the_iron_duke
Posts: 79
Joined: 10/7/2016 Status: offline
|
I found a good source. Here are the results of a survey of 109 NATO field grade officers, asked to assess the relative combat values of various different categories of weapons sytems and in various terrains. The study the table is from was released in 1993, so it's probably of greater relevance to the military of that time, although I think it still has a level of applicability to the Second World War-era battlefield. - Assessing Combat Power: A Methodology for Tactical Battle Staffs - Major Allen D. Raymond (1993) In the terrain that it's best-suited for - rolling/open terrain - a single tank is estimated to have the combat value of 1.76 infantry platoons. So, roughly, a rifle company being worth two tanks. I think this probably doesn't tell the full picture in terms of a tank's value. A rifle company's strength will, I think, be pretty much all combat power, since it has only basic mobility and no armour. A tank, on the other hand, has the mobility to conduct strategic manoeuvres way beyond a rifle company's capability and, potentially, in game terms, to attack multiple times in a turn. Also, a tank's armour will surely form part of its combat value score, but, in more general terms, it will make a tank a lot less vulnerable to bombardment, such as by artillery or air power. So I think that, if these things are taken in to account, a rifle company might then be worth a single tank, rather than two.
|