Question on tactics: Assault, assault and assault

[Huib Versloot]

Huib,

I would say that there were many armored encounters at less than 250 meters. We cannot shoot within the same hex in CS so the assault is the only option.
It was very rare but I have recently read accounts of Russian armor (during Kursk) ramming German panzers to disable, etc.

So assaulting is ramming? That is not a good definition because assaulting in CS is much more common than 'ramming'.
What I'm trying to point out is that people invent so called realism ROEs while at the same time they can't even give a definition of an assault between armored vehicles. I don't have any problem with anybody's ROE as long as their mutually agreed. I for one find it acceptable that HTs assault armor, given the limitations of the game engine, and as long it is not clear what an assault stands for.
That doesn't mean I would use that tactic, since my HTs are usually behind the lines because I find their MG's too undergunned to provide fire support for my infantry. CM is modelled better in this respect. You can actually utilize the HT's MG, while at the same time the HT is unable to harm a tank. Vehicles can't "assault" in that game.