I want to squash some infantry!!

[Mercury]

Having a decent knowledge of WW2 leads me to believe that AFVs were used to over run infantry positions by simply crushing these poor souls in their fox holes or trenches.

I'm pretty sure that soldiers were encouraged to dig quite deep into the ground to ensure they would be relatively safe from this form of assault, amongst other things!

Clearly there would be a considerable risk from AT weapons but with infantry support this would appear to be an emminently sensible, although appalling, tactic.

When you have 40-60 tonnes of steel roaming around it can do more than just fire its gun!

However, there does not appear to be any way of utilising AFVs in this manner....why not?

I seem to recall both Squad Leader and Panzer Blitz/ Leader had overrun attacks in them so I don't think I'm on my own with this thought.

Any thoughts?

[tar]

These are not the overrun attacks you are looking for.

The overrun attacks in SL and PB are abstractions, much like close combat (PB: CAT attacks) in the current CM games. It is not meant to be taken literally in the sense of physically running over the bodies. It is more in the sense that a position is overrun. This entails the armored forces driving up to and around the position.

The effect is that the infantry ends up getting shot at from multiple directions and is thus enfiladed and cut off from retreat. You simulate this more directly in CM by gettting multiple squads and vehicles to move through or around the enemy position and start shooting from multiple directions at very close range.

[Mercury]

I take your point.

However, I am still pretty sure that armour did, quite literally over run infantry positions.

Is it a tricky situation to add to the engine, or been left out for another reason?

[Abbott]

However, I am still pretty sure that armour did, quite literally over run infantry positions

Yes it did. However overrun does not mean "all casualties were caused by the tracks physically contacting all the troops" killed or rendered combat ineffective.

It is an abstract term. Firepower was the casualty-causing element (KIA and morale) to a much larger degree. Thus when you park a couple of AFV’s in close to a disturbed infantry position you are overrunning the troops.

[Pig Dog]

Originally posted by Mercury:

I take your point.

However, I am still pretty sure that armour did, quite literally over run infantry positions.

Is it a tricky situation to add to the engine, or been left out for another reason?

Well.... was possible, yes, and I know I've heard of it happening from time to time. However its not like someone said, 'Forget your 88's boys, lets save our ammo today and just run over the enemy.' It sounds very much like the sort of tactic someone would employ in Command and Conquer in order to get rid of a pesky soldier dogging their tank/harvester.

No sane tank commander would risk the possibility of having his tank close assaulted by infantry in order to squash one or two men, the risk is just too great. Infantry may look generally harmless on the surface as compared to say, a Tiger or Panther, but they tend to have some nasty surprises when confronting tanks in close quarters.

There's also the issue that even the very dumbest and highly suppressed grunts are generally at least smart enough in open ground to try and get the heck out of the way when a tank is threatening to roll over their heads.

I have no actual reference material that covers this particular topic, but I'd imagine that this sort of thing happened when the tank was so close when they noticed the enemy position that they decided to just drive right over, perhaps squashing one or two men (a squad of 10-13 men isn't going to lie in one spot and let a tank run over them, they'll scatter in all directions most likely). I suppose if the fireteam/squad were entrenched in loose or wet earth that you could collapse the trench on more than one, but I really don't think you can count on this sort of thing as a battle winning tactic.

Incidentally, I believe there was a report of this sort of thing in Desert Storm by the Iraqis when massive formations of M1 Abrams mbt's plowed over the sandy trenches dug by the Iraqis filled with troops. Iraq claimed as many as 10,000 soldiers might have been buried in this way, but that seems a highly inflated number. I'd be surprised if it were even 1/10th that.

I would seriously question the sanity/ability to lead of any of my subordinate tankers that *actively* tried to seek out infantry to try and run over, rather than stand off a bit and hammer them with guns. I would most likely send him off somewhere nice and quiet for a bit of R&R and perhaps a psych evaluation.

Anyway, in short, I wouldn't count on this as particularly useful tactic, especially if you're facing infantry with satchel charges and/or panzershrecks/fausts.

[AnonymousOxide]

Well this reminds me of the movie 'Patton' where one of the German soldiers was run over by his own (tiger?) tank while the forces where being ambushed by Pattons Shermans etc. Hahaha now that's comedy!

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Mercury:

I take your point.

However, I am still pretty sure that armour did, quite literally over run infantry positions.

Is it a tricky situation to add to the engine, or been left out for another reason?

A search in the archives would show the latter.

[Mike13]

"One witness of what transpired next was Oberst Franz. As he moved on horseback towards the southern end of Hill 239, Franz spotted 15 T-34s approaching from the direction of Pochapintsy. As the tanks bore down upon a narrow gorge close by, he noticed that it was filled with columns of peasant carts blazoned with Red Cross flags- one of the units that decided not to leave its wounded behind.First, the tanks stopped and machine-gunned the wagons, horses, and their contents. Then, they moved forward and crushed the wagons with their treads, smashing horses and men into bloody pulp. To his horror, Franz watched as the tanks drove back and forth over the bloody mess, until nothing was the left alive." From the book HELL's GATE by Douglas Nash

[Pzman]

Thats not in combat, Mike. That's unprotected, and wounded men, not infantry that is armed and fighting.

[Thin Red Line]

There are witnesses accounts of russians heavy tanks willingly rotating 360 degrees on themselves over trenches to crush dug in german infantry in La Guerre a l'Est, Histoire d'un regiment (18th IR) by August Von Kageneck, Perrin editor.

[ November 06, 2002, 04:05 AM: Message edited by: Thin Red Line ]

[Heartland]

Yeah, I've seen several references to this kind of action by primarily Russian tanks. When there was a deep hole that could conceivably contain a nasty enemy, they moved over the trench/foxhole and rotated or "wiggled" in place, efficiently burying the unfortunate occupant and removing the threat.

Now, if the occupant had a panzerfaust and felt like taking someone out with him, I imagine the tankers would soon be very uncomfortable.

[JonS]

Originally posted by Ted Kern:

... However its not like someone said, 'Forget your 88's boys, lets save our ammo today and just run over the enemy.' ...

I remember reading a radio log of operations of a Sherman platoon on Iwo Jima. IIRC, it was recorded by a radio operator on one of the ships offshore. I just did a search for it, but couldn't find it - I think it was something Wild Bill Wilder had up on a website.

Anyway, the point of the story: at one point in the log the platoon commander orders one of his tanks to go over and squash a Japanese foxhole (and machine gun?). A few minutes later he notices that the tank hasn't moved and is spraying the foxhole with MG fire. Needless to say, the Pn commander goes completely off his trolley, and starts yelling at the crew to stop wasting ammunition and to godam well get over there and squash the japs like he'd told them to.

Its a fascinating read, and really shows the supervisory role that commanders have to perform constantly while engaged in combat. If someone can recall the article I'm talking about and post a link that would be great.

Regards

JonS

[offtaskagain]

Pivoting tanks on top of trenches seems to be limited to the Russians from the various accounts I've read. Certainly doesn't mean the Germans didn't do it, they just didn't bother to write it down. German tanks seem to have been quite willing to run over AT guns and their crews though. I've never actually read an account by a German of trying to crush infantry in trenches.

[JaegerMeister]

I agree with Heartland and others, i too have read countless excerpts from books describing this kind of action, used by both Germans and Russians. Maybe there should be a 'shock' effect coded in as tanks close right in on suppressed infantry. (that would simulate men cowering in their holes being literally eliminated by this ghastly means). Many books imply that it was a common tactic used to terrify and demoralise the enemy. One book stated that at a German infantry position around Stalingrad outskirts, a group of T34's would arrive every day, select a portion of the line and sytematically crush the occupants, knowing they had no effective AT cover. I presume that had a massive demoralising and terrifying effect on the remainding soldiers.

Theres been a few times in CMBO & BB already where i've thought it would be a handy tactic to employ/risk to eliminate an infantry position, when time is of the essence.

[JonS]

w00t! I found it! God bless google.

FWIW, I don't think this should be in the game.

Regards

JonS

[Andreas]

I think those who would like to see this feature have not really thought about the abstraction involved sufficiently. In CM, a squad does not have its soldiers stacked one on another in a 2x2m piece of trench to be crushed at Ivan the tankdriver's convenience. They are spread out in the tile. A single tank can therefore not physically crush a squad that is spread out over such a large area. Having said that - if I drive a T34 up to a trench with occupants that are not covered by AT weaponry, and are out of handheld AT weapons, what happens is that they take losses, and often break. When they break, they leave the trench, they get gunned down. The effect is the same (tank wins, infantry dies), and probably more realistic anyway.

Crushing ATGs is already in the game, and I am reasonably certain that if you drive a KV1 up to a mortar or HMG position, it will have an effect on the Germans in that position.

[JonS]

Originally posted by JaegerMeister:

... Many books imply that it was a common tactic used to terrify and demoralise the enemy. One book stated that at a German infantry position around Stalingrad outskirts, a group of T34's would arrive every day, select a portion of the line and sytematically crush the occupants, knowing they had no effective AT cover...

IIRC, that was in a Sven Hassel book - hardly an authoratative source

Regards

JonS

[JaegerMeister]

'a Sven-hassel book'....was it? If so, my mistake, i've read so many different accounts over the years, might have got my wires crossed, but pretty sure more authorative accounts i've read have bore witness to it.

Also, what Andreas said also makes sense in the CM context but still think a 'shock' effect of armour on normal infantry at close range should be factored. Infantry were afraid of 30-60 ton tanks bearing down on them..de-facto.

[Mercury]

I read a superb account of the battle of the Bulge which definitely mentions this happening around Krinkelt-Rocherath, amongst other locations by German Panzers.

Unfortunately I've leant the book out so can't remember the author, Charles Stuart? Not sure....

The point about the abstraction of squads is interesting....

However, the AFVs in CMBO/BB all seem pretty harmless in collision with each other and in literally over running positions.

I can't fault the ballistics or, in fact, just about anything else but the AFVs do not seem to have a "solid" presence. They can partailly integrate with buildings, other vehicles and infantry with little effect....

AFVs DID kill infantry with their weight, not just enemy infantry either. And faced with death from an AT gun when my gun is damaged there would be two courses of action. 1) Get the hell out of there!

2) Charge!!!

Is there a morale factor in the game engine that takes into account the foreboding presence of armour closing in on infantry? Be it with all guns blazing or simply from closing in?

Let's face it, who wouldn't be unnerved with a King Tiger bearing down on their position? Bazooka in hand or not.