 |
|
Half track question - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Campaign Series (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=8) +--- Thread: Half track question (/showthread.php?tid=41949) |
RE: Half track question - majog - 08-20-2007 Does that mean it should get an MG platoon strength of 2 or 4? RE: Half track question - Mike Abberton - 08-20-2007 Just don't forget that you're typically getting 2 extra halftracks in a platoon sized unit. Because of the loading rules, a 6SP infantry platoon requires 6 halftracks to load it. However, the typical mechanized platoon really only had 4 or 5 halftracks assigned per the TO&E. For the Germans, one 251/1 for each squad (total of 3) and one 251/10 (with a Pak 37mm) for the HQ section. US AIB (1943) look like they have 5 M3A1 HTs (one for each squad and two for the attached MG/mortar/bazooka teams). British armored infantry company in 1942 had 13 carriers assigned (presumably 4 per platoon and 1 for the batt HQ). RE: Half track question - Jason Petho - 08-20-2007 Panther Bait Wrote:Because of the loading rules, a 6SP infantry platoon requires 6 halftracks to load it. With the 1.02 patch for the Matrix Edition, only 3 halftracks are now required for 6SP an infantry platoon. Jason Petho RE: Half track question - Mike Abberton - 08-20-2007 Jason, That is great news. The 6SP HT groups always bothered me a little. :) Another advantage of the ME edition. Mike RE: Half track question - junk2drive - 08-20-2007 While it makes sense to change it, how will it effect existing scenarios that are currently (pre 1.02) balanced? RE: Half track question - Jason Petho - 08-20-2007 junk2drive Wrote:While it makes sense to change it, how will it effect existing scenarios that are currently (pre 1.02) balanced? It shouldn't, as there is a new set of halftracks that the weapons values are changed for, not the stock. Jason Petho RE: Half track question - LEGXXIIPRPF - 08-25-2007 i have fired a couple of thousands life rounds with the redesigned version of the MG42, in the light, heavy and the mounted (truck and infantry fighting vehicle) version. here are my thoughts: definitively it is much more difficult to fire from a vehicle. the weapon is not well fixed as the machine gun serves also an aa machine gun. when you fix it you have a limited field of fire. turning the weapon costs more time than in the dismounted version. secondly the angle for fire is poor to fire at dismounted adversaries. besides that there is also the psychological factor.....at least for an infantry man. :) you feel exposed and you ARE exposed....no melting into the country side.the protection plates protect only against small arms fire caliber max 7,62 and light shrapnel fire. additionaly imagine the halftrack moving around and you have to fire in slow or even full movement...really bad aim. in my opinion the vehicle mounted mgs should be less effective than the dismounted versions. perhaps a bit upgrading would be more realistic. In the Panzergrenadiertruppe the driver and a least another guy remained in the SPw. RE: Half track question - Krec - 08-25-2007 otlig, yor thoughts make total sense, mounted mgs work best when not totally exposed, if that makes sense. alot of times thou the HT is guarding a road or area with long ROS which makes swivling difficult or limited . In the game the HTs are a versiltile unit that can really make things difficult if used right. RE: Half track question - Von Luck - 08-26-2007 Have to agree with Majog on this if you can move a H/T then the crew must be there so they can fire the mg.Armour etc is not a factor if its the same gun as mg units then should have the same firepower. RE: Half track question - Herr Straße Laufer - 08-26-2007 Since this is an HT thread I thought I would respond too! :smoke: Remember the purpose of the gun mounted on the HT? The Germans saw it as dual purpose and really wanted AA capabilities. They may have carried a bit more ammo per gun as the Americans. But, the gun was not the "all power fire god" that it was made out to be? :rolleyes: Especially, in the AA/mounted role? Does the gun have the full crew and support (ie ammo carriers) that the infantry MG squads had? Ya just cannot put a "super weapon" into a role it was not designed for and expect it to operate as a super weapon? Just my thoughts as I drool over the thought of another HT going into the fray! ;) Ed |
){kind=link}