JaegerMeister Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 Is this simulated in CMBB as an effective measure? I haven't tried it so dont jump on my ass! After reading many books and first person accounts from WW2 over the years (from both sides), it became apparent that artillery was very often used, and sometimes considered the only way, to destroy or damage AFV's and thwart or defeat concerted armoured attacks. This must be particulary more effective in the early war years when tanks were more lightweight and had thinner armour. Barrages would wreck tracks, smash optics & guns, penetrate upper plates and damage engines etc or destroy tanks outright. Often tanks commanders would halt the attack, refusing to try and drive their tanks through a barrage. There is also this qoute from 'Achtung Panzer'(relating to the eastern front)article stating: "The Red Army's field artillery provided the main antitank support for the infantry" "Otto Carius: "Even the Americans, whom I would know very well on the Western Front later on, can not be compared with Russians. The Ivans fired on our positions with all kinds of artillery, from light mortars up to heavy howitzers. We were not able to come out from our shelters in order to check our Tigers. It is not strange that the Russians easily broke our front line after such heavy fire". What i'd like to know is that is this an effective measure to use in CMBB?,is it simulated properly in the game or would we just be wasting shells trying to KO tanks either static or advancing. I tried it many times in CMBO but only got the occasional 'immobilised' sherman, even when i dropped (accurately) 210mm shells directly onto 4 of them sitting together once...surely some of those tanks would be completely wrecked or damaged too badly to continue the fight? What do you guys think/know?, anyone seen arty work well v AFVs in the game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrold Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 I would hazard a supposition that the artillery might be used in such a case in the hopes that an HE shell would take out a track, shock crewmen, or other such damage. You are right that the size of the shell, the quality of the tanks, and probably the experience of the crew would each lend a variable into the question of the effectiveness of this tactic. It would seem to me that the most effective use is still the ability to strip off infantry from the advance so AT assets can do their job easier. BDH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bone_Vulture Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 I've managed to wreck tank guns with field mortars and light off-board artillery; on several occasions the shells have also immobilized the tanks, or destroyed them completely with a top armor hit. Heavy ordnance will destroy (partially) open vehicles easily with near hits, and might also kill spotters on unbuttoned vehicles. But I think the shells are still put to better use as infantry repellants, so the AT guns can trash the enemy tanks... As barrold713 already stated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 Here you can see how heavy barrage affected Soviet armour in the summer of 1944. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnuif Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 That's what you get for deploying AFV's upside down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berlichtingen Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 I served on an 81mm FO team in the Marines. Our doctrine called for targeting tanks... the thought being that it will make them button up and make them more vulnerable to the grunts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew H. Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 I've had a near miss with a 152 mm HE shell knock out two tanks at once; I think that the effect would be the same if 152 mm arty were falling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 Big artillery will kill just about anything if it's close enough, but I've not had much success dropping lighter 75mm artillery or mortars onto tanks. The exception to that rule would of course be open topped sp guns and halftracks. Mortars may not always kill 'em but it WILL chase 'em away! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrivateTom Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 I had a top penetration of a 222 by a 50mm mortar last night but it didn't have any effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaegerMeister Posted October 31, 2002 Author Share Posted October 31, 2002 Thanks for the responses, maybe i'll try and do a test later, setting up a QB with various tanks and different size ordnance to drop on them..or perhaps someone else can if they have CMBB in front of them now? Could be useful, if we all know its now worth shelling tank concentrations or defensive positions containing tanks. I would think even 75mm arty would be dangerous to the tankettes and Pz I's & IIs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bone_Vulture Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 Originally posted by PrivateTom: I had a top penetration of a 222 by a 50mm mortar last night but it didn't have any effect.Well, duh: a 76.2mm shell might already be more destructive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJungnitsch Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 Originally posted by tero: Here you can see how heavy barrage affected Soviet armour in the summer of 1944. That is maybe the result of Naval gunfire support from the Baltic? German heavy ships were used quite effectively to break up Soviet tank attacks, same as the Allies broke up Panzer attacks in Normandy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvio Manuel Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 Weren't the Russians also really big into using their field guns in direct fire? For both offense and defense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
demoss Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 "The Red Army's field artillery provided the main antitank support for the infantry" This could be referring to the 76.2mm field artillery being used in a direct-fire AT role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_K Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 I remember killing a PzIV in CMBO with a commonwealth on-map 3 pdr mortar. I had a top penetration and the tank blew up ! So I guess artillery could be useful in killing light tanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futureman Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 In CMBO I've had luck with 80mm mortors against Panthers....very rarely though. Lit 'em up a few times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warlord69 Posted October 31, 2002 Share Posted October 31, 2002 Actually it kind of sucks that 76.2mm guns are all the russians get for on map guns. And all do the same HE loadout. While the Germans get 2 types of 75s, a 105, a 150, and russian 76.2 guns to chose from. With the 150mm having a HE of like 250! Its a shame BTS couldn't give the Russkies some 122mm and 152mm guns to even the odds in a Infantry only battle. Of course they would counter with 152mm FOs being very cheap....But just look at how hard it is to get those things to be accurate. While the Germans get great, accurate guns that can do massive DIRECTED damage. Its just a shame. But I think I'm going to use late war 100mm Russian guns with no AP as a replacement if I ever need to simulate a German attack on some arty batteries or a German frontal assault or a Soviet frontal assault scenario (Seelow Heights come to mind). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnersman Posted November 1, 2002 Share Posted November 1, 2002 In "Hornets Nest" I used the 150mm guns to knock out, disable or immobilize about five T34's towards the end of the battle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bone_Vulture Posted November 1, 2002 Share Posted November 1, 2002 Yeah... Like I've said before, the 150mm inf gun is my favorite: the HE shells alone serve hell to the enemy infantry, and the HC rounds penetrate ANY armor... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiggDogg Posted November 1, 2002 Share Posted November 1, 2002 Guys, In CMBO, I am a real fan of US Army 155 mm FOs mainly because of their incredible destructive power and wonderfully short 2 minute targeting time for regular FOs. Almost invariably (but, of course, not all of the time), if I "well spot" target enemy tanks (even Tigers and other such uber tanks), I will at least knock down (but not necessarily kill) one or two of these beasts. In those one or two such knock downs, I will at least get one or two guns and/or immobilizations. If I so target lesser tanks or SPs, I'll usually (but not always) get at least one outright kill. If Wespes, halfies, Hummels, etc are well targeted with 155s, then 2, 3, and even more "kills" may result. Remember, big fast guns (155s), well spotted. Cheers, Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 1, 2002 Share Posted November 1, 2002 Originally posted by demoss: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> "The Red Army's field artillery provided the main antitank support for the infantry" This could be referring to the 76.2mm field artillery being used in a direct-fire AT role.</font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nippy Posted November 1, 2002 Share Posted November 1, 2002 Originally posted by demoss: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> "The Red Army's field artillery provided the main antitank support for the infantry" This could be referring to the 76.2mm field artillery being used in a direct-fire AT role.</font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted November 1, 2002 Share Posted November 1, 2002 Originally posted by Paul Jungnitsch: Originally posted by tero: Here you can see how heavy barrage affected Soviet armour in the summer of 1944. [/qb][/qb]That is maybe the result of Naval gunfire support from the Baltic? German heavy ships were used quite effectively to break up Soviet tank attacks, same as the Allies broke up Panzer attacks in Normandy. What is shown are the effects of a combination of Finnish field artillery and aerial bombardment. The only non-field arty assets in play were the Finnish medium bombers and the only German assets were the planes (Ju-87 and FW-190) of detachment Kuhlmey. [ November 01, 2002, 01:24 AM: Message edited by: tero ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
demoss Posted November 5, 2002 Share Posted November 5, 2002 Finnish 105 artillery works just fine against BTs. Assuming, of course, that you get a shell close enough. I don't think the one I saw last night was a direct hit, but it was darn close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akdavis Posted November 5, 2002 Share Posted November 5, 2002 German 105mm HE will rip the **** out of a T-34 with a well-placed front turret shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts