The BT were designed to have the tracks removed, the road wheels were powered( welcome to the Christie designed tanks).It improved track life, allowed for improved road movement. Was never really used, to bad though, would allow the tank to travel a lot farther as well.
How to become better at using AFVs in ASL?
- Thread starter Actionjick
- Start date
STAVKA
Elder Member
You ain't really surprised are you? , your efforts to bend the rules tell us - not much, lol , take care
Post edited by moderator.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Purist
Elder Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 2,917
- Reaction score
- 1,480
- Location
- In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
- First name
- Gerry
- Country
-
Good afternoon, Stuh,
While a lot of what you posted would apply to one degree or another in the real world they do not all have application to ASL.
For example: Early BTs had the ability to remove the tracks but the process took some time to complete and was rarely used. The BT-7, did not have the wheels option. In any case this attribute is not used at all in ASL.
ASL tank combat is all about DRMs,.... maximizing the opponents and minimizing your own.
Take your items 1 and 2. Having a turret is no guarantee of success in an attack and much is dependent on what you are given in a scenario. It would not be uncommon to have just one or two tracked vehicles (if any) for use and both might be "assault guns" if a panzer unit is not involved. In any case, the +3 DRM for VCA change or AFPh by an NT vehicle is no worse off than a T-34 or KVs RST which requires the tank to be buttoned up to fire. As many NT AGs (mainly German) are small targets, the targets response, even if CE and with a regular slow turret is still +3 (+2 TCA change, +1 Small Target),.... so a properly used AG could have just as many, or as few, DRM as a turreted AFV.
A Pz VI is certainly no more vulnerable to infantry than a Pz III, IV or V. In fact, it is arguably less so considering it is armed with a Snuffleupagus 7 or 9 (model dependent) in CC, it has heavier armour versus a Baz or PIAT and an ATR can't hurt one short of a critical hit.
DRMs are the key.
Cheers.
While a lot of what you posted would apply to one degree or another in the real world they do not all have application to ASL.
For example: Early BTs had the ability to remove the tracks but the process took some time to complete and was rarely used. The BT-7, did not have the wheels option. In any case this attribute is not used at all in ASL.
ASL tank combat is all about DRMs,.... maximizing the opponents and minimizing your own.
Take your items 1 and 2. Having a turret is no guarantee of success in an attack and much is dependent on what you are given in a scenario. It would not be uncommon to have just one or two tracked vehicles (if any) for use and both might be "assault guns" if a panzer unit is not involved. In any case, the +3 DRM for VCA change or AFPh by an NT vehicle is no worse off than a T-34 or KVs RST which requires the tank to be buttoned up to fire. As many NT AGs (mainly German) are small targets, the targets response, even if CE and with a regular slow turret is still +3 (+2 TCA change, +1 Small Target),.... so a properly used AG could have just as many, or as few, DRM as a turreted AFV.
A Pz VI is certainly no more vulnerable to infantry than a Pz III, IV or V. In fact, it is arguably less so considering it is armed with a Snuffleupagus 7 or 9 (model dependent) in CC, it has heavier armour versus a Baz or PIAT and an ATR can't hurt one short of a critical hit.
DRMs are the key.
Cheers.
Last edited:
The Purist
Elder Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 2,917
- Reaction score
- 1,480
- Location
- In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
- First name
- Gerry
- Country
-
Joe,.... the 5 Shermans to kill a Pz V or VI is a myth in the real world and is a myth in ASL. It happened, certainly but the actual loss ratios in NWE between German and Allied armour during engagements was about 1.7:1
Only the Shermans with a 75 MA get vehicle note R. Hopefully your Pz V was not killed by a 76L.
Anyway. It really comes down to DRMs and (in scenarios with multiple vehicles/guns) trying to ensure your tanks have support close enough to help out (including infantry with Baz, PIAT, PF/Psk). One thing I learned years ago is that it is better to eat the backblast from from an LATW than risk losing a tank that is critical to the defence.
And as others have said,..... practice, practice, practice. Play scenarios with AFVs constantly and you will get better.
Last edited:
JoeArthur
Elder Member
I have wondered how accurate AFV combat is in ASL. If it is - how did those men find the courage to climb into a tank?
Sparafucil3
Forum Guru
Of course I wasn't surprised. I knew I was right all along. -- jim
Sparafucil3
Forum Guru
Have you read Death Traps? Keep in mind the author writes from his perspective and it has some skew to it, but it is a chilling look at the vehicles and some of the men who manned them. -- jim
PabloGS
Senior Member
Reading Svetlana Alexievich's "The Unwomanly Face of War", one of the things that struck me the most was that female nurses in tank units were not simply comfortably waiting in field hospitals, but rather moved behind the tanks, so as to be able to jump into the ones that were hit to help the tankers exit the flaming wrecks.
The Purist
Elder Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 2,917
- Reaction score
- 1,480
- Location
- In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
- First name
- Gerry
- Country
-
If you dig around on the internet you will find a couple of studies done on German tanks. It turns out the Pz IV and V were more likely to burn than was the US M4. Neither German tanks had armoured or wet ammunition storage. The sponsons above the tracks in both tanks were used for ammunition storage and Pz IV used a number of loose two-round racks they propped up on the turret floor for easy access by the loader.
Such cliche's as "Ronson" are also not accurate. The Ronson cigarette lighter, while available since the 30s, did not come into widespread use until well after the war. The most common lighter in use by the US military was the "Zippo" (produced exclusively for the US military during the war) but you do not see the Sherman being called a "Zippo".
The Sherman has a bad rep because the post-war narrative tended to amplify Allied failure while at the same time holding up the Wehrmacht as "the ideal". German officers in allied captivity found a willing audience in Allied debriefing officers as they gave their side of experience in the war. The unfortunate effect this had on the West's view of the Red Army in particular is still being undone.
Last edited:
lightspeed
Senior Member
I read somewhere that the 4 or 5 Shermans to engage a Pz V or VI was real; only because Shermans
fought in platoons of 4 or 5. I don't think the Allies did anything to give a more realistic number (to what
end, really), and besides, it makes the V and VI sound a lot tougher.
indy
The Purist
Elder Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 2,917
- Reaction score
- 1,480
- Location
- In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
- First name
- Gerry
- Country
-
Aye, that makes perfect sense but one didn't lose 3 or 4 of those tanks to knock out the Pz V or VI. It seems the usual tactic, sans Firefly or other 76mm mount, was to blind the enemy tank with smoke and then get around the flank and kill it.
If given the chance to visit the Imperial War Museum in London check out the Jagdpanzer V on display (or was in 2013). It has three neat holes in its right side made by the humble Cromwell. It appears this particular tank destroyer was waiting to ambush the British but was spotted by three Cromwell tanks. They 'smoked' its position, with two tanks keeping its attention to the front. The third Cromwell rolled around the flank and three quick shots later, two into the engine compartment, the third into the crew compartment, the TD was knocked out. No loss on the British side.
If given the chance to visit the Imperial War Museum in London check out the Jagdpanzer V on display (or was in 2013). It has three neat holes in its right side made by the humble Cromwell. It appears this particular tank destroyer was waiting to ambush the British but was spotted by three Cromwell tanks. They 'smoked' its position, with two tanks keeping its attention to the front. The third Cromwell rolled around the flank and three quick shots later, two into the engine compartment, the third into the crew compartment, the TD was knocked out. No loss on the British side.
Last edited:
JoeArthur
Elder Member
I met and talked to a bloke who was in D Day +4. He was in the Royal Engineers working on knocked out tanks to make them operational again. He stated that they sprayed creosote into the tanks prior to working on them to remove the blood and gore.............
Hey just my opinion....played ASL since 1984-5 so my points stand because it is my experience and research..BTW an ATR can disable a Tiger by knocking it's tracks off. remember a tanks worst Hull AF applies... and historically why do you think the Russians used massed ATR versus tigers....read battle reports you will see what I mean..Roadwheels are not armored, drive sprockets and idler wheels are not armored, that is why even a grenade bundle can knock a track off. Hell even a good sized rock can disable a track. I drove armored vehicles for 9 1/2 years in the CF. tracks are vulnerable to rocks, tree stumps, and even parts of trees. I lost many road wheels due to rocks. So an armored round would damage even the drive gear. Russians were trained to aim for the weaker drive gear, not the armor.
Actionjick
Forum Guru
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2020
- Messages
- 7,589
- Reaction score
- 5,086
- Location
- Kent, Ohio
- First name
- Darryl
- Country
-
An episode of Combat saw Sgt. Saunders immobilize a tank with a log in the track. Any port in a storm!
Same for the Shermans.....the gyro was rarely used, and most gunners preferred the regular aim and shoot method. So in ASL a gyro really should be an optional piece of equipment, but to me I would take the T-34/M43 or T-34/85 anytime. Reasons are ease of maintenance, low ground pressure, smaller profile. I like the fact that the T-34 being so common, you can pull parts off a wreck and repair yours. Also it uses diesel, a fuel designed for winter operations, and less prone to explode like gasoline. If I had to crew a flame tank, I would use the OT-34(44 version) with 76mm or 85mm and coaxial mg, plus the flame thrower. By 44 Russian armor tactics were a lot better, with a more flexible command structure. And by late 44 with their deep operation doctrine, outperformed the German tactics. I would say by 44 they could easily out perform any force in the European front. The Shermans are good tanks, but have an achillies heal: Gasoline. Extreme cold typical on the eastern front, plays havoc with fuel.Second is the Shermans height, in Italy they had a lot of problems due to rollovers. I live near a tank museum, and you can see the obvious issues regarding vehicle profiles. The Russian liked the Shermans for their rubber padded tracks, which extended the life of the track itself, and the ice grousers that could replace some of the track pads, but not for it's performance in soft ground, or hilly terrain. The short 75mm was okay, but versus a panther or tiger good luck. I can see the lower kill ratio of the German tanks versus the Shermans in western Europe. The majority of the terrain was was either close, or built up. with few large areas of open ground. Now try the Shermans on Steppe Terrain, their chances drop considerably. In North Africa they were mauled by the Germans.
Gordon
Forum Guru
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2017
- Messages
- 2,491
- Reaction score
- 2,942
- Country
-
I thought I read somewhere that most tank fires were caused by ammunition igniting and not by gasoline fires, hence the "wet stowage" Shermans mostly resolving the fire issue. German tanks tended to have ammunition fires as well because of ammunition being stored in the hull sponsons.
The Purist
Elder Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 2,917
- Reaction score
- 1,480
- Location
- In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
- First name
- Gerry
- Country
-
Good afternoon, Stuh,
Just to be clear on the rule, C5.7 states the Basic TK#... is > the targets lowest hull AF,....
The Russian ATR has a Basic TK# of 6 while Pz V has its lowest AF of 6 and Pz VI has an AF of 8. Neither may be DI'd by the Russian ATR in the game. The Pz I through IV hulls with weakest AF of 3 are certainly vulnerable to the ATR,... even to point of being killed by them.
That's why the Germans came up with Schuerzen, first deployed in Russia in late 42, before the Baz had been encountered. The plates deformed or otherwise helped deflect the 14.5mm round so its penetration power was substantially reduced. I know, most people think Sz was developed to block SCW but that is just another myth coming out of the war and our post-war western-centric view. ASL has D11.21 wrong.
Any source that reference the original test data at Kummersdorf will explain the same thing. Here is a brief but good rundown.
https://balagan.info/why-were-schurzen-introduced-in-ww2
Any tank with unprotected ammunition was just as likely to burn quickly, the Pz IV was notorious for catching fire and some sources note it burned more often than Sherman . One need look no further than the footage of the "Cologne Panther" to see how quickly even a Pz V went up in flames when the ammunition caught fire. The fact that the penetrations were made by a 90mm gun does not change this fact.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=The+Colgne+Panther+battle&qpvt=The+Colgne+Panther+battle&view=detail&mid=45BB9D3913306F5858B345BB9D3913306F5858B3&&FORM=VRDGAR&ru=/videos/search?q=The+Colgne+Panther+battle&qpvt=The+Colgne+Panther+battle&FORM=VDRE
The battle of Arracourt was likely the "show piece" action of US armour in action in NWE. Here a single Combat Command of 4th AD took on and defeated two panzer brigades with few losses. They did so with Shermans and a few M18s. The US tanks mopped the floor with the Germans. Here is a brief description but the 4th AD history provides more detail. For about a dozen Shermans and few Stuarts and TD, two pz bdes are shattered.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=The+Colgne+Panther+battle&ru=/videos/search?q=The+Colgne+Panther+battle&qpvt=The+Colgne+Panther+battle&FORM=VDRE&qpvt=The+Colgne+Panther+battle&view=detail&mid=6FF2DE17E2D288988E4A6FF2DE17E2D288988E4A&&FORM=VDRVRV
In discussing how to best use/fight AFVs in ASL we need to focus on what the game allows and those are the +/- DRM counts. ? The real world is something else again. With that I have no argument.
Cheers.
Last edited:
Actionjick
Forum Guru
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2020
- Messages
- 7,589
- Reaction score
- 5,086
- Location
- Kent, Ohio
- First name
- Darryl
- Country
-
Read a book last year about the Colgne Panther written by one of the crew of the Pershing that took it out. Can't recall the name of the book but a good read. Will have to check the Google for the title.
Spearhead. An American Tank Gunner, His Enemy and a Collision of Lives in World War 2
Last edited:
bendizoid
Official ***** Dickweed
The basic TK # is calculated by using everything inside the box, A-D are outside the box. An Russian ATR at six hex range has a basic TK of 7, enough to mess with a panther.