Matrix Games Forums

Deal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold Ask Buzz Aldrin!Pike & Shot gets Release Date and Twitch Session!Deal of the Week Espana 1936
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs IS-3

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs IS-3 Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs IS-3 - 12/30/2011 10:31:19 PM   
vaned74

 

Posts: 337
Joined: 11/17/2008
Status: offline
Okay, same test conditions 200 tanks on each side with support, max XP, morale, clear terrain, max leaders.

Soviets have IS-3, Germans have Panther Gs

Soviet attacking:
8 combats
avg german loss - 9.5 Panther G
avg Soviet loss - 1 IS-3

German attacking:
8 combats
avg German loss - 19.3 Panther G
avg Soviet loss - 1.4 IS-3
Post #: 1
RE: Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs... - 12/30/2011 10:35:24 PM   
gingerbread


Posts: 1785
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: online
I wonder how the poor sods in Shermans will fare vs. Panthers...

(in reply to vaned74)
Post #: 2
RE: Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs... - 12/30/2011 10:57:12 PM   
vaned74

 

Posts: 337
Joined: 11/17/2008
Status: offline
Do you really want to find that one out...

I was thinking actually of testing some T34s attacking a pile of 88mm Flak next. That one will be interesting as the end of the combat will likely result in, no matter the number of T34s killed, a CV ratio win for the Soviets. Maybe I'll mod a rifle squad with no weapons for the Germans to make the CVs balance and we'll see. I have a suspicion from watching details pitting Tank Corps and Brigades against Flak regiments that the 88mm Flak is not destroying too many tanks.

< Message edited by vaned74 -- 12/30/2011 10:59:20 PM >

(in reply to gingerbread)
Post #: 3
RE: Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs... - 12/30/2011 11:19:35 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6395
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
The answer is still: attack panzers with rifleman and lots of them. Laugh as panzers die by the score. The panzer division's greatest enemy is the lowly Soviet rifle division and especially the rifle corps.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to vaned74)
Post #: 4
RE: Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs... - 12/30/2011 11:59:27 PM   
glvaca

 

Posts: 1109
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

The answer is still: attack panzers with rifleman and lots of them. Laugh as panzers die by the score. The panzer division's greatest enemy is the lowly Soviet rifle division and especially the rifle corps.




Certainly a truely, complete and utter historical result!
Long live the Soviet rifle Corps, the secret weapon of WW2!

< Message edited by glvaca -- 12/31/2011 12:00:02 AM >

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 5
RE: Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs... - 12/31/2011 1:21:48 AM   
Mentor


Posts: 50
Joined: 12/8/2011
Status: offline
I'm not sure of the stats for the Axis / Soviet war, but in 1939 the Poles scored many of their panzer kills with arty, either in indirect barrages, or (particularly) in a direct fire role.

Soviet rifle corps have lots of arty.

(in reply to glvaca)
Post #: 6
RE: Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs... - 12/31/2011 1:53:57 AM   
jwduquette1

 

Posts: 110
Joined: 3/5/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mentor

I'm not sure of the stats for the Axis / Soviet war, but in 1939 the Poles scored many of their panzer kills with arty, either in indirect barrages, or (particularly) in a direct fire role.

Soviet rifle corps have lots of arty.



That may have been true of Poland and 1939, but operational studies conducted by the various belligerents on tank losses during 1944 and 1945 clearly show high explosive to be extremely ineffective at killing armor. Typical statistics indicate tank losses attributable to artillery being less than 10%. Kinetic energy (KE) projectiles -- AP, APC, APCBC, APCR, APDS and HVAP -- account for the lion’s share of tank kills with operational studies indicating loss from KE ranging between 50 and 70%. Landmines typically came in second behind KE. Kills from HEAT projectiles such as panzerfaust, panzerschreck, bazooka, piat, etc. fall between mines and high explosive.

(in reply to Mentor)
Post #: 7
RE: Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs... - 12/31/2011 3:44:45 AM   
randallw

 

Posts: 1972
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

The answer is still: attack panzers with rifleman and lots of them. Laugh as panzers die by the score. The panzer division's greatest enemy is the lowly Soviet rifle division and especially the rifle corps.




Certainly a truely, complete and utter historical result!
Long live the Soviet rifle Corps, the secret weapon of WW2!


The game mechanisms work the other way too: German rifle divisions can force a Russian tank division to retreat, with the Russian division taking about 60-80% losses of it's tanks.

(in reply to glvaca)
Post #: 8
RE: Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs... - 12/31/2011 2:16:16 PM   
glvaca

 

Posts: 1109
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline
I have most of Glantz books, certainly not a German biased writer by any stretch of the imagination. And like all the other writers, the main weapon under discussion are the tank Corps and the Panzer divisions. That is in the offense and in when counter attacking/defense. Why is that if it are actually the Rifle Corps that did all the tank killing?

Basically, WitE departs from the well established wargaming "truth" that Tanks (as in Pz. Divs and Tank/Mech Corps in cooperation with all arms including inf, etc...) are real OFFENSIVE weapons of WW2.

Just think about that for a moment.

I understand that this is due to a lack of persuit phase and is a weakness of the system. Hey, it happens, I'm still having fun. Just don't try to explain it as historical truth, it's not.

EDIT in bold

< Message edited by glvaca -- 12/31/2011 2:59:53 PM >

(in reply to randallw)
Post #: 9
RE: Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs... - 12/31/2011 3:11:04 PM   
Marquo


Posts: 1350
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline
"Basically, WitE departs from the well established wargaming "truth" that Tanks (as in Pz. Divs and Tank/Mech Corps in cooperation with all arms including inf, etc...) are real OFFENSIVE weapons of WW2."

Tigers, elephants, KVs, etc. were better on the defense than offense; better to exploit than be squandered doing the dirty work of breaking through.

Marquo


(in reply to glvaca)
Post #: 10
RE: Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs... - 12/31/2011 3:35:13 PM   
glvaca

 

Posts: 1109
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marquo

"Basically, WitE departs from the well established wargaming "truth" that Tanks (as in Pz. Divs and Tank/Mech Corps in cooperation with all arms including inf, etc...) are real OFFENSIVE weapons of WW2."

Tigers, elephants, KVs, etc. were better on the defense than offense; better to exploit than be squandered doing the dirty work of breaking through.

Marquo




Don't take my word for it, perhaps pick up a copy of Panzer Leader by Guderian. As more or less the inventor of the Panzer Divisions, he has a thing or 2 to say on the subject. But surely, what does he know, the game must be right!

(in reply to Marquo)
Post #: 11
RE: Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs... - 12/31/2011 8:31:34 PM   
HaydenDawson

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 8/17/2011
Status: offline
While the 50-60:1 results from the T34 test may seem a little over, I don't think it's so far beyond the possible. In fact, it may quite well represent historical realities. Think about how many times a 'Kampfgruppe' of no more than 8-10 tanks and a few infantry squads was indeed tasked with holding up entire divisions and doing so at least for the period represented by a game turn. Carius and Wittmann may have been in Tigers rather than Panthers, but there is a reason the Panther is thought of as the prototype of today's MBT. The Stalins evolved into the T-10 series which was pretty much played out not far into the 50s.

(in reply to glvaca)
Post #: 12
RE: Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs... - 1/1/2012 1:24:11 PM   
amatteucci

 

Posts: 318
Joined: 5/14/2000
From: ITALY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca
Basically, WitE departs from the well established wargaming "truth" that Tanks (as in Pz. Divs and Tank/Mech Corps in cooperation with all arms including inf, etc...) are real OFFENSIVE weapons of WW2.

Are you basing this observation on vaned74's test results or on your experience of the game? Because in my current game (grand campaign as the Soviets vs the AI) I'm being mauled by German armoured units and, even in the very few succesfull counterattacks I made, I managed to obtain a retreat only massing beefed up Tank Divisions.
It seems that large armoured units are very efficient in attacking and destroying enemy formations (providing they are adequately equipped and have high experience), what vaned74's tests show is not the uselessness of tanks but the fact that, all other things being equal, a superior tank will easily dispatch an equal number of inferior tanks when fighting in an open battlefield.

In both tests (Panther vs T-34 or Panther vs IS-3) we have a tank that cannot penetrate (frontally) the other at typical (or even short) combat ranges while being capable of (frontally) penetrate and destroy the opponent at all ranges.

Considering that optimal morale, training and leaderships were given to both sides, this basically means that we can assume that everyone is able to spot the enemy at distance and begin firing and scoring hits at long range. Obviously only the hits scored by the "superior" tanks will have an effect (i.e. the annihilation of the "inferior" force) since the other hits will bounce off harmlessly most of the time.
In this respect, the switch from the 76mm armed T-34 to the T-34-85 doesn't change the scenario that much, since even the 85mm isn't able to routinely penetrate the front protection of a Panther at normal combat ranges.

OK, these tests' results puzzled me too, at first. And still seem weird, in some respect. It would be nice if the devs would add a feature that allows the dumping of all combat related information one can read at Message Level 7 into a log file.

Anyway, we should not forget that, historically, Soviet armour accomplished very little when frontally assaulting experienced German Panzer units equipped with superior tanks (e.g. Prokhorovka). And we should also not forget that Soviet standard doctrine was onening blows in the enemy lines using infantry (supppported by artillery and independent armoured brigade/regiments) and the exploiting the gaps with mobile forces raiding the operational rear of the enemy and encircling enemy units. Late war Tank and Mechanized Corps were not expected to smash enemy Panzer divisions in frontal assaults.

quote:


I understand that this is due to a lack of persuit phase and is a weakness of the system.

I think that we don't need another "boadgame-like" feature in WitE, as a "pursuit phase". Moreover, since we have the opportunity of mixing moves and attacks, I don't see the usefulness (or even the rationale) of such a phase. Or are you referring to having the possibility to "chase" retreating and routing units just after a succesfull attack? It's my understanding that the game's engine already considers such a phase automatically (and some people here think that additional losses due to retreats and routs are too high).


quote:

ORIGINAL: HaydenDawson

While the 50-60:1 results from the T34 test may seem a little over, I don't think it's so far beyond the possible. In fact, it may quite well represent historical realities. Think about how many times a 'Kampfgruppe' of no more than 8-10 tanks and a few infantry squads was indeed tasked with holding up entire divisions and doing so at least for the period represented by a game turn. Carius and Wittmann may have been in Tigers rather than Panthers, but there is a reason the Panther is thought of as the prototype of today's MBT. The Stalins evolved into the T-10 series which was pretty much played out not far into the 50s.

You are right in considering that the test results might not be beyond the possible and in poiting out that the Panther was a sort of MBT ante litteram. But I wouldn't downplay the effectiveness and the evolution ponential of the IS tanks too. The T-10 tank was not a dead end in itself but was the end of the Soviet heavy tank development just because of a political decision (Khrushchev decided to abort all R&D on 'big' conventional weapon systems). If fact the first true Soviet MBT (the T-64) was a direct descendant of earlier medium tanks (and it was itself styled a medium tank, at first). There's a clear lineage between the T-34 and the T-64, passing trhough the T-44, T-54 (and T-55 and T-62). One can only wonder what the result could have been if the Soviet MBTs were the descendent of the IS-T-10 series, had further development of the heavies not been stopped. After all, western MBTs derived from heavy tanks (and not medium tanks). The M46/M47/M48/M60 series of tanks are direct descendants of the heavy M26 Peshing not of the medium M4 Sherman. The same is true for the British Centurion tanks. Western designers, after WW2, decided to "drop" the medium tank concept and develop the late-war heavies (Pershings and Centurions).

(in reply to HaydenDawson)
Post #: 13
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Why it's nice to drive new vehicle 2 - Panther G vs IS-3 Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.080