HT's and transporting squads

[Splash]

This discussion of transport or not to transport squads over hot areas is something I am very interested to know peoples practices.

I have not because if you get casualties you really get them but I was replaying one of Bil's scenarios that I had played when I first got the game and I found that I received no

casualties in 1/2 tracks and unacceptable losses by moving in tandem with the HT's but on the ground.

There are employed AT guns on the far hills and squad with MG's and a zook over the rise

in front.

I rush 5 HT's and 5 tanks with a stationary barrage standing back with LOS. The HT's

never die and I lose at most 2 tanks (well actually mostly none and sometimes one). The

squad on defense is entirely destroyed and the flag is mine.

In short I have to rethink the transport issue and would like to know other ideas on the subject.

[Louie the Toad]

Splash,

From your experience which do you think the AI targets first given a choice:

Halftracks loaded with inf.

Inf on the ground

Halftracks empty

I don't know myself but it is an interesting question.

Motoring Toad

[Michael Emrys]

I wouldn't want to rush in halftracks or any kind of armor in the face of an unneutralized Pak front. But once I feel that I have identified those and dealt with them, and hopefully have pounded the infantry a bit as well, thundering down on the remaining infantry with a few platoons of armored infantry mounted in halftracks and supported by tanks is a satisfying way to wind up a battle. The 'tracks stop just short of the enemy positions, the infantry hops out and closes with the demoralized enemy, and Bob's your uncle.

Michael

[Splash]

Caution: Scenario busting further on!

I've run the scenario a few times allowing the computer a few different set ups. Sometimes it has 3 guns with LOS (altho' it seems to allow at most 2 to open up) sometimes the infantry in ambush has 2 MG's, a squad and a zook, sometimes a platoon and zook. Their artillery has LOS and is just started firing ( a 19 blast or so). Everyone is moving on fast.

It takes two turns (around 70 sec) to get all my equipment into the dip. HT's are zipped.

I have 5 HT's rushing in the front line (3 squads, PHQ and a mortar and spotter) and 5 tanks coming up behind them - they run 3 abreast hence 4 deep (2 lines HT's/2 lines tanks). On the side I have 2 HT's and 1 tank with LOS on the area but not moving.

Invariably because the HT's are faster they hit the location first -- as they are first arriving the tanks are in full view and the enemies guns open up and the zook comes out (he takes a shot at a moving tank (he gets only one - sometimes two). The squads open up on the HT's (I guess to protect the zook).

At most I lose 1 piece (occasionally a tank from the gun (but the gun has to be very lucky) but mostly it's a stationary HT from an artillery shell landing on top of it.

The force of the assualt appears to be so overwhelming that the defending forces get at most one round off before being completely suppressed.

After this stage a funny thing happens. I don't disembark the infantry and their artillery has LOS. So one turn I rush the HT's forward as shells begin to hit their old position. Next turn they go in full reverse as shells begin to hit the position they just left. This can go on for up to 10 turns!

If it were a human playing we would have to second guess the others moves but as it is the computer you know first it targets where I am not where I will (or may) go. Very gamey!

If you haven't guessed the scenario is Fire and Manuever -- I gave the computer plus 1 experience and 25% more forces -- so those troops in front of me aren't chumps. But the scenario is designed to allow you to mass overwhelming firepower on certain areas

If I disembark the troops and run them with the armour they take it heavy.

[Gen-x87H]

I have toyed with Mechanized warfare but have found that the only units worth moving are slow ones like HMGs, AT teams, and on map mortar crews.

The regular guys by the time you manuever around the field and unload them could have moved there on thier own power.

So use the HTs for HMGs or other slow units.

Gen

[Michael Emrys]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gen-x87H:

I have toyed with Mechanized warfare but have found that the only units worth moving are slow ones like HMGs, AT teams, and on map mortar crews.

The regular guys by the time you manuever around the field and unload them could have moved there on thier own power.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But if it's more than a couple hundred meters, they will arrive pooped out. They are also more vulnerable to small arms fire on foot.

Michael

[Splash]

Well I suppose I should move this over to scenario talk but what I'm speaking of seems to be about what the computer targets (I'm supposing it would target the same in all circumstances.

The transportation I'm speaking of has more to do with 'what offers the most protection in particular circumstances'. In the F&M scenario covering that 150 meters in a HT with tank support is less costly to the infantry than dismounting them and having them run with the armour. Obviously the "time of exposure" is paramount and 'preferred targets for the computer' is an issue.

It seems here that the computer goes for the tanks first (with all AT assets) and the foxholed infantry goes for the HT's. If you dismount the troops those same infantry go for your troops. Further they open up earlier if your troops are exposed. With everyone protected by armour the defending infantry wait until the zooks have fired off their first round at the tanks. By this point the HT's have arrived (or closely arrived) to their destination. Further if you dismount at this time (to add to your fire power) the upside is minimal and your troops suffer casualties.

It seems here that transporting under fire is the only option. Prior my rule was to never do this.