I've edited the discussion to the salient points brought forth by the following contributors: MB, Michael Black; TR, Tate Rogers; PM, Patrick Manlig; PF, Paul Ferraro; DG, Doug Gibson; and BY, Brian Youse. There is now a link to Chuck Payne's first hand experience with dug-in tanks. I highly recommend you read his comments on this.
MB>I like the following purchases:
| Purchase | Cost |
| KV Pltn(dug in) | 2 |
| T-34 M43 Pltn (dug-in) | 3 |
| Mol-P Pltn(reserve) | 1 |
| Bn Mortar | 1 |
| or | |
| SMG Coy(reserve) | 3 |
| Pre Reg Hex | 1 |
| Bn Mortar | 1 |
| Fortifications | 1 |
PF> What is this facination with dug in tanks? IF I was the Germans, it wouldn't bother me all that much...they can be bypassed for the most part, or smoked into uselessness then killed in CC.
PM> They can be bypassed or killed during the next day, but they can put a real dent in your planned offensive during the first day if you enter directly into the killing zone of the cupolas.
PF> Vs an 8 ML unit? I'd still rather have infantry than dug in tanks.
PM> Add wire and you'll have a pretty ugly thing to face. Add to that the fact that the cupolas will set up in the open, meaning your guys will have to cross open ground to get to them. (Say one in S3 or R3 and the other in O3 or W2. Then W1 is mined along with W2. Makes for a pretty tough day 1 if the Germans all set up to enter in that area on turn 1.) Then, they're covered by MGs on level one (say Z1 and N5). Plus a few squads to bolster the defenses and an ATG to beef it up even more. That's 2 KV, 1 ATG, 80FPP, <1 Rifle Coy. Reasonable troops to use for defending the flank on day one, and makes for a hell of a defense, IMHO.
PM>And, remember that the KVs set up as TCA counters ["?"], making them hard to tell apart from infantry...
MB>The hard part isn't killing the vehicle in CC; its getting into CC in the first place.
PM> First of all, you have to get close enough to use CC. That's what the handful of squads are for in the defense I outlined. Then, the tanks are in the middle of the open ground in the O1-U5 area. Getting close enough to do CC can be suicidal (that's point iv. among the ones I listed.)
BY> Second, with Wire in the hex you get an extra +1 DRM. No ambush terrain, and you certainly wouldn't be concealed so forget the ambush. You're left with 6 CCV and the leadership DRM. But, then there are mines in the hex as well. In order to get to attack, the units will have to survive a 6 flat or worse. If you break, you're very likely do be eliminated. It sure is an option, but not one I'd like to try if I could come up with something less dangerous.
TR>I don't think a '6' with -1 to -3 (or more) is nothing to sneeze at. Also, since the Cupola is treated as an Immobile vehicle, if the attacking infantry doesn't destroy it and survive (not to unlikely with the KV having a 4FP it will probably be on the 1 vs 2 table) CC the Cupola can not now fire out side it's hex.
PM>That's very true. However, should the KV be left in this position it won't suffer from any Russian IFT attacks into the Location while the German infantry would. [Also wouldn't the cupola have TBF against the infantry? -jds]
TR> What about a 150mm HE OBA (which has the added advantage of also hammering the fortifications and infantry around the Cupola)?
PM>That is a very good thought, assuming the Germans bought a 150mm OBA on day one. It's also the reason I asked if a trench would provide a TEM of +4 against this. :-)
PM>This is perhaps the greatest threat together with Stukas (which I think is more likely to be bought on day one). But, both have the disadvantage that they may take time to kill the offending AFV. What will your infantry do while the OBA/Stuka hammer the KV? Especially since there is another KV nearby, plus Russian infantry with MGs. OBA might very well K/O the KV with a 6 or less to affect it. If the trench is a valid idea, however, the OBA would have to roll snakes to affect it...
MB>That would be a waste IMO. 150 OBA is mighty expensive. WRT day one this would not be very efficient usage.
TR>Also, the fact that you have to devote so much resource just to make the Cupolas survivable seems to make them actually more expensive than their original cost. You'd mentioned something like 80FPP, half a Coy (six squads), and an ATG as overwatch for the Cupolas to keep enemy infantry from swarming it. OK! You have protected the Cupola, of course those Germans pouring through the rest of your line are not going to be to concerned about the Cupola.
PM> That estimate was to seal off the German's left flank entirely. It is less than half of the initial Russian resources, and they cover half of what the Russians need to cover on day one. Keeping the Germans from striking along the shore of Volga is important, IMHO.
PM> Making the cupolas survive is very important if they are right in the face of the German attack. Those resources are wasted if the Germans choose another avenue of approach. However, what happens when the Germans choose to enter on the left, assuming that the cupolas are harmless infantry?
PM> How many Germans have you seen that haven't entered everything they could on day one? If they do, they're in trouble for the rest of the scenario. If they enter there, they _have_ to fight their way through the teeth of the Russian defense or withdraw and try again next day. Additionally, I would check the rules for setting up AFVs under a trench counter. They _can_, and I don't think the rules say they are then restricted from setting up elsewhere on subsequent days. [I think PM's got this one wired, er buried!] Granted, this would be a loophole and I would be ashamed to use it. [What? Afraid to use a loophole?!]
PM> Apart from the fortifications used to make the cupolas survive (about 80FPP) I added less than the troops I would normally use to defend the right flank. Sure, they defend the cupolas - but they still have to be there even if the cupolas aren't! You can't leave that flank undefended anyway. This is a cheap defense of the Russian's right flank; it could be devastating to any German attack in the area. It does not prevent the Germans from attacking elsewhere, but if they do they'll never see the cupolas and the surprise will be retained for another day.
PM> The defense is cheap, BTW, because it uses 80 FPP (2*Wire, 2*Mines, 2*trench) plus the dug-in KV's to free half of the infantry normally allotted to defend that flank. The KVs cost 2 CPP, and the FPP can be taken from the initial FPP plus another CPP. That's three CPP, one AT gun, and 2 1/2 coy to defend the rest of the map with. On day one, that's about as good as the Russians can expect. Note that the proposed MG nest in N5 would cover more than just this flank. The only concern would be that there would be no MG left to cover the Russian left flank.
DG> This [cupolas] is an interesting idea. I'd like to point out that, in my experience, even Stukas are only so effective against KVs. They need a Direct Hit with a bomb to get a very good kill number. However, for this very reason (among others), I'd hate to dig in the only KV platoon available for the entire CG. The German armor must FEAR these babies, and they're reasonably cheap to begin with because of the small platoon size. As an alternative, why not dig in either a T-60 platoon (same price, but you get one more) or a T-34 M41 platoon (I chose this one in particular because its radiolessness makes it noticeably less useful) at a cost of one CPP more. That extra CPP should probably come out of the FPP expenditure.
DG> IMO, you've got overkill on the fortification defenses for the cupolas anyway. I think I'd favor the T-34 M41s, because with the lack of radios they're just MADE to be dug in, plus they have some AT capability which the T-60s do not (though T-70s, at the same price, would be tolerable against the Pz IIIs and StuGs, but not as good as the T-60s against infantry).
MB> The idea is to use common tactical doctrine. Break up avenues of approach with mines and obstacles, cover any remaining avenues of approach with direct fire, shell the enemy with arty to disrupt his rear area. There are several ways to use mines and obstacles. The linear defense that was suggested for Jungle Citadel is not always the best use of resources. When setting up a defense you don't have to block all hexes. The idea is to create as many unfavorable hexes/ kill zones as possible. A cupola cost 1 CPP and fills three hexes: the one its in and the 2 OG hexes in front of it. That's not to bad considering the fact that the Germans most likely will not purchase anything that has a good chance of killing it outside of CC.
MB> Consider the possibilty of two cupolas in the B-E 10-13 vicinity on day one. Throw in a few obstacles and a little infantry. Ask yourself how will I attack this mess? What are the consequences of failure? I've seen the Germans fail and get a little bunched up in those wooden buildings. Down comes the 80 mm OBA and, all of a sudden German squads begin to be reduced. Ugly. Assuming this happens, you have just stopped the German advance on this flank and inflicted horrendous casualties.
TR> Dug-in tanks are, however, they are extremely static, almost always have limited LOS, and are (if set up forward, which is the only way they're of any use) almost always over-run on the next day when the Russian has to set up a little further back. Why not buy Guns which can give similar FP, set-up with better LOS, and can be moved during play and/or redeployed between scenarios.
PM> Buying dug-in tanks sure is a one-shot ploy, but it can still be useful. The obvious reason why you want the dug-in tanks rather than Guns is simple: they're hard targets! They can't be killed by MG or inherent FP, and if they're KVs, the Germans have preciously few weapons that can touch them.
PM> The only practical defense against this for the Germans is to smoke the cupola and try to get around it.
PM> Related question: If a tank is dug-in by virtue of setting up under a trench, would it get the +4 TEM vs. OBA? Would it if it set up dug-in using the armoured cupola rules?
MB> We should all agree that the Russians are amazingly short of AT defenses.
PM> How's that so? That depends entirely on how much armour you're planning to buy, doesn't it. The 45mm AT Guns they get is threat enough to AFVs with 6 AF, and they can get plenty of them if they need 'em. Expect them to run out of AT during the end of the CG unless you're using the RB variant in CH #2 - which is why I am dubious about the effect it would have on balance. I would probably make a system where the Russian gave up similar RGs to get the new ones just like the Germans have to do with their infantry before I'd use it.
PM> Ahem! One of the problems with RB is that tanks can't go everywhere. If they're used in the right place they are effective. But they can't be used everywhere if you want to attack with 'em. Unsupported tanks go down real quick, too.
PM>But I agree that the Germans can raise hell with Russian plans if he uses lots of armour on the left flank. Add that to the reasons why you want dug-in KV's there (re: see above). Those 45LL Guns can raise hell with German armour, though, and I think not putting one in W10 is sacrilege.
Yes, I did lose both of the remaining T-34s on day #2, but both D10 and V5 did their job of holding up serious penetration into the areas I cared most about on day #1. The Germans moved slowly through the choke points these guys created, which was what I needed to hold on through the first day. The V5 T-34 died from a HEAT shot from a StuG III B. Not much I could do against that. The D10 T-34 got slimed. Neither of us realized at the time that placing a DC is a concealment loss activity. A concealed sturm squad with a DC and an 8-1 leader placed the DC as an assault move from my fallen C11 strongpoint, so the A-P mines didn't help. Had the concealment been lost, then the T-34 would have needed only a "6" to hit them in C11 while placing the DC. Plus they would have drawn more fire from other Russians too.
Overall, the armored cupolas caught the German by surprise and significantly influenced his actions for 1.5 days.