Captured vehicles

[Taskforce]

I've been thinking about captured vehicles in general and how it all should be improved.

To start with, using a captured vehicle means a reduced ammo loadout due to the difficulty in finding captured ammo and to take into account ammo already used by the old crews, more work for the mechanics, more training for the crews, maybe the wrong fuel used in these captured vehicles and finally slightly more reduced ammo loadout a second time since a part of the existing ammo loadout is used for target practice for the new crews. Also captured vehicles aren't as commen as the respective vehicles produced for the countries army in question, so having whole companies of them seems to be unrealistic to me.

In other words, it should be more expensive to buy and use captured vehicles.

Therefor I suggest the following changes:
-Reduced ammo loadout by about 30%
-Captured vehicles only available as single vehicles or in groups of two
-Increased point cost by about 50% (or even more) compared to the normal point costs for the normal armies, where these vehicles are normally used

Those are my thoughts to the subject of captured vehicles, what are your thoughts?

Cheers, Taskforce

[Imp]

Where can you buy captured vehicles in companies? Most are available in 1s & 2s that I have seen.
For the niche times they are used why bother but I suppose if you wanted to ideas.
Ammo not really worth bothering about it could easily have a full load scavanged though perhaps APCR should be reduced. Keeping it running is probably just as hard or harder.
Perhaps reduce speed by 1 to reflect this & crews lack of time with the vehicle.
Reduce experience of the unit to reflect lack of training on the vehicle.
If its a good bit of kit (Tiger for instance) give a big morale boost.

Then again you could do the same with say the T-34s that were driven straight out of the factories into battle sometimes by the guys that built them.
My view judgement call for a scenerio designer to add flavour, also I do believe some companies were composed entirely of captured equipment.

You are not talking about stuff like Czech & Italian gear that the Germans used I pressume

[Cross]

Originally Posted by Taskforce

Those are my thoughts to the subject of captured vehicles, what are your thoughts?

Cheers, Taskforce

I would think that stockpiles of enemy ammo was captured more often than enemy AFVs; and I believe captured AFVs were usually abandoned (sometimes dumped in lakes etc.) because of a lack of spare parts, not ammo.

From a gaming standpoint, if an enemy AFV is available for purchase, then you could assume that it's 'battle ready' (full mobility, full ammo, competent crew), just as we assume the same for friendly AFVs; because SPWW2 doesn't model damaged AFVs or depleted/low ammo at the start of battles.


When I play against humans in a campaign I use this rule:

You may only purchase an enemy vehicle or crewed gun that surrendered, was abandoned or immobilized, and ended a previous battle undestroyed and overrun.

In other words, captured vehicles are considered trophies, and you have to earn the right to purchase one.
As a result of this rule, I sometimes deliberately choose not to destroy immobolised AFVs so I can capture them.

If you're playing against the AI you can also use the above rule. Just don't allow yourself to puchase captured vehicles unless you actually captured one in a previous battle.


cheers,
Cross

[Taskforce]

That's exacly the rule I use in my current AAR: If a German vehicle is found abandoned on the battlefield I allow my Soviet' taskforce to buy exacly that captured vehicle (that's why I jumped with joy when I saw no less than four abandoned Tiger II after one battle!)

As for the captured vehicles, I've changed the last of the three captured T-34 tanks available for Germany to the T-34/85, and I'm also thinking of adding the KV-1 and IS-II to that list, since the Soviet Union allready had the Tiger I as an option (the only thing I've done is to add a few more German' tanks, such as the Tiger II).

I am however thinking about making them more expensive to buy.

Cheers, Taskforce

[DRG]

There is nothing to stop you from repricing vehicles however you like in your own personal OOB's but when the cost calculator is used units are given a cost based on capability NOT rarity so if you put in less ammo and restrict the SABOT it's going to be cheaper and if you lower the experience level of captured formations-------they get even cheaper.

Don

[Imp]

Why not just leave it as is & roll a die to see firstly if you can capture it & secondly if it makes it as far as the next battle without breaking down.
Equipment was often destroyed by abandoning crew, the likes of Tigers the percentage destroyed by the crew rather than enemy fire is high.
Roll a die at the start of each battle for captured armour say a 1 in 3 chance it actually makes it to the battle, just drive it off on the first turn.
That takes care of the cost problem its now a gamble using them plus the crew will never gain much experience in them as they wont be around for long because you cant keep them running.

[Cross]

Originally Posted by Imp

Equipment was often destroyed by abandoning crew, the likes of Tigers the percentage destroyed by the crew rather than enemy fire is high.

Hey John,

I could be wrong, but I thought abandoning crews almost never destroyed vehicles while under fire, because they were under fire, and there was a good chance they may be able to recover the tank later.

I read quite a few accounts of Tiger crews abandoning their damaged tanks. The normal M.O. appeared to be to attempt recovery the following night. In fact - in the German army - there were recovery teams whose purpose was to go out every night and recover tanks.

I think they would only destroy their own vehicles as a last resort, once they were determined to be unrecoverable.

I do think you are right about the high percentage of Tigers destroyed by their crews, but I believe these were Tigers in impossible situations, especially towards the end of the war.

regards,
Cross

[Imp]

I do think you are right about the high percentage of Tigers destroyed by their crews, but I believe these were Tigers in impossible situations, especially towards the end of the war.

Greets Simon

You may well be right though the mighty Tiger was probably stopped by nothing more than a lack of fuel towards the end of the war.

[Rosollia]

The first T-34 tank that the Finnish forces captured was brand-new and had just two 76.2mm shells missing from its ammunition racks. It also had manuals for operating the tank and detailing technical information.

As for ammunition supply there was a domestic production during the war here so it was not a problem. If a new type of shell was captured it was studied and copied if needed. Ofcourse Finland used the same ammunition calibres as the Russians already before the war.

As for the Germans I am pretty sure they also build ammunition for captured Russian guns.


Ofcourse there is the question of what you think a captured vehicle is ingame:

A) Is it a vehicle that was taken over by your troops during the battle and used.

B) Or is it a vehicle that was captured, sent back to a repair depot and then re-issued to the troops on the front.

[gila]

Well,here we go,

Are captured tanks so alien to experieced tankers to figure out?
I think not as WW2 tanks were not really very complicated as modern tanks are.

I would suppose a few days to get the feel of it, maybe couple more.
The tiger had a steering wheel which made the driver's learning much easier,if it did not break down.

Experience will be lower for captured AFV'S already (IE:an exp.crew will lose some pts) so no debate there.

Ammo suppiles would be more scarce for some it also depends what it had before capture and ammo dumps,so it is assumed all ammo is available before battle as in the game.