Some issues?

[Charles22]

DRG: On the tanks suppressing themselves whilst in the hex with an enemy; it is very much going on and i've seen it several times. We're talking about units that aren't able to fire back in the same hex. Perhaps this will make things clearer:

1. You have a routed infantry in one hex.
2. Unsuppressed tank enters that hex and stays unsuppressed.
3. The tank fires with no reponse and gets suppressed.

This did not occur on the previous version of SPWW2. We understand that if you have two units of your own in the above example,that the 'other' unit will get suppressed, but not a single unit on it's own. BTW, there's no chance that any other unit fires into that hex, because the enemy unit is non-responsive and there was no fire even from any units whatsoever other than described above.

I was playing Germany against Poland in the LC.

[Charles22]

DRG: On the infantry getting killed issue. I'm sorry to disagree with snake, but it's working VERY well as far as I'm concerned. It was the prior version of SPWW2 that had practically invincible infantry. Snake has to get used to either/and the infantry being tougher in cover or dug in, and also for the increased difficulty of anything being hit when the targeting unit has moved the same turn.

Snake: Don't worry, it really is fine, and when your infantry is in cover and dug in you will benefit from that. Get them in the open against stationary gunners, and they're dead or falling back real quick. You don't know invincible infantry until you played the prior version of SPWW2.

[snake]

Charles,
My gripe is more along these lines:
My tanks move in close and blaze away with minor effect. Folks say thats OK, it's the way it should be - fair enough. I don't know, I guess tanks in WW2 weren't very good against infantry.......
Except, in the exact same game turn (replay a save), I don't move the tanks up but rather fire my infantry at the same targets at much longer ranges and the enemy gets chewed up.
So how come the tank main guns and MG's at 1 hex can't cause casualties but rifle and mg fire from several hexes distant can?
I figure it's the act of moving and shooting - not weapons. So I replay the save where I don't move the tanks and fire their guns and mg's.
Gee, same results.....why are the tank mg's not the equivalent of infantry rifles and mg's at the same targets?

My guess is the code that says 1 unit (the tank) fires so gets X times 1 shooter kills per shot where the infantry is X times 10 (10 men for instance) shooter kills per shot.
So do the tanks not do as well as an infantry unit with the same mg weapon because the casualty routine takes into account the number of men firing a weapon at a hex in which case a squad of ten men will get more results than a single man in a tank?

Is it one tank fires one main gun and one mg compared to ten men firing ten rifles and ten men firing ten mg's or something similar?
The reason I ask is because this was exactly an issue in some earlier versions of the 'other' steel panthers game. The fix was too adjust the values of the secondary weapons slots.

[narwan]

The weapon in the first slot of an infantry type units gets a multiplier effect for number of men in the unit IF it is a primairy weapon type (rifle, carbine, smg, etc). Weapons in another slot don't get a multiplier effect (even if they're primairy ones) nor weapons in the first slot of an infantry unit that are not primairy weapons.

So part of the why a tank has more problems of hitting the infantry is that he has fewer weapons to aim and these often face the same direction (main gun and cmg for example). The enemy infantry is not conveniently packed together so they can't all be aimed at simultaneously by the tank. Although they can score the lucky hit that will take out multiple enemies, they'll usually have to pick them off one at a time (but splash effects can also result in additional casualties).
Infantry squads have many different weapons, usually a collection of rifles, an lmg and maybe something else of use against enemy soft targets. These can all aim at different targets at the same time, potentially taking out multiple targets with 1 'shot' (ie a shot in the game).

Narwan

[snake]

Narwan,
That seems to be the case as it's the infantry's rifle fire getting the kills and not the secondary mg, mortar, etc.
So I guess any tank's main gun and mg's are the equvalent of a squad's secondary armament.
I just can't rationalize that ten men shooting 6 bolt action rifles (6 men), 1 Lmg (2 men) and 1 mortar (2 men) at a target can put so many more rounds on a target than a tank crew firing a main gun and two Lmg's that the casualty results are so skewed.

After all, the 75 mm gun is better than a mortar, 1 LMG equals 1 LMG and the other LMG equals 6 bolt action.
But I suppose the number of targets chosen is a good thought since 6 rifles can pick 6 targets and 1 LMG can pick just one.

[Mobhack]

Tanks are rather good against infantry, if you use the correct tactics!.

It is not the job of an AFV to close to knife range on enamy infantry. It is the infantrys task to do so.

If you charge in to sabre range with tanks, you will be firing from a bouncing moving target. Any enemy infantry left within 1 hex, may well rally and assault you in thier turn for your temerity

If you have infantry targets to engage with tanks, then stay at least 2 hexes away and within about 3-500m, and engage halted. Even a panzer 1, with its TMG used this way is a real killer for infantry. It is a nice stable, mobile pillbox which the infantry have no real reply to.

Always try to engage infantry with tanks from outside any anti-tank range the infantry have.

Do not expect "Hollywood" instant evapouration of the infantry, you will need a turn or 2 do deal with a rifle section. More if the enemy is dug in.

But the tanks engage the infantry from the halt, and supress or rout them. Your accompanying infantry can then close with the enemy, and if any are still around on the engagement line when these arrive, they can execute the survivors. Or if the enemy infantry is retreating or routed - simply gun them down while halted and stable, do not try to close with a "cavalry charge". The "charge" uses MP, which uses up shot opportunities, and the movement will tend to make these fewer shot opportunities at close range less accurate, and the act of closing can put you into danger from any of the infantry that happen to rally, or you may trip over previously unseen infantry or inf-AT. far better to stay halted and fire 6 rounds of CMG while halted at any infantry in LOS.

Meanwhile, as you have located enemy infantry, call in some mortars on the position. If they are still fighting back when these rounds arrive, they will help your task. if the enemy is departing when they arrive, mortar fire is an excellent way of killing off routers,or encouraging such to keep on going.

If you need to close, then your infantry skirmish line (one or 2 hexes in front of the tanks) should advance 1 hex a move (max), with your tanks advancing behind at a similar slow rate. The infantry should lead onto the objective and clear the route for the armour. Your artillery of course should prepare the position for your grunts as they do so. Remember that in real life (as opposed to Hollywood , an attack is done in slow-slow time, and not as a wild "cavalry charge".

It is very rare for armoured forces to charge into the middle of an objective area. The only time to contemplate doing so is if you can guarantee that the enemy is 100% neutralised (retreat or worse), and you should really only do this with APC or tank rider infantry which will dismount and "take names". If any tanks join this charge - then they should remain behind the infantry line, or at least, share the same hex as the tank-desant infantry. About the only time you can be reasonably sure of such neutralisation is when running into the impact zone of a batallion (16 - 24 or so guns) of field arty, and even then if one or 2 squads have kept thier heads, this can be a recepie for disaster. Better to dismount on the forward edge of the beaten zone and fight through the objective cautiosly (1 hex a turn movement, max), while continuing the arty support on the area to be traversed, and tanks 1 hex behind the infantry skirmish line (or sharing a hex with a squad, with the riflemen advancing first, tank moving up only when the grunts have cleared the way).

Cheers
Andy

[Charles22]

snake said:
Charles,
My gripe is more along these lines:
My tanks move in close and blaze away with minor effect. Folks say thats OK, it's the way it should be - fair enough. I don't know, I guess tanks in WW2 weren't very good against infantry.......
Except, in the exact same game turn (replay a save), I don't move the tanks up but rather fire my infantry at the same targets at much longer ranges and the enemy gets chewed up.
So how come the tank main guns and MG's at 1 hex can't cause casualties but rifle and mg fire from several hexes distant can?
I figure it's the act of moving and shooting - not weapons. So I replay the save where I don't move the tanks and fire their guns and mg's.
Gee, same results.....why are the tank mg's not the equivalent of infantry rifles and mg's at the same targets?

My guess is the code that says 1 unit (the tank) fires so gets X times 1 shooter kills per shot where the infantry is X times 10 (10 men for instance) shooter kills per shot.
So do the tanks not do as well as an infantry unit with the same mg weapon because the casualty routine takes into account the number of men firing a weapon at a hex in which case a squad of ten men will get more results than a single man in a tank?

Is it one tank fires one main gun and one mg compared to ten men firing ten rifles and ten men firing ten mg's or something similar?
The reason I ask is because this was exactly an issue in some earlier versions of the 'other' steel panthers game. The fix was too adjust the values of the secondary weapons slots.

I'm sorry snake, but in all my experience playing the various versions of SP, I've never seen that tanks were worse off than rifle fire. I'm just pleased to be hosing them down pretty much to any extent. Though if you're correct, be that a good thign or not I cannot say, but one of the things you may be seeing is taking account of the number of guns. Perhaps out of proportion, but perhaps that all the same. Is it reasonable at very close range that you can kill more men with 13 pistols (though we're not talking them here, I'm just trying to exaggerate the point more) from 13 men than with one MG? The end result is the same, but if the targets scatter the 13 pistols will do the job quicker. Why? Well part of the reason is the MG mount itself, as it has a very limited arc (as a BMG anyway) and the tank will have to turn to shoot all the scattered guys. Same with a CMG though with less restriction. OTOH, an AAMG comes pretty close to the pistols and in some cases might exceed them. If the men all stay together then the AAMG has the quickest kill, but if they do then you have the problem of only one gun though it shoots very rapidly. Sometimes, of course, the 13 guns having 13 shooters cam be a problem, as some of them can be really bad shots.

Naturally, you're wanting to say that these guys are at 50m and not a 0m (but of course they're never truly at 0m, but for the hex description this will pass for an adequate description), such that there is little angle and the tank has to turn very little if any. Well, then again, it may not be right, but the formula may have too high a respect for the advantage of having 13 guns as opposed to the more rapid one MG.

BTW, just for the respect that people would hav for MG's you would figure that it would have diminishing returns (sort of odd) for the longer it fires at the same target, because the surviving targets will be more apt to scatter and find cover, as opposed to mere pistols for example. The aim on the gunner will get better, but the men sometimes harder to hit (of course some could find decent cover, see MG shots closeby, panic, and then get out into the open again) with more shots.

You might be on to something, but for what little I've had of range 1 MG's firing off, not that much, I don't see a problem, but then again if I do any range 1 fighting it's almost always with AFV MG's and very little with rifle fire. I have had very little, if any, rifle fire at range 1 in this version.

[narwan]

Charles22 said:
Naturally, you're wanting to say that these guys are at 50m and not a 0m (but of course they're never truly at 0m, but for the hex description this will pass for an adequate description), such that there is little angle and the tank has to turn very little if any.

Wrong conclusion I'm afraid. You're assuming that although both units are in the same hex all the enemy are still in front of your unit. Not so. They can (and more often than not are) all around your tank, front, rear, side, possibly even up and under. So the tank has extreme angles to deal with at range 0.

Narwan

[Charles22]

narwan said:

Wrong conclusion I'm afraid. You're assuming that although both units are in the same hex all the enemy are still in front of your unit. Not so. They can (and more often than not are) all around your tank, front, rear, side, possibly even up and under. So the tank has extreme angles to deal with at range 0.

Narwan

I think I mixed you up on that one. I was triyng to make a point that gunning down men with a BMG, if they scattered, would not work as well as with pistols, BUT that would only be true at 0m. I was trying to then imagine that who I was responding to would then say "but we're not talking about 0m, we're talking about 50m."

In other words:

0m - good for pistols or rifles, no so good for BMG's.
50m - Not quite as good for pistols or rifles, better for BMG's.

[snake]

I suppose I should have mentioned that all the enemy infantry were routed. I would expect that AFV's chasing routed men at 0-50 meters would somehow have more effect than men shooting at them from 200-400 meters. I would expect more surrenders or dispersals from the remaning enemy squads from the tanks proximity and ability to pursue yet it's actually quite quicker to 'eliminate' the enemy by shooting at long range with infantry rifles rather than closing in and surrounding/overruning? them.

Certainly all the points mentioned earlier are excellent concerning infantry not running for the hills and only a fool would close with AFV's against entrenched/determined or well-supported infantry.