.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

Raging Tiger- Save $9.00
winSPMBT: Main Battle Tank- Save $6.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > The Camo Workshop > WinSPWW2
Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 16th, 2009, 10:16 PM

Mobryan Mobryan is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 86
Thanks: 6
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Mobryan is on a distinguished road
Default Recon/Strike group.

Ketch's Killing Group post of a few weeks ago got me to thinking on and codifing a project I'd been working on since I started playing SP. I wanted to see how small you could get a fast attack group and still have the capacity to react to any attack or situation. Given that I prefer to play with early Russian kit, it was both easier and harder than I expected. I think I finally have a force balanced enough to stand on it's own, whether the mission is offensive or defensive.

OOB:

Main body:
1 platoon T-34's. The obvious choice through the war, fast, good armor and firepower.
1 3 squad platoon of infantry. I've tried pretty much every troop type available, and this was one of the most difficult choices, since my troop quality sucks If I had to buy stock platoons, either Marines or Mtn Troops work, the Mtn scouts need thier own transport, while the marine sniper fits on the tanks with the rest. However, the Mtn troops have more AT capability. If I'm cherry picking individual sections, 3 of the heavy Mtn troops with satchel charges.
The Mtn Pioneers offer a bit of an option if you want an organic engineering asset, available either with rifle,LMG,grenade(+),satchel, or rifle,LMG,FT,satchel. They are probably the least weak of the engineering types in open combat, but that's being the tallest midget in the room. (It might be true, but you're still short.) Their defensive abilities in close terrain, however, are hard to beat.

Screen force:
1 platoon T-50 tanks or M3 Stuarts. The T-50 has better frontal armor and a bit better main gun, but the Stuart has a better MG complement (inlcuding an AAMG), and blazing speed. I generally prefer the Stuart, but it's a close match.
3 sections of light infantry. I prefer the MC sections with the LMG and 50mm mortar, using them as fire support for the main infantry once the firing starts. There are plenty of SMG sections available, both as MC troops and desant teams, if you plan on short range engagements. Doing that with those 6 man sections gets bloody in a hurry...

Recon:
either 2 or 4 scout teams with satchel charges mounted on motorcycles. I generally include a cheap marksman/sniper with each scout team, often using them as stay behind spotters once I'm deep in enemy territory. You could also mount up some 2 man AT teams with the scouts, but it would mean giving up the stay behinds. They could be dropped off from the T-34's in the main body, however.

Support:
Here's where it gets fun I use three, one gun DShK AAMG sections mounted on motorcycles for long range harrasing fire and AA work. Combined with the AAMG's on the Stuarts, this gives a basic but adaquate AA capacity on a quite small budget. Used en masse at long range, they also serve well to break up massed infantry assaults.
I really wanted to include an indirect fire capacity, however my experiments with MC mounted mortar teams were general failures. Splitting a 12 man 82mm section into two parts also halved thier combat ability, even when manovered and fired as one unit. A custom 6 MC transport group helped, but it still didn't play well. Salvation came in the form of some really nifty 76mm recoiless gun/bazooka things A 2 gun battery mounts on 2 MC sections, has a huge range, and has a substantial AT capacity with sabot ammo. Thier indirect fire is no less capable than the 82mm mortars, with much more flexiblity.

I really like having the MC transport, since the support group can hang well back until needed, then sprint into place. Blazing speed is the whole units main asset, the T-34's are the tortises of the group @ speed 17 It allows me to get into place first and fight an ambush/defensive battle on ground I prefer. I think the Russians are probably the hardest army to build this type of unit for, a German or British player could rely extensively on armored cars, and a US player could build a excellent unit around half traks and Hellcats.

Anyway, just a free thoughts I wanted to share.



Matt
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old April 17th, 2009, 08:19 AM
gila's Avatar

gila gila is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 898
Thanks: 45
Thanked 60 Times in 54 Posts
gila is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Recon/Strike group.

What month and year are you proposing putting this posse together?
T-50 although a good little tank was obsolete by the time the T-34 {faster and better everthing) got in full production.
T-34 would out pace them and carry a whole squad.
M3A1 was a much faster light tank but the russians didn't like them much i think they called them "iron coffins".

Last edited by gila; April 17th, 2009 at 08:37 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old April 17th, 2009, 06:07 PM

Mobryan Mobryan is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 86
Thanks: 6
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Mobryan is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Recon/Strike group.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gila View Post
What month and year are you proposing putting this posse together?
T-50 although a good little tank was obsolete by the time the T-34 {faster and better everthing) got in full production.
T-34 would out pace them and carry a whole squad.
M3A1 was a much faster light tank but the russians didn't like them much i think they called them "iron coffins".
Fall of 41, mostly. The T-34's were definately better tanks, but I think it's a little early to devot a a short company of them to recon. Besides, the light tanks are more fun I think you might be confusing the M3 Stuart with the M3 Lee/Grant. The Lee/Grant was called "A coffin for seven brothers", at least according to post-war sources. I've noticed a little discrepency in those reports, though... For as much desparagement as is heaped on the Lend-Lease equipment in post-war Soviet sources, they sure lined up at the docks when a convoy came in

Matt
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old April 17th, 2009, 07:24 PM
gila's Avatar

gila gila is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 898
Thanks: 45
Thanked 60 Times in 54 Posts
gila is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Recon/Strike group.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobryan View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by gila View Post
What month and year are you proposing putting this posse together?
T-50 although a good little tank was obsolete by the time the T-34 {faster and better everthing) got in full production.
T-34 would out pace them and carry a whole squad.
M3A1 was a much faster light tank but the russians didn't like them much i think they called them "iron coffins".
Fall of 41, mostly. The T-34's were definately better tanks, but I think it's a little early to devot a a short company of them to recon. Besides, the light tanks are more fun I think you might be confusing the M3 Stuart with the M3 Lee/Grant. The Lee/Grant was called "A coffin for seven brothers", at least according to post-war sources. I've noticed a little discrepency in those reports, though... For as much desparagement as is heaped on the Lend-Lease equipment in post-war Soviet sources, they sure lined up at the docks when a convoy came in

Matt
You are right! i did mean the M3 Stuart and your probably also correct on the Grant being "coffin for 7 bros."
That's what happens when you post a messege in hurry
Although i've never used the cross attachment feature.
It seems a good way to gather up units for a fast recon/flanking/reserve role for a particular battle.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2024, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.