Artillery versus tanks.

[Lt. Kije]

My Dad was a WWII forward observer. He said, quite explicitly, that calling in 105 fire on a German tank was a waste of time and material. "Yeah, you could do it and you might get lucky and damage his running gear, but it just wasn't something you did."

I'm sure you could get the tank to button, even with 81mm. That seems completely accurate, although I never heard my Dad say the company commander asked him to get a tank to button up. In real life, I don't think my Dad's boss would have been radioed by some tank platoon commander asking if the arty would mind buttoning up a couple of German tanks just before the US tankers began engaging.

I'm sure that larger arty fired at a dense concentration of tanks would yield more satisfying results, and that the Russians did loose raining death down on areas they thought were full of Germans. Very different from shelling two tanks in CMBB, hoping for some damage or looking to reduce their ability to spot.

Just a report, second hand, from one of the guys who did the real thing.

-- Lt. Kije

Son Of A Good Man

[CombinedArms]

My CMBO experience is pretty consistent with Lt. Kije's dad's RL experience--in CMBO, 150/155mm arty and up is pretty darned effective against tanks--it can sometime kill and quite frequently immoblize. Anything below that, most commonly 105mm, is inconsistent and chancy at best against tanks (though it can be quite effective against HTs and other open topped vehicles.) I immoblized a Tiger recently with 105mm while targeting infantry (and I once killed a Panther with a top penetration) but I would tend to argue that for 105 or under one should target infantry and HTs, while for 155 or better, hit both infantry AND tanks (preferably the two together for maximum kill opportunity). I think the fast and accurate US 155 is a very good buy as a multi-use kill-all, and because for the same money--according to my tests-- it will also kill MORE infantry, I would always buy it in preference to 105 (don't worry about the fewer rounds.)

In a whole different category in CMBO is VT artillery. That stuff, in my opinion, is just plain murderous against tanks, open tops AND grunts. I would pick the 155 for sheer killing power and multi-use effectiveness, but the 105mm VT can also kill, immoblize or gun damage tanks with some consistency.

I haven't fooled enough with high test arty in CMBB to comment with any confidence on how it might work, but I would tend to believe that in the absence of VT, you'd want to target tanks mostly with 150 or higher.

[MasterGoodale]

I'd like to know the answer as well. It would seem heavy arty should have quite an effect on tanks if they score a close or direct hit.

[JaegerMeister]

When you guys mention only using 155mm, i presume your thinking of late war scenarios? because surely 105's would smash/damage most 1941 tanks, and i suspect, even 81mm mortars may penetrate the top plates of these early war types?

[blackbellamy]

I think that people are confusing the huge and long lasting preparatory artillery barrages with the off-board support available in the game.

It is true that the Russians used artillery to destroy tanks. However, I do not think this was a tactical application, but was instead the result of massive barrages that are not modeled in this game. The Russians destroyed tanks, that's true, but I think that this was because the entire German line was shelled prior to the ground assault. The Russians weren't specifically targetting tanks, they were just laying down shells all over the place. They destroyed bunkers, trenches, machine guns, etc, so it's only logical to assume that this barrage would also affect any AFV's in the area being shelled.

I don't think the Soviet doctorine at the time was flexible or allowed specific targeting of AFV's by artillery. I think they just blasted the hell out of some area, and if some tanks got hit, well so much the better.

I wouldn't count on the off-board artillery in CMBB to be very effective against tanks simply because it represents a limited number of tubes over a short period of time, instead of the saturation shelling of a preparatory barrage. Sure you might get a lucky hit, but I would save the off-board artillery against infantry and soft-skinned vehicles instead of targetting tanks.

[Andreas]

In CMBO, Jon sent me a file once that depicted a realistic MIKE target (forgotten the scale) coming down on two Jagdpanthers. I.e. corrected for number of guns and ROF. The end result was two abandoned Jagdpanthers. Ammo expenditure was probably in the mid-hundreds. Been a while, but it was impressive. That from 25 pdrs.

Heavy artillery is useful against tanks per se only if used in mass (unless you are very lucky), which I would argue is outside CM's scale, or to strip the infantry support off the tanks. Those 30 rounds of 120mm mortar coming down will not stop the tanks, but they will get rid of the pesky crunchies accompanying them. And once you got rid of the crunchies, the tanks are so much easier to deal with.

Soviet accounts or German accounts dealing with Soviet artillery have to be read very closely to understand if they talk about DF or indirect use. If you can not figure it out, you can not draw any conclusions from it.

[Halberdier]

In C.B. MacDonald's book A Time for Trumpets: The Untold Story of the Battle of the Bulge (great book) there are a few accounts of US artillery taking out quite a few German tanks. The tanks would often try to escape the bombardments. These were called in tactically, but probably quite massive, accurate, and 155mm+.

I've had mixed results trying to take out tanks in CMBB with arty, but I don't always get 150mm+. I usually use my arty to button/shock the tanks and to suppress infantry.

cheers,

-gabe-