Infantry vs tanks
 

The new patch has definitely changed this dynamic, and for the better IMO. In one scenario (#275, Hold the Panzers) "my" Polish engineers, rifle squads and militia were getting eviscerated by German armor "bulling through." The grunts had a handful of kills, and AT rifles scored some mobility hits, but at a fearful price. If I hadn't had the foresight to send some 37mm AT guns to a critical junction--where they subsequently ambushed and destroyed a dozen tanks--it would've been time to throw in the towel.

As Andy noted in a thread at SPMBT:

"More for WW2, but with the 2 MP required to assault I have had the AI "bull through" unsupported infantry with tanks especially in a case where my guys had just arrived on the spot in light trucks then got hit by advancing armour. Cue routed grunts being peppered up the backside by Pz3s and burning Morris 15cwt...

Infantry that want to receive armour will now have to have had the time to "go firm" on the held position, i.e. had a move or so halted.

Plus, attacking infantry that are fighting through a position that come on some unexpected enemy armour cant just take a quick "off the cuff" assault on it now either if the MP has all gone, so will have to proceed a little more slowly or at least with more caution."

Quite right, and as it should be. AT guns were the best tank killers in WWII, and infantry without "dedicated" AT weapons (bazookas, panzerschrecks, etc.) had a rough time of it. My compliments to Don and Andy for their outstanding work. :up:

Re: Infantry vs tanks
 

Not meaning to look a gift horse in the mouth, but in a recent try at "Totenkopf Attacks" (Scen #46) a Tiger loaded with infantry got assaulted and destroyed by a dug-in sniper. The assailant (experience and morale of 61) had no dedicated AT, just a rifle and F-1 grenade (penetration 1). After reloading tried it again; this time the Tiger got immobilized. A third attempt resulted in no assault, the sniper was pinned. A fourth try saw an assault but no more than suppression to the tank. (Except for the third try the infantry passengers dismounted, with suppression relative to tank damage.)

Question: Do snipers have special abilities against tanks, or were the first two episodes atypical events? Reason I ask is 'cuz ordinarily infantry w/o AT or good morale don't ordinarily prosper against armor. Thanks.

Re: Infantry vs tanks
 

atypical event.....sometimes you roll boxcars and it's not entirely appropriate but the game needs random "heroic" acts because in real life sometimes the most improbable things do occur. If this was happening 10x per scenario we'd have a problem but with the game being played thousands of hours per week things like this pop up from time to time. Blame the random number generator as you saw reloading the game and playing the turn again does not generate the same results. It's one of the main reasons the game is still played in 2014 when the original concept was laid down in the early 90's

Re: Infantry vs tanks
 

Yeah,can't count on various lone inf. to do the job anymore.
You can still get a possible gang up kill however still, but takes more planning and skill.
A few Panzershrecks and bazooka's being 0 size are worth buying.

Re: Infantry vs tanks
 

You can say that again! After overcoming my disgruntlement I started the scenario again from scratch. This time the sniper in question was pinned and got wiped out immediately. The odds do even out over time, although sometimes one is tempted to cry foul at the sheer capriciousness of the RNG. But as you point out this element of unpredictability helps keep the game fresh and exciting.

With confidence restored and bruised ego bandaged, yours truly went on to get a decisive result (2768 to 334) in this most challenging assault battle (maybe I'll do an AAR for posterity). Truly sublime :angel. Steel Panthers is a gift that just keeps on giving.

Much obliged Don; hope you and Andy are enjoying your much-deserved sabbatical. Cheers and have a happy :up:.

Re: Infantry vs tanks
 

I remember one squad leader game I played.........must be over 30 years ago now........my opponent had a leader well back and all he had to do was cross a road and recover a LMG and I nailed him with a burst of HMG fire either rolling snakeyes or boxcars.....forget which......it was a throwaway roll that you would never expect would hit and it did. The same thing happens sometimes in SP

Re: Infantry vs tanks
 

...which reminds me of the time my brod and I played Hill 621, the venerable SL scenario. He was Russian, pursuing an essentially broken German force up the hill. Charging too impetuously with his T-34's he allowed one to get within range of an AT gun which blew it away on a lucky roll (IIRC snakeyes favored the firing unit). A slew of deleted expletives followed as he contemplated the consequences of indiscreet valor. A threat to abandon the game was narrowly averted.

After a suitable period of sober reflection and due commiseration on my part we agreed to recommence. Shortly thereafter the circumstance was repeated: He had ANOTHER tank blown away by ANOTHER snakeye roll. At which point he peremptorily terminated the game with a sweep of his hand, upsetting all the counters and stalking off in quiet fury at the iniquity of the RNG. We never played that scenario again.

It's fitting that SPWW2 and SPMBT follow in the same unpredictable tradition. Ain't it grand?

Re: Infantry vs tanks
 

Consider also that the SP AI doesn't walk away from the game when it's losing :)

I think mine was Buchholz Station and yes it was snakeyes that did it. It was a John Sedgwick moment ( ".....They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance."<SUP> ) </SUP>and my opponent was just as impressed as yours

Re: Infantry vs tanks
 

Good ole Squad Leader. I was playing in a game at a convention once, and one of my Russian squads went berserk and proceeded to wipe an enemy company before it was shut down.

Things happen in real life as well. I recall a passage in The Two Ocean War, detailing a naval engagement in which a B-17 actually scored a bomb hit on a destroyer, which Morison described as "an event that amazed both sides."