AT guns and AT teams, observations (long)

[Barticus]

HOW TO GET THE MOST OUT OF YOUR AT GUN / TEAM

I’ve been playing Combat Mission for awhile now, and I have made some observations that I would like to share with the group. Specifically with this posting, I would like to address different usages of AT teams and Guns. As I was sitting down in front of the computer last night, rehashing some favourite scenarios, I got the inspiration to write an article for the CM crowd to see how valid my observations were in the light of public criticism. To that end, I asked myself (hey, self.....) which unit do I consistently purchase enough of to make a decent article about, and the answer was AT guns and teams. Please bear in mind that I am NOT a professional military soldier in any sense, but am a long-time addict of both tabletop and computer wargaming. Grognards and experienced gamers will probably find nothing new here, although I would appreciate your input. New gamers, or at least those new to Combat Mission may find a few things of interest here, or at least, I hope to be somewhat useful. So....here goes, and tell me what you think, all I ask is that all criticism be constructive.

Clarification: For the purposes of this article, the term AT Gun, or just gun, refers to a (generally) towed Anti-Tank gun (any of the multitudes), and the term AT Team refers to an Anti-Tank team of infantry (PIAT, bazooka, Panzerschrek).

WHICH ONE SHOULD I PURCHASE?

I guess the best way to make this decision is to compare the two platforms and use these comparisons to guide your decision.

AT GUN vs AT TEAM: MERITS

Generally longer effective range

More robust (i.e. Will last longer when exposed to enemy fire)

AT GUN vs AT TEAM: FLAWS

Far less mobile

Larger target

TWO RULES

When purchasing AT guns and Teams, there are two rules you must remember;

1) Terrain dictates tactics.

2) Once you’ve bought it, expect to lose it.

HOW TO USE THE TWO RULES

RULE 1) This particular rule is not new, but is so important that it CANNOT be overlooked.

OFFENSIVELY;

The towed AT gun is of limited use, I find it handier to setup a couple of AT guns in defensive positions overlooking possible routes my opponent might use for a counter-attack rather than bother lugging them along.

The AT team is an entirely different matter. Although slightly slower than the infantry it usually accompanies, the AT team is generally nearby should the occasion for it’s use arise, and trust me on this, it will. Care must be taken, however, to protect the AT team against enemy infantry and direct fire HE weapons. With only two men per team, it is very fragile and can be eliminated far too easily. The regular infantry should be used to sweep suspected enemy infantry positions prior to the AT Team advancing, if at all possible. Take care to use terrain to advantage; walking the Team through Woods and Tall Pines so enemy armour and gun positions cannot draw a line of sight to them. Even if buildings and woods are scarce, note folds in the ground and take advantage of them. In short, anything that keeps your infantry alive will keep your AT team alive (they ARE infantry after all). Once an enemy vehicle has been identified, the AT Team can use any number of methods to attack it. I find the best method is to have regular infantry squads advance with the team, generally with a sneak command if feasible. The reasons for this are twofold; 1) to eliminate enemy infantry covering the vehicle, and 2) to draw fire from the vehicle should it spot you. Up until the vehicle positively ID’s your team AS an AT team, it tends to shoot at full squads first. One further note, should your team ever become involved in a firefight, do as much possible, which is little enough, to keep them from wasting what few rounds they carry in firing their AT weapon at enemy infantry.

DEFENSIVELY;

Designed as primarily a defensive weapon, the AT gun is in it’s element in this role. Within the scope of CM, however, how you use the gun is dictated by which gun it is. In order to further explain myself, I will have to break ATG’s down into two categories; Light (up to and including 57mm / 6 Pounder) and Heavy (anything over 6 pounder). It should be remembered that the ATG is not an anti-infantry weapon and is particulary vulnerable to them, if you would like the gun to have any kind of lifespan at all, it should be accompanied by friendly troops to provide security. Also, in order to effectively use the ATG, when setting up, I give all guns the Hide order until such time as they are needed. All ATG’s are useful vs almost any light armour, but when attempting to destroy half tracks and armoured cars, I find the lighter guns to be more useful. They have a faster rate of fire than the heavy gun, sufficient penetration to deal with these targets, and revealing light ATG’s let the heavy guns stay hidden for use against more heavily armoured vehicles. Terrain once again becomes critical in siting AT weapons in the defensive role. Initially I sited guns in terrain that gave them a wide field of fire, but ran into problems, brought up in various threads on this forum, where they keep acquiring targets over and over without engaging any of them effectively. The only real answer I have found to this is to buy multiple guns and choose more restricted fields of fire for them, hopefully overlapping. If you are willing to sacrifice them, buying several light guns and siting them well in advance of your main line of defense can also bag you a number of scout vehicles, deny your opponent any data on your setup, and maybe throw in a little disinformation at the same time. However, their survival rate is going to be in the “snowball’s chance in Hell” range. The German side in particular has an advantage in the ‘88. Carrying enough penetration to deal with any allied tank from the front, it can be sited well to the rear of the German defensive line, and still take out it’s share of armour and other vehicles. The British 17 pounder could also fill this role, but I find that this particular gun is quite inaccurate at the longer ranges. The American 76mm ATG I have very little experience with, so it is hard to say. Another limiting factor is the superior quality of the heavier German armour. If natural cover (woods, brush etc.) is scarce, the ATG can take advantage of small hills by being setup behind them and oriented to have a field of fire off to one side or the other, making for excellent flanking shot opportunities.

The AT team is also well suited to the defensive role. Shorter ranged than even a light ATG, however, it packs a punch equivalent to a heavy gun. With hidden initial placement in any type of cover, the AT Team can bag any vehicle that comes too close. I find that the AI running teams in CM has a tendency to shoot them at too far a range for my liking, and I attempt to set them up where the ranges will be under 50m or so. An experienced opponent using combined arms tactics can severely limit their usefulness, so buying extra teams is quite often worth the points. Try not to setup teams in buildings by the way, with the exception of the PIAT, they all have a backblast and can cause casualties to themselves, or other infantry in the building.

RULE 2)

Regardless of whether we are talking about Teams or Guns, once you’ve bought them, expect to lose them. Neither platform is particularly robust and a well placed HE round, or an enemy squad of infantrymen can wipe them out easily, if given the opportunity. Whenever I purchase these items, it is ALWAYS with the intention of making my opponent lose more points worth of equipment eliminating them than I did purchasing them. Heartless I know, but this IS a game. One further note, like death and taxes, artillery is a constant in CM. Regardless of how clever you are in setting them up, all locations are vulnerable to artillery fire. I find when playing the computer that it finds ATG’s particularly attractive and will drop artillery on them, sooner or later. Live opponents are far less predictable, but I find that unspotted lighter artillery to be next to useless in knocking out one gun. If a spotter of any artillery type can get line of sight on a gun, it’s gone regardless of artillery size, it’s only a matter of time.

OK people, there it is.

Am I right?

Am I wrong?

Am I crazy?.....oops, scratch that one.

------------------

"I have slipped the

surly bonds of earth...."

[Jackson]

That was a nice little article. I would only add a few things. First, ATGs and AT teams benefit greatly from experience. Purchase only veteran or better. Second, AT teams are at their best when working in groups, just like AT guns. Hide them together in ambush, or move as many as possible to the target. Three teams have a greater than 300% chance of getting a kill over a single team. Third, the American equivalent to the dreaded 88 is the 90 mm flak gun. When on defense, buy at least two or three of these monsters and keep them in hide-mode until multiple targets are available. Then open up all guns at the same time. Keep enough spacing between them to avoid getting them all killed by the same barrage. Fourth, make sure AT guns are within command radius of an HQ unit. It keeps them from jumping back into their foxholes too early. Finally, once an AT gun has un-hidden itself, don’t even think about hiding it again. The jig is up. Just keep firing at whatever target, hard or soft, comes into range.

Hope this is helpful.

[Olle Petersson]

You have some valid points.

My only objection is that you can rarely afford to have as many guns/teams as needed to follow these guidelines.

The advice to save heavy guns for heavy armour is rarely useful. The situation is more like; here comes some light armour, should I let it be or should I use my heavy gun? (The light guns are at the other end of the map.)

One gun mixture I've recently found to be useful for the Germans are to have a mix of PaK 40 and Puppchens, supporting each other.

The PaK 40 is powerful enough to take on most allied armour (but have trouble with Churchills an Jumbos), and the Puppchen is affordable.

Cheers

Olle

------------------

Webmaster of Combat Mission för svensktalande, a CM site in Swedish. Norwegians, Finns, Danes and Icelanders are also welcome as members, others can still enjoy pictures and downloads.

Strategy is the art of avoiding a fair fight...

Detta har kånntrollerats av Majkråsofft späll-tjäcker.

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

20mm or 37mm FLAK for light armor, 75mm or 88mm PAK for heavy armor. As for "on the other end of the map", well, you need a better fire plan then. You want to cover all open areas with both. The FLAK will also hit infantry for you.

The 20mm is cheaper, but has less of a punch against armor. Still enough for all the halftracks and scout cars of the world, but not always up to scratching the light tanks. 50mm ATs are also cheap for the Germans. They kill tanks from the side and anything else from any angle.

Personally I like the 20mm as the Germans, and it is more realistic to use those too. 2 or 4 of them in a company or battalion position. For the Allies, the 57mm ATG can do lights, or 40mm FLAK.

I found the original article quite useful. Especially the point about ranges for AT teams. You really do want to fire at 50 yards, and beyond 100 yards is a complete waste. Don't believe anything about the listed "maximum range".

For panzerfausts, the right range is about half the rated distance, or 20-40 meters generally speaking. That is the next "tile" over, or two tiles for the late war version at most. While you don't fire the panzerfausts (the AI does it for you automatically), knowing the right range for their use is tactically important. E.g. when you use an HQ unit to set a platoon ambush, or when you are deciding how many squads are really needed to cover this and that gap between woods.

One other item about the choice between AT types, is the terrain. The tighter the terrain, the better the infantry teams look compared to the guns. The guns work best with long lanes of fire, but without being seen by everybody. They don't work in woods with clearings here and there. The teams can shift from one side of an obstacle to cover one area, back to the other side to cover another area, much more easily than guns can. In open terrain, the guns cover more because of their range, and because AT teams have a real short life expectancy running around in open ground while in contact.

[Olle Petersson]

Originally posted by jasoncawley@ameritech.net:

As for "on the other end of the map", well, you need a better fire plan then. You want to cover all open areas with both.

I agree, but unfortunately what I want and what's possible doesn't always come together.

The case I had in mind feature an open area, that I want covered by ATGs, on each flank, and some tight terrain (like a village) in the centre.

I can only afford to get one heavy and one light ATG, or maybe three light ones.

The opponent can be expected to have some tanks or assault guns.

Should I leave one flank without AT cover or not?

(I find this situation surprisingly common, so it's not hypothetical to me.)

Cheers

Olle

------------------

Webmaster of Combat Mission för svensktalande, a CM site in Swedish. Norwegians, Finns, Danes and Icelanders are also welcome as members, others can still enjoy pictures and downloads.

Strategy is the art of avoiding a fair fight...

Detta har kånntrollerats av Majkråsofft späll-tjäcker.

[Vinci]

I liked the article, it hits a lot of good points.

I guess the main driver of choice is the type of engagment you have. In an offensive I think it pays to "put the gun on wheels" - light armor or tanks. AT teams work at such short ranges that except for really clutered terrain or towns they rarely get much opportunity - generally therefor it ends up as armor chasing armor.

Defensively ATG are a very good idea - esp if there are some "must pass here" points - eg bridges, objective hexes etc.

LAst but not least, I find that arty & mortars can sometimes be used in an antitank role against light armor - esp halftracks/OT vehicles.

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

Well, another consideration here is price. Consider the Americans first, and assume you are using regulars. For about the price of a platoon of infantry, you can take -

1 solid tank destroyer (M36 Jackson e.g), with a good gun, able to move through the open quickly, armored thinly and open topped but some protection.

- or -

2 57mm ATGs

2 of them instead of one, and easier to hide, but effectively immobile, more vunerable to HE, and not able to penetrate the front armor of the heavier German tank types.

- or -

8 bazooka teams (or 6 veteran ones). Short range, about the same lethality as the 57mm, but able to move through any terrain, and lots of them.

Or for the Germans, you might face the choice between -

1 Hetzer, or 2 50mm PAK, or 4-5 Panzerschreck.

The TDs are capable beasts, but if you do not have much to spend in AT assets they are risky. Much of your AT defense rides on one chassis that a single good AP shot can disable.

Of the above choices, the 50mm PAKs look good to me for the Germans. The Allies have fewer heavy tank types; there aren't as many Schrecks "on offer" in exchange, because their prices are higher each, and for close in weapons you already have fausts. (Don't let the supposed 200+ meter range of the schreck fool you - its reliable lethal range is more like 50-100 yards, the upper end of that at best).

But with the Americans, *8* teams is an awful lot. In actuality, each infantry battalion had an "AT section" in the battalion weapons company, with 3 57mm towed ATs, and 7 bazooka teams. These could be "farmed out" to line companies as needed, or sent as a reserve when someone needed anti-tank help. So buying lots of zooks is not as "gamey" as it might first seem, if you use numbers or 7 or less added to the "organic" 3 per company. They also usually had a TD battalion in each infantry division, able to send 1-2 TDs to support each infantry company (or to send a whole platoon of 4 from reserve).

On the German side, the historical practice was for each infantry regiment to have some PAK guns in a seperate small company, and for the division to have an AT battalion with TDs or PAK, in reserve or farmed out to the infantry. There would be enough for a typical defending company to have 2 or 4 guns, 75mm PAK being the most common gun type in the period covered by CMBO. The TDs would usually be in reserve at first, but could be sent to support a company in platoons of 3. Their "panzer-jaeger" companies in each infantry regiment also often had numerous schrecks, which were usually distributed to the line companies, with 1-4 per company being realistic ranges.

I mention these for realism's sake, but also because I find they often did things for decent reasons, so using weapon's mixes close to the historical ones is often more effective than you might think.

[This message has been edited by jasoncawley@ameritech.net (edited 02-11-2001).]

[Abteilung]

I appreciate the thoughtful post Barticus, nice work! One minor tactic of mine when deploying at guns is to locate a hmg team RIGHT next to them. I find it takes quite a while (given you have proper inf support) for the enemy to distinguish it from a tank or sp at gun and thus committing more valuable armor assets in the mean time.