birdstrike Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 When playing on the Allied side, I got the impression I'm loosing more HTs to german HMGs (notable the MG42) than to tanks or guns. :mad: And this happens at ranges of 400+ metres! I'm pretty much used to have axis light armor shot to bits by the M2 (I LOVE that gun ), but I was really surprised that the german HMGs are about as effective - if not more effective in taking out HTs. :confused: Is this overmodelled in CMAK or were those HTs really that vulnerable? (I remember reading in another thread - can't remember which one it was - about someone putting a hole into an allied HT with a Colt .45 - but that was at point blank range.) [ January 28, 2004, 05:56 PM: Message edited by: birdstrike ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airborne Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Allied HTs do seem overly sensitive to MGs. I made a scenario to practice taking out a bunker. I used an MG bunker and assaulted it with Inf mounted in HTs. I don't remember the ranges, but all of my HTs got taken out with the MG before even getting close. I thought this was odd at the time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 German MGs don't have the penetration of a 50 cal. But US halftracks don't have the 15mm front armor of German HTs, either. They are only 7mm. In reality that could stop a single round of 7.62 or 7.92 at range - though marginally. The game gives MGs somewhat higher penetration than a lone round would have, though, to reflect multiple hits on the same plate. As a result, US HTs are quite vulnerable to German MGs. The armored cars, British carriers, and even the M3 scout car provided it keeps front facing toward the MG, are better protected. But if you see armor thicknesses with only 1 digit, expect trouble even from MGs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CombinedArms Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 This is good to know and also fits with my CM experience...I just killed a US HT with my German HT at about 500m. This surprised me but I guess actually fits. I generally avoid exposing HTs to anything but unsupported infantry and I guess this confirms that that's a good idea. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 One little addenda to this: Back in CMBO days, the Brit M5 HT (8mm armor plating) stood up to HMG 42 fire considerably better than the M3 did. I haven't checked to see if this is still the case in CMAK, but it wouldn't surprise me. Generally, even with the M5 variety, I agree you're better off viewing Allied HTs as slightly more rugged versions of trucks. Cheers, YD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 It's an interesting contrast to the CMBB Soviet Maxim MG's which had virtually no hope against German halftracks and even when firing onto their sides it was extremely marginal even at close range (under 100 metres). I guess I'll have to be careful with halftracks again in CMAK. Regards Jim R. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Freakin' double post! [ January 29, 2004, 06:09 AM: Message edited by: Kanonier Reichmann ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abteilung Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 While I've no great input regarding the exact numbers, penetration/killing shots are possible on all HT's from a heavy MG's standpoint. I use mortar carrier HT's and a pathfinder platoon (on foot) to help find and suppress (smoke if feasible) MG positions during an approach march. I found that mortar supported HT's are infinately more desirable than either trucks or non-motorized troops for approach marches. Getting your assault troops to the rally point/assembly area intact is the whole point of the HT in my mind. That may or may not jive with generally accepted grogging principles, however it seems to work for me. [ January 29, 2004, 01:24 AM: Message edited by: Abteilung ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wisbech_lad Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Climbed around a captured US HT in Hanoi recently - (captured from the French) APC's they are not! Pretty thin all round. But better than walking to the FUP, and decent support (50 cal) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scarhead Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdstrike Posted January 30, 2004 Author Share Posted January 30, 2004 Whoops, I don't know, but it seems the post I wrote just sometime before somehow disappeared. :confused: Anyway, thanks for your replies, guys (once more). I will be more cautious with HTs in the future. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bone_Vulture Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Originally posted by birdstrike: Whoops, I don't know, but it seems the post I wrote just sometime before somehow disappeared. :confused: Ditto. :confused: I clearly remember commenting about the dire fate of my Marder earlier on in this thread. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Originally posted by Wisbech_lad: Climbed around a captured US HT in Hanoi recently - (captured from the French) APC's they are not! Pretty thin all round. But better than walking to the FUP, and decent support (50 cal) I got to ride in an M3 once at a snow camp thingy with my dad when I was like . . . 6 or something? I wasn't really aware of inspecting the armor thickness of it but I don't remember it being all that thick either. =) Kitty 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Hey Kitty! You're old punching bag by the name of Kiwi Joe has returned. How about challenging the self professed CM guru to another game to squash his ego just one more time for old times sake? Regards Jim R. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Originally posted by Kanonier Reichmann: Hey Kitty! You're old punching bag by the name of Kiwi Joe has returned. How about challenging the self professed CM guru to another game to squash his ego just one more time for old times sake? Regards Jim R. LOL Kiwi Joe? I don't really remember that name...too much partying...I DO hate Kiwis though... Kitty 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UPCdave Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 I am pretty sure you meant the furry vitamin C rich fruit right? ...right? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Gents, A nickname given to the U.S. half-tracks by the troops who rode in them was "the purple-heart box". Indeed, the 7.92 round used by German MG's could pierce the thinly armored vehicle at range. I seem to remember that after a round got inside, it would not have enough energy to exit, so would ricochet around the inside. I wouldn't think it would be a good idea to be one of the G.I.'s crammed inside a half-track with machinegun rounds rattling around with you. Ken 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 I've got a feeling that a regular ball round from a 7.92 weapon probably won't penetrate an M3 HT, but that sMK ammo (steel cored) will. Harking back to WWI, early British tanks were immune to ordinary rifle/MG fire, but were susceptible to 'K' ammo ('K' ammo = sMK). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdstrike Posted January 30, 2004 Author Share Posted January 30, 2004 Originally posted by flamingknives: I've got a feeling that a regular ball round from a 7.92 weapon probably won't penetrate an M3 HT, but that sMK ammo (steel cored) will. I ran a couple of quick tests and I got the impression that this exactly the case in CMAK: Both HMG34 and HMG42 knocked out HTs with no problem at ranges between 100 and 500 metres. (with one even catching fire after shot by MG34 at 120 metres). LMG34 and LMG42 ceased firing at targets after HT crews went buttoned. Afterwards refused to fire at buttoned HTs. Maybe they should call them Halfdeads instead of Halftracks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.