Perhaps mobius can comment on the side armor modeling. I believe the lower side armor was 60mm?
It seems MR mostly used Rush as a movement command. I am not sure what other commands he may have used.
I would have liked more tac maps to see the overall situation especially at the end game.
I think video adds greatly to these type of AAR of DAR or SIAARs. It's great that the hobby can be shared without buying magazines or Journals, etc. Media should be used to its fullest.
I had hoped that everyone would agree to let the Soviets come closer but it was what it was. Its clear they were going for the flags, At least to me. If I were the Germans, I would have used the halftracks as flank protection along the board edge on my right. I wonder what else the Germans may have had.
The list of German Panzer Aces lists two 'Elephant' aces, 653rd had one ace with 22 credits and 654th had one with 16 credits. If this game was representative of what a Ferdidinand platoon could do to a T34 battalion, God help the Soviets. There would have been many more aces.
Hopefully MR develops the scenario and expands the infantry to a full company and includes some mortar or artillery support. And emplacements. Since this battle seems to model the Germans after breaking through the first line of defense in the Northern part of Kursk, I would not expect dense minefields. I am not convinced that scenario generation was needed to test out a simple claim in regards to what a T34 could do to the side of a Ferdinand. Don't get me wrong. It was fun. But one guy stalking and whacking 6 Ferdinands? I don't think so. He nailed StuGs.
The Northern assault at Kursk was peculiar in its use of non-turreted AFV in the first battles. StuGs, Ferdinand, Brumbar were supposed to break through the front (meaning the first line of minefields and trenches), along with the infantry, while the Panzers were held back. The Germans just did not have the technical means to break through the minefields. Turretless afv were severely restricted once they lost even one track. The Germans only got as far as the second line of defense up North. I suppose this scenario takes place 'between the belts'.
Perhaps the Porsche chassis could have been developed as a heavy engineering vehicle. A sort of super-mine-roller or plow attached to its front. It's electric drive gave good low end performance and a roller or plow would protect its vulnerable tracks and brakes, etc. A superstructure could have housed other weapons like flame-throwers or MG or even a mortar and allowed engineers to get some protection so they could handle bunkers. They could have controlled the tele-operated vehciles also. The chassis production run were basically 'captured' resources. As far as I know, there were no plans to make more of these vehicles and the continued use of them just generated a need for more specialized parts in the German supply chain. I guess it's true that Germans just don't like to throw anything away.
Was the 88mm long weapon really needed at Kursk? The Soviets did not field any heavy armor beside KV-1. As far as a bunker buster, I think any German 75mm L43/48/70 could do as good a job. I have always thought that the regular Tiger I chassis should have been used as a Panzerjaeger. The Tiger I production was aways painfully slow. That strange turret with its bent metal curvature did not lend itself to mass production. A simple superstructure that could house the 88mm long could have been produced quicker.