Useful Axis vehicles for Recon?

[Herr Kruger]

Just wondering what Axis vehicles people out there use for recon? Halftracks?

[tools4fools]

I prefer the 250 Halftrack with the 20mm gun. It can take on most light allied vehicles and the gun is not bad in killing AT guns either. Cheap as well. Disadvantage is the small ammo load, but they don't live long doing forward recce usually anyway.

[Jorgen_Cab]

Don't forget the puma, it can withstand alot more fire and also have either a 20mm or 50mm gun.

Otherwise I agree the 250/20mm Halftrack is a superb recon vehicle, I do use it alot.

But I prefere using halfsquads and snipers for most of my scouting.

[tools4fools]

The Puma sure is a good vehicle. It's 50mm gun can even take on a lot of allied tanks from the side. The 20mm variant has better armor and even more important a bigger ammo load than the 250 HT, but then again those two vehicles cost a lot of points compared to the 250 HT and that's why I do prefer the cheaper HT for recon.

[tools4fools]

Forget to add:

Halfsquads are great for recon, I completly agree, but the initial question was about using vehicles for recon.

Using snipers for recon can upset certain players. They consider it gamey due to the good stealth of snipers.

[Mannheim Tanker]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by tools4fools:

They consider it gamey due to the good stealth of snipers.<hr></blockquote>

Why is it "gamey" if it can be done in real life? "Gamey" use would be teleporting them into position.

[Randl]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Mannheim Tanker:

Why is it "gamey" if it can be done in real life? "Gamey" use would be teleporting them into position. <hr></blockquote>

I agree on using Sharpshooters! Half squads and Sharpshooters are my favorite shortrange two legged recon troops. I do love the Lynx to putter about in mechanical mode though. Although, they say there weren't that many of the small beasts around to use for recon that much. So I can only use one every 35 games or so.

I noticed something interesting while using a Sharpshooter as forward recon. I had one stumbling through the woods on a recon mission and he fell into a foxhole inhabited by an enemy Sharpshooter. The two refused to fight. I thought maybe mine was too close, so had him leave the hole that he could better see to target. No dice on holding a target line once the turn started. The Sharpshooters Guild must have rules of engagement that I am not privy to By exposing the fellow however, a friendly MG was able to terminate the enemy's Guild membership.

[Chad Harrison]

i usually use (very carefully) the puma accompanied by a platoon of foot soldiers. why the platoon also? i spread them out somewhat and so when something is found i have 8 total "eyes" watching for it and a puma to get a killer side shot on a possible tank!

[CRSutton]

Actually the Puma was pretty rare. I think only a few hundred were produced. Funny, how often it appears in the game though. I don't much like it because of the slow turret. Best to send a cheaper vehicle on recon as they are the first to die.

[Herr Kruger]

Thanks for the responses so far... yeah, I was thinking of going with that 20mm HT b/c it is so cheap and can kill Wasp and Carriers and things and has decent speed. But I also have this thing where I like to preserve my vehicles and soldiers hehe, so it makes my recon efforts fruitless.

[CombinedArms]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by CRSutton:

Actually the Puma was pretty rare. I think only a few hundred were produced. Funny, how often it appears in the game though. I don't much like it because of the slow turret. Best to send a cheaper vehicle on recon as they are the first to die.<hr></blockquote>

I think I read somewhere on this forum that only 50 Pumas (or 500??) were ever produced, yet they absolutely PERVADE the CM battlefield, not only in QBs but in "historical" scenarios. I must have faced 5000 of them by now. Since I play mostly Allied, I wish scenario designers would tone down those Pumas. I absolutely hate to face them since they're cheap--so not much reward for killing them-- but their 50mm gun will go through most Allied armor. The other addiction I wish scenario designers would get over is AT pillboxes, which show up, like Maidenform bras, in the most unlikely places.

In general, I think we probably see more recon vehicles than would actually be on battlefields like these in real life. As I understand it, the recon vehicles would already have done their quick look-see at the battle and then would have cleared out as the assault phase began.

I don't think the were meant, in real life, to be used as cheap, expendible assault vehicles, which is what they become in CM.

[Silvio Manuel]

Sharpshooters have "gamey" stealth?

Would such a player think that VT artillery is gamey because it explodes above ground level?

Edited: I realize why they are gamey...if they are 500m from your other troops and maybe even out of LOS...you as the commander get the full "take" on what they see...even though they might be out of C-and-C and wouldn't have radios of their own. Darn Borg/absolute spotting again, "dag nabit Malorie git me ma shotgun so I can blast that Borg back to Hades...!"

Puma rarity?

The number I've seen is about 100 total Pumas (50mm PSW 234/2), along with another 100 75mm 234/3 and about 600+ 20mm 234/1's.

I like the 250/9 for recon, but if I'm confident enough that I can keep it alive, I'll take the PSW 234/1 AC, with its radically higher ammo load (something like 98 HE, 20 AP, and mebbe 80 MG rounds), and better armor (handy vs. the ever-popular .50cals). I also like the higher speed of 55mph vs. 37mph. (mainly for road usage) and the alternate rear-facing driver for quick getaways.

[ 10-26-2001: Message edited by: Silvio Manuel ]

[ 10-26-2001: Message edited by: Silvio Manuel ]</p>

[Silvio Manuel]

I agree with the apparent over-proliferation of Pumas in CM scenarios & QB's.

It also seems like there's quite a few very rare Hotchkiss tanks running around- I wonder if that is because the scen. Designer is abstracting some other tank that isn't represented in CM:BO.

[ 10-26-2001: Message edited by: Silvio Manuel ]</p>

[Jagdwyrm]

My favorite is the SPW234/1 as lead recon sometimes with a SPW234/2"Puma" as backup to the 20mm variety. Heres some #s for you that I have, not 100% sure of the accuracy. Besides saying the Puma was rare well if it was you would say the other 2 heavy armored cars the germans have in CM were as well. Spw234/1 20mm AC (200 produced), Spw234/2"puma" (101 produced) Spw234/3 75mm AC (88 produced). Doesnt seem the puma was much rarer than the other 2 variants of the 234 8RAD type. If you want a more common AC it would be the Sd Kzf222 with 20mm gun, with 989 being produced, unfortunately its not in CM

[ 10-28-2001: Message edited by: Jagdwyrm ]</p>

[JAT]

Randl, sharpshooters have a limit. They must be beyond 70m to shoot. 71m or more. Found this out and tested it. I've had my sharps sipping tea with enemy spotters. Neither one of us would get shot at and neither one would shoot. Kinda eerie.

[Commander]

When I play Axis, I like to use a platoon of King Tiger's for recon.

It's just that I don't play as Axis...

[PiggDogg]

Commander,

I too like King Tiger platoons as recon vehicles:

They are able to instill fear in the allies.

They flush out & discover enemy troops like no others.

They supress enemy troops once discovered.

They smash all under their treads.

They eviscerate enemy defenses.

They can hold ground until the 'invisible' Luftwaffe airplanes arrives (gee, that may be a long time).

KTs are pretty darn good as recon vehicles. :eek:

Cheers, Richard :cool:

[Redwolf]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by CombinedArms:

I think I read somewhere on this forum that only 50 Pumas (or 500??) were ever produced, yet they absolutely PERVADE the CM battlefield, not only in QBs but in "historical" scenarios.<hr></blockquote>

101. However, most of them actually were in France. The Western Front saw most of the armoured cars the Germans possesed.

Also, the overuse is somewhat explainable by the absense of the 50mm armed tanks, which were not uncommon enough in 1944-1945 to leave out of the game, IMHO. The Allies get the Stuarts, but Axis gets no Panzer III and no AT-gun armed halftracks, nor the 234/4.

If you say "all halftrack-class vehicles with 50mm or better gun", you end up with a quite large number in Normandy and the Puma is the only model in the game.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>I absolutely hate to face them since they're cheap--so not much reward for killing them-- but their 50mm gun will go through most Allied armor. <hr></blockquote>

I disagree, they are quite expensive and thin, you get a lot of points for killing a rather thin vehicle. They are vulnerable to the .50cal, at least from angles and sides that a Sherman is vulnerable to the 50mm

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>In general, I think we probably see more recon vehicles than would actually be on battlefields like these in real life. As I understand it, the recon vehicles would already have done their quick look-see at the battle and then would have cleared out as the assault phase began. <hr></blockquote>

No, in reality all kinds of action was seen from vehicle recon units. From "dancing" in front of suspected positions to trigger fire to careful watching.

At times, the Germans made powerful recon groups including StuGs that were clearly doing recon, but killing anything they met short of a battlegroup.

Today that is called counterreconnaissance.

And gainst the Allies in 1944, it meant that the Allies woulld need stronger outposts and strong own recon forces, they couldn't convince their troops that recon is that harmless.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>I don't think the were meant, in real life, to be used as cheap, expendible assault vehicles, which is what they become in CM.<hr></blockquote>

I have seen several remarks by German battalion or regimental commanders how they distasted that higher headquarters ordered them to use their armoured recon units in deliberate fighting (amoung them von Luck).

So, while it was not SOP and even the local commander opposed it, you would have seeen such action.

[ 10-28-2001: Message edited by: redwolf ]</p>

[offtaskagain]

Another rare one that could be be fun is the SPW 251/22. HT with a Pak 40 on top, but it only carried something like 12 rounds. I've also wondered about the absence of the smaller ACs.

[CombinedArms]

Thanks, Redwolf and others, for the very useful replies.

I agree with KTs as recon--under the right circumstances. If you've got really heavy units who can withstand fire, it's sometimes good to have it out in the lead. If I get a Jumbo or Churchill VIII as Allies, I generally stick it in front of my tank column, where it can shrug off anything short of an 88.

[kotay]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by CombinedArms:

Thanks, Redwolf and others, for the very useful replies.

I agree with KTs as recon--under the right circumstances. If you've got really heavy units who can withstand fire, it's sometimes good to have it out in the lead. If I get a Jumbo or Churchill VIII as Allies, I generally stick it in front of my tank column, where it can shrug off anything short of an 88.<hr></blockquote>

Don't forget about the faust/schrecks. IMO one of the most painful way to lose a Jumbo or Churchill VIII

[CombinedArms]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by kotay:

Don't forget about the faust/schrecks. IMO one of the most painful way to lose a Jumbo or Churchill VIII <hr></blockquote>

Well, yeah. Which is why even with a Jumbo, Churchill, or KT, the tanks should not be in the lead of the whole force but should have infantry out in front screening for AT weapons. Sometimes you can even flush out a hidden AT gun if your infantry screen is pushing aggressively enough. But these heavy tanks can usually handle zook/faust/shreck shots that hit their frontal armor, so they can be in close support of the infantry, maybe 50 mm or so behind. That was the whole idea of an Assault tank, which the Jumbo and Churchill, at least, were meant to be.

KTs are more of a leap forward to the Main Battle Tank--an tank that's supposed to do all the tasks on a battlefield very well. The technology wasn't quite there to make that fully possible--the KT was somewhat underpowered and unreliable-- but it's the role model for all subsequent tanks. Its a rather expensive asset to use in recon, but it can be devastating in the assault role under the right circumstances.

[Commander]

At least when your facing a KT you know what your up against. My last QB the AI had 2 KT and 2 Hetzers - those Hetzers caused me more problems than the KTs! It was like swatting a wasp - you would wack it and it would get up and sting you - again and again. I hate Hetzers now.

[Redwolf]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by CombinedArms:

But these heavy tanks can usually handle zook/faust/shreck shots that hit their frontal armor, so they can be in close support of the infantry, maybe 50 mm or so behind. That was the whole idea of an Assault tank, which the Jumbo and Churchill, at least, were meant to be.

<hr></blockquote>

Well at least *my* Jumbo in a currently running PBEM couldn't handle the Schreck...

I don't think they were built to resist Panzerschreck and Panzerfaust shots, the probably still want to keep 150m out of enemy lines.

However, they handle a lot of guns, including the flaks they met in late-war in Germany and most artillery and fire support and vehicles well. That is 99% of the stuff the is flying around the battlefield and would hurt normal Shermans.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>

KTs are more of a leap forward to the Main Battle Tank--an tank that's supposed to do all the tasks on a battlefield very well. The technology wasn't quite there to make that fully possible--the KT was somewhat underpowered and unreliable-- but it's the role model for all subsequent tanks. Its a rather expensive asset to use in recon, but it can be devastating in the assault role under the right circumstances.<hr></blockquote>

I'd like to say, built to handle all tactical tasks, but few operational tasks. Read: can't really exploit break-ins.

This recon debate is quite a change from the usual jepp-gamey-or-what stuff. King Tigers and Churchills for recon!

[tools4fools]

I we have King Tigers and Churchills for recon, I wonder what will be in the battle groups they do the recon mission for :eek: