Targeting Universal Carriers

Moderators: Vis Bellica, Laffe

BLabrum^
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2015 4:06 am

Targeting Universal Carriers

Post by BLabrum^ »

Have experienced several game instances where Universal Carriers have been used very much in harm's way with near impunity. While I appreciate that LMGs may drive them off and grenades may ruin their day it still seems given the carrier's extremely low profile relative to other open top armoured carriers (e.g. Sdkfz 251) that they should be more vulnerable both to small arms fire and even close combat. While it is understood that Universal Carriers should probably not be used as close in infantry fighting vehicles it would be better if there were rules (house or otherwise) that brought about historical results in such instances. Was considering that a Leader could spend 2 Command Initiatives to have even a rifle team count as an LMG for the purposes of driving off Universal Carriers?
User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 8788
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Targeting Universal Carriers

Post by Truscott Trotter »

As much as I love my carriers to be fair reading the historical accounts they should be hard cover at best
Levi the Ox
Posts: 246
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2019 11:57 pm

Re: Targeting Universal Carriers

Post by Levi the Ox »

From my reading on Crete a couple of years ago, the Fallschirmjager scattered in the central landings had a very tough time dealing with them with only small arms. They could only knock them out by luring them into rough ground and assaulting them from ambush, which in turn was only possible when they were operating unsupported.

As written, the closest thing to "assaulting" them would be getting adjacent to them and throwing a grenade. As it's an enclosed space you can throw a grenade into it at point-blank range, at which point a hit is nearly automatic. I'd rate a stationary carrier no worse than a "door or ground floor window" for -2, making it a 4+ to-hit (on 2d6). If it has moved that would go up, but even so the odds of ruining its day are pretty good.

House rules-wise, your suggestion for trying to drive them off with rifles using CI seems fine. In another recent thread someone also mentioned having a senior leader use CI to detail one figure to act as a sharpshooter, using the sniper rules for firing on vehicles.
User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 8788
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Targeting Universal Carriers

Post by Truscott Trotter »

Funny in France 1940 the crews got shot up badly
Rowan10
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2019 10:38 am

Re: Targeting Universal Carriers

Post by Rowan10 »

I agree with the hard cover rule. It would stop your opponent using them as “mini tanks”.
User avatar
BaronVonWreckedoften
Posts: 1193
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 10:28 am

Re: Targeting Universal Carriers

Post by BaronVonWreckedoften »

Truscott Trotter wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 3:02 am Funny in France 1940 the crews got shot up badly
Different/heavier weapons in use by the enemy in that theatre perhaps?
No plan survives first contact with the dice.
User avatar
Guadalcanal Diarrhea
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2021 11:14 pm

Re: Targeting Universal Carriers

Post by Guadalcanal Diarrhea »

They weren't very successful vs. Japanese units during the Buna/Gona operations in New Guinea either...
"One hundred rounds do not constitute firepower. One hit constitutes firepower..."~ Col. Merritt Edson, 1st Raider Battalion, U.S.M.C
Foxhound61
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2020 1:48 am
Location: Canberra, ACT

Re: Targeting Universal Carriers

Post by Foxhound61 »

re GD's comment above.

On 5 December 1942 five Australian carriers were used to spearhead an attack by the US Army's III/128th Regiment at Buna. Shortly after crossing the Start Line/Line of Departure the supporting Infantry were stopped by heavy Japanese fire from concealed bunkers. The five carriers advanced alone through an overgrown coconut plantation. Each carrier had a crew of four and was armed with two Bren guns and the crews' personal weapons. Crews were provided by the 18th Australian Infantry Brigade - one crew from the 2/5th Infantry Battalion and four crews from the 2/7th Infantry Battalion. Within 30 minutes all the carriers were abandoned after the crews suffered heavy casualties. Four to the five drivers were killed almost immediately by Japanese riflemen firing from the top of coconut palms into the open-topped carriers. The Lieutenant commanding the carriers was also killed in a similar manner when he attempted to replace his own dead driver. Other casualties were also killed or wounded by Japanese grenades tossed into the carriers. Three of the carriers "bellied" on fallen coconut trees concealed by long grass and creepers. Of the 20 personnel in the crews six were KIA and five WIA.

The Australian Army Official History "South West Pacific Area. First Year" records "... within half an hour, the five vehicles lay abandoned, proof of the dictum that carriers were not tanks." p. 378

The whole incident is recorded on pages 376 - 378 of the Official History.

If anyone is interested; there is also a contemporary three page report in the 18th Infantry Brigade Unit [War] Diary for December 1942 - pages 11 - 13 refer.

Both the Official History and the 18th Brigade Unit Diary are in digitized form in the Collection section of the Australian War Memorial internet site.
Captain W Martin
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 11:35 pm

Re: Targeting Universal Carriers

Post by Captain W Martin »

I've been experimenting with using the LMG vs AFV rule.

AFV with 2 or 3< armour if open topped can be targeted by ALL weapons at close range (e.g. not just LMG's but all teams

I've found this works really well and keeps these lighter vehicles much more honest, esp in early war with the lack of AT weapons.

The need be used in a much more canny and less risky fashion....

I certainly wouldn't want to sit in a 222 for too long while people plinked away with full load .303 ammo.....
Contrarius
Posts: 551
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2018 1:35 pm

Re: Targeting Universal Carriers

Post by Contrarius »

Captain W Martin wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 9:49 am I certainly wouldn't want to sit in a 222 for too long while people plinked away with full load .303 ammo.....
The 222 wasn't so bad - the slightly smaller 221 had even thinner armour. And let's not talk about the Kfz 13.

There are several accounts from 1939 of Polish tankettes and armoured cars being repulsed WITH CASUALTIES by LMG fire. The TKS and TK-3 tankettes were of course, like the Universal Carrier, based on the Carden-Loyd.
Post Reply