Sniper Teams vs Snipers (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns



Message

Dragoon 45 -> Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/14/2005 12:42:04 AM)

During World War II most of the Armies involved didn't use single snipers. Snipers were normally employed as a two man team with one being the shooter and the other being a spotter/security man. Also snipers were usually junior NCO's or senior Privates, it was a major waste of a leader using an LT as a sniper. I am not sure that this is an issue deserving an OOB change, but I would like to get other people's opinion on the subject.



Terminus -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/14/2005 12:43:14 AM)

The sniper team is still the basic building block today. Always two guys: one on the rifle and one on the spotter scope.



Riun T -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/14/2005 2:07:51 AM)

Well, in canada and the UK as far as my godfather told me, who was a sniper for can in north africa and europe. he said the # of men was always relitive to the type of terrain and mission duration that would dictate their disposition, He had lots of 1-5 mile reccies that he'd do himself. most often with a hand radio, but if there was the chance or distance to make it an overnighter, the CO sent someoneelse to keep an eye on him and help with not getting lost and most importantly keep him awake. AND didn't I read or hear somewhere that the Russians used to employ whole 6-10 man squads for some of the industrial neiborhoods in Stalingrad.??



Dragoon 45 -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/14/2005 4:35:42 AM)

Thanks for the replies. I spent over thirty years in uniform and am very familiar with training and organization of modern sniper teams. The biggest reason I brought this up was in dealing with this in the game mechanics. As I understand it a two man team is much easier to spot than 1 man. In the game a two man team is as easy to spot as a four or five man team, if I understand it correctly. What I was trying to figure out was how to accurately portray a two man sniper team. If the team knows their business, two men are just as hard to spot as one man, and historically a sniper was very seldom seen prior to them engaging a target. Even then a trained, well camo'ed sniper was almost impossible to spot until he had expended a considerable number of rounds. I know this all has something to deal with unit size and the game automatically resetting size for a unit above a certain level of manning.



Wild Bill -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/18/2005 4:10:12 AM)

I use sniper teams in many of my scenarios. I've been upbraided for it but I keep on doing it. After all the upbraiding I've had, this rhinoceros hide of an old gamer is almost impenitrable (Did I spell that right? - Gunny, take back this beer!)

WB



Gloo -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/18/2005 12:33:50 PM)

quote:

...I would like to get other people's opinion on the subject


I agree with the idea. Personally, I always use 1 sniper + 1 scout + scout car (Kübelwagen). It may not be more historically accurate but surely more fun to play :o)



FlashfyreSP -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/18/2005 4:48:18 PM)

Actually, the 2-man sniper team is a recent development in warfare history. Throughout history, the use of snipers has been wide-spread, but usually as single men who were crack shots, and who were encouraged to, for all intents, "hunt" enemy soldiers and officers. In the American Civil War, for example, sharpshooters were those soldiers who had great skill using telescopic scopes on their rifle-muskets, and were usually deployed in positions of concealment to "take out" enemy officers.

Even in the early half of the 20th century, snipers tended to be lone soldiers. But unlike today's sniper teams, most of them were employed close to the front lines, rather than infiltrating the enemy's rear area to perform their duties. US Army Field Manuals of the period indicate that the job of sniper was to be assigned to, "...an expert rifleman, well qualified in scouting, whose duty is to pick off key enemy personnel who expose themselves. ... Snipers may be employed by the company commander and platoon leaders in either offensive or defensive situations." (FM 7-10, Infantry Rifle Company, Infantry Regiment - 18 March 1944, pg 164)

US infantry platoons routinely employed the marksman within their area of operations. Referring to the manual, "One M1903A4 rifle, equipped with a telescopic sight mounted directly over the receiver, is furnished to each rifle platoon for use in sniping. (See FM 23-10) This rifle is employed by an individual designated by the platoon leader to act as a sniper. (See par. 141)" (FM 7-10, Infantry Rifle Company, Infantry Regiment - 18 March 1944, pg 3)

The in-game Sniper has always seemed to me to be this single rifleman, assigned to sniper duty by the platoon/company commander, and positioned within the platoon/company's Op Area.
So, I made the following change to the standard US Rifle Platoon formation in my personal OOB modification:


  • US Inf HQ
  • US Marksman (new unit: 1 man armed w/M1903 Scoped)
  • US Rifle Squad
  • US Rifle Squad
  • US Rifle Squad


My Sniper unit is now a 2-man unit, armed with an M1903 Scoped and an M1 Carbine.



KG Erwin -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/19/2005 1:31:14 AM)

Flashfyre, you raise an interesting point. In 1942, Col. Bill Whaling of the USMC organized a special "Scout-Sniper Platoon" on Guadalcanal. In 1943, these platoons were organized for other Marine Divisions, with one 43-man platoon (three squads) for each regiment. I still haven't found a way to set up one of these for use in SPWaW. The closest I can figure would be a change in the "LR Patrols". These 6-man half-squad units have Thompsons, a BAR, Satchel Charges and Grenades. If this was intended to be the swift-moving scout-sniper recon unit, then I'd believe that the Satchel Charges should be removed and replaced by the M1903 sniper rifle (30 rnds), and rename them Scout Snipers. The LRRPs, as such, were born in the Pacific.

Maybe the Thompson should be in slot 1, the M1903 Sniper Rifle in slot 2, the BAR in slot 3, and grenades in slot 4. This, to me, better defines a long-range recon unit.

Opinions?



Riun T -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/19/2005 2:41:37 AM)

My problem with the ships loading on the land rectifyed itself by the 4th effort I did to reload the saved previous battleconclusion screen, rerepair and up grade where needed and try and play threw it .
So I got a defend on Cape Clouchester 12/18/43 and everything deployed properly.


this is what I'm using,
USMC CO hq p/t
1 USMCp/t hq with USMC sniper and USArmy FO attached
3 USMC assault sqd's riding 3 french Peatard FO's {carries 8}followed or lead by 3 USArmy grayhounds with USMC scout patrols riding
I break these Recci elements down to lead each USArmy mobile infantry platoon { 3 }2rifle squads,army Lt mortar squad, and 30cal MMG that I've already switched up to 50cal,as well as switching the 37mm to the3in AT gun.
Bought a company of Lee's for the start and have switched the p/t leaders with Assie Sherman flames in early 43 and a couple of regular M4's in sucessive fights since.
2 pairs of SP 75's and 2 pairs SP 105's full p/t of 81mm mortars in light trucks followed by 8 ammo trucks.
2 CS 105 M4's with USMC listening posts riding. split to cover the SP's and mortars
1 p/t USMC E sqd that I changed to Raiders and gave there own 50cal
1 p/t USMC Paratroops that initially had a NGF team attached but changed them to LR patrol
and last but not least 1 p/t of marine engineers riding Amtraks




KG Erwin -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/19/2005 3:11:33 AM)

Riun, my friend, aren't you missing something? OK, you're playing for fun, BUT, when I play as the USMC, I stick with historical. In an amphib assault, you get MASSIVE amounts of off-board firepower. The trade-off is the Japanese getting all these fortified positions and assorted arty.

Forget all that motorized-mechanized junk. The USMC is an infantry force with tanks, SP atillery and engineers as close-support attachments. You job is to blast & burn and kill, nothing more, nothing less.

It is brutal and no-quarters-given. You gotta think that way, as that is how that war was fought.



Goblin -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/19/2005 3:24:46 AM)

Mines OFF is not historical...[;)]


Goblin



KG Erwin -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/19/2005 3:50:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Goblin

Mines OFF is not historical...[;)]


Goblin


And the AI makes up by deploying other defenses. OK, Goblin, maybe I should reconsider my stance on AI mine deployment. You have a point-but I hate those
buggers. My USMC core does allow for engineers, so I guess I should give them something else to do besides being a reserve infantry element--- you got me on that point. [;)]



Goblin -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/19/2005 4:59:10 AM)

Lol, I hate them too, but it does add an element of sphincter pucker waiting for one to go off as you creep forward...[X(][:@]

[;)]

Goblin



KG Erwin -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/19/2005 5:19:32 AM)

Welcome to the jungle, indeed. [sm=00000959.gif][sm=00000106.gif]



BruceAZ -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/23/2005 1:25:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FlashfyreSP

Snipers may be employed by the company commander and platoon leaders in either offensive or defensive situations." (FM 7-10, Infantry Rifle Company, Infantry Regiment - 18 March 1944, pg 164)

US infantry platoons routinely employed the marksman within their area of operations. Referring to the manual, "One M1903A4 rifle, equipped with a telescopic sight mounted directly over the receiver, is furnished to each rifle platoon for use in sniping. (See FM 23-10) This rifle is employed by an individual designated by the platoon leader to act as a sniper. (See par. 141)" (FM 7-10, Infantry Rifle Company, Infantry Regiment - 18 March 1944, pg 3)



Are snipers now in US Patoons as part of the standard OOB? (i.e. 8.4?)

Recon
Semper Fi



FlashfyreSP -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/23/2005 4:48:37 AM)

Not that I'm aware of, BruceAZ.



KG Erwin -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/23/2005 6:06:29 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

Flashfyre, you raise an interesting point. In 1942, Col. Bill Whaling of the USMC organized a special "Scout-Sniper Platoon" on Guadalcanal. In 1943, these platoons were organized for other Marine Divisions, with one 43-man platoon (three squads) for each regiment. I still haven't found a way to set up one of these for use in SPWaW. The closest I can figure would be a change in the "LR Patrols". These 6-man half-squad units have Thompsons, a BAR, Satchel Charges and Grenades. If this was intended to be the swift-moving scout-sniper recon unit, then I'd believe that the Satchel Charges should be removed and replaced by the M1903 sniper rifle (30 rnds), and rename them Scout Snipers. The LRRPs, as such, were born in the Pacific.

Maybe the Thompson should be in slot 1, the M1903 Sniper Rifle in slot 2, the BAR in slot 3, and grenades in slot 4. This, to me, better defines a long-range recon unit.

Opinions?


Still no comment? --I made the change for my personal USMC OOB. These units should be used carefully-- they are designed for covert ops, and should be used as such. This is in response to Flashfyre and BruceAZ.

There is no equivalent covert ops team in the US Army OOB, but one should exist.



Major Destruction -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/23/2005 6:16:49 AM)

Getting back to the original question:

Snipers can be used in such a way that they remain totally undetected, as can other units (not ALL other units).

1. Allow them to find cover
2. Never move them in the enemy LOS except 1 hex per turn.
3. Switch off the rifle until you need to use it. Never allow them to opfire during the opponent turn.
4. For added insurance against human opponents, don't place them in the usual expected locations. Rough terrain is great. Trees and buildings often attract more attention and can lead to enemy search paries sniffing you out. Out in the middle of an open terrain area does not attract attention and gives you a super 360 field of fire.
5. never fire more than one shot per turn.



Dragoon 45 -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/23/2005 7:38:13 AM)

Some of you raised some good points. What I was trying to get at in my original post was that I think historical accuracy is a little off when dealing with snipers. Yes the U.S. Military issued sniper rifles to each platoon for a unit marksman, not a trained sniper per se. The Russians from what I can find generally used two man teams when they deployed snipers on the battlefield. I am not sure on German Deployment.

Back in the late 70's I spent some time at Quantico, Va. A friend of mine was an instructor at the scout/sniper school there. He showed me a class they presented to all students in the school. In the class they had stated that Marine snipers had always been deployed in two or three man teams since their reintroduction into the Corps in WW II. The class went on to make the distinction between the unit marksman who used a 1903A4 and placed precision fire on a target and the true trained sniper. The unit marksman was in direct support of his unit and would be found very close. The sniper along with his spotter/security would not be in direct support of a unit but instead would operate were ever the sniper felt he could accomplish his mission which a lot of times was Intel related. If this information that was being taught at Quantico is fact, then the case could be made for both the individual unit Marksman and the Sniper team included in the OOB's. If I recall correctly, the British employed both individual snipers and sniper teams based on their experience in WW I.

I have in the past read comments on the somewhat improbable ability of snipers taking out an armored vehicle with a close assault. I would agree that it is highly unlikely one man armed with just a rifle and possibly a grenade could take out a Panther through close assault. But I would also a sniper team working together would find it much easier to accomplish this if for no other reason that two or three men would be able to carry the munitions that could take out a tank where as one man in most cases wouldn't.

While this is not a huge issue in the Game, I do think if the distinction was made between sniper/unit marksmen and sniper teams which in some cases is historical accurate; it would allow more flexibility in game play and might possibly alleviate some of the querks involved in the questionable ability of the single sniper able to take out tanks.

There are many examples of one sniper or one sniper team pinning an entire infantry company for hours on end during WW II. But I never seen this happen in game play. A trained and experienced sniper or sniper team can do great damage to the enemy and I believe this is not adequately portrayed in the game. Instead the Game seems to portray the sniper more as the unit marksman instead of a true sniper.



Possusoturi -> RE: Sniper Teams vs Snipers (7/23/2005 3:36:38 PM)

The little what I know about snipers is that Finland had some snipers who worked alone for extended periods of time during ww2. I also once noticed that red army seemed to employ whole sniper platoons which were given quite high independence from chain of command, and therefore fought as units of variable size, most often 1-3. I don´t know if this was a rule or an exception, however, as I don´t have the source of this knowledge anymore. At least my company during my service at 3rd jaeger(mechanized infantry) company of finnish defence forces saw snipers employed almost exclusively as part of the squads. I don´t know if this applies to other arms as well, or is it based on any tradition from ww2.

Regarding to the spwaw rules, is it possible to have sniper eliminate squadleader and what are the chances of this occurring?

Thanks for your patience.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.4375