RE: Infantry?

[JOHN PITTELLI <jplily-at-yahoo.com>]

Yes, while it is true that most fixed fortifications
could be ignored or overrun, small lightweight
anti-tank pak fronts were very mobile and used with
deadly results by all sides. A side might think twice
about a flanking move that could possibly be covered
by a few anti-tank weapons. Or might slowly pursue a
retreating tank because of a trap. Our hobby is more
tactical that strategical. John" 88's Rule" Pittelli
--- William Harris <trollstomper-at-voyager.net> wrote:
> I'm considered ways to expand what can be used in a
> radio control battle,
> but this list is RC Tank Combat. Other types of
> combat units, (airborne,
> infantry, artillery) not only deviate from the
> stated focus, but would be
> pretty unmanageable. I suppose bunkers would be an
> option, but fixed
> defenses have historically fallen to any type of
> mobile force. The only real
> advantage I would see in using them would be that
> the "big picture" element
> would be ignored. (from my meager knowledge of WWII
> many fixed emplacements
> were surrounded, cut off from supply, and pounded
> into submission with
> artillery and bombing runs.) So I guess it boils
> down first of all to how
> practical and usable such things would be, and
> secondarily, how likely would
> these things be in your average engagement?
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tanks-admin-at-rctankcombat.com
> [mailto:tanks-admin-at-rctankcombat.com]
> > On Behalf Of Grauwolf
> > Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2003 10:33 AM
> > To: tanks-at-rctankcombat.com
> > Subject: Infantry?
> > 
> > 
> > --- Steve Tyng <stevet-at-stcharlesmd.com> wrote:
> > > Oh yea, if any little GI Joe infantry with their
> little one
> > > shot bazokas gets in my way.  I won't need a
> machine gun.  I'll be
> > > rolling right over them, their puny rockets
> bouncing off my front
> > > armor, to get to you!  ;-)
> > >
> > > Steve "Steam Roller" Tyng, Commander T005
> > >
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > Greetings "Steam Roller" and All,
> > 
> >   Since the first battlefield operations of WWI it
> has become a well
> > accepted truism that tanks need infantry support
> to deal with the
> > threat posed by oppositional infantry.
> >   I fully realize that the sport is in its true
> infancy and thus the
> > following suggestions may require a bit of time
> before they could hope
> > to see implementation, but since folks are getting
> rather excited about
> > tank mounted MGs why not give them something to
> use them on?
> >   Wire operated stationary "One Shot" units would
> not be hard to
> > construct and could be concealed by a
> referee/neutral
> > non-player/controller prior to combat. Or provided
> and operated by both
> > forces to represent their infantry. Hardened
> bunkers with multi-shot
> > weapons systems and mines may also prove
> interesting challenges.
> >   As an additional tactical combat question --
> Regarding the use of
> > re-supply depots to provide additional ammunition
> and "rebirth" to
> > destroyed tanks -- What is to prevent the
> opposition from destroying
> > these prime targets? Would it be possible to
> capture your enemies
> > supply depot?
> >   I realize that this may shorten battle times,
> but hey, you can always
> > try again and it just might make for some
> interesting scenarios.
> > 
> > 
> > Dan
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site
> design software
> > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com