Anti-tanks tech for Soviet Union?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Anti-tanks tech for Soviet Union?

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII: World at War >> Anti-tanks tech for Soviet Union?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Anti-tanks tech for Soviet Union? - 9/7/2020 4:57:01 PM

boudi

Posts: 346
Joined: 1/7/2007
From: France
Status: offline

Yes or not? What are your opinions?

Post #: 1

RE: Anti-tanks tech for Soviet Union? - 9/7/2020 5:57:00 PM

Bo Rearguard

Posts: 492
Joined: 4/7/2008
From: Basement of the Alamo
Status: offline

Anti-tank units are kind of a niche creature. If the enemy parks a tank unit right next to them so you can blow it away with the 30% prepared bonus in your turn, they're great. If an enemy armored unit bumps into them unseen while moving they're really great. The rest of time they're sort of an oddball unit not especially good at defending against the infantry and artillery units which are the majority of any army.

I'd definitely hold off on researching/buying these until all other needs are met. However, by that point in the game as the Soviet Union maybe the tide has turned and you are in more need of offensive than defensive units, so they're kind of out of a job.

I think I only built one when playing the Russians. I was always uncertain where to best deploy it and wherever I put it, it always seemed to get stomped on by German Corps and Armies. I think may have eventually banished it to Siberia.

_____________________________

"They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist ...." Union General John Sedgwick, 1864

(in reply to boudi)

Post #: 2

RE: Anti-tanks tech for Soviet Union? - 9/7/2020 6:23:40 PM

Bo Rearguard

Posts: 492
Joined: 4/7/2008
From: Basement of the Alamo
Status: offline

Now that I think about it, the ultimate drawback of anti-tanks units may be their single purpose research branch. When you research advanced tanks it benefits light tanks, tanks and heavy tanks. When you research infantry weapons the resulting upgrades apply to cavalry, partisans and recon units as well. But only AT units get anything from AT research which makes it less desirable to invest in as there is no cross-situational bonus.

Just a thought, but maybe anti-tank upgrades should result from a combination of both tank and infantry research. After all, most anti-tank units were usually nothing more than a group of tank-caliber guns & crew, without the tank.

_____________________________

"They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist ...." Union General John Sedgwick, 1864

(in reply to Bo Rearguard)

Post #: 3

RE: Anti-tanks tech for Soviet Union? - 9/7/2020 7:20:18 PM

Marcinos1985

Posts: 430
Joined: 1/22/2020
Status: offline

They are definetely worth it in my opinion. Couple of pros:
1. You get this tech for free. Refunding it yields only 62 MPP's
2. They are very good against tanks, which for USSR are main threat (esp in early years)
3. They are really resilient against infantry too. Against 'Hard' type their defense is 2, so like Corps with level 1. But at the same time, they are 'Light Armour' type, so inf attack against them is noticeably lower (army with IW1 has attack of 3). Put them in a good terain and they will not give in easily.

There is also a psychological factor. Rarely a player will want to put their shiny Panzer in range of this thing. Put them flexibly on the front, and your opponent will have to solve a puzzle.

They aren't that good on attack, true, but against tanks still they will deliver some dmg. And as Russia you should be happy to trade Panzers hp for your at gun HP's.

_____________________________

WaW ELO Tournament
3 Tips to improve your game now

(in reply to boudi)

Post #: 4

RE: Anti-tanks tech for Soviet Union? - 9/7/2020 8:28:23 PM

Torplexed

Posts: 305
Joined: 3/21/2002
From: The Pacific
Status: offline

As the Russians, I only ever get around to making anti-tank units if virtually everything else on the roster has been built, and if there are MPPs to spare. The soft build limits only allow for a few, and they're not particularly cheap. The base cost of a Russian anti-tank unit is 200 MPP. You can buy a far more useful heavy artillery or rocket artillery unit for that price. Plus, as mentioned, each level of anti-tank research only profits the anti-tank class and no other units, and they are almost useless for attacking infantry.

_____________________________

(in reply to Marcinos1985)

Post #: 5

RE: Anti-tanks tech for Soviet Union? - 9/7/2020 8:46:34 PM

Elessar2

Posts: 883
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bo Rearguard

quote:

Just a thought, but maybe anti-tank upgrades should result from a combination of both tank and infantry research. After all, most anti-tank units were usually nothing more than a group of tank-caliber guns & crew, without the tank.

Or with a tracked anti-tank vehicle.

In previous editions of SC, anti-tank tech was built into infantry units. But with a maximum of 3 tech slots, something had to go (vs. infantry, mobility, and A-A). Opening up a 4th slot would help remedy this situation, and would model all sorts of A-T goodies, from simple stationary guns to panzerfausts & bazookas to StuGs and M-36's and Su-76's and such.

(in reply to Bo Rearguard)

Post #: 6

RE: Anti-tanks tech for Soviet Union? - 9/7/2020 9:26:24 PM

Bo Rearguard

Posts: 492
Joined: 4/7/2008
From: Basement of the Alamo
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elessar2
Or with a tracked anti-tank vehicle.

I seem to recall one of this game's developers stating that the anti-tank units in this game represent massed anti-tanks guns on a narrow front. What the Germans called "Pakfronts". During the large Soviet armored attacks on the Eastern front in late 1941�1942, the Germans quickly realized that their anti-tank guns, operating individually or in small groups, and with no central commander, were quickly overwhelmed.

The pakfront concept was developed to counter this. A group of up to ten guns were placed under the command of one officer. He was responsible for designating targets and directing the fire of his guns. This allowed the Germans to spring particularly effective anti-tank ambushes, with all guns being assigned separate targets and then firing at once, maximizing surprise and minimizing the chance for return fire. These were then developed into even larger units.

The Soviets soon copied the tactic, and used it to great effect at the Battle of Kursk in July 1943. The tactic was found to be extremely effective, and the Soviets embellished upon it by using multiple pakfronts in co-operation with minefields, anti-tank ditches, and other obstacles to channel the enemy armor into their fields of fire. I'm thinking that this is what is represented in the game by the anti-tank units.

The problem with the anti-tank guns mounted on an AFV chassis, (tank destroyer concept) is that because they looked like a tank, everyone (including officers who should have known better) tended to treat them as tanks. I just got done reading American Knights, a book about the US 601st towed anti tank battalion that got upgraded to M-10 tank destroyers. The author of the book complained that were often taken out of their anti-tank role, and called upon to do everything the Sherman tanks in the armored divisions and battalions did, from overrunning infantry to bunker busting with the M-10s. I guess that explains why the tank destroyer concept got shelved at the war's end. Why have two different types of vehicles that do the same thing?

_____________________________

"They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist ...." Union General John Sedgwick, 1864

(in reply to Elessar2)

Post #: 7

RE: Anti-tanks tech for Soviet Union? - 9/8/2020 6:22:10 AM

Tanaka

Posts: 4378
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marcinos1985

They are definetely worth it in my opinion. Couple of pros:
1. You get this tech for free. Refunding it yields only 62 MPP's
2. They are very good against tanks, which for USSR are main threat (esp in early years)
3. They are really resilient against infantry too. Against 'Hard' type their defense is 2, so like Corps with level 1. But at the same time, they are 'Light Armour' type, so inf attack against them is noticeably lower (army with IW1 has attack of 3). Put them in a good terain and they will not give in easily.

There is also a psychological factor. Rarely a player will want to put their shiny Panzer in range of this thing. Put them flexibly on the front, and your opponent will have to solve a puzzle.

They aren't that good on attack, true, but against tanks still they will deliver some dmg. And as Russia you should be happy to trade Panzers hp for your at gun HP's.

Agreed. In my current MP game I have probably destroyed more allied tanks with my German anti tank guns than I have with tanks. And many times offensively. Next game I will focus even more on anti tank units and research. As it should be. The German 88 was devastating and one of the most effective weapons of WW2.

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 9/8/2020 6:23:06 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Marcinos1985)

Post #: 8

RE: Anti-tanks tech for Soviet Union? - 9/8/2020 8:45:18 PM

ElvisJJonesRambo

Posts: 1345
Joined: 2/6/2019
Status: offline

Considering you'll be facing Panzer tech level 4+ at some point, you never everything you got. Winter weather and a couple Anti-Tank units can be tasty. Can have all the toys in the toybox, but as most know, I mix my game up each game. Give them a shot. Have fun.

_____________________________

Without Him, I could do nothing
Without Him, I'd surely fail
Without Him, I would be drifting
Like a ship without a sail

(in reply to Tanaka)

Post #: 9

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII: World at War >> Anti-tanks tech for Soviet Union?

Page: [1]