The Heavy Panzergrenadire Platoon (mounted)

[JAK]

After reading the Bootcamp thread on on light AFV's I thought I would share my thoughts on the use of the Panzergrenadire and thei Halftracks, and also to ask what your tactics are or if you use them at all? When I employ Pzgndr I will load them into their HT's and add a HMG42 and 3 Pzshk or 2 Pzshk and one FO (usually 120mm mortar)and the HMG42. This unit often is part of a company sized force with the regular infantry company purchased seperately, and is used as a high speed maneuver asset (not a reconiassence unit as those tend to die fairly quickly). I will take this unit and if a covered route is avalible to the obj point I will rush it through inorder to hold a perimeter or local buildings and wait for the relief company to arrive. The Pzshk give this unit organic AT assets and if used properly (incover and with ambush) will keep most players from getting too fiesty with thei armor. The HMG and the arty in concert with the units own weapons will stop a force 3 to 4 times larger than them for 5-6 turns or until their ammo gets low. Then if the company arrives or the position gets too tenuous to hold I will withdraw the heavy weapons into the Halftracks which are brought up to the back of the buildings or the edge of the forest and then attempt to run all of the Panzergrenadire into the safety of the 251's as well. If pulled off not to late and if nothing really unexpected happens the grenadire get away with little if any casualties. On the other hand if a covered route is not available I will put the company into the line and attack with it until the situation starts to stall due to heavy infantry and arty fire. When this happens the Panzergrenadire unit will race to a harassing or a assault position in order to break the opponents ranks and morale. If and when this is accomplished the company will assualt the remaining enemy along with the Panzergrenadire and their arty fire. Once the attack is comminced the SPW's will (unloaded of course) fire at close range with their MG's while keeping pace with the infantry. If all works well, a panzergrenadire platoon (heavy and armored as they should be) can be a tremendous asset to the battlefield commander and a fearful specter to the enemy. My thoughts, how about yours?

Cheers,

Jake

[ March 05, 2002, 05:21 PM: Message edited by: JAK ]

[CrapGame]

Well, I have tried this before, and it doesn't work.

It sounds good and all, but what if your opponent has some .50 cals with them? Your SPW's will not only not offer any safety, they'll be dead half-tracks, and any surviving occupants will be routed and running for the edges of the map.

It also assumes the enemy will attack only from one direction if you can bring things safely to the rear. Typically, a human player will attack from multiple directions, and if you are holding a building, the building will be reduced to rubble within 2 minutes due to direct fire from some SPG, tank, AA or on or off-map arty.

My only success with mounted infantry has been utilizing the Canadian Ram Kangaroos with a platoon of troops to make high speed dashes to turn the tide of a battle or show up someplace unexpected. The Ram has much heavier armor than the half-track, and if you are reasonably certain the AT assets are dead or suppressed, the Ram is very, very handy.

[JAK]

Hi crapgame, and I must tell you in a meeting engagement in a forested area this tactic does work, well and often. I negelected to mention that in a Mechanized game I will add Pak50's towed by half tracks and in a Combined arms game there will most certainly be Jgdpz's in support! The .50 is a deadly weapon in CMBO but the Ht's are kept alive by not putting them in harms way (thats the part about the covered route and deploying the motorised units behind cover ie- buildings and forest). Try playing around with it, and use the covered routes, that makes sure that the SPW's stay alive and give you their greatest talent-moving troops and heavy weapons to at risk objectives before the enemy can reach and secure them. Oh, one last thing. I always plan my position to include 180-360 fire areas, and I send the tracks away before the enemy makes first contact- your right about that, if the tracks stay after off loading they do die like flies.

Cheers,

Jake

[ March 05, 2002, 05:48 PM: Message edited by: JAK ]

[Redwolf]

I am skeptical as well.

The problem is that the halftracks are too expensive. Not only in purchase but also in victory points. 52 points plus two crewmembers makes 60 points. For a transport assert carrying a 30 points squad.

The principal tactical problem is making sure the covered lane (if any) is actually free. In a CMBO ME you can be, as oppposed to reality or attack/defense. Still, a light AT gun covering any part of this route will ruin your day. .50cals are bad surprises as well. As the Allies it is even nastier since the halftracks are thinner and the Germans have the autocannons (20 and 37mm flak, also on light armor), which kill them instantly.

I like the Stuart (not RAM) Kangaroo to bring PIATs, flamethrower or stuff like that into action, but that means reinforcing positions already reached by foot infantry.

If you really like mounted infantry, I am looking for a PBEM partner under rules where people are required to have infantry mounted, so that you can choose between trucks and halftracks. Lots of other rules are needed (like no flak guns or vehicles), it's a mess. But should be fun once you unparse the rules.

[newlife]

I'ld have to agreed with Crap Game. Normal HTs will get smashed in a typical QB. I think the best use of the mobility you describe with the HTs happens at a much larger level than you typically see on CM map. Most CM maps are just too small to make that sort of HT use safe.

SHAMELESS PLUG:

I have designed an incredibly HUGE scenario which can be found at the Scenario Depot called "Mechwar". The basic premise is to give both sides completely Mechanized forces on a map large enough to require the infantry to be in the HTs and on the back of the tanks in order to keep up. I listed it as a PBEM, but now that I think of it, I may want to see if it would be better as a complete Saturday exercise.

Basically, it would be a map that you can try your mobile tactics to your hearts content, just be aware your enemy is probably doing the same thing.

[JAK]

Hey guys, I work alot with mounted infantry and I agree wholeheartedly that the battlefield is a very hard place to keep HT's alive. Its kinda my CM specialty and I guess maybe its where I'm lucky

(cause I get thrased every were else:) I just pick routes that have the most cover and I run the HT's right up/into the buildings or forest and it works as a good way for me to fast deploy a heavy infantry stoping force. Maybe I just get lucky but I think theres alittle more to it then just luck. When my CMing is reborn we can give it a go.

Jake

[CrapGame]

JAK,

Now don't get me wrong, but against a human opponent, it is really, really hard to find a lane that is secure enough to get your troops to that building without the HT just ending up being a hearse going to visit Quincy at his office. Even if you are dragging along a few PAK's, it takes far too long to get them unlimbered in a spot that has a useful lane of fire without the crews ending up trying to catch bullets with their bodies.

The plan is a good one, however. we all know that a good plan never survives contact.

Perhaps it would work better in the forest terrain, but I just can't see it working in urban areas.

Newlife, e-mail me that scenario if you would, I'd like to give it a crack sometime. Sounds like fun.

[Michael Emrys]

One thing that has worked for me is to hold back a platoon or two in halftracks until near the end of the game. By this time I will usually have identified and dealt with anything that could prove fatal to the 'tracks. I can then send in fresh troops to quickly reinforce a critical attack if I am attacking or to hold a VL if defending.

But by and large, I prefer to have my infantry advance and attack on foot. They live longer and are vastly more effective in view of the fact that they cannot fire their weapons while mounted.

Michael

[Ozzy]

It is one of the very small drawbacks of CM:BO that some "useless" ground units are available, while others are not.

In fact CM:BO deals with tactical battles on a usually not more than Bn. size level on battlefields smaller than 2km x 2km. Typically (and historically), ALL infantry types(included Panzergrenadiere) fight under such circumstances on foot - that's why they are infantry.

Basically the SPWs are transport assets to follow the travel speed of tanks in Armoured Divisions, hence to be used for large scale troop movements and not for tactical purposes. In real fighting engagements (unless an ambush), the SPWs would have been left well behind (and hence of the map).

If I ever use SPWs, then only if I have no choice than to proceed a quick movement on a long flank of >2 km.

Thus, CM:BO could in many occasions live well without these form of transport. And we have already read a valid point: a SPW equals two Squads in purchase - hence I choose the Squads!

[newlife]

Hey Jake,

I don't think anyone doesn't think it can be a great tactic. Most of us are unwilling to take the risk with em and draw a QB map with no good approach lanes. I think I will give it a try. By the way, what size battles do you usually play?

Pete

Originally posted by JAK:

Hey guys, I work alot with mounted infantry and I agree wholeheartedly that the battlefield is a very hard place to keep HT's alive. Its kinda my CM specialty and I guess maybe its where I'm lucky

(cause I get thrased every were else:) I just pick routes that have the most cover and I run the HT's right up/into the buildings or forest and it works as a good way for me to fast deploy a heavy infantry stoping force. Maybe I just get lucky but I think theres alittle more to it then just luck. When my CMing is reborn we can give it a go.

Jake

[JAK]

Hi Newlife, I generally play medium size maps, Meeting engagement, 1500-2000pts, and with any kind of terrain, of course medium trees work well and they are historically accurate. As I said earlier, the main fighting force is the rifle company for all the reasons you guys mentioned. The Panzergrenadire platoon is a "elite" blocking force and/or heavy assault asset only. It is not ment to fight out in the open (atleast without tank support), it is ment to take advantage of the enemy moving too fast or the enemy fixating on the rifle company and not covering himself on the flanks. A good use of the platoon would be if two companys got locked in a battle for the VL and both are low on ammo, with many KIA or WIA, and the enemy still holds the VL but you haven't the arty any more or the troops to take it. Then you would make a fient forward to attract the full attention of the enemy and then circle around with the Pzgndr to the very rear of his position. from that point you would quickly disembark the grenadires and combined with you HT firepower overwhelm a beaten up enemy.

Jake

[JasonC]

I think it is rather hard to get to work and the 'tracks are overpriced. You wind up paying as much for a platoon of light armor with infantry as for a company on foot. The light armor platoon will only fight as well or better, against infantry devoid of serious AT assets, vehicles (since most have at least 50 cals) zooks, and foot 50 cals.

Foot 50s are harder to spot and knock out than vehicles, harder to knock out than zooks, or even than AT guns. On defense, you can't afford the point cost. On the attack, you can, but you have to prepare the ground quite a lot before the light armor pays. And even then, MG-only light armor tends of underperform, because vehicle MGs are undermodeled.

I do find a use for German HTs, but a more modest one than this. On the attack, using combined arms or an armored force type, I often build the force around a motorized Pz Gdr company - as I expect many do. It is a nice unit, with 3 infantry platoons of 2 LMG infantry and a large and powerful heavy weapons section, and 5 HQs all told.

One of the few drawbacks is that the strong heavy weapons are very slow. I like to task them with both the weapons platoon HQ and the company HQ, since it gives each a workable 3 teams to command. I find 2 HMGs give good suppressing firepower, and a lone 81mm can also break point targets. So I think of the company as having 2 "overwatch teams" of HQ, 2 HMG, 81mm.

To lift all of them, I want 4 squads worth of vehicle carrying capacity. Tanks can provide some of it. But the 81mm mortar has a transport class too high to carry on the back of a tank. So, buy 2 'tracks and put one with each overwatch team, carrying the mortar and an HMG. Put the other HMG and the HQ on a tank.

Now the overwatch teams are faster than the regular infantry when they need to be. They can move up to covered positions, deploy, overwatch, and quickly relocate when the battle moves. Each has ranged firepower in the form of a tank gun for HE, vehicle and foot MGs with abundant ammo compared to squads, indirect firepower from the mortar, and a leader.

When desireable, the halftrack can nose around ahead of the tank to avoid the more important vehicle getting bushwhacked. The HQ provides a fast moving dismounted scout when that is what you need.

A variant is to use 2 MG tracks per weapons section along with a SPW-251/9 as the HE chucker. In point terms, you pay as much as you do for a tank instead, but you spend vehicle category points, instead of armor points, that way. The downside is far greater vunerability to enemy 50s and light armor. Another add on is sharpshooters and FOs added to the overwatch teams, either fast-moving on foot alongside, or on a third vehicle in each group.

Meanwhile the regular platoons just move up on foot. They are fast enough for it. And they mark the front line, behind which fast movement is safe. Schrecks go with them, up front where they are more likely to be used.

If I have extra AFVs (e.g. armor force type), they can work with the platoons on a one AFV per platoon basis. The schrecks can ride them if available, along with FOs or the HQs, at least in the approach march. The squads spread out ahead of these AFVs to scout for them and protect them from infantry AT weapons.

If I have run out of armor points, a pair of these AFVs can be PSWs, to deal with enemy light armor and suppress enemy MGs and such. They only hold one team so the fast HQ goes on foot. The platoon schreck provides the heavy AT ability the light PSWs lack, nearby.

Added mobility helps slow heavy weapons much more than it helps fast Pz Gdr squads. Fast foot movement is fast enough for most move to contact purposes, even in meeting engagements. I'd rather have 10 man squads than 8 man, also. Tanks can lift HMGs and HQs, but not mortars, so there is a role for the SPW-251/1s.

What works for me...

[ March 06, 2002, 11:17 AM: Message edited by: JasonC ]

[JasonC]

The problem with the "save the mounted Pz Gdrs until late" to "overwhelm a beaten enemy" idea, is that the heavy Pz Gdr *platoon* with its attached teams costs as much as a dismounted infantry *company*. As regulars, the force costs around 400 points (without an FO).

If you can reduce the enemy to nearly beaten without using a whole foot company, you can beat him, of course. But that is because you've fought him to exhausted with a company worth of points tied behind your back, as it were. Whatever manner you then thrown the remaining company of points at him, it will knock him over the rest of the way, certainly.

But you are less likely to get that far with the light armor platoon as your reserve, than with a foot company as your reserve. Because if things don't go so swimmingly, you can give him all or part of the foot company to worry about before he is "already beaten", to beat him in the first place.

Another foot company has dramatically greater firepower once in close, than the lone platoon with 'tracks. The thing the 'tracked platoon has is relative invunerability to small arms, but this is only a big benefit if small arms is all the other guy has available.

The added mobility of the 'tracks only pays off if they make mobile something not very mobile to begin with. At CM distances with reasonable cover, foot infantry is fast enough. The 'tracks might help cross open ground when there is less cover. But are too vunerable to common light anti-armor weapons to try this, in typical CM fights, if there isn't much cover.

That is, they need cover at least as much as the foot troops do. So they really only pay for themselves moving slow heavy weapons, not fast foot infantry. Imagining situations in which 'tracks work is not enough to use them, because they have to work *better* than other uses of the points. If they only work when you have "points overkill", that is as much as saying they don't pay for themselves.

[Mr. Johnson--]

Very true good and bad points of mechanized troops.

I've had 2 platoons of Pzgrendiers hanging back behind a sloop while my other forces carry out an attack on a dug in enemy before. And have one Fighter Bomber proceed to shoot up every single one of my halftracks after blowing up 3 with its bombs. I was very sad that day.

But when you make it work it feels great, wether you are doing it with Germans or Canadians.

[Redwolf]

It's a very old discussion about the units that are best held back until the battlefield is ripe for them. Of course, doing so weakens the initial force and so the chance that the neccessary conditions are reached is lowered. In my opinion, only a minimal amount of point can be invested into these things, like 5%, for example a Sexton or a Hummel in a 1500 points game is already pretty much. A platoon in halftracks is way too expensive. If you project the cost according to the 5% rule, you end up with a game size where a single infantry platoon with a few MG-armed vehicles doesn't make a difference anymore.

Note that I'm not talking about a general reserve. A robust reserve is always worth having. This comment is about a reserve that can be committed only under special circumstances.

About the prices of the halftracks: it's always hard to argue the prices and BTS have their formular I take as given. It seems to me that the BTS formular did its thing assuming a CMBO MG is as useful as a real-life one, which it is not.

The formula values transport capablity pretty high, which we can argue about, but I'd say a single 250/1 can be a very valuable unit to have for your Schreck or flamethrower, so I wouldn't plainly reduce it to Steel Panthers level or something. If I was to design a wargame, I would probably give rebate for transport, the more you buy the cheaper each vehicle becomes cheaper, approaching a price that reflect combat abilities only.

Having said this, I would not give shot up halftracks their full value as knockout points, for reasons named in a recent long thread.

[ March 06, 2002, 01:05 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

[JAK]

All good points Redwolf. However, I have found that I generally always find a time and place to employ them and usually the result is either a costly standoff (if I pick the WRONG time and place ) or it is a smashing blow. Having fresh troops moved without a penalty for being tired into the range in which their weapons (being mostly automatic) at the crucial time in the right spot will lead to a situation that the enemy can not deal with (atleast in my experience). I always send a FO (normally 120mm, for the reason that the arty arrival time is short the round is big enough to do horrendous damage and all these work with the fighting styly of this unit), and a HMG. I addition to this I always send a Pzshk or 2 with the troops because this can be deployed as soon as enemy armor is spotted (I don't think the effectivness of the Pzshk is very questionable) and has a good chance for KOing nearly any allied vehical. I said it before and I think it still stands, that the Pzgndr will not hold out forever. They are very effective for around 4-5 turns of hard fighting.

Jake

[JAK]

True, atleast in my experience. Tired leg infantry with the reduced mobility in snow earn the commander nothing. This is very true in Meeting engagements in snow because the enemy commander is going to be going no faster than you leg infantry so a fast armored and un-exhausted platoon waiting at the objective with a HMG, a 120mm FO and Pzshk will have predictable results on the attacking leg infantry.

Jake

[Redwolf]

Hm, good point about the snow, but at least the allied halftracks bog down way to often for me when I drive them in show.

Talking about Speedy Gonzales kampfgruppen, try a Stuart, a Stuart Kangaroo with a veteran PIAT and a MMG carrier running around the battlefield. For extra fun upgrade the MMG carrier to a wasp. Not good when 37mm flak stuff shows up, but otherwise nice. At least you can claim you had the "initiative" for some part of the game, for a wide range of meanings for that word

[newlife]

In the interest of finding out how often German HTs bog is moderate snow (yes I had an hour to waste) I did a small, statistically insignificant test. But I'll share the results anyway.

22 German 251/1s were given orders to travel 4km through moderate snow against the opposition of a lone enemy FO hiding in a building with no ammo. The first HT managed to immobilize itself after the first 250 meters. After that not too bad.

# of times a HT bogged: 31 times

That means several HT's bogged multiple times.

# of Immobilizations: 8

Distance traveled before immobilizations:

3860m

3460m

3060m

2900m

2510m

1480m

870m

250m

Yes, one HT immobilized just a few meters from the finish line so that sorta counts as a success.

4 HTs made it through without bogging once.

6 HTs crossed the finish line in the same turn. (significant as 2 HTs bogged, but for such a brief period as to not be greatly significant.

6 more HTs crossed the line a turn later.

The last 2 HTs crossed the line 2 and 3 turns after the leaders did.

In the end, the HTs won as the FO was stupid enough to look out a window and got shot to death by the HTs. Silly FO. So this test conclusively proves that HTs bog in the snow!

[Cpl Carrot]

This was with regular HT yes?

[JAK]

I have a suggestion Newlife, run 8 SPW251's with Panzergrenadire VS. a company of infantry on foot 2 Klicks through light snow. give the enemy 2 vet 81mm mortar spoters and 2 MMG's and see who gets there firstest with the mostest.

Jake

[JasonC]

I think Pillar's comments about the value of mechanization were directed at real world cases and not at CM. I don't think they are true in CM. Large bodies of infantry in CM do not pin nearly as easily or for as long as in real life. In real life, open ground covered by 2 MGs, or a short artillery barrage, might easily lead to an hour long cock up, with men scattered, casualties to evac, a lot of ground hugging and reorganization, etc. In CM, you take 5%-10% casualties and continue the mission, with a few minutes delay for a few of the squads, at worst.

JAKs comments continue to strike me as completely unrealistic. He is impressed with the fighting power, for "4 or 5 turns", of 500 points worth of troops held out of the battle until late in the fight. Um, a platoon of 4 medium tanks would also fight rather well if held out for that long. Or an entire battery of self propelled artillery. Or a whole company of infantry. Or a fire mission by an entire artillery battalion.

All this says is that 500 uncommitted points are a significant part of the forces engaged. It says absolutely nothing about whether those 500 points would be more or less effective as an armored infantry platoon, or as a tank platoon or infantry company. And I challenge JAK (later, busy at the moment but say second half of March or later) to try to fight me with 500 points tied behind his back until late in the fight. I doubt he will find the fight is going so well before he uses them. I'm not the AI.

There really is no way 4 halftracks with 1 MG apiece have the fighting power of 2 medium tanks, with the same number of MGs or more, and guns to boot. Mounted infantry (in light armor) in CM winds up costing three times what leg infantry does, with the result being you get a unit one step smaller if you take it mounted. The same as tanks. I think they ought instead to cost only about twice what leg troops do. Meaning halftracks should cost more like 30 points. While unarmored trucks should cost more like 10-15.

The CM pricing formulas obviously overrate carrying ability, and vehicle MGs are obviously undermodeled (MGs as a whole are being upgraded in all sorts of ways for CMBB, so BTS clearly knows this). As things are today, the only halftrack style vehicles that may be worth their cost are the US M4A1 halftrack and M3A1 scout car. Both because they have 2 MGs, one a light-armor killing 50 cal, and 250 ammo - not for their carrying ability. Carrying ability is still useful for slow heavy weapons teams, but you don't need very much of it to perform that task.

[JAK]

JasonC, I understand that you don't believe what I am saying. I have put in more disclaimers in my thread than I think necessary to avoid you trying to ram something I already said isn't true down my throat! I SAID that it doesn't always work. I SAID it isn't for everybody under all circumstances! I SAID that HT's if not kidgloved don't last long! I also SAID that the SPW251/1 is NOT the main fighting unit, it is a SUPPORT tool to get the troops QUICKLY and SAFELY to places that would lead to their complete annihilation if attempted to reach on FOOT! YES there are .5 MG's and there are mortars and zooks, and all these combined are not assaultable head on. That is why I SAID to get there FIRST and pull the H-T's back or Flank after the leg infantry has been sufficently drained! So, in conclusion you don't need to completely try and discredit me, just leave the thread. I will not play with you because I will not try and prove anything to you, it is for people with a open mind that I am talking about a particular tactic about!

Thank you,

Jake

[newlife]

You also have to remember (or know if you missed the thread) that JasonC is a diehard proponent of Attrition warfare and gave many long emails regarding how all battle reduces to attrition warfare. That said, his devalueing of your idea comes from the idea that they will be used in an attrition warfare style. You're point purchases for your mobile arm will not equal the firepower of a standard company. Well, yes. He's correct and I don't think you'ld disagree with that either. The value of the force comes from maneuver.

I played around with setups on a map you decribed and there was plenty of room for maneuvering on most of the maps. It gets even better with limited visibility at night or with fog as you can go places previously off limits. I really like the one I found with rain at night. The rain helps kill the sound of you HTs making things even better.

That said, Jason should consider playing you with 400pts of yours held out of the game until they end up coming up behind him. You can easily send your mobile units on quite a nice journey behind him that most poeple wouldn't consider their enemy making and prepare for it. Of course if you play him now, he would have to prepare for it, expecting it. That's just as good as it keeps probably roughly 400pts of his troop tied down just the same. (This all assumes appropriate conditions)

As for Jason, he seems to be in a grumpy mood lately. He attacked Berkut when Berkut was simply looking for help and still figuring out what questions to ask. Maybe if he finally decides to play the game he challenged me to, it might lift his spirits. I'll go bump that thread up on the main forum. It's one on Flamethrowers.

<Edited because the thread is call "Is this Gamey or realistic", but it's still about Flamethrowers>

Pete

Originally posted by JAK:

JasonC, I understand that you don't believe what I am saying. I have put in more disclaimers in my thread than I think necessary to avoid you trying to ram something I already said isn't true down my throat! I SAID that it doesn't always work. I SAID it isn't for everybody under all circumstances! I SAID that HT's if not kidgloved don't last long! I also SAID that the SPW251/1 is NOT the main fighting unit, it is a SUPPORT tool to get the troops QUICKLY and SAFELY to places that would lead to their complete annihilation if attempted to reach on FOOT! YES there are .5 MG's and there are mortars and zooks, and all these combined are not assaultable head on. That is why I SAID to get there FIRST and pull the H-T's back or Flank after the leg infantry has been sufficently drained! So, in conclusion you don't need to completely try and discredit me, just leave the thread. I will not play with you because I will not try and prove anything to you, it is for people with a open mind that I am talking about a particular tactic about!

Thank you,

Jake

[ March 07, 2002, 12:00 PM: Message edited by: newlife ]

[JAK]

Hello newlife, my beef with JasonC is not his ideas on combat (I happen to agree with him on many things). It comes from how he tries to rip apart something he disagrees with without courtesy to the author of any sort. I don't do it to anyone and I will not take it from anyone.

That said, I would enjoy playing several TCP/IP games with you with this concept and develope it into a real viable way to wage a super mobile attack (we can develope some rules and guidelines for mechmobile warfare in CM). If your interested drop me a line at Tellermine57@hotmail.com

Thanks,

Jake