Welcome to The Few Good Men

Thanks for visiting our club and having a look around, there is a lot to see. Why not consider becoming a member?
Register

AT gun questons

K

Kacper

Guest
HI everyone.
just wanted to ask if any of you pros have any tips for AT gun emplacement.

stuff like do you use the fox holes(do they give away your positions to easily?)
Are trenches good for AT guns? does anyone use the triangle sandbags?
how invisible can you make your guns? any tips? stuff like that let's talk about it I would love to know people's experience.
 
I'm no expert, so please real experts correct me where I am wrong:
  • Use keyhole positions; let it cover a tiny bit of your killing field (preferably where it can flank-shot a tank), so it can only be shot at from that keyhole. Do not make the keyhole too small, leave time for the crew to load the gun (unlike tanks, who always seem to have a shell ready to fire instantly, guns need to load the proper shell first) and aim.
  • Overlapping fields of fire; preferably let two or more guns overlap their fields, with (semi-)crossfire being the best of course
  • Foxholes are great, once the gun is seen and fired upon, your men will cower inside the foxhole and be very hard to kill, except for a direct hit by HE or being overrun by infantry Foxholes can be seen at a distance of around 140-200 meters (there's a nice post on this over at BFC forum)
  • Put the gun itself on hide, if needed with a covered ARMOURED arc. Guns have a hide bonus before their first shot (camouflage is assumed) if set up during setup phase, so you want to make that first shot count. Place their HQ unit nearby with a short cover arc (to prevent it from firing and giving away their position) to do the spotting. They will pass the info the gun, who can then spot the target quite fast. I usually manually unhide the gun and give them firing arcs when I want them to engage. Be aware that things like halftracks and scout cars also count as armor for the covered arc, and usually you do not want to spoil your first shot on them.
  • Trenches are not good at all, foxholes are always better. If you get trenches from the scenario designer, I wouldn't put a gun in them myself, since they are too easily spotted. But I have no experience with guns in trenches
  • I usually assume my oppo can see anything at ~150 meters (if clear weather during day) with infantry / unbuttoned tank, so I rarely bother trying to be stealthy, especially with an AT gun, below those ranges.

Happy to hear other people's thoughts!
 
Blady said:
Foxholes are great, once the gun is seen and fired upon, your men will cower inside the foxhole and be very hard to kill
Click to expand...
I must say my experience has been different. It seems to me foxholes only provide cover for small weapons like mortars and MGs. And I find that foxholes don't really make your troops hard to kill.

I think that the "logic" of the game is that for AT guns you need to place them in trenches.

Notice that if you place an AT gun on foxholes, the gun will graphically sit on top of the ground and the crew around it. If you place the gun in a trench, it will look like it's physically inside the trench.

But this is just a guess - I never tested this out.
 
Last edited:
Not much experience nor testing here either. Above is mostly based on a PBEM game I have going with @Tchoup at the moment.

I had an AT gun there in foxholes, it has taken out a pzIV, an armored car and a few halftracks in 4-5 minutes. It has been showered in MG fire from a few squads and halftracks, shelled by another 75mm pzIV, and even close assaulted once. Sure, it has been pinned a few times for quite a bit, but so far has only taken one lightly wounded.

Another gun which eventually took the other pzIV out from the flank wasn't even spotted I think (some 900-1000m away).
I've caught a glimpse of a 105mm howitzer on the way, so maybe that changes the balance a bit
 
Blady said:
Not much experience nor testing here either. Above is mostly based on a PBEM game I have going with @Tchoup at the moment.
Click to expand...
In my recent game with Drifter Man, I chose to set up in foxholes even though I rarely use them. Part of the reason why I did it was to see how much protection they would offer.

It seemed to me that my opponent had no real trouble destroying the foxholes with direct tank fire and mortars.
 
Bulletpoint said:
In my recent game with Drifter Man, I chose to set up in foxholes even though I rarely use them. Part of the reason why I did it was to see how much protection they would offer.

It seemed to me that my opponent had no real trouble destroying the foxholes with direct tank fire and mortars.
Click to expand...
:LOL: This asks for some proper testing I guess. Maybe I'll have some time tomorrow to try some stuff out.
 
Blady said:
:LOL: This asks for some proper testing I guess. Maybe I'll have some time tomorrow to try some stuff out.
Click to expand...

Thanks :) Because I don't have time to test it myself.

I think foxholes are only good for protecting infantry against artillery, and only when the infantry is given the HIDE command ... AND the artillery doesn't land in the actual square.

However, this is a bit of a moot point, since the opponent has many ways of making HE land in that square.
 
no one has yet talked about the sandbag triangle I'm guessing no one uses it?
also for the AT camouflage bonus I'm guessing it's additive to the terrain they are in so if you put them in a grass field the bonus will not be as high as if they were in woods?
 
  • Foxholes are great, once the gun is seen and fired upon, your men will cower inside the foxhole and be very hard to kill, except for a direct hit by HE or being overrun by infantry Foxholes can be seen at a distance of around 140-200 meters (there's a nice post on this over at BFC forum)
Click to expand...
hm looking for this thread.....
 
Kacper said:
hm looking for this thread.....
Click to expand...
Here:

Sandbags ruining concealment

I'm guessing this has been mentioned by plenty others before me, but what's the point of sandbags if all they do is give away your position? Even though my enemy can't see the actual unit or gun hiding there, they open up against the bags and that's it.
community.battlefront.com community.battlefront.com

(Sorry I was too lazy to look it up before)

By the way, more info about gun setup here too:
https://community.battlefront.com/topic/138742-thoughts-on-gun-setup/
 
Kacper said:
no one has yet talked about the sandbag triangle I'm guessing no one uses it?
also for the AT camouflage bonus I'm guessing it's additive to the terrain they are in so if you put them in a grass field the bonus will not be as high as if they were in woods?
Click to expand...
Sandbag triangle only provides a bit of cover against bullets as far as I can see, and that's usually the least of your worries. Maybe in an infantry only game it would be useful.

Yes, AT guns are way better hidden in forest than in an open field.
 
Bulletpoint said:
Yes, AT guns are way better hidden in forest than in an open field.
Click to expand...
Are they not more vulnerable to indirect HE fire? Tree burs and everything? I think trees in CM are a bit of a mixed blessing for infantry. On one hand they are dangerous due to tree bursting HE fire (sometimes even friendly fire going through/over the infantry position), on the other hand the tree trunks are an invincible bullet/fragment/tungsten stopping force.
 
Blady said:
Are they not more vulnerable to indirect HE fire? Tree burs and everything? I think trees in CM are a bit of a mixed blessing for infantry. On one hand they are dangerous due to tree bursting HE fire (sometimes even friendly fire going through/over the infantry position), on the other hand the tree trunks are an invincible bullet/fragment/tungsten stopping force.
Click to expand...

Tree bursts are not so dangerous in CM, as trees actually provide decent protection from mortars. I do sometimes notice a casualty from a tree burst, but they are not what some people crack them up to be. The reason seems to be that while moving the impact up from the ground creates a bigger fragment distribution, it also means a bigger distance between the explosion and the target troops, making it less deadly. A 60mm mortar that bursts in a treetop 20 metres above your head is less of a danger than a mortar that drops down to the forest floor and explodes next to you. Also, tree trunks block lots of the fragments.

But yes, if you place your gun in trees, some tank shells will burst in the trees instead of passing overhead like in an open field. In the end, it doesn't really matter, because if your opponent can fire HE at your gun, it's usually the end of it very fast.

What keeps AT guns alive is concealment, and forest is some of the best terrain for that.
 
Bulletpoint said:
But yes, if you place your gun in trees, some tank shells will burst in the trees instead of passing overhead like in an open field. In the end, it doesn't really matter, because if your opponent can fire HE at your gun, it's usually the end of it very fast.

What keeps AT guns alive is concealment, and forest is some of the best terrain for that.
Click to expand...
I fully agree with this. Never expect it to live after the first few shots. That's why you want to make sure you trade the cheaper ATG for a more expensive AFV in the first few shots. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top