Using TDs

[Skippy]

I want to know how and when to use TDs - not the big, heavy TDs like Elefants, but the thin-skinned ones like the Marder series or the M10 Wolverine.

In what sort of QB setups (terrain, era, score, force composition and nation) are TDs preferable to normal tanks?

How can you use an "eggshell with a hammer"* effectively? How should tactics for turreted and non-turreted TDs differ?

Thanks

*How JasonC once described the PzIV

[civdiv]

Personally I like to employ them off to a flank at an oblique to the enemies line of advance. I tend to 'keyhole' them so they have a pretty small field of fire. I like to stick them behind patches of woods and then put infantry hidden in the woods (perhaps with AT weapons), so I can see what is coming. If I have at least a pair of them I'll try and position the second one on the other flank in the oblique. Hopefully the first TD only engages a tank or two at a time, and they get the first shot from the flank. I'll use covered arcs (armored) to control them, and if, say, two tanks appear close together, hopefully they will nail one. As the second enemy tank turns to engage that usually gives a 90 degree flank shot or even a rear shot for the second TD. Sometimes I will give one TD an armored covered arc and the second a short covered arc to keep him from firing. This will be the one furthest from the enemies line of advance. That way as the enemy armor turns to face the TD that reveals itself by firing (the one with the covered arc), they expose their flank and/or rear to the second TD. I sometimes mix in ATRs/Snipers/Sharpshooters/Long range MG fire/Light Mortars to get the enemy tanks to button.

[Skippy]

That covers a lot of defensive tactics. How, then, should I use them offensively?

[The Coil]

I'm a big fan of the improvised scoot-n-shoot - have them just below a ridgeline, hunt order up to the ridge with a reverse order back down the same line, timed to have them crest the ridge with 10-15 seconds left in the turn. They'll get a shot or two off, and if you want them to stay there, you can cancel the orders. If it's too hot, you change the 'hunt' to a reverse, drag it back behind them, and they back off the ridge with no command delay. You can also put in a pause for 10 or 20 seconds to give 'em more time to shoot...Always found it a lot more flexible than the real scoot and shoot, but good for getting a few shots and back under cover.

[Redwolf]

They need to be keyholded, otherwise they'll get eaten up by (unrealistic) return fire.

I don't think I ever buy them unless forced to because their usefulness against infantry is so limited.

[The_Enigma]

in a scenario am playing, i sent off my panzer IIIs to Id the enemy.

The map is set in Tunisa so i had a decent idea where the enemy was coming from due to dust. Although most of the terrain is brush so there is no dust.

I moved them them up and identified the enemy, the general direction and the how many.

I however lost one tank in the process.

A turn or so later tanks and some marders arrived.

I drove them to the nearest hull down positions facing the flank of the American tanks and opened fire.

My recon tanks looking at the enemy form say 7'oclock, my tanks and marders where moved from 7to5 on the clock.

The americans where running from 3to9.

Now with the majority of the enemy tanks which we found out of the picture, i advanced 2 tanks to the next hill. Which as well as giving los on there pervious position will give los on the ravine they where running into.

My intention is to move my force up there.

Its a ME, i have the better guns and armour but am being as offensive as i can.

Hope this helps lol

Edit: 2 other games come to mind.

One was a Goodwood scenario.

M10s, churchills and shermans.

It was advance as fast as possible, if i get a los on a German tank. Halt everyone who can see it and open up.

Same is sort of happeneing in a game i have going on set in Italy '44.

A bunch of M10s, i had sitting in some open terrain because they could see a Jerry tank, firing away at him.

When 2 could no longer see him, i moved them off to a position i wanted them. When the other 2 were finally through they joined them.

This position is currently in some scattered trees, waiting in ambush for some German tanks i know are coming that way.

Once other forces have leveled up with there position and i can advance with other units. These M10s in the treeline will move on through.

I wouldnt try this with Marders, but the American and British TD can take a bit of a slugfest and survuve Agressivness wins! (most of the time )

[ October 26, 2006, 11:26 AM: Message edited by: the_enigma ]

[DavidFields]

Well, sounds as though you are doing well.

But as to your general question, TDs on the offensive, are very hard for me to use. Sounds as though you have it right though: use other assets to scout, then bring the TDs in at the last minute, when the enemy is already occupied. But the TDs are very vulnerable during movement. If your opponent has an AT gun, and the patience not to fire on your scouting units, your TD could be clobbered--maybe even without the offending unit being IDed.

Since this is an ME, if I were your opponent, I would wait for you to come to me

It sounds as though the map you are on is very infantry-unfriendly (no rocky terrain?)

[The_Enigma]

the desert one?

Well the infantry battle will be taking place a few hundred meters to the left of the American tanks which have been engaged?

My infantry force is on my right flank along with some other assests and tanks, plus they were brought in via halftracks.

Just seems the tank battle will take place first ... possibly end first too lol.

We also have a bit of raiding going on with American halftracks.

[DavidFields]

Originally posted by the_enigma:

the desert one?

the_enigma: If this question is to my statement of "infantry unfriendly" terrain, yes.

Infantry in the desert, not dug in (as is the case with an ME), only bushes, no rocky terrain, is not, I think, going to do well (particularly if there are HT around!)

My point, with regard to the TD topic?: Such terrain makes it unlikely infantry/guns will be a threat to to a TD, unlike more closed terrain. (In closed terrain, a TD rolling by a previously unspotted bazooka/gun then has to pivot its entire body to get a shot in--which is the handicap in using these things offensively)

Rocky terrain, however, is fantastic, I think, for infantry in the desert.

[realest]

Rank, what about using grunts to button up the tank and running your TD out of hiding for a fast scoot and shoot?

I can't time something like that well at the moment, LOL. But so long as the AI doesn't tag the TD as a threat you should be in good position. The problem for me would be trying to ensure nothing else opened up on my TD. Seems i can't hide a tank running through a tunnel LOL>

[jBrereton]

Originally posted by Skippy:

That covers a lot of defensive tactics. How, then, should I use them offensively?

You shouldn't... at all... they're not for offensive usage. Don't use them as tanks, that's not what they're for.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by jBrereton:

You shouldn't... at all... they're not for offensive usage. Don't use them as tanks, that's not what they're for.

I think destroying tanks is exactly what they're for - more so than Shermans with 75mm guns.

[jBrereton]

True, but TDs are really for defensive use. There are a fair few tanks more suitable to AT work which are more versatile and survivable than TDs, for example the Firefly for the US and the Elefant for the Germans, although a Tiger is perfectly adequate at tank destruction in all fairness.

[The_Enigma]

You need them rolling around, from hull down position to hull down position

The offensive action is via moving foward ... pushing the enemy back etc, unless of course there is a great overwatch position....

Rankorian: well the map is a mix of open space, hills, some palm trees, a small town, brush, rocky terrain and rough ground.

With the addition of HTs and trucks it is decent infantry terrain

the Firefly for the US

The Firefly is British.

... a modified Sherman II or V, the radio moved, the bow machine gun removed for storage, a big "box" slapped on the back of the turret ... and it would seem the back of the turret was cut open to allow the gun to recoil into this overhand on the back of the turret.

Surprisingly ... the 17pounder was also position on its side in the turret.

[ October 28, 2006, 09:33 AM: Message edited by: the_enigma ]

[Skippy]

Well, since I think we've more or less covered how to use TDs (though please contribute more if you can think of something), I still have my question of *when* to use them.

In what sort of QBs (eg low point budgets?) is it a better idea to use a TD than a normal tank? What sorts of terrain settings?

[The_Enigma]

in a completly unrestricted QB, tanks is the answer, in my opinion.

Something which can kill the enemy decently but at the same time can waste infantry - Shermans for example.

Although if there is a decent ammount of points, i have seen people when i was playing desert QB buy Marders.

2 situations which i can recall:

one was a random map based around a town. It was a main road down the center of the map with the town around this road. The flanks where pretty much open with the odd building.

my opponent had them covering on one flank. Around the corners or in between these few buildings on the flank.

My tank force took a hamering from them, however even though i only had Valentines i was able to outflank and outrun his marders and thus destroy them.

I believe he had bought marders, the odd MK III and several AT guns. Probably based off pervious exp where i had bought as many tanks as possible lol.

2nd situation.

Guy bought 2 platoons of marders and several platoons of MKIIIs in a hilly desert map.Ihadplaoons of Shemans which kept hidden, a platoon of Vlentineswith 6 pounders and a few Churhcills.

His marders were deployed 1 platoon per flank on the reverse slope of hills.

His MKIIIs moved from the flanks towards the centre and towards my lines iirc.

In the ensuring battle, my tanks took out his marders on one flank as they were getting into position but had a hard time off the marders on the right flank.

Eventually knocking them out although after some heavy losses iirc. The battle climaxing with his MKIIIs and my Churchills mixing it up in the centre ... followed up by the rest of my force overwelming his hehe.

[DavidFields]

realist: the problem is that with the spotting algorithm used with CM, if anything spots the TD, everything spots it. So, even if you button up the tanks, if there is any infantry, say with binoculars, the tank spots it also.

One of the primary issues with CM.

Still, a great game.

[realest]

I see, so it has a "i spot, everybody spots" way. Then it simply does the LOS calculations.

[DavidFields]

Right, realest, if a unit is spotted, the enemy units do LOS calculations to see if they can actually shoot at it. (And TacAI calculations to see if firing actually seems to make sense)

But as long as your unit is "spotted", an enemy unit which does not have LOS to it can move to where it does have LOS and fire--does not need to acquire individual "spotting".

With FOW, and especially EFOW, infantry and [lower calibre] guns have a good chance of staying undetected. Armor, of course, still has a poor chance of remaining undetected-particularly if moving.

So a TD moving forward, if there is any covering ground, risks getting hit with infantry (bazookas or equivalent), and guns, coming from seemingly nowhere. And, given a lack of turret, they are slow to even be able to turn to engage any threat.

Hence, (and I admit I am a conservative player): infantry scouting ahead to uncover targets, tanks and indirect then engage, TDs to cover the flanks or be moved up later (along with halftracks and similar vehicles--also very vulnerable to close assault/AT)

But.....the desert, and the open steppes, can make this difficult, because infantry is so incredibly vulnerable. I find those environments very difficult--probably because my armor tactics are not as well developed. (ie--hunting to find hull-down points, gauging what distance to engage at depending on relative armor types, and at what speed)

Much to learn.

[dieseltaylor]

Generally speaking tanks are better than open topped armour as mortars, artillery and aircraft find them nice targets.

However as sometimes the only armour with the gun big enough is a TD. Now from the point of view of mixing it with the enemy consider first that perhaps the smartest thing to do is to let your opponent know you have at least one of something that can hurt his armour.

If it deters his assault, delays his advance you may have achieved sufficient advantage. Trying to duke it out, or being extremely clever at setting an ambush may not be half as effective.

However that is a general rule. Sometimes though you need to fight. First check that what you are using will kill the enemy quickly - you cannot afford a miss and a couple of riccochets as your armour is generally crap. Bear in mind that 20mm AA , light guns, heavy MG's may all be lethal. And mortars may disturb you from being in the ideal spot.

In an ME you may have had the opportunity to notice his forces but where you are advancing it is high risk time.

BTW sometimes sacrificing say something like an Archer for a Tiger is worth the point differential/risk involved but try to play smart.

[DavidFields]

My first experience with TDs were with units such as the Jagpanther--the german thick-metal-box-low-to-the-ground-no-turrent brand of a TD.

I was really shocked when I went to the Allied TDs. "What the...." Open topped? Thin armor? A mortar can take them out?

I find them very hard to use (ie, the CMBO scenario South of Sword). In most tactical situations, in CM, I would rather have an AT gun: Easier to hide, more likely to get a first shot off, more likely to stay unspotted, less vulnerable to random enemy AT fire.

I have tried to imagine how the Allies used them, on the attack, in Normandy. My guess would be that they would be used in ways which are not easily modeled in CM.

[jBrereton]

Originally posted by Rankorian:

[QB] My first experience with TDs were with units such as the Jagpanther--the german thick-metal-box-low-to-the-ground-no-turrent brand of a TD.

I was really shocked when I went to the Allied TDs. "What the...." Open topped? Thin armor? A mortar can take them out?

The Allied turretted TDs are basically harder to use due to the fact that they're more versatile, no?

With a Jagdtiger, you know what you're getting - an 88 on tracks, with a whole load of armour.

With something like a Wolverine, things are a bit different.

You might use them as transports for platoons of machine guns and set up a strong firebase, due to their exceptional speed.

You might use them for shoot and scoot, again, because they're speedy, but also because their turret lets them track targets easily - this can also extend to engaging infantry.

These choices are what makes them slightly harder to use than the Axis TDs.

As I said - Jagdtigers really have one aim in life - fire extremely deadly rounds, and take a bit of punishment (although keeping them out of the line of fire is also important).

M10s, for example, can attack infantry as well as vehicles due to their turret speed, can be used without having to keyhole them, so they become a more versatile asset - and hence a commander can find a great many uses for them, and it's more of a dilemma as to when and where to use them for their best effect.

I find them very hard to use (ie, the CMBO scenario South of Sword). In most tactical situations, in CM, I would rather have an AT gun: Easier to hide, more likely to get a first shot off, more likely to stay unspotted, less vulnerable to random enemy AT fire.

On the other hand, a TD can move a great deal faster than an anti-tank weapon, and hence can be used to counter-attack and indeed retreat and redeploy on the defensive.

If enemy vehicles are moving to within a few hundred metres of a TD, you can just run it away, stop after a couple of hundred or so metres, and fire straight away - this takes, in total, about a minute or two.

With an AT gun, preferably you'd have a truck, APC or halftrack nearby to redeploy at speed - not often the case. If you didn't have this capability, your ATGs would have to trudge away at snail's pace - doubtless getting overrun, and then take a couple of minutes to redeploy their gun as well.

For a static defense, ATGs are better, for something more flexible, I'd prefer a TD myself.

I have tried to imagine how the Allies used them, on the attack, in Normandy. My guess would be that they would be used in ways which are not easily modeled in CM.

A TD is a great many times faster than an ATG. This is important when rapidly on the advance - a TD can also be used as an impromptu tank, even if it's not very good at this, and can hunt down infantry ill-equipped to deal with it.

An ATG is slow and can't be used to hunt down infantry while they retreat - they're simply too slow.

If one made a 20x20km battlefield, it'd be clear why TDs were often preferred to ATGs. At 2x2 or so, it's a bit less clear cut.

[ November 01, 2006, 09:13 AM: Message edited by: jBrereton ]

[realest]

JB, you are correct in the speed factor (although i've not used the TD's in game as of yet).

I was watching a documentary on these vehicles (M10 wolverine & some others??) on History Channel or one of those types. The allies were said to use them for fast scoot and shoots. They knew they were easy targets to kill. Basically what i got out of it was that they preferred to run like he11 hoping to outmanuever the opponent, they were also utilized as quick defense weapons if an area got hot and was stretched thin. I don't know that the game will work well with what i was watching though.

The documentary seems to back up what you said in your post.

[JasonC]

Allied TDs are great. Take them every day and twice on Sundays.

They cost 2/3rds or less what an improved Sherman costs. Less than a vanilla one in fact. Their only real downside is limited infantry killing ability, from just the flexible 50 cal as an MG - with quite limited ammo - and from modest HE loads. The Jackson is the best of the lot - the bigger 90mm gun is obviously useful and it also makes for much stronger HE, though still ammo limited.

The main reason to take a pair of them (one in a very small fight) is at a dedicated AT shooter, especially as a cat-killer. The plain 76mm varieties (US) need T ammo to be as good as it as you need, but other than very early fights usually have some. The Brit Achilles with its 17 pdr doesn't need it, nor does the Jackson.

The hellcat is a special case, very fast but thinly armored. I prefer the thicker varieties. The issue is whether the Germans need a full tank or heavy PAK to take you out - which is what you want. The hellcat is a bit too vulnerable to light stuff like 37mm Flak, 75mm leIGs, etc. But if you opponent rarely takes that stuff, by all means take the extra speed.

How do you use them? Simple, you stalk. That means the TDs stay well back until you have a marked target seen by others. You can use plain 75mm Shermans to kill infantry, and as bait. Or you can use the cavalry vehicles, which the TD formations had organic (meaning M8s, M20s etc). Infantry also goes first of course. Trailing zooks to restrict areas safe for enemy armor.

At some point he springs his heavies. Then pick a direction the critter isn't facing, run there in dead ground, and shot and scoot into LOS. It isn't complicated. The winner is the one stalking the other guy. You just have to see him first with other units and save the TDs until they have a clear shot. Keyhole to avoid losing them to hidden guns - the leading cause of loss in my experience, certainly not mortars.

With T ammo you can kill Tiger Is any aspect and range, though a hull up target is best (that "reinforced turret front" etc). With Panthers, sides and the turret front are the vulnerable spots, so hull down is better. The glacis can bounce things, nothing else will. Same is true for 17 pdr and 90mm.

If you have only plain US 76mm with AP, then you need close range in addition, if facing Tiger I front or Panther turret front. Under 400m is solid. You want that to be the original range, don't try to run a long time in the open etc.

The initial aspect has to be one you can hit and the target can't have its gun pointed your way. The first may miss or get poor behind armor effect. Stay and fire if you have a good initial angle or don't have another shooter to use. Otherwise fire the one round in the tube and get back out of LOS. Next shot comes from somebody else.

The Russians would love to do this sort of thing with SU-85s, but their ammo is neutered. They wind up using SU-152s for it, with a third of the rate of fire of the Allied TDs. And without turrets on either. They don't get anything with armor useful against a full cat until mid 1944 (the IS-2 not early model). Before then, the T-34/85 is as effective as a plain 76mm TD without T ammo - better against infantry of course, but costs more etc.

Brits can reasonably use Sherman Fireflies in their place. The early ones get pure AP ammo though, making them pure AT shooters themselves, and they always cost more.

You don't want to fight 2-3 Panthers with 3-4 Sherman 76s, that way lies sorrow. Instead fight them with 2-4 TDs and 3-5 Shermans. Having over twice the enemy numbers makes a large difference.

If none of them are effective shooters the enemy can do too many things to stop you - see T-34 vs. Tiger suicides. But when you have a few upgunned types he can't sit in the open anymore, or you just nail him when he is looking the wrong way. So instead he has to skulk himself.

Fine, let him. Close in the dead ground his cover creates, eat up the field, and kill his infantry with your vehicle HE. All without showing your TDs or all of your zooks. Then everything else is bait, those are the hooks.

[DavidFields]

The shoot and scoot point is a good one. For those of you who can make that technique work, I tip my hat to you.

I can't imagine that hauling infanty/MGs is usually a good tactic for a TD. On typical CM maps--which are more 2 x 2 km than 20 x 20-open-top TDs would be vulnerable to being popped by AT, HE chuckers, and even heavy HMGs from over a kilometer away.

Am I mistaken, or does the tacAI seem to favor targeting Firefly/Hellcats/Woverines?