CMBN:MG - PIATs are a PITA

[enven]

I'd love to hear some of your personal experiences with the PIAT in CMBN:MG - I was playing a defensive scenario (Borderland) yesterday (British - 1st ABN) and noticed a few interesting flaws with the PIAT when closing into the enemy. *I was playing in IRON mode as per usual.

1/ PIAT is great stationary and under 50M - usually scoring on the second shot unless I was < 30M.

2/ PIAT accuracy takes a hit when moving toward the enemy: - Most of my PIAT shots > 50M took a dive in front of the armor. I counted maybe 2-3 shots (out of 10~ +/-) that flew over. when moving.

3/ I had destroyed 1 with Grenades at close range. 1 with a PIAT at under 30M and 1 with a direct hit from an artillery (75MM PAK Howitzer) barrage.

Needless to say, I love handheld death wielding AT weapons at close range but anything < 25M - I'd rather blast the tank with demo! bahahah!

I would like to hear about all of your experiences with the PIAT.

Ending rant with: "The PIAT seems wonky to me."

 

[Nathangun]

You need to get up close, try to use the 'pop smoke' with another squad when your assaulting the tank.

 

[fivefivesix]

Ending rant with: "The PIAT seems wonky to me."

The PIAT is just a wonky little thing. With its spring loaded firing mechanism, to me its like a huge metal Nerf gun with an exploding projectile. Given the relatively weak velocity that can be applied to the projectile, the looping trajectory that is needed for a longer shot is wild to watch - doesn't really seem like such a slow moving projectile should be able to much damage.

I've had similar results as you have - fairly effective, especially in urban or built up areas where < 30 m shots are possible.

 

[Ithikial]

The PIAT was never a widely praised weapon even by the Commonwealth forces wielding them. Given some of the personal accounts from when they were introduced I'm surprised of the quantity that are provided in some of the earlier CMFI time periods. Soldiers would simply abandon them or leave them behind as they thought they were unreliable in most terrain environments or ineffective against most of the German armour.

Saying that, as a player, if CM ever goes back to Africa... 1941, 1942.... yeah you'll miss them.

 

[enven]

@fivefivesix @Ithikial @Nathangun - Yeah, I've read quite a bit about PIATs - I just wanted to start up some small talk about combat effectiveness and experiences - we all seem to have the same experiences, so that is good to know.

- I find that popping smoke is wonderful under any circumstance when combating armor in tight spots or if you have additional cover and additional support around the opposing force.

With that, the Panzerfaust is definitely my favorite in terms of close combat other than demo charges and AT grenades.

 

[Ithikial]

Personally the schreck. The added range is a huge bonus at the moment in mid-1944 games. I've got a nagging feeling by Bulge and into 45 when later fausts appear it will be a bit more evenly split between the two systems.

I don't think the Allies ever matched the Germans in this man held AT department.

 

[Richtig]

Ithikial is right all the allied nations played catchup on this, with the poor soviet infantry left to tough it out completely. It is a huge force multiplier for German Infantry.

I played a big CMBN scenario recently and I think I hit the same Panther 4 times including once form the rear as it paniced in an enclosed courtyard and the damn thing still drove out under its own steam. Tho that could be a nod to the omnipotence of the Panther in combat mission rather than the failings of the PIAT...

I do still have an affection for it tho, but I think its like when anything 'heath robinson' finally does what it was meant to do, the feeling of success/accomplishment is always magnified...

I also wonder how often Pfausts and Schrecks got utilised by allied troops...

 

[Nelson1812]

I also wonder how often Pfausts and Schrecks got utilised by allied troops...

Heard or read somewhere recently, Russians troops would search them out, and how the Russians capture stocks and were using the Pfausts against the Germans.

 

[Richtig]

@Nelson1812 makes sense...

 

[enven]

@Nelson1812 @Richtig - pretty sure under most circumstances in a theater of operation where the world is crashing down and understanding what works, and does not work, capturing and utilizing what works efficiently makes sense.

I have zero love for the PIAT at this point.

 

[Ithikial]

Heard or read somewhere recently, Russians troops would search them out, and how the Russians capture stocks and were using the Pfausts against the Germans.

Captured small arms is something I really hope can get moddled into the game one day, either for scenario designers to use or for the tac AI based on tenancies of different nations forces. For example Russians picking up Fausts if they can or replacing your weapon with a German one if you run out of ammo but have taken the enemy position.

For any future African title, be interesting how they handle re purposed vehicles by both sides.

 

[Rico]

Captured small arms is something I really hope can get moddled into the game one day, either for scenario designers to use or for the tac AI based on tenancies of different nations forces. For example Russians picking up Fausts if they can or replacing your weapon with a German one if you run out of ammo but have taken the enemy position.

For any future African title, be interesting how they handle re purposed vehicles by both sides.

That would be cool -- Germans also often picked up and used the Russian PPSH 41 SMG for their own use as it was so sturdy and reliable.

 

[Mauser GDog]

In game, I find the deciding factor with infantry carried AT weapons is unit/squad experience.
I tend to "game" it a little when I can select my own forces, upping the experience of my AT crews a little.

Panzerschreck is my favorite, but it's increased range tends to tempt me to try for long shots and miss.
With the Panzerfaust, I play more cautiously and take the <30m sure shots, and likely have a higher success rate.

 

[spidey]

If I remmber well in Close Combat series if your soldiers run out of ammo they could pick up weapons with some ammo from fallen enemies or comrades. Otherewise they could fight only in hand to hand with bayonets. It was kind of realistic cool thing.

 

[PhilM]

The PIAT is just a wonky little thing. With its spring loaded firing mechanism, to me its like a huge metal Nerf gun with an exploding projectile. Given the relatively weak velocity that can be applied to the projectile, the looping trajectory that is needed for a longer shot is wild to watch - doesn't really seem like such a slow moving projectile should be able to much damage.

I've had similar results as you have - fairly effective, especially in urban or built up areas where < 30 m shots are possible.

I'm pretty sure I'm correct in saying that - like the other hand held weapons discussed here - this was a "shaped charge" weapon: ie the penetrating power (or, in this particular case, lack of it!) was based not on the round's kinetic energy (no need for high muzzle velocities, hence much less recoil and so man-launchable) but on the energy developed on detonation by the shaped charge nature of the warhead. So, its slow speed isn't material to the level of damage done.

 

[Richtig]

But what happens if he comes at you with a pointed stick...

 

[spidey]

But what happens if he comes at you with a pointed stick...

I will defend myself with a banana !

 

[enven]

I'm pretty sure I'm correct in saying that - like the other hand held weapons discussed here - this was a "shaped charge" weapon: ie the penetrating power (or, in this particular case, lack of it!) was based not on the round's kinetic energy (no need for high muzzle velocities, hence much less recoil and so man-launchable) but on the energy developed on detonation by the shaped charge nature of the warhead. So, its slow speed isn't material to the level of damage done.

Sure - except you need to be under 30m to really give it a good go. (You said Penetrating power...awesome.)

 

[spidey]

At Discovery Channel there was a series about Weapons of War, in epizod about PIAT ex-sf guy was demonstrating usage of PIAT at shooting range. He was supoused to shoot at target about 50m away but when he had pushed the trigger spring broke and heat projectile flew like 2-3 m and hit the ground. He was lucky cuz projectile was dud but guy was pale white and they cut off scene. It's just one of many examples how PIAT's were unreliable AT weapons.

 

[Zinzan]

Basic advantage was - anything is better than nothing.

Bazooka's weren't available in sufficient numbers for most of the early war. Given a choice between NOTHING except improvised stuff and a PIAT I'd choose the PIAT every time

I also believe the PIAT was liked for urban fighting due to the no exhaust gaseds making it easy to operate from buildings etc and the lack of backblast made it stealthier than bazookas etc.