though).

BHE isn't great and sometimes a tank will survive 2-3 strafings. But if the Germans don't have working AA, they will come back for 6 passes, any one of which has a good chance of at least M-killing a medium tank.

Then we come to vehicles. The thing to understand here is that the doctrinal answer - a T-34 horde that gets somebody close on a flank - is not the way to go. It is possible, but harder than you need it to be. T-34s are great infantry killer tanks, mobile, and very powerful before the Germans get long 75 guns in late 1942. But once those are out, they are weak on the armor side. And they won't get through 80mm plates, in practice.

Instead you want specialized shooters with powerful guns. The SU-152 is the first of these that really works. (The ISUs are out in 44 and comparable). The T-34/57 is also very good, and out in the fall of 1943. All the mobility of the T-34 plus a gun that can punch through a Tiger's front hull or a Panther's turret front at medium range. The T-34/85 is fine in 44 once it is out - gun and ammo are good enough. Avoid the SU-85 in 1943, though - its ammo stinks and it won't achieve the performance the numbers seem to promise.

With all of these you need to stalk ubertanks and use teamwork, to set up a shot for somebody while the enemy is facing the other way. With the big caliber guns, you want to use "shoot and scoot" to get back into cover while reloading, because the reload time for a 152 is long. Always use "fast" move to the position you intend to fire from - never "hunt". Hunt deliberately avoids any vehicle that can kill the hunter. You will see your tanks "cower", reverse, etc.

Other choices for AT shooter vehicles are Lend Lease items like the Valentine IX and the Churchill III with Brit 57s (not quite as good as the Russian one, but adequate against 80mm StuGs). Shermans are marginally better than T-34s, and can at least deal with Pz IVs and StuGs at reasonable ranges. (Later, the Sherman 76s appear, but by then you have T-34/85s which are basically as good, with better HE and mobility).

You can also try captured German StuGs to see how he likes it - but be warned, those are eggshells with hammers (thinner front, and against better German guns - the gun kills what it hits, though).

You will notice that many of these countermeasures are relatively high rariety - planes, 57mm, lend lease items. In reality most of them were far more common in absolute terms than the German uberarmor varieties. Ask for rariety off if the German is allowed to pick any tank he likes. If rariety is variable, take the items that happen to be common for you. If none of them are, you can fall back on 76mm guns crossing their fields of fire, pioneers and AT mines up front, and the occasional SU-152 using shoot and scoot from the back of the map.

I hope this helps.

[ April 05, 2005, 06:34 PM: Message edited by: JasonC ]

[GS_Guderian]

Originally posted by coe:

I think you'll find that most tanks have trouble with receiving shots on the flank.

Conan

Really?

Seriously I meant, that imho Russian early to midwar tanks have less trouble with sideshots compared to German tanks all over the war.

First T-34 has same amor on all sides (of course not slope), KV Series is strong all around. That´s what I meant.

Especially when it comes down to the Panther, which is really a beast frontally but rather tame sidewise.

[MikeyD]

"Anyone know why the 57mm ATG (russian) seems to be more effective than their 76mm or their 85mm guns?"

The Russian 76 is roughly equivalent to the Sherman 75mm gun (though its inferior in CMBB) and the 85 is equivalent to the U.S. 76 (though the 85 is superior in CMBB). You'll recall in CMBO the Brit/US 57mm AT gun had higher penetration stats than the Sherman's 75 too. In both instances the 75/76.2 guns were general purpose support weapons while the 57mm guns were designed as dedicated tank killers.

[coe]

ok so I'm a little slow sorry for stating the obvious (most tanks are weaker on their flanks)...I wonder though if that means later in the war (1944-1945) when Germans run up against IS-2 and IS-3 if one is supposed to fight those tanks like the russians are supposed to fight king tigers etc.

Interesting thing about the 57mm ATG - I assume that the 57mm round is smaller than the 75 or 85 mm rounds. I wonder how this affects penetration power over a distance and if 57mm ATG was better why not put it in place of the less effective 75 or 76.2 guns - even more so if the 57mm ATG is smaller....anyone konw how the 57mm ATG stacks up against the 50 PAK/38 or 75mm PAK/40?

Conan

[Locksley]

Awesome as always cheers guys!

[Foreigner]

The 57mm ZiS-2 from the get-go was designed as an ATG, while the 76mm ZiS-3 was more of a general purpose divisional gun.

By the way, the 51.6 caliber barrel length for ZiS-3 quoted on the website above is probably a typo, though it is repeated in several sources. That figure will put the overall barrel length at over 4m (around 13 feet), around the same as the overall barrel length of the ZiS-2, and you can tell from the pictures that's simply not true (both guns had almost identical carriages). The 41.6 caliber length for ZiS-3 listed elsewhere seems much more realistic.

Now with a smaller and lighter round, significantly longer barrel, and similar (if not greater) powder charge, the 57mm ZiS-2 was bound to have a greater muzzle velocity and penetration ability than the 76mm ZiS-3. But apparently the longer barrel of the 57mm was also its curse, as it was much more expensive to manufacture and it wore out much quicker. So for the price of one 57mm one could get several 76mm guns, which couldn't quite match the kill distance but were "good enough" and could set a "killing sack", were generally more likely to have at least some survivors after an encounter than a lone gun and were much better against non-armored targets.