How many Flak guns are reasonable?

[SturmSebber]

Hi,

When playing a tcp/ip ,as the Germans, i caught myself, always buying at least 2 (often more) Flak 37mm.

Now i wonder... is that completely honest? Historically and game-wise?

What is a good alternative?

Thanks!

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by SturmSebber:

When playing a tcp/ip ,as the Germans, i caught myself, always buying at least 2 (often more) Flak 37mm.

Now i wonder... is that completely honest? Historically and game-wise?

What is a good alternative?

2 in what size of game? 1000 points? 3000?

Let me put it this way: if you invest a major part of your points in 37mm flaks, and it paid off most of the time, then your opponent must use even more gamey hordes of M8 HMC

[Agua]

Originally posted by redwolf:

Let me put it this way: if you invest a major part of your points in 37mm flaks, and it paid off most of the time, then your opponent must use even more gamey hordes of M8 HMC

Ahh.... the swarm of M8 HMC roaches. Are those things annoying or what?

[flamingknives]

Not as much as 20mm flak when your fielding M3 halftracks.

Plus they mess up almost anything and are invisible.

For 21 points, a bargain at twice the price

I'm not bitter, I'll just carry on eating this lemon

[Redwolf]

M3 halftracks suck, even Patton knew it (the two most dangerous things are cigarettes and halftracks). M8 HMC are not frontline materiel. If people lose too many of them to flak guns they get what they deserve. There is a reason why a real tank has the armor it has, and there is a reason why Third Army drove on with Shermans, not Priests.

EDIT: this is meant halfway humorous, of course, take no offsense. I think there is some truth in it, people buy lots of these thin HE shooters and I kinda like it when they get punished.

[ April 15, 2002, 05:43 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

[Michael Emrys]

To answer the original question: One about every fourth or fifth game.

Additional: The AI is gamey as all hell. I run into these things nearly every game, and once it had six of them on the board! They oughta be outlawed!

Michael

[BloodyBucket]

Someone groggier than myself would know, but I am guessing that there were less than a dozen 37mm flak tubes in an infantry division. I think the medium flak guns were used as "strategic" AA assets, that is, they would be concentrated around likely target of allied air attack, and there would be less available for local tactical air defense as the need for strategic AA grew.

If I were a division commander, I would be reluctant to risk my few medium flak guns repelling ground attacks if I had rear area depots, bridges and such to defend. The 20mm variety was probably much more common for the average allied infantyman or tanker to encounter, as they were lots more to begin with, and they are easier to transport and more suited to using against low level fighter-bombers.

I am no German T/0 and E guru, but I think two 37mm AA guns per CM sized battle is a bit much.

[Olle Petersson]

Originally posted by BloodyBucket:

... I am guessing that there were less than a dozen 37mm flak tubes in an infantry division.

Correct. There were none, AFAIK.

They had about a dozen SP 2cm guns (single barrel) though.

Each Panzer division had eight towed 37mm AA guns.

For a more in depth revue on the subject, read my post in This Thread.

Oh, and for the pupose of gameyness; I think it's more appropriate to have two guns than one, deployed way back on the battlefield, although no guns would be best.

Cheers

Olle

[JasonC]

When you take light flak, the right number of guns is 2-4 20mm or 1-3 37mm or 1-2 20mm quad. How often it is realistic to take them is another matter. The sharp division was between mobile formations and the bulk of the infantry. The infantry had very little flak support, while the mobile divisions (panzer and panzergrenadier, both SS and Heer) had plenty of the stuff.

Only 1/3 to 1/2 of the infantry divisions had any light flak at all. They were constantly below TOE. When a division had some, if generally had either 9 37mm or 12 20mm guns as one company of the divisional anti-tank battalion. Three batteries for the whole division. Given the number of rear area targets (HQ, artillery, supply with its concentrations of wagons), even these would often be in the rear sectors of the division. At most there might be one battery in a regimental area.

A reasonable conclusion is that infantry defenses would have light flak only about 1/10 of the time if relatively small (a company or two), perhaps 1/5 of the time if a bit larger (battalion and up).

But the mobile divisions are a whole different story. They had up to 60 guns per division. (E.g. in Normandy the 17th SS had 44 20mm, 7 20mm quad, and 9 37mm). Panzergrenadier regiments usually - but not always - had a light flak company each. The panzergrenadier battalions often had a single battery of 20mm flak. There were typically a handful of flak panzers in the HQ sections of the panzer regiments and battalions. And each mobile division had a divisional FLAK battalion, with 2-3 companies of 88s (4 guns each) and 1-2 companies of 37mm (9 guns each).

You could thus see a flak battery with panzergrenadiers as common as them having artillery support, meaning most of the time. Most of them would be 20mm, with perhaps 1/4 either 37mm or 20mm quad instead. When a full panzergrenadier battalion is present in a CM fight, they might have more than one flak battery - up to 3 of them. But such fights are relatively rare in CM, because the point cost of a full panzergrenadier battalion starts getting steep when you throw in all the extras they usually had (tanks, arty, guns, vehicles, etc).

There was also a seperate supply of light flak for air defense of rear areas. Some of them did see ground action, so occasionally an infantry defense might have more than its normal share. But the basic story remains - with panzergrenadiers having a light flak battery is perfectly normal. With regular infantry (or FJ, incidentally, which was no better off in this respect) they ought to be used sparingly, only now and then.

[ April 16, 2002, 11:17 AM: Message edited by: JasonC ]