An idle thought on infantry assault...

[Marek_Tucan]

...that came to me after watching a Soviet rifle platoon (under my command) massacring almost two platoon's worth of Panthers (AI) with just antitank grenades.
IRL to use such weapons as RPG-40 or RKG-3, the assaulting party has to get very close to the target and out of cover. So... Shouldn't an infantry assault with "range 1" weapons result in the assaulting party rushing out to the hex where the assaulted vehicle is? This would of course make the assaults much more deadly for the assaulting troops, but OTOH they were so in real life as well, tha's why the ranged light antitank weapons were adopted.
So just a thought... Are "Range 1" antitank weapons somehow penalised in close assaults?

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by Marek_Tucan

...that came to me after watching a Soviet rifle platoon (under my command) massacring almost two platoon's worth of Panthers (AI) with just antitank grenades.
IRL to use such weapons as RPG-40 or RKG-3, the assaulting party has to get very close to the target and out of cover. So... Shouldn't an infantry assault with "range 1" weapons result in the assaulting party rushing out to the hex where the assaulted vehicle is? This would of course make the assaults much more deadly for the assaulting troops, but OTOH they were so in real life as well, tha's why the ranged light antitank weapons were adopted.
So just a thought... Are "Range 1" antitank weapons somehow penalised in close assaults?

No - but assaulting without a weapon with an A/TK value is (HE bundles, hand grenades etc).

Skill and current suppression level of the assaulting team, and not having moved, is also important. Being unspotted is rather critical too.

Target vehicle being suppressed helps the assault, as does any lack of side/rear or top armour. (Most WW2 halftracks are grenade buckets).

Failing a close assault can leave you neutralised and exposed, or running away in 'tank panic'.

Cheers
Andy

[Marek_Tucan]

Thank you for clarification.
Now, one accompanying question: if the ammo in the "assault weapon" is HE, does its HEAT penetration play role? As in Satchel Charge or Flamethrowers?

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by Marek_Tucan

Thank you for clarification.
Now, one accompanying question: if the ammo in the "assault weapon" is HE, does its HEAT penetration play role? As in Satchel Charge or Flamethrowers?

Satchel charge - HE ammo - no AP or HEAT value - not a good anti tank assault weapon (but better than nothing). As it should be. Satchel charges are for use on bunkers.

Flame thrower - flame weapon - special penetration rules. Special morale rules for target etc. A reasonable AT weapon - but AT grenades (with big enough HEAT) are better.

Anti tank rifle - AP ammo - uses the piffling HEAT value most ATR have for just that purpose in close assault. (The guys probably push the thing into the tracks )!.

Andy

[Marek_Tucan]

OK, thanks, just wanted to make sure the HEAT value present for Satchel charges and flamethrowers does not have an effect.
So if I wanted to downgrade infantry assault success, I could either give them HE "antitank" weapons (resulting in a significant downgrading, but as long as the HE pen is larger than that of a hand grenade, it would still be better) or HEAT grenades with lower penetration (which will result in less significant downgrading).
It's what I suspected, but since tests were not all that conclusive (as I forgot to alter "test infantry" morale and the buggers often failed to assault and panicked instead) so I thought I'd rather ask