Author Topic: Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?  (Read 835 times)

Goose

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1401
  • … the Laws on his tail, burning for home …
    • Home of HeavyMetal Pro
Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?
« on: 21 April 2024, 18:18:00 »
How many tanks, presumably treaded, would you consider as a minimum deployment-size to hold ground? Without much more then light woods, at some paved intersection? A goat path?

Do you fear a hovercraft raids? If you didn't have "tank guns," but LRMs?

 :blank:
Goose
The Ancient Egyptian God of Fractional AccountingAnimare Tai-sa Shikishima
I'm always ready to learn, although I do not always like being taught.

AlphaMirage

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3725
Re: Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?
« Reply #1 on: 21 April 2024, 18:33:10 »
There needs to be some more context, like against what? Also what do you consider the base medium tank? Is it a Vedette, Goblin, or Myrmidon?

That said I would consider a Platoon of 4 to be sufficient depending on the threat profile (will we know if the enemy is coming, etc...). I would probably use a 1:3 ratio of LRM Carrier and MBT. If you use Goblins you can also have a platoon of infantry manning towed long range field guns like the LBX/5.

Now a Platoon of Goblin IFVs with a Mechanized LBX/5 field gun platoon, that's a solid little square setup with the MLRS in the middle.

Charistoph

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3792
Re: Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?
« Reply #2 on: 21 April 2024, 22:04:22 »
Yeah, as AlphaMirage said, you need to set expectations.

In general, I'd probably go with anywhere from 4-8 tanks, again, depending on what's available, what their mission would be, and how close I need to defend it from.

Against a Lance of Medium Introtech Skirmish Mechs where I'm intercepting them far from their theoretical target, I'd want something to keep up with them.  Demolishers would be fun for a turn or two, but would be left behind as they just bounced around/over me.  Those Demolishers being where those Skirmishers need to pick something up and take off with it is a different story.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Charistoph's Painted Products of Mechanical Mayhem

DevianID

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1803
Re: Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?
« Reply #3 on: 21 April 2024, 22:42:22 »
So holding ground requires a bit of elevation.  By using a hill to hide behind, the tanks can create local superiority massing behind the hill, but other then this tanks are not a good stationary defensive tool.  (I think this is true IRL as well)

Holding OPEN ground, on the other hand, is much harder.  In a running battle, tanks have vulnerable flanks that have to be protected or they lose mobility.  Tanks that lose mobility are easy prey for long range firepower.

Tank formations are best to attack with, not to hold ground with.  By moving forward with tanks, you automatically close the gap, and stragglers/tracked tanks are not isolated and killed but left behind for rear logistics crews to tow away and fix.  If the enemy is running from tanks, then they arnt flanking them, so the mobility/track/through armor crit issue is much reduced.  And if the enemy does stand and fight, the overwhelming numbers of tanks on the attack gives the odds you need to win locally--the stacking 2 tanks to 1 hex kind of illustrates this, as your tank company fits in 6 hexes, allowing for better massed forward fire then mechs who have to spread out more.

I believe the tool for holding ground is infantry in buildings, or infantry in cover in improved positions.  Behind this you have fixed guns/artillery, that can attack anywhere from a single point in the rear.  Tank destroyers and field guns in hiding augment infantry to protect tight spaces, as a deterrent to attacking forces for moving too fast.  They dont really stop an attack, more just slow it down so you can counterattack or have time to land that artillery.

Ruger

  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5602
Re: Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?
« Reply #4 on: 22 April 2024, 06:32:19 »
I tend to support the maxim “Overkill has a quality all its own.”

Ruger
"If someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill 'em right back." - Malcolm Reynolds, Firefly

"Who I am is where I stand. Where I stand is where I fall...Stand with me." - The Doctor, The Doctor Falls, Doctor Who

Starfury

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 831
Re: Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?
« Reply #5 on: 22 April 2024, 13:18:17 »
Medium tanks (and by definition, Mechs) aren't designed to hold ground. They're designed to take it or give it up in favor of new positions.  Infantry backed by heavier, slower tanks, Mechs, or both are far better to hold ground with.  But to effectively take or defend ground with good positioning, two introtech lances against lostech. If you're talking against Clan or post 3050 designs, a company of introtech tanks isn't a bad start. If you're taking lostech or more advanced tanks, then it can go down to a Level II to two lances vs Clan/IS advanced tech.

Charistoph

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3792
Re: Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?
« Reply #6 on: 22 April 2024, 14:16:22 »
Medium tanks (and by definition, Mechs) aren't designed to hold ground. They're designed to take it or give it up in favor of new positions.  Infantry backed by heavier, slower tanks, Mechs, or both are far better to hold ground with.  But to effectively take or defend ground with good positioning, two introtech lances against lostech. If you're talking against Clan or post 3050 designs, a company of introtech tanks isn't a bad start. If you're taking lostech or more advanced tanks, then it can go down to a Level II to two lances vs Clan/IS advanced tech.

I'm going to disagree a bit.  Units like the Centurion are meant to hold ground.  They don't have the strength of Heavies to take ground, nor the speed to give it up in favor of a new position.  However, they are cheap enough to deploy en masse, such that you have 2 Centurions defending against that 1 Thunderbolt that IS trying to take the ground.  Same thing applies to tanks like the Goblin.

Hovertanks, would be a different story, just like the Wolverine or Phoenix Hawk would be different from the Centurion.  They are designed to flow with the battlefield and give up positions in return for more favorable ones.  It's almost like they have different Roles to guide a person in their use.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Charistoph's Painted Products of Mechanical Mayhem

Goose

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1401
  • … the Laws on his tail, burning for home …
    • Home of HeavyMetal Pro
Re: Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?
« Reply #7 on: 22 April 2024, 17:06:40 »
Medium tanks (and by definition, Mechs) aren't designed to hold ground.
This is Battletech: Armor has been demoted to Occasionally Offensive
Goose
The Ancient Egyptian God of Fractional AccountingAnimare Tai-sa Shikishima
I'm always ready to learn, although I do not always like being taught.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37983
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?
« Reply #8 on: 22 April 2024, 18:09:47 »
Four Goblins carrying Combat Engineers should be able to build hull down positions pretty quickly.  If you have time, only bring one squad of Combat Engineers and throw the rest into Field Guns.  With three Taurian squads, that could be Thumper Artillery Cannons... >:D

Hellraiser

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13384
  • Cry Havoc and Unleash the Gods of Fiat.
Re: Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?
« Reply #9 on: 22 April 2024, 19:16:51 »
How many tanks, presumably treaded, would you consider as a minimum deployment-size to hold ground? Without much more then light woods, at some paved intersection? A goat path?

Do you fear a hovercraft raids? If you didn't have "tank guns," but LRMs?

 :blank:

Medium Tank?   Sooo, the quintessential TRO:3026 Vedette?

I'd start with a Company as the Minimum.

LRMs?   So a Vedette w/ LRM15 & 2 Tons ammo instead of AC5?   
The same Company, only I'd feel a little better that they won't get steamrolled.

3041: General Lance Hawkins: The Equalizers
3053: Star Colonel Rexor Kerensky: The Silver Wolves

"I don't shoot Urbanmechs, I walk up, stomp on their foot, wait for the head to pop open & drop in a hand grenade (or Elemental)" - Joel47
Against mechs, infantry have two options: Run screaming from Godzilla, or giggle under your breath as the arrogant fools blunder into your trap. - Weirdo

Natasha Kerensky

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3491
  • Queen of Spades, First Lady of Death, Black Widow
Re: Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?
« Reply #10 on: 23 April 2024, 12:13:54 »

With the warning that BT rules don’t resemble real combat at all, this video on the Battle of Debecka may be useful.  It involved control over a crossroads.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wmmvVMrHBqY
"Ah, yes.  The belle dame sans merci.  The sweet young thing who will blast your nuts off.  The kitten with a whip.  That mystique?"
"Slavish adherence to formal ritual is a sign that one has nothing better to think about."
"Variety is the spice of battle."
"I've fought in... what... a hundred battles, a thousand battles?  It could be a million as far as I know.  I've fought for anybody who offered a decent contract and a couple who didn't.  And the universe is not much different after all that.  I could go on fighting for another hundred years and it would still look the same."
"I'm in mourning for my life."
"Those who break faith with the Unity shall go down into darkness."

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37983
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?
« Reply #11 on: 23 April 2024, 18:11:45 »
Hilariously, I watched that one this last weekend at random... :D

EPG

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: Critical Mass of Medium Tanks?
« Reply #12 on: 18 June 2024, 19:35:13 »
Medium tanks (and by definition, Mechs) aren't designed to hold ground. They're designed to take it or give it up in favor of new positions.  Infantry backed by heavier, slower tanks, Mechs, or both are far better to hold ground with.  But to effectively take or defend ground with good positioning, two introtech lances against lostech. If you're talking against Clan or post 3050 designs, a company of introtech tanks isn't a bad start. If you're taking lostech or more advanced tanks, then it can go down to a Level II to two lances vs Clan/IS advanced tech.

That’s why if you have tanks and you need to deny a position to the enemy with them, you place them away from that spot in a location where they have the right range and field of fire to hit that area hard.  If the enemy tried to take that location they open fire, than  advance (cleaning up the remnants of the attack) or retreat (if they are overmatched)

 

Register