Vanir Ausf B Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 For self preservation and concealment purposes, I think infantry should not use small arms against armor, absent an explicit Target Unit command from the player. The risk/reward for staying quiet in your hole versus plinking away at 300m seems like a no-brainer to me, no matter what the manual says. Except for snipers targeting TCs. That's a legit target of opportunity there, at least out to several hundred meters. Maybe unit sharpshooters as well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnergoz Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Just played a H2H match where I lost at least 20 infantry as a direct result of them firing on Shermans that were 500+ meters away. They plinked away with no discernible effect, until the tank answered with a few HE rounds, shattering an entire squad. There can't be anything realistic about that. I don't think many here would disagree with you. It happens to MG teams too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 it's just like the other thread by GreenasJade with his covered arc problem. It really seems to me that infantry have too much bravado when it comes to armour. Sure they have bazookas etc but really even these are something of a last resort weapon. A 80kg Person is would not be very keen to take on a 30 tonne tank 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chops Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I like to add a sense of immersion and realism to the game by going into the Editor for Quick Battles and Single Battles, and renaming a unit (HQ or Squad) with my name. This effectively places me on the battlefield. It is amazing how the orders I give and the actions of "my" squad are very carefully considered before being implemented. I suggest trying this, and also adding the names of family members or friends to other units. Anyway, before starting a mission I brief my squad on certain procedures. One of the things I always tell them, is that under NO circumstances will you follow MikeyD's Manual on enemy tanks. Did you hear that? Under NO circumstances! If one of my boys decides to start plinking away at an enemy tank, without my orders, and a specific plan of attack, he will find himself all alone as the rest of us haul ass to a new location and remain as quiet as a pack of mice. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 "I suggest trying this, and also adding the names of family members or friends to other units." That's a good plan, take their relatives hostage 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnergoz Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 While you're at it, rename the enemy units after your "favorite" bosses, co-workers and in-laws. That should add a new level of satisfaction to your victories. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chops Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Now, now gents let's not get off topic here. We have important business to address with this tank plinking, and lives to save, While you're at it, rename the enemy units after your "favorite" bosses, co-workers and in-laws. That should add a new level of satisfaction to your victories. although, I have done something similar to your suggestion. I always play as the Germans, and name the U.S. units after republican members of congress. At the end of a scenario, I often find these "republican" units cowering and panicked in foxholes, sucking their thumbs, crying for mama, along with obvious signs that they had wet their pants. Go figure. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenAsJade Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 If it's been agreed somewhere that it'll be fixed in a patch sometime, then it seems that all there is left to do is start relentlessly asking "when's this fine patch coming!?" GaJ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlackHand Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 WHAT?! This can't be true . . . or, if it is . . . it must be good for us. Battlefront has ten, twelve, twenty plus years of programming TacAI. Do not question this expertise. Those riflemen are shooting for the optics . . . from 400 hundred yards away. You bet. Why not? Could happen! Not only that, the field manual says that this is a good and wise tactic. What more do you need to know? Besides, I've seen British riflemen blow up PanzerIV's with one, well placed shot in Battleground Europe so . . . put that in your pipe and schmoke it! It happens. For real. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I have to admit that it certainly was a Russian tactic to snipe at armoured vehicles. However generally they would be using ATR's at range and therefore unlikely to attract much retaliation if well concealed. German tanks had to carry plenty of spare vision blocks. In the event the German tanks were trying to break into a defensive position then every thing would let rip. But that was Russian tactics. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I was just now firing a platoon of tanks at 2 '?' markers, when the (presumed) 3rd squad of that platoon, a little to their left and an HMG group way out on the right flank all decided to open up on my tanks, becoming additional '?' markers. They're all taking indirect and direct HE now... as well as all the MG fire I can bring to bear. They buttoned up the tanks, sure, but it's making no difference to their effectiveness at this stage. And the HMG is still occasionally popping up and spraying the tank column... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MengJiao Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I have to admit that it certainly was a Russian tactic to snipe at armoured vehicles. However generally they would be using ATR's at range and therefore unlikely to attract much retaliation if well concealed. German tanks had to carry plenty of spare vision blocks. In the event the German tanks were trying to break into a defensive position then every thing would let rip. But that was Russian tactics. I occasionally have infantry target a tank either to keep the crew from getting back into it or to kill the crew when they bail. Other than that, I mostly take the side of the US Army and if they occasionally do something right I'm very happy. I haven't seen a bazooka kill anything yet, but the troops have been firing them a lot and that seems like about all you could ask for. In general, I have little idea of what anyone is actually shooting at, but when I give specific orders, the results are usually pretty satisfactory versus armor. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drtechno Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 For self preservation and concealment purposes, I think infantry should not use small arms against armor, absent an explicit Target Unit command from the player. The risk/reward for staying quiet in your hole versus plinking away at 300m seems like a no-brainer to me, no matter what the manual says. Agreed. Case closed, end of discussion. As an aside, do the manuals say that AT crews should use their rifles/SMGs to pepper enemy armor from a concealed position prior to using the AT gun? Is this to range them? (j/k) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MengJiao Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Agreed. Case closed, end of discussion. As an aside, do the manuals say that AT crews should use their rifles/SMGs to pepper enemy armor from a concealed position prior to using the AT gun? Is this to range them? (j/k) I think there are cases where the infantry (or crew) can engage, but the gun is too low or otherwise unable to target (maybe out of ammo or still limbered?). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Well, unless they get a patch out for this problem. I suggest you learn these pronciples. Covered arcs on your infantry does wonders at preventing them shooting at tanks when they should not, but it also stops them from shooting other things also. I rather keep them hidden until I have a target I know I want them opening up on, in wego this can be a problem if both enemy tanks and infantry are close to my unit. but I have stopped the issues many mention here at firing at tanks for no good reason. second, when said infantry shart shooting at armor, give them the command to get the H-ll out of there, that is the only way to keep them alive in that duel, find a new place to hide. I am setting up squads with AT weapons with covered archs of 30 meters and running them up behind brush and hedges and such and been finding it easy for them to move up, not get spotted by armor and firing their AT assets with great success. If they fail, I then run them back out of sight 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Manuals. Go to town: http://www.90thidpg.us/Reference/Manuals/index.html http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/FM/index.html Well it might have been helpful if you had specific examples. Still it has been interesting but my brief research fails to find anything to support the BF practice. FM 7-10-2 published in 1945 is probably handy as it presumably builds on experience post Normandy so it is slightly anchronistic. PAge 17 addresses what to do when ATTACKED by a mechanised force I did take the opportunity to Army Talks 27/1/1945 page 7 where a Russian General was suggesting infantry dive into holes and leave the enemy armour to tanks and ATG's! Seems wise. One thing that I did gfind interesting that in the FM it said the bazooka was reasonably accurate against moving targets up to 300 yards. Who would have thunk it.! My men are obviously wimps. Perhaps there is a specific piece that says if not being attacked shoot to button them up - but I might need your help to find it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Well it might have been helpful if you had specific examples. Still it has been interesting but my brief research fails to find anything to support the BF practice. FM 7-10-2 published in 1945 is probably handy as it presumably builds on experience post Normandy so it is slightly anchronistic. PAge 17 addresses what to do when ATTACKED by a mechanised force I did take the opportunity to Army Talks 27/1/1945 page 7 where a Russian General was suggesting infantry dive into holes and leave the enemy armour to tanks and ATG's! Seems wise. One thing that I did gfind interesting that in the FM it said the bazooka was reasonably accurate against moving targets up to 300 yards. Who would have thunk it.! My men are obviously wimps. Perhaps there is a specific piece that says if not being attacked shoot to button them up - but I might need your help to find it. The same text pictured above is in the March 1944 edition of FM 7-10. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 ...in no circumstances will defending infantry be diverted from...engaging and destroying hostile infantry... Seems sensible. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vark Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Is the patch going to stop the infantry behaviour or fix, what seems to be unrealistic spotting abilities of buttoned WWII tanks? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holien Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Had a jeep, passing a burning Stummel, get knocked-out when the ammo blew up. Very cool. Not so cool was the four man jeep crew (an HQ unit I think), who were panicked, jumping out of the jeep and charging at another MG armed half-track and firing their .45 pistols at it. Needless to say, they all died - very quickly. My 1/2 tracks and for me the sight of an American with a .45 facing down the 1/2 track was absurd. The crew had to run back and fight the 1/2 track. I have also had a single rifleman try and take on a tank. Absolutely wrong. It is as if we have gone back in some things and I guess the re-write has lost some of the old lessons learnt... Overall a good game with some strong areas for improvement. I guess however Relative spotting makes up for these niggles.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Robert Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Interesting thread. It does seem that buttoned tanks spot things a bit better than i would suspect. As to small arms fire, one US battle report noted the number of US tanks destroyed, and by what means, and listed one as destroyed by "small- arms fire." I don't know what they specifically meant by "small-arms fire," but I don't think the percentage to damage/destroy/drive away enemy armor is worth the risk in most cases, other than unbuttoned tanks buttoning up. Bruce 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 "Small-arms " may be a catch-all for infantry weapons other than bazooka. Do you have a link? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Robert Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Sorry dieseltaylor, I read an archival report in the Cantigny Museum in Wheaton, Il. many years ago during my micro-armor table top days. I am sure those reports are still housed there, but I don't have any references or specific titles. Bruce 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 WHAT?! This can't be true . . . or, if it is . . . it must be good for us. Battlefront has ten, twelve, twenty plus years of programming TacAI. Do not question this expertise. Those riflemen are shooting for the optics . . . from 400 hundred yards away. You bet. Why not? Could happen! Not only that, the field manual says that this is a good and wise tactic. What more do you need to know? Besides, I've seen British riflemen blow up PanzerIV's with one, well placed shot in Battleground Europe so . . . put that in your pipe and schmoke it! It happens. For real. Knock it off. My tolerance level for juvenile sniping behavior like this is extremely low. Reread the Forum rules you agreed to if you have further questions. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I don't have a reference handy, but one assault on Aachen was scrubbed because sniper fire picked off quite a few TCs as they were getting ready in their assembly area. Not really the same thing, but it is evidence that taking out an enemy TC can have a larger impact. I'm sure that a standard rifleman or MG gunner, when faced with a tank, would be inclined to fire on it if he thought he was doomed if he didn't or thought he had a good chance of taking out the TC. Also, infantry know that they have a better chance of evading/surviving a tank attack if the enemy is buttoned up. Even that should be occasional rather than standard. Otherwise, for sure, they should not be firing. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.