AA unit

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

AA unit

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> The War Room >> AA unit

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

AA unit - 2/6/2008 12:49:40 AM

cymloveselva

Posts: 31
Joined: 1/26/2008
Status: offline

I would like to know more on how to properly use the AA unit within a formation.
Does there really provides a radii of AA protection if defending (or unmoved) from the beginning of that turn, while other unit pass through it?
Really wanna know...

Thanks...

Post #: 1

RE: AA unit - 2/6/2008 2:34:21 AM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

Nope, it'll just fire at air units attacking the hex.

Of course, in most scenarios, the AA units have a (generally completely ahistorical) ground combat capability.

So they're actually elite assault troops. Screw the Marines -- send in the AA batteries.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to cymloveselva)

Post #: 2

RE: AA unit - 2/6/2008 2:48:04 AM

sPzAbt653

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline

I know you said most scenarios, but it made me think of the US in WWII using their twin and quad 50's mounted in halftracks (designed for AA defense) in deployment against ground troops to great effect. Also, the German 88 Dual Purpose is well know for this type of role. Do you think most countries had a doctrine against allowing their AA units in ground support roles?

(in reply to ColinWright)

Post #: 3

RE: AA unit - 2/6/2008 3:39:46 AM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I know you said most scenarios, but it made me think of the US in WWII using their twin and quad 50's mounted in halftracks (designed for AA defense) in deployment against ground troops to great effect. Also, the German 88 Dual Purpose is well know for this type of role. Do you think most countries had a doctrine against allowing their AA units in ground support roles?

The British certainly didn't use them that way on a regular basis -- not until about 1944.

More importantly, even in the case of forces such as the Germans -- who did use their flak as ground support right from the start -- a flak gun can't do two things at once. It cannot simultaneously be protecting a road junction two kilometers behind the front from air attack and supporting your assault on Point 352.

...so if I find a flak unit in the historical OOB, I don't just mindlessly make the corresponding unit. I look at what it actually did. Because one thing's for sure. If you make the unit, and you make it able to cooperate with other units, it'll be up there in the front line, supporting every assault it can.

No matter what happened historically.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 4

RE: AA unit - 2/6/2008 7:56:58 AM

sPzAbt653

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline

I see your point, two functions at once. Although I tend to think that if a turn is a week, this wouldn't be abnormal. I also think if I move my AA units to the front, my airfield defense is lacking. This may only be in my mind, I'm not sure if AA units actually contribute to the defense of an airfield.

(in reply to ColinWright)

Post #: 5

RE: AA unit - 2/6/2008 8:09:17 PM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I see your point, two functions at once. Although I tend to think that if a turn is a week, this wouldn't be abnormal...

It might not be completely abnormal, but it does call for an enemy that is at least moderately cooperative. He has to avoid staging his air strikes at the same time as the ground combat is taking place.

I think that aside from doctrine, one has to look at the circumstances in the particular scenario. After all, the British and Americans started using their AA for ground support because they had total air supremacy. Had there been Luftwaffe units around to shoot at, less of that AA would have migrated to the firing line.

Of course, detailed accounts of the actual fighting are always good. Are the AA units popping up in them all the time? Occasionally? Never?

It's like in my Exporter (Commonwealth invasion of Syria) scenario. Vichy had all these Lebanese 'Chasseur' battalions. But did they actually try employing them in combat? With one regrettable exception, no. So...not many Lebanese Chasseur battalions.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 6

RE: AA unit - 2/7/2008 3:54:00 AM

sPzAbt653

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

... the British and Americans started using their AA for ground support because they had total air supremacy. Had there been Luftwaffe units around to shoot at, less of that AA would have migrated to the firing line.

Air Superiority is a great luxury. The examples that came to my mind were times when the Allies didn't need much airfield defense. And the Germans were usually up against it and improvising with everything.

In my past tinkerings with a 1944 west front scenario, I made the German Flak units static at their airfields, while the Allied AA units were left mobile. So I must have subconsciously at least partially understood the concept.

Cheers.

(in reply to ColinWright)

Post #: 7

RE: AA unit - 2/7/2008 5:29:56 AM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

... the British and Americans started using their AA for ground support because they had total air supremacy. Had there been Luftwaffe units around to shoot at, less of that AA would have migrated to the firing line.

Air Superiority is a great luxury. The examples that came to my mind were times when the Allies didn't need much airfield defense. And the Germans were usually up against it and improvising with everything.

I'll note that German flak units did provide direct fire support to ground troops as a matter of doctrine right from the start of the war -- and did so even under conditions where the Germans didn't have air supremacy. However, obviously if they find their hands full with actual AA duties...

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 8

RE: AA unit - 2/7/2008 12:01:50 PM

Heldenkaiser

Posts: 58
Joined: 8/8/2006
Status: offline

I think the German army routinely used their AA units for ground support, more or less regardless of the air situation. One example that comes to mind is the British AB battalion that advanced into Arnhem on the river road being more or less stopped cold by a single flak wagon on the other shore using it's small caliber AA guns in the ground role with great effect. That's against infantry, not even vehicles. Of course, the 88 mm AA gun was notorious for its effectiveness in the AT role.

(in reply to ColinWright)

Post #: 9

RE: AA unit - 2/7/2008 8:14:18 PM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Heldenkaiser

I think the German army routinely used their AA units for ground support, more or less regardless of the air situation. One example that comes to mind is the British AB battalion that advanced into Arnhem on the river road being more or less stopped cold by a single flak wagon on the other shore using it's small caliber AA guns in the ground role with great effect. That's against infantry, not even vehicles. Of course, the 88 mm AA gun was notorious for its effectiveness in the AT role.

Still. One of the points I would emphasize is that in the real world, a flak gun cannot simultaneously be supporting that position up at the front and be protecting that road junction a kilometer back. Moreover, enemies are notorious for making air attacks right when they're making a ground attack as well. They're inconsiderate that way. It could be hard for that flak gun to drive off the attacking aircraft at the road junction, limber up, get to the actual front, dig in, and knock out the attacking Shermans.

Except in OPART. There, it's a snap. I'm not squalling that some sort of programming change needs to be made -- but designers do need to critically look at what they do with the flak.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to Heldenkaiser)

Post #: 10

RE: AA unit - 2/7/2008 11:43:29 PM

sapper32

Posts: 1197
Joined: 5/7/2007
From: Warminster England
Status: offline

Didnt Rommels supply dumps take a terrible pounding in North Africa as a lot of his 88s where shooting holes through the Desert Rats tanks??.

(in reply to ColinWright)

Post #: 11

RE: AA unit - 2/8/2008 2:20:13 AM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sapper32

Didnt Rommels supply dumps take a terrible pounding in North Africa as a lot of his 88s where shooting holes through the Desert Rats tanks??.

Could be. Doubt if it was much consolation to the contents of the tanks, though.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to sapper32)

Post #: 12

RE: AA unit - 2/9/2008 1:52:26 AM

cymloveselva

Posts: 31
Joined: 1/26/2008
Status: offline

I see...
Then, does the AA unit provides Anti-Air while moving...? Particularly during Enemy Interdiction againts my moving units...

(in reply to ColinWright)

Post #: 13

RE: AA unit - 2/9/2008 2:26:49 AM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cymloveselva

I see...
Then, does the AA unit provides Anti-Air while moving...? Particularly during Enemy Interdiction againts my moving units...

Good question. I've wondered about that myself.

Of course, it wouldn't be so hot even if it did. Then the thing to do would be to lead off every turn by having your AA units run back and forth as much as possible -- real authentic.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to cymloveselva)

Post #: 14