assualting an ATG

[pavlov]

Okay, this still bothers me about CM. I sneek a reduced platoon to the crest of a hill (playing Government Issue Joes vs Krauts in N Africa). Just over the crest on the reverse slope there is a trench 20-30m away and so far I am not taking any fire. So I charge a squad, a BAR crew, and Section HQ toward the trench while keeping a MMG for covering fire. As the units run foward into the trench, they encounter an PaK38 in the trench.

All advancing units stop almost exactly 10m in front of the gun and appear to just sit there as the PaK slowly turns, gets off three point blank shots, eliminating all my units in one turn. Keep in mind that two of the four eliminated units were in the trench.

IRL that gun crew would have surrendered or been killed. But then again, I have to ask myself, why do I keep trying this tactic when I know what will inevitably happen.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

What movement order do you give for this charge? I'm asking because I do not recognize your complaint. Such assaults should indeed be like taking candy from a baby, and usually are for me.

Mind you, if it's a really good quality gun crew they'll stick with their gun surprisingly long. Best have your squads positioned around the gun for optimal results.

[pavlov]

Used 'assault' and 'fast' with units that can't assault. I have better success with placing waypoints on two or three sides of the target, but of course in this case I did not know there was a gun there.

My complaint about CM is that, (1) when inf units are assaulting or running they always stop a few meters short of [an enemy unit] regardless of where you place the waypoint. And, (2) this is always within the firing range of a gun of any kind which unrealistically (I think) will turn and point the muzzle down and shoot 10m in front of itself while under small arms fire from 10m away. I would think this game mechanics problem could be fixed by increasing the minimum range of any large guns.

That's my opinion but I'm only whining about a known flaw and the obvious solution, as you say, is to spread out the assaulting forces more, splitting squads if necessary.

(edit in brackets [])

[JoMac]

In most cases you should have captured the gun crew with no problem, with either a run or assault order, However, an advance order might stop short of its objective if there is return fire. I have done this a few times in the past and have always been successfull in capturing the gun.

Try to simulate this a few times against the AI. Have a U.S. Infantry Platoon against say an entrenched ( Weapons Section ) HMG, Mortar, AT gun, Weapons PHQ or Section HQ with random bonuses every game to see what other results you encounter.

[Kingfish]

Okay, this still bothers me about CM. I sneek a reduced platoon to the crest of a hill (playing Government Issue Joes vs Krauts in N Africa). Just over the crest on the reverse slope there is a trench 20-30m away and so far I am not taking any fire. So I charge a squad, a BAR crew, and Section HQ toward the trench while keeping a MMG for covering fire.

Its worth using area fire on trenches for at least a turn before assaulting it. It would either pin, or uncover, any enemy units hiding in the trench. Had you done so, and the gun uncovered, you could have utilized the MMG, BAR and section HQ to pin it down while assaulting with the squad.

[JasonC]

The actual game routine you have encountered is contested entry to defended cover.

The way it works is, infantry ordered to move into the same physical location as an enemy unit that is above a pinned morale state, through its frontal arc, will be unable to do so.

Just taking fire won't stop you, unless it pins or breaks the moving unit. You can enter through a non-covered side (roughly, 90 degrees or more off the unit's facing). You can enter a different level. If the spot you are trying to get to is more than about 14 meters from the enemy unit, you can move there. If the enemy is pinned you can move right up to bayonet range (though there is some chance the unit rallies and stops you, unless it is in a red morale state already - panicked or worse).

Movement does not take ground. Fire takes ground.

What this is meant to simulate is the ability of the defenders to fire point blank at anyone trying to move right on top of them. Unless a movement is prepared by fire that forces them all to duck, or comes from a blind side, the defenders would find it physically trivial to point their side arms at men moving up to them from the front and at point blank range, and shoot them down to a man. Effortlessly.

The right way to accomplish the movement you intended is to overwatch with most of the men and send a single unit to the trench first, preferrably not straight ahead (or a half squad only, if you do go straight in). Overwatch will pin anyone there. If the movers are shot to rags first, it will only be the second wave that works. If you pin the defenders first, the movement may succeed with the first guys, but you can't count on it.

With guns specifically, they are also very tough to plain infantry fire through their front 120 degrees or so, provided they have a gun shield. Gun shields are arguably overmodeled, but that is how it works. You defeat guns with infantry by coming at them from 2 different directions at least 120 degrees apart, so they can't face both shooters. Also, they will spend time rotating even if they do stop one prong.

I hope this helps.

[pavlov]

Its worth using area fire on trenches for at least a turn before assaulting it. It would either pin, or uncover, any enemy units hiding in the trench. Had you done so, and the gun uncovered, you could have utilized the MMG, BAR and section HQ to pin it down while assaulting with the squad.

I think you make a very good point here. I generally don't think to do that. (taking notes)

[pavlov]

The actual game routine you have encountered is contested entry to defended cover. . . . I hope this helps.

Yes that is actually very informative and helpful. I was unaware of those detailed game mechanics. Yet again it makes sense to assault guns from more than one direction. In this case the the PaK did have a shield which added to my problem.

The phenomena of assaulting infantry stopping short of unsuppressed entrenched defenders (outside of bayonet range) certainly seems realistic to me--which is why one should suppress and approach from different angles. Okay.

I still question the realism of a field gun firing [at] point blank range like that . . . but I don't really know having no real world experience with such things . . . is it in fact realistic for an ATG to fire HE at infantry 10m away in a combat situation--in this case shooting into its own trench?

[iRL I would expect the crew to defend with small arms fire. I suspect that most crews carried basic infantry weapons or had them nearby especially when placed in a front line trench. Of course I also understand that CMx1 does not model this.]

[Chainsaw]

[iRL I would expect the crew to defend with small arms fire. I suspect that most crews carried basic infantry weapons or had them nearby especially when placed in a front line trench. Of course I also understand that CMx1 does not model this.]

Both Basic infantry weapons and anti personel rounds for their Pak as well.

[Joachim]

Some guns had canister - which is very entertaining for attackers from the front.

Crews do fire sidearms (even before abandoning the gun). Even FOs are armed. I had one give away its position with some small arms vs a HT251 50m away.

German gun crews were armed like inf - often there was even one LMG per crew. This is modelled in the CM TOE: if you buy guns in some German escort company, you get 3 guns and 3 LMGs.

As it was SOP not to deploy guns (aka arty magnets) close to inf, the gun crews had to care for their own security.

Gruß

Joachim