Game Questions

[gila]

Originally Posted by Ramm

If an infantryman runs out of ammo for a specific weapon, is he still able to tank assault with that weapon? I ask this because it seems that infantry with with a dedicated AT weapon slot but no ammo are more successful when assaulting tanks then infantry with no AT slot at all. Could just be blind luck on my part though

Imagine 8-12 guys climbing all over a buttoned tank stuffing grenades under the turret, in the engine compartment in the tracks and underneath (where the armour is weakest) and even down the main gun without supporting inf. to hose them off.

[Ramm]

Originally Posted by gila

Imagine 8-12 guys climbing all over a buttoned tank stuffing grenades under the turret, in the engine compartment in the tracks and underneath (where the armour is weakest) and even down the main gun without supporting inf. to hose them off.

Sounds like a recipe for disaster for the tank and a recipe for manburger on the infantryman's part I can easily see a guy getting off the tank too late

[Lt. Ketch]

Originally Posted by Ramm

Sounds like a recipe for disaster for the tank and a recipe for manburger on the infantryman's part I can easily see a guy getting off the tank too late

See Saving Private Ryan for what happens when you anti-tank weapon goes off in your hand.

Granted, stuffing your SMG in the drivers slit, up the air vents or get it under the turret, and you might be able to enough damage to seriously impair it's fighting power. A tank crewed by dead men is not likely to be shooting at you.

[Imp]

Imagine 8-12 guys climbing all over a buttoned tank stuffing grenades under the turret, in the engine compartment in the tracks and underneath (where the armour is weakest) and even down the main gun without supporting inf. to hose them off.

Imagine is exactly what you will have to do, the reason assault chances are based partly on squad size is more of them might develop big cahoonas. The idea is that when the first guy tries at least some of the others will decide to help him if for no other reason than save your buddy. The whole squad deciding this is a good idea is probably not going to happen.
Modern military traning means more men are effective on the battlefield but in WW2 or even Vietnam the odds were not much higher than one in 10. not saying the other guys would do nothing they would see targets pass ammo etc but most of the fighting was done by just 1 or 2 men.
The fact that modern training means more people participate has allowed reduced squad sizes as in fact more people are firing back.
It is to me however discusting that the modern military trains people to be good killing machines but the buck seems to stops there. What happened to training them to deal with it after, Mr cynical says its not a good return on your dollar.
Dealing with it though maybe partly what drives the US to want to kill everything from a distance.

[gila]

Originally Posted by Ramm

Sounds like a recipe for disaster for the tank and a recipe for manburger on the infantryman's part I can easily see a guy getting off the tank too late

Exactly!
Have you noticed when inft.assaults vehicles,pillbox's or whatever,, they are suppressed by the action?
Whether they succeed or not there is some suppession.
Sometimes will not rally enough to be effective for awhile.

[gila]

One other tactic I've learned the hard way.
When assaulting a stonghold from the rear don't stack other squads with assaulting squad.
If it fails...well it's not good for nearby friendlies