Forums

Tiger ace Michael Wittman said he hated enemy guns more than tanks, and I'm sure CM players agree with him because guns can usually get off 2 or 3 shots before they're even spotted.
In this top pic my herd of T-70's suddenly came under fire from a light AT-gun in the trees in the previous turn and holes began appearing in them.
So in the next order phase I jam everybody's brakes on and order them to saturate the gun position with area fire (yellow lines)
Then just 9 seconds into the turn the gun crew run off as the position erupts in a storm of high-explosive tank fire, (not bad considering the T-70's guns are only baby 45mm's)..
That's usually my standard tactic against guns, I stop and return fire on them with everything I've got because they're so deadly and must be taken down without delay, although sometimes i'll let my tanks keep moving on 'Fast' if the gun can be quickly bypassed.
Notice I used mostly area-fire into the ground around the gun position, that's because area-firers will keep on plastering throughout the whole turn, whereas if I used direct fire they'd stop firing if the gun became pinned, because they'd lose their lock on it.
However I do leave a small proportion of the tank force direct-firing (red lines) so they're free to shoot up the running gun crew or anything else..

POS, I don't have a problem with the Mass Firepower Tank concept, in theory. I do have an issue with the pictures of the tactic in practice.  Firstly, I agree, the more rounds you can place on or near an enemy gun or tank the better. You increase the odds of destroying the target in the picture that you posted, at the least should be able to trade 1 for 1 depending on experience and rate of fire of the unit that you are engaging. As the attacker, this seems like a good thing, you already start with more points anyhow.
But this is where I find flaw with the tactic. First off, what if the enemy is employing a good overwatch or if stationary multiple guns with interlocking LOS and kill zones? The "Herd" pictured has most tanks within 45 deg. of one another with reguards to the gun. Now add a couple more guns that "SHOULD" be there with good covered arcs, inlocking kill zones and you are in trouble. As your armour gets knocked out, it takes less time for the enemy guns to rotate to the next target as they are so close together, thus increasing the odds of you losing more, quickly. And the close spacing allows the main body to become engaged at a range chosen by the enemy. If the enemy guns are spread out with a good HQ or two, they are not going to panic easily. If the enemy waits 'till the "herd" is in a better position, he should be able to getat least quartering shots, and probably side shots at some or most of the "herd". I also do not see any friendly infantry (does not mean they are not there, they maybe out of the picture) which will increase the odds of a successful multi-gun ambush on your armour.
To repeat, this tactic seems to be only partly true. "Do" mass your firepower but "Do Not" group your firepower close together or you too are vulnerable.

I agree with you Ratzki... it looks all fine in well here, but usually won't stand the test of a good opponent on the battlefield, especially one looking for this type of tactic. There are benefits of combining tanks together to bring fire upon targets in a concerted effort, but you have to weigh the negatives.

Tactically speaking, the right thing to do would be to identify a target(s) and then converge on them, from multiple positions when possible, flanking and guarding against retaliation. Much of these pics do not detail the level of intuition that is needed, and although very useful and appreciated, are much too oversimplified at times.

Cheers!

Leto

Thanks guys but don't read too much into just the top pic, as every battle is different and we have to play it by ear as the situation changes minute-by-minute..
For example in this one below (viewed from the German side of the map) my Russkis captured the flag at top right, went through some Marders like butter, then my T-34's came down the road and were stopped dead by a pakfront of (gulp) 7 guns and were butchered.
Okay I win some, I lose some, i'm kool..

I've always found the 'tank fist' concept most helpful on defense, where you can move it around under cover and lie in wait, in the manner of your 'line of death' pic, POS. It's a great way to get maximum firepower on the opponents AFVs as the come in to sight one at a time, especially as your vehicles are generally stationary, and acquire targets quicker.

For me, always been too risky on the attack, especially against a good opponent. 12 tanks on 1 gun, you'll probably be OK. But drive that fist into LOS of 3 guns against an opponent who knows when to fire (in the manner of the second pic), and your fist will be hurting. As a defender, I'm usually very happy if I can trade a gun for 2 tanks. An experienced gun crew will get that on a tank fist before it's even spotted.

The advantage of the tank fist on the attack, on the other hand, is that your throw your whole weight at one small slice of your opponent's line, minimizing the amount of troops you are fighting with the fist, unless he's done a good job shifting forces...

Yes POS, every situation is different. It is just that th 1st picture indicates a form of attack that I do not subscribe to. The 3rd picture illustrates exactly the flaw that was pointed out. Multiple guns from different locations with good interlocking fire. What I do notice is the lack of infantry in both that I do not see. They would have handled the guns if they were out combing the cover for the enemy. I'll make an infantryman of you yet.

Right mate, it's not rocket science, anybody can do it -
"Man schlagt jemanden mit der Faust und nicht mit gespreizten Fingern" - Gen. Guderian
("Punch with your fist and not with your fingers spread")

Here's a shot from an ongoing game, my tank fist of 12x T-34/85's raced over the hill at bottom right and blew away a Panther and 3x 75mm(?) ATG's that opened up on them, shooting it out over the next couple of turns.
The result? - I lost 4x T-34s and he lost the Panther and the 3x Guns..
It's only turn 6 and I've kicked in the door of his entire left flank..
Now my infantry are fanning out into a screen to walk in front of the tanks to flush out any schrecks in the clumps of trees as my whole force rolls up to the flags..

BELOW - THE POWER OF THE GUN.
PIC 1 - In another game this 6-pounder opens up on three Stugs






PIC 2 - The gunners view. It fires several times before the enemy can even spot it and begin trying to return fire..






PIC 3 - Within 2 turns the Stugs are dead. One fired back several times but was no match against the fast-firing highly-accurate 6-pdr, it peppered them with 17 shots (note ammo readouts), most of which hit and penetrated.
"Whoever fires first, wins" - modern Israeli tank doctrine.
"The day goes to the first to plaster his opponent with fire" - Rommel



6-pdr, Normandy

It is better never shot from gun then shot to early because when gun is spotted = gun is destroyed I never allow tank versus gun duel - if my tank would survive first shot - usually reverse (or smoke) and near by infantry seek for LOS near the gun - then tank goes to that spot and fire .
The best weapon against guns are mortars

105mm Howitzer