Thread: Close Assaults
View Single Post
  #15  
Old March 25th, 2011, 12:38 PM

Brian61 Brian61 is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 157
Thanks: 32
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
Brian61 is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Close Assaults

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobhack View Post
A fast-moving vehicle is not exercising caution. The crew focus is on the terrain ahead in order to avoid crashes etc into unseen ditches or whatever. The crew do not have your player's "God's eye view" of the map!. The passengers, if any, are getting much more interested in hanging on for dear life, avoiding biting through their tongue as they "chin" the deck while trying to peer out the hatches. Little unseen ground ridges produce real jarring "bumps" - even with a suspension system.
Right, no disagreement there. The fast moving vehicle should have little if any opportunity to inflict casualties on the attackers in response to the close attack, absolutely no argument.

On the other hand, the close assaulting infantry is also at a disadvantage. Climbing aboard is nigh impossible, and getting close enough and/or being fast and accurate enough to slap a mine on the tank or throw a satchel charge into the treads would be rather difficult.

But yeah its a micro detail. It just seems a bit at odds with tactical teachings of the German army for panzer units in certain situations: charge out of smoke screens and cross open terrain at a rapid pace. I would have to think that the risk of getting successfully close assaulted by unknown/unspotted infantry had to be significantly outwieghed by the advantage of decreasing accuracy from enemy ATG positions (also unknown/unspotted).

While not as well-read as some, I've been led to believe that successful close assaults by non-dug-in infantry (especially prior to the advent of PIAT/Bazooka/PzFaust) against fast moving AFVs in open terrain had to be every bit as rare as 'assault by tread overrun'.
Reply With Quote