anti tank unit creation for defence

[guctony]

Does anyone spent AP for creating antitank support unit to distribute to soviet armies. Do you think would it make a difference in the long run. I mean early creation of anti-tank support could grind more German tanks over a longer period of time.

[Stelteck]

Anti tank support units do kill some german tanks in combat.

But i found very hard to attrit german tanks because german production is quite high, especially starting from 1942.
It is easier to attrit german manpower by killing infantry squads.

Anti tank support units are interesting, but remember that you have few AP and tons of stuff to create.

[No idea]

I think making AT units is in general terms pointless.

First of all, during 1941 the german tanks exist only to be replaced by better and more numerous (production wise) tanks. So, killing them, wont change things much.

Second, german tank production is more than enough to cope with losses, so, unless for some reason the german player has lots of losses above the average (some kind of Stalingrad disaster) I think the additional losses caused by your AT units wont change things much again. (the fact that german production is more than enough to cope with the posses is imo due to low losses overall, or low attrition, or both)

Third, with this on mind, it is better to invest your limited APs in other things, imo. Better harm the german manpower, as Stelteck said, and for that there are much better units than AT ones

[tomeck48]

While I generally agree that AT units are not a game changer for the Soviets, I do think that some smart shopping can improve your situation.

The AT brigade costs 5 points and, more importantly in my view, counts as a stacked unit, thus depriving you of another infantry division to dig in with. The AT brigade only gives you 16 76mm and 12 45mm guns. Too expensive on a per gun cost. My German opponent in this, my first Soviet campaign, said he never felt they caused him much harm.

But there are other choices available. When they become available the 42a AT Regiment are two points each and has a TOE of 20 76mm guns. So paying one point less (for 2 regiments) gets you 40 guns instead of 16. But wait, there's more! Spending the same 5 points as a brigade can get you five 42 TD Battalions at 12 76mm guns each, for a total of 60 vs 16.

Since neither the regiments nor the battalions count as a stacked unit, it seems you can get more bang for your buck with them. I'll be trying out that strategy in my next Soviet game. Of course, you still need a commander who will commit them to battle, but that's another story.

Which brings up a question for the developer guys, are AT support units more likely to be committed to a battle involving German armor or do all support units have the same chance of being committed? It seems if I'm looking at panzers on the horizon I'd rather get an AT regiment than a motorcycle regiment.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: tomeck48

While I generally agree that AT units are not a game changer for the Soviets, I do think that some smart shopping can improve your situation.

The AT brigade costs 5 points and, more importantly in my view, counts as a stacked unit, thus depriving you of another infantry division to dig in with. The AT brigade only gives you 16 76mm and 12 45mm guns. Too expensive on a per gun cost. My German opponent in this, my first Soviet campaign, said he never felt they caused him much harm.

But there are other choices available. When they become available the 42a AT Regiment are two points each and has a TOE of 20 76mm guns. So paying one point less (for 2 regiments) gets you 40 guns instead of 16. But wait, there's more! Spending the same 5 points as a brigade can get you five 42 TD Battalions at 12 76mm guns each, for a total of 60 vs 16.

Since neither the regiments nor the battalions count as a stacked unit, it seems you can get more bang for your buck with them. I'll be trying out that strategy in my next Soviet game. Of course, you still need a commander who will commit them to battle, but that's another story.

Which brings up a question for the developer guys, are AT support units more likely to be committed to a battle involving German armor or do all support units have the same chance of being committed? It seems if I'm looking at panzers on the horizon I'd rather get an AT regiment than a motorcycle regiment.

Disband the Motorcycle regiment problem solved ;-P Plus Motorcycle regiments are truck hogs.

[tomeck48]

Sorry if I wasn't clear. My point wasn't about motorcycles.

To clarify: If I have units attacked by panzers, will their HQ prioritize send AT battalions or regiments as support? Or prioritize tank regiments as support, for that matter?

[morvael]

No, there is no prioritization.

Also, with many smaller units you risk reaching the limit of support units per HQ in battle and the general limit of units in battle. That said larger AT support unit may be better even if it has less guns. I'd go with regiments, one per army (at most two). After hundreds of turns the extra losses should mount to a not insignificant number. It all adds up in the long run, even if impact in single battle is very small.

[tomeck48]

Good to know. Thanks again.

[Crackaces]

This game is an excellent simulation of tactical, operational, and strategic decision making involved with any large campaign. There are strategic considerations like spending 1 AP that will not really provide the benefit of killing very many AFV's. But I might propose there are operational and tactical considerations in whether to build an AT SU. For example, the German's have 3 PZ Flamm units that convert fuel into CV. Using the alt CV option I see 15 CV per support unit. In addition, a Pz flamm SU can disrupt a lot of infantry .. lowering the Soviet CV in a battle. Given a Soviet formation that might have enough CV to provide resistance A AT SU can take a crack and is able to penetrate a PZ II providing some probability of disrupting, damaging, and possibly destroying in a particular battle a device providing a great amount of the total CV. A battle winner if the CV odds start close to the 2:1 mark. It is quite possible to add Stug's and PzJd SU's to boost the power of German Infantry formations. The AT SU's has the ability to take some shots to influence a particular operation or tactical battle .. knowing that overall strategically the numbers of AFV's destroyed will be replaced and it is debatable if the AP's spent will be worth it ..

[tomeck48]

Interesting. The Soviets have a lot of demands on their 50/60 Admin points. What do you think are the most worthwhile "buys?"

[morvael]

IMHO:
sappers (it was a few patches ago, now I hear there are limits on element production, so you have to build them up slowly or start later)
artillery
tank (until 1944)
aa
at
rr construction

My final setup in 1945 was (I tried to build around existing units):
1 AA Regiment
1 AA Battalion
1 Sapper Regiment
2 Artillery Regiments
1 Howitzer or Mortar Regiment or Mortar Battalion
1 AT Artillery Regiment
1 RR Construction Brigade

+for Guards and Shock armies
1 Flame Tank Regiment
1 Light Rocket Regiment
1 Flamethrower Battalion

Tank Armies had a bit different setup
2 AA Regiments
1 Flame Tank Regiment
2 Artillery Regiments
1 Mortar Regiment
1 AT Artillery Regiment

Also, every Corps (Rifle, Cavalry, Tank, Mechanized) had 1 Sapper Regiment
Tank and Mechanized Corps also had Heavy Tank Regiment and Heavy SU Regiment
Cavalry Corps also had Heavy Tank Regiment

Bear in mind that composition was different in different periods of war when it comes to factory produced units.
Early on tank battalions and tank regiments were widespread, but I had to disband them once T-34/85 was introduced with much lower production, along tank brigades (and I had a lot of Tk/Mech/Cav-Tank corps late war).
Later I had a lot of Light and Medium SU formations, but they were disbanded because Light SU went to Guards Rifle Corps, and Medium SU went out of production (barely enough to fill Tk corps slots).

[Nix77]

Baseline for support units should be AT LEAST three of the artillery type units (ART/MORT/RCKT/AT), since they get a special commitment for three extra units when defending.

Morvael's list looks good to me, I'd maybe have some more artillery and rockets in elite attacking formations, and would try to fill out all the corps' SU slots (with either AT regiments, more sappers or maybe even MG arty battalions that have a good amount of firepower).

[Stelteck]

Some more elements from my current experience :

Early game :
- Sapper regiment are more op than ever as they now dig fortification from HQ, so it could be interesting to have at least 3 per HQ.
- Tank battalion are good (and upgrade to tank regiments in 1943) BUT use light tanks. And you lack light tanks all the time so it is a trade off. I will use the minimum of them. (Maybe only in early tank corps)
- TD compagny use Zis-30 anti tank equipment. It is interesting to create some or the equipment will be lost. They upgrade to excellent light SU regiment later.
- You can divise artillery between long range artillery, short range artillery, and AT. Short range are mortar and rocket. Long range howitzer and guns. You already have tons of long range artillery support units at the start of the war, maybe it is not interesting to create more.
- Light rocket regiments are guard and interesting short range artillery. If you do not create tons of them, the associated rocket truck will not be used at all and sit in pool.
- Mortar battalion have tons of 130mm mortar tube for cheap.
- AA regiments and AT regiments because it give you things that you do not have without support units.

Do not give non motorised support unit to a motorized unit, because they will require additional trucks.

Except sapper, it is better to give artillery to HQ instead of combat support units, because artillery have extra commitment.
Combat units are better attached to corps, starting to cavalry, then tanks and mechanized and then rifle corps.

Late game :
- Heavy tank regiments are guard and the only way to use heavy tanks in late game. They are well rounded items for all motorized corps.
- You will have tons of SU-76 to give light SU regiments to every corps. Medium and heavy SU regiments have more difficulties to find equipment.
- Flame tank battalion are interesting, cheap and use special tanks OT-34, not used by anything else.

Careful not to spend to much in support units as it is always better to have a unit on the board than abstracted in a HQ.

[Nix77]

ORIGINAL: Stelteck
- You can divise artillery between long range artillery, short range artillery, and AT. Short range are mortar and rocket. Long range howitzer and guns. You already have tons of long range artillery support units at the start of the war, maybe it is not interesting to create more.

Due to ToE changes, there will be plenty of 152mm Howitzers in the pool in '41. It may be a good idea to create some Howitzer Regiments to use those guns, basically armament-free since the guns are already built.

Same for rockets, as Stelteck said, if you have the APs, just build the regiments and they'll get filled quickly with rocket trucks.

[tomeck48]

Great stuff, thanks guys

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: tomeck48

Sorry if I wasn't clear. My point wasn't about motorcycles.

To clarify: If I have units attacked by panzers, will their HQ prioritize send AT battalions or regiments as support? Or prioritize tank regiments as support, for that matter?

Your point was clear. My recommendation was too

[guctony]

thanks for all valuable information.

One last question. What should be SU attached to Cav corps in first Blizzard. I consider one Tank Bat, one Sapper and one Ski bat.

Thanks

[Stelteck]

ORIGINAL: guctony

thanks for all valuable information.

One last question. What should be SU attached to Cav corps in first Blizzard. I consider one Tank Bat, one Sapper and one Ski bat.

Thanks

Gamey answer and most efficient : 3 sapper regiments. (Experienced). (Until far later in the game where you can replace them with heavy mechanized things). With that the cavalry corps will also be your best digger for emergency fortifications, even in contact with the ennemy, very usefull in spring 1942.
If you want a more historical approach and mix things, Tank bat are also very good but they use light tanks and you do not have so much to spare in a long term view.
Ski bat are cheap although not astounding. You can also use your 20 motorcycle regiments of the beginning if you do not know what to do with them.

Personally i was using 2 sappers regiments and 1 tank bat. I clearly see the benefits of the sapper regiments (Especially some become guard and be concentrated on elite troops). The benefits of the tank bat not so much.

[Nix77]

Ski Battalions' problem is that they become available too late, in November '41. They don't have time to gather xp for the First Winter, and during the following years' blizzards when they have XP, there's bound to be more useful experienced support units available.

They will have slightly more CV in the blizzard than a comparable sapper regiment and they're cheaper, but you're bound to have more experienced sapper regiments at the end of '41.

I'd go as far as giving the Soviets a handful of pre-trained frozen (pun intended!) ski battalions on the beginning of the game, to make them actually useful. They could unfreeze during the First Winter (by the campfire?).

Another issue that makes them less useful is the battalion vs regiment argument, which should really be fixed. Battalions and regiments take the same amount of "space" in support unit commitment. Battalions, companies and smaller formations in general should be easier to commit, to balance them out with regiments and larger formations, exactly like it's done with on-map reserve commitment.

[piotrmx]

Ski battalions are really killers during blizzard. Unfortunately they doing waterski in summer on Karelian's Lakes.