• Blitz Shadow Player
  • Caius
  • redboot
  • Rules
  • Chain of Command
  • Members
  • Supported Ladders & Games
  • Downloads


Sniper vs Armoured vehicle.
02-26-2011, 04:35 PM,
#1
Sniper vs Armoured vehicle.
Can someone explane to me how to hell sniper can even destroy armoured vehicle at 1hex ? With rifle and graned....awesome work :)

Can game coders change some factors on there...Little update perhaps for this?
Send this user an email
Quote this message in a reply
02-26-2011, 09:53 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-26-2011, 09:55 PM by Leo.)
#2
RE: Sniper vs Armoured vehicle.
Infantry unit can successful assault armored unit at one hex (of course, only if infantry unit has any anti-tank weapon. Grenade counts as anti-tank weapon too). And for assault not necessarily presence of charges.

If the anti-tank weapon weak, usually occurs immobilization. There is a destruction less often. Theoretically, the sniper can destroy even the Maus.
Quote this message in a reply
02-26-2011, 11:04 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-26-2011, 11:06 PM by Cross.)
#3
RE: Sniper vs Armoured vehicle.
Are we talking about SPWaW, or SPWW2/SPMBT?

For SPWW2/MBT:

1 hex range is considered a 'close assault'.

AFVs are vulnerable to infantry 'close assaults', especially if your armoured vehicle was open topped?

Infantry often found a way to KO nearby armour. To avoid this, never drive AFVs next to enemy infantry, unless they are fleeing/routed.

Infantry do have a chance to 'panic' when 'close assaulting' an AFV, especially if the AFV is large. If they panic, they won't assault, will get high suppression, and may even flee.

Infantry have much better chance of a successful close assault if they were stationary (eg. ambush), and didn't move up to the AFV to attack it.

AFVs have a much better chance of surviving a close assault if they are carrying infantry, which work as an extra defense for the AFV, but the carried infantry may suffer bad casualties.

You can even shoot into open topped AFVs, especially if the infantry are above the open AFV, say in a building or on higher ground. If the crew are all KO'd in this manner, the AFV will be considered destroyed.

Hope this helps
Quote this message in a reply
02-27-2011, 02:44 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-27-2011, 02:44 AM by spwaw.)
#4
RE: Sniper vs Armoured vehicle.
That make no sense. My german snipers even destroy t-34,Shermans ect...

Think yourself in battle with sniper rifle and handgranade. Could you destroy tank or immobile it? I cant.

I mean SPWW2
Send this user an email
Quote this message in a reply
02-27-2011, 03:33 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-27-2011, 07:08 AM by Cross.)
#5
RE: Sniper vs Armoured vehicle.
Here's a couple of threads that discuss this issue:

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthrea...se+assault

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthrea...se+assault

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthrea...se+assault


I don't know how easily infantry could KO tanks in WWII.
I do believe it's easier than you think it is.

A single man close to an AFV could be dangerous in WW2. They were trained to attack weak spots on the tank, like the engine cover and view ports.

I know molotov cocktails were very dangerous, I posted a brief animated gif in one of the above posts showing a single Rumanian knocking out a T28 with a molotov cocktail (actual footage).

[Image: romanianvst28.gif]


But I don't know about grenades. I would think a grenade on the weak top armour, engine cover, critical track part, or jammed into a port could do damage. But that may require you to be in the same hex as the tank.
Quote this message in a reply
02-27-2011, 04:24 AM,
#6
RE: Sniper vs Armoured vehicle.
Quote:False: Wrote by Cross
But that may require you to be in the same hex as the tank.

Making several tests and dont needed be at same hex. Enough if you are adjacent one.:smoke:

And sniper rifle men what i mean dont have any molotov coctails and (By the way we in Finland know molotovs ,we inspirated that on WW2.)

So game engine must be fault on this region . This is my opinion.

Never read on military books that single nade destroy tank? Mayby mu mistake but very odd thing.

I know that you could immobile tank example with log and when you are in open field there are not log´s and log dont destroy tank.
Send this user an email
Quote this message in a reply
02-27-2011, 05:57 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-27-2011, 05:57 AM by Cross.)
#7
RE: Sniper vs Armoured vehicle.
(02-27-2011, 04:24 AM)spwaw Wrote: Making several tests and dont needed be at same hex. Enough if you are adjacent one.

Sorry, poorly worded sentence on my part.

I ment to say, that I think close assault by 'range 1' weapons (satchel, grenades, mines) should probably be changed to 'in the same hex' as the target tank.

So I was sort of agreeing with you, that it should be a little harder than it currently is.

But at least SPWW2 is much better - in this regard - than SPWaW where the infantry are much more uber.
Quote this message in a reply
02-27-2011, 03:43 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-27-2011, 04:54 PM by Gila.)
#8
RE: Sniper vs Armoured vehicle.
Nice gif Cross.
However, it looks like that brave soldier got some blow back on him also in that assault ouch!
@spwaw
Most snipers have grenades and only takes one or a bundle put underneath the turret to blow it off track , and effectively it's KO'd .Turrets are free floating and not hard fastened to the hull as some think. which could KO the tank if breached and probably kill most of the crew, not that it's likely but very possible.
IMHO,Infrantry even a single sniper close to a tank and able to close assault most of time always means bad news.
Quote this message in a reply
02-28-2011, 03:34 PM,
#9
RE: Sniper vs Armoured vehicle.
I played a PBEM one time and had a British Bren gun team take out a Panther. The cardinal rule is advance with recon fallowed by infantry fallowed by tanks. As far as a sniper taking out a tank. It probably didn't happen often but it's not beyond probability.
Quote this message in a reply
02-28-2011, 04:52 PM,
#10
RE: Sniper vs Armoured vehicle.
You should read the threads. I doubt that you have a new argument, nor even a new response to an old argument. Ever been in a tank? If you have access to one, even a static museum piece? Go sit in it, if you're allowed to. Can't see out, can you? Neither could the crew. They had to stick their head out to see anything. Heads make good targets. If you can't hit a head at 50 meters, you should practice more.
A tank alone is easy meat. You can jump on the back and piss in the carbuertor if there is no one watching for that ( A line from the movie "Sahara"). That is why tanks are always used in mass.
Quote this message in a reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 9 Guest(s)