how good are the pumas and stationary pak's?

[Pak_40_Gunner[11b]]

I was wondering what some of you veteran players thought of buying Pak 40 's and such, and the light recon vehicles like the Puma and PSW 221? worht buying?

[japinard]

Depends on your tactics and what you believe you're up against.

Do you have the full game?

[Warmaker]

The German recon vehicles are pretty useful, depending on the variant. My favorites either gravitate to long gunned 50mm versions or plain old (and cheap) ones having 20mm or just MGs. More variants out there for your playing style.

As for the ATGs they are mostly useful for defense due to the extremely limited mobility. The PaK40 (75mm) specifically, IMO, is one of the best ATGs in CMBO or CMBB. It can deal with all but the most heavily armored AFV and is VERY cost effective as the war goes on. It's performance as infantry killer is diminished due to a lower HE loadout but it's a fair trade-off for a reliable allied tin can opener. The PaK40 will be one of your most oftenly used weapons, esp. on the defense.

The PaK38 (50mm) is very cheap, has a relatively fast ROF, and is accurate. It doesn't punch through armor like the PaK40 so flank or close-ranged fire is a must for tough armor. Still, these things are excellent deterrents for light armor... they reliably kill Stuart swarms in CMBO and can reliably kill lots of the light armor the Soviets have too like the SU76 and T70 in CMBB. Keep in mind that as the war drags on these guns become more scarcer and more expensive.

The PaK43 (88mm) is what I consider the .44 Magnum of the German ATGs. It has good infantry killing power, is accurate, long ranged, and can kill ANY armor fielded by the allies, East or West. It is quite pricey and I usually like taking a few, depending on the size of the battle. Save these to act as Silver Bullets for tough tanks the PaK40's can't handle like the IS-2 or the uber expensive/rare T-44.

The PaK44 (128mm) is interesting. While I consider the PaK43 the .44 Magnum the PaK44 I believe is the equivalent of bringing a .50 Cal Rifle to a knife fight. It's overkill and unwieldy in short ranged situations. It's got a relatively slow ROF but is fairly accurate, has a good ammo loadout and an almost even blend of HE/AP ammunition. The traverse of the PaK44 is terribly slow so long ranged engagements is a must! Despite this, this beast kills ANYTHING with ease. Infantry must worry about the high blast value, of which I can't recall the exact number. If properly supported and placed a PaK44 will cause lots of headaches for a Soviet player. BTW, beware the cost of the PaK44 if you're using any of the rarity systems. Quite pricey to say the least.

With this in mind as far as ATGs go, the PaK40 strikes the perfect balance of AT capability and cost.

[ October 11, 2002, 02:23 AM: Message edited by: Warmaker ]

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Warmaker:

The PaK38 (50mm) is very cheap, has a relatively fast ROF, and is accurate. It doesn't punch through armor like the PaK40 so flank or close-ranged fire is a must for tough armor. Still, these things are excellent deterrents for light armor... they reliably kill Stuart swarms in CMBO and can reliably kill lots of the light armor the Soviets have too like the SU76 and T70 in CMBB.

I think you may be underestimating the gun slightly. I haven't used it against any Soviet armor yet, but it was killing my Shermans in BO with great regularity. Given that the 37mm PaK36 will kill a T-34 with a bit of luck, I see no reason why a 50mm Pak38 will not do likewise.

Michael

[ October 11, 2002, 06:55 AM: Message edited by: Michael emrys ]

[Michael Emrys]

I think it is hard to demonstrate the true value of any of the recon vehicles in CM because the mission that they were designed to perform is not included. That was to make contact with the enemy and survive to return with the information. (It was also their job to recconoiter routes of advance ahead of the main body of a formation whether there were enemy troops on it or not, but that's really getting outside CM's paradigm.) While they might overrun a light roadblock (and in the German army were encouraged to do so), or exploit a seam between adjacent enemy formations, it wasn't really their job to slug it out. It was their job to locate the enemy and then call in the heavy troops.

If the CM engine rewrite were to include the recconaisance mission, you would probably be scored on how many of the enemy's positions you had gotten him to reveal, location of fortifications, etc. You would lose points for casualties incurred but would gain points for casualties inflicted on the enemy, but enemy casualties would not be weighted as heavily as your own for scoring. Again, the purpose of the mission is not to inflict damage but to acquire information. In that case, the speed and stealth (recon vehicles were usually quieter to operate) of recon vehicles would begin to emerge as qualities of importance.

Michael

[ October 11, 2002, 07:13 AM: Message edited by: Michael emrys ]

[Fishu]

With a cheap armoured car, you can always go find enemy ambushes in CM and then act accordingly against the threat.

[Michael Emrys]

Ah, yes, the mighty Jeep Rush.

Michael

[Sgt. Schultz]

I use ACs to go out and find ambushes before my troops find them the hard way. I would rather risk one AC that at least has a slim chance of escaping(rear driver on german AC) than have an entire platoon(or more) stroll into something they won't stroll out of.

As soon as I have any direct fire HE and/or FOs in overwatch positions of the area in question, I will sprint an AC up and see what happens. I include a reverse order in the initial movement set to reduce the time it takes to get out and find another area to probe. This allows me to start the long CMBB arty process that much sooner, so when my troops are finally ready to assault said postion, so is the arty. The anti-tank rifles in CMBB make this a tad more risky than in CMBO, but I feel it still is worth it and it seems more 'realistic' to me anyway. If you bring ACs.. might as well put 'em up front where they belong.

Using ACs in leapfrogging pairs gives them a slight edge but should be reserved for high point(2K and up) games.

The ATG question has been answered above much better than I could have stated it.

[ October 11, 2002, 07:58 AM: Message edited by: Sgt. Schultz ]

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Michael emrys:

If the CM engine rewrite were to include the recconaisance mission, you would probably be scored on how many of the enemy's positions you had gotten him to reveal, location of fortifications, etc. You would lose points for casualties incurred but would gain points for casualties inflicted on the enemy, but enemy casualties would not be weighted as heavily as your own for scoring. Again, the purpose of the mission is not to inflict damage but to acquire information. In that case, the speed and stealth (recon vehicles were usually quieter to operate) of recon vehicles would begin to emerge as qualities of importance.

You could set up such a mission as part of an attack like this:

Attacker gets an initial recon force, which must exit for points. The exit zone is the attacker's back (friendly edge). So he is strongly encouraged to make careful contact/probe/scout, but not engage in serious fighting.

The attacker's main force arrives after X turns.

Make it a longish scenario with a pretty deep map, so that the recon force can do some scouting to try to find the real MLR, and not just be defeated/deterred by screening elements.

Give the attacker mucho time to exploit info learned by the recon guys, to do some bombardment, perhaps even before the main force arrives.

Point-balancing it might be hard, but with a friendly opponent you could play it just to 'see how it goes'.

The defender could also have a fun battle trying to defeat the recon force without revealing his main assets.

[Michael Emrys]

Interesting approach there, CMP. I was thinking of how you would motivate the attacker into actually doing serious recon and not just pulling his recon units back off the map without exposing them. It occurs to me that not having much time to utilize the main force to attain the objectives might be the answer. In that case, you'd want to start out with a maximum amount of information on the enemy's dispositions, and maybe do a bit of preparatory bombardment. This would require some careful balancing of the size and timing of the reinforcements.

Michael

[CMplayer]

Yes you'd need that info in order for the attack to be able to succeed (ideally). And you can always give the defender an extra flag to two to account for the exit points.

[CMplayer]

A fun way to do it might be this:

Maxed out map: 3x3 KM.

Fairly high population density, so small villages are about 1km about (maybe 7-10 of them on the map) in a kind of staggered formation. Road net connects the hamlets.

This give a 'net' of possible routes through the map, connected by village nodes. Because of the terrain, moving the main force through the whole map while ignoring the road net is likely to fail.

Some of the villages are strongpoints, defended by something like up to a company. Some are undefended or only defended by a token force.

The terrain gives a decent mix of open/closed so that long range weapons can support each other between villages to a certain degree, but there is also dead ground and potentially exploitable aspects of terrain.

This means that the recon troops will be able to snoop after possible routes through the matrix, and there will be a lot of different ways to go (many roads, forks in the roads, etc). This recon info will be very important for succeeding with the main attack.

Attackers will be likely to want to bypass pockets if possible since 3km is a long way to drive.

The attacker's reinforcements will arrive on a 'back edge' lateral road in cover, so that they can drive on their first 2 turns on board to any jumping-off point along the back edge.

Bombarding villages is likely to fail in the absence of reliable info on main locations of resistance because of the number of villages and the size of the map.

Access to positions with good observation will be important, and perhaps need to be fought for. Attacking spotters coming in as reinforcements will need to be driven to their OPs if they are to avoid firing blind.

Attacking force should be fully mechanized or at least have enough trucks.

The attacker's recon units could also continue being used for screening, and for looking for arriving armored reinforcements which the defender might get after a while.

Time limit, longish, almost like a campaign (90 minutes or somesuch)

[ October 11, 2002, 09:53 AM: Message edited by: CMplayer ]

[Michael Emrys]

I've been thinking about this while I was away on the General Discussion Forum and a couple things came to mind.

One is that, generally speaking, the time lag between doing recon and launching an attack was usually measured in hours or even days, which places it beyond the time limits of a single CM battle. Could it be done as an operation? How could you ensure that the intelligence gathered in the first battle would still be of any value in the second? The defender could shift his forces all over the map. And how would you score the withdrawal of the recon forces?

Sooo, I return to the single battle. The only kind of battle that I can imagine that would fit into the mold of a CM scenario realistically would be the exploitation of a breakthrough where mechanized forces are advancing rapidly through lightly held enemy territory preceded by recon elements. This resembles your plan too, CMP, in some respects. I will detail my differences in another post.

Michael

[Terence]

I volunteer to playtest.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by CMplayer:

A fun way to do it might be this:

Maxed out map: 3x3 KM.

Fairly high population density, so small villages are about 1km about (maybe 7-10 of them on the map) in a kind of staggered formation. Road net connects the hamlets.

This give a 'net' of possible routes through the map, connected by village nodes. Because of the terrain, moving the main force through the whole map while ignoring the road net is likely to fail.

Some of the villages are strongpoints, defended by something like up to a company. Some are undefended or only defended by a token force.

The terrain gives a decent mix of open/closed so that long range weapons can support each other between villages to a certain degree, but there is also dead ground and potentially exploitable aspects of terrain.

This means that the recon troops will be able to snoop after possible routes through the matrix, and there will be a lot of different ways to go (many roads, forks in the roads, etc). This recon info will be very important for succeeding with the main attack.

Attackers will be likely to want to bypass pockets if possible since 3km is a long way to drive.

The attacker's reinforcements will arrive on a 'back edge' lateral road in cover, so that they can drive on their first 2 turns on board to any jumping-off point along the back edge.

Bombarding villages is likely to fail in the absence of reliable info on main locations of resistance because of the number of villages and the size of the map.

Access to positions with good observation will be important, and perhaps need to be fought for. Attacking spotters coming in as reinforcements will need to be driven to their OPs if they are to avoid firing blind.

Attacking force should be fully mechanized or at least have enough trucks.

The attacker's recon units could also continue being used for screening, and for looking for arriving armored reinforcements which the defender might get after a while.

Time limit, longish, almost like a campaign (90 minutes or somesuch)

I've got a couple of problems with this, though it has a lot going for it.

I'm not sure if the map you describe resembles anyplace that actually existed on the Eastern Front. It sounds sort of like the surburbs of a major city. I don't know, maybe there were such places. If there are any experts on eastern European geography I hope they will comment. If there were, I'm wondering if an attacking army would want to go at them with a hasty attack. Again, I just don't know. But I tend to think of this kind of thing being more likely in the open countryside with but single villages and a lot of space between them and not much in the way of a road net. Instead of villages connected by roads, how about a single village on the edge of a vast forest? Instead of roads, forest trails can be replicated by lanes of clear or scattered tree terrain. This would reproduce conditions for Army Group North in 1941 say. Under pressure to advance rapidly but vulnerable to ambush and delay.

Going the other way, there might be suitable scenarios set in the Carpathians in '44 and after with impassibly steep and rugged hills. Just thought.

Michael

[CMplayer]

Yes, the idea was densely populated farmland, like Belgium or somewhere. I was just picturing the tactical situation, not trying to localize it to an actual campaign.

But as you mention, instead of villages, one could have any type of terrain feature that could serve as a focus of resistance.

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Terence:

I volunteer to playtest.

Want to make a map?

[Jack Carr]

Much prefer the 50mm to the 75mm PAK. Quicker rate of fire and quicker targeting. I have to agree wholeheartedly with Mike on this issue. The T-34's should go up just as easily as the Sherman's with the 50mm PAK. Unless you have great distances involved between the PAK and the targeted armor, the 50mm is the better gun. It won't take out IS-2's frontally but it will take out T-34's.

[Chad Harrison]

To the original question, it depends. If you have a LOT of points, then buying some recon vehicles can be very effective. But, you dont really run into any opposition that lets say the Puma can take care of. By the time the Puma shows up, the list of vehicles that it can take out is limited. But, if you are tricky with them, you can take out quite a bit with side or rear shots.

AT guns are a must for every scenario IMO. They conceal well, and can be quite lethal. And, you get called gamey from bringing them!

Chad