Jump to content

Narses

Members
  • Posts

    270
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Narses

  1. OK, many thanks. Guess it makes some sense but most often reverse is not due to a retreat, oh well its OK.
  2. Am I missing something. I just noticed my tanks do not reverse when I try and get them to pull out of danger to new positions. They turn their lightly armored rears to enemy fire. I checked the manual but don't see anything. Hopefully this is not true and there is a "reverse" possibility.
  3. It is superb graphics-wise but tanks knocking down large mature trees is not just silly it doesn't happen because it would damage the tank or its components. That needs to be fixed as it creates an unrealistic enviornment.
  4. The literature in English on APCR ammo used by the Soviets in WW2 indicates ( Guns and Armor website) only the 45mm had APCR by the time of Kursk. Although another source sems to say the 57 and 76mm guns (anti-tank ??) had APCR by April 42. But V. Potapov at the Russian Military Zone seems to say delivery was delayed until October ( no year but I assume he means 1942). I can't figure out if they are talking anti-tank guns or tank guns. Then sources say APCR was not available for the Zis5 F34 T34 and Kv1 tanks until October 43 and then in very limited numbers until spring 1944. Can anyone at 1C clear this up? In the game you have APCR for the anti-tank Zis3 but not in the tanks. I'm assuming this was the case in July 1943 at Kursk.
  5. SE is easy and works great with a few limitations. You can fight the same battle over several times trying different tactics and the AI reacts to your changed tactics nery nicely.
  6. I find that I can get unfortified map regions if I carefully select the right area of the map as far as the Simple Editor is comcerned.
  7. OK thanks for that info. But why can't it be in the SE as well. Basing "support" on points is a bit odd. It seems its in the campaign as well. As the German assaults the southern portion of Cherkasskoe you cannot access your air or arty because of "insufficient points." That is crazy. An all out assault on an important objective would have priority for some support.
  8. I did not want to post this as a "Bug" as it is a developers' judgement situation. First let me say I've not played all the way through the campaigns (actually the reason is I'm experiencing some problems retrieving my "saved" games but that is another issue). I've been mostly playing games using the simple editor. In my own editor made scenarios I find it frustrating to not get support when I want it. Yes, I realize this is an issue in every army especially for divisional arty support already planned or for air support even more difficult. But when one is making game editorial missions support such as mortars which are organic to your own lower level units at co, bn and rgt should be immediately available. There should be a way tp permit immediate mortar support to you as cdr especially at the start of an attack and even for div arty support. There should be a way in the SE (maybe it is available in the Editor [not the Simple Editor]). I've read the manual (pg 54, etc.) and do not understand the reason for victory points as a means to getting support. Support should not depend on successful or difficult even failure in reaching objectives. Especially under difficult combat situations requiring withdrawal support may be provided. Support it is true, based on my 20 yrs in the army, is planned for with priorities to certain units in defense or attack. However outside those planned parameters support is or may be available for other reasons developing during the battle. If in the attack units not expected to be the point of main effort suddenly make a breakthrough fires and support are usually quickly shifted. In defense the same is true as battle conditions will ultimately dictate where support is sent. I simply think the victory points is an artificial and unnecessary restriction. Perhaps div arty and air could have instead a % chance of not happening but it should be available and mortar support organic at much lower levels should be available. Anyone have any thoughts on this?
  9. I've always been very impressed with the Total War series (Sega/Creative Assembly). I have them all except the very old Shogun and they seem to come with no issues relative to loading, fps or freezes or any of the "mechanical" aspects. Of course there are issues of type units, accuracy of type units and weapons or the way play or AI might be structured but the games, for me, play flawlessly through all the different PC's I've had since Total War Rome (my first TW game) that I still play. Medieval II Kingdoms is absolutely great.
  10. Also, it seems you cannot preload your SdKfz 251 or 250 (the carriers not the weapons versions) with pzgrds until the game starts. Wouldn't it make more sense to embark in deployment? Or better to have the choice.
  11. Well, I gave up on TOW (1) because with Vista I could not use the Editor. However, Sneaksie I think it was, said there is a fix coming for that. I loved the editor. Ther panzers had lots of different skins you could select. I didn't much care for the scenarios but then I seldom do.
  12. Just in case someone on this Forum knows or remembers the guy who started all the East Front modding of Panzer Elite back in 1999 this will alert you to his recent death from liver cancer in March 2010. Bryan, known as "Christian" on Pz Elite and as "Wolff" on his own website "GD" and "1SS" had illnesses most of his life. I first got involved with him and "BobR" on making scenarios for their OstPak series that churned out some 60 East Front scenarios for Pz Elite (and its still an ongoing mod at PEDG). Bryan dropped out of Pz Elite first to start his own site utilizing Red October then I dropped out of Pz Elite around 2005. BobR keeps breathing life into it to this day. I stayed in touch with Bryan these last 10 years and was the "honorary" historian and Forum "FAQ" (about WW2 and the East Front) answer guy (as well as I could) although I didn't play their mods of Red Oct MP with them. Bryan was an avid reenactor and guitar collector and player. He was 50 last year. I exchanged emails with him these last 6 mos about his terminal illness and we thought a second surgery had taken care of his issues but the cancer returned very quickly. Bryan threw me off by saying his last visit to the hospital was simply a small outpatient procedure but 2 or 3 days later I was frantically trying to reach him by his website, phone and emails. To no avail. Bryan, we loved you man and you will always be with us. My prayers for you will continue until I see you again.
  13. The Panther did resolve most of its issues but still German Panthers and Tigers did not have great operational rates even in the West. Jentz's 2 vol Panzertruppen provides those rates. For example Tiger Abt 101 (SS) with 45 Tigers authorized generally had about 15 available daily during Jun thru Aug 44 in France with an average total including Tigers in repair of around 26 or 27. They did however have total combat losses of 15 in June and 5 in July. While Panther probably was the best tank the T3485 and the later 76mm & 17 pdr Shermans were very good especially considering their ammo. APDS ammo & numbers kind of evened things out and as Stalin famously said "Quanity is an advantage all its own."
  14. Let me respond this way. I'm using both the book mentioned above (Zetterling) and Jentz's Panzertruppen Vol II. The Operations section of XXXXVIII Pz Korps in their daily Tagesmeldungen (daily reports) showed for each day July 5 thru July 18 the following Panthers available: 184, 166, 40,?, 16,10,30,25,43,36,20,43,44,44. These reports from Ops were submitted between 1700 and 1800 hrs so that is the status at that time (From Panzertruppen Vol II by Jentz. The figures in Zetterling are a bit different). Since there were 200 Panthers at Kursk you can see there were some major problems with this machine especially if 40 only were operational after the third day (7 July)! This was due not to enemy action so much but due to defects in the engines, hydraulics, transmissions, suspension and bad gaskets. One other interesting statistic is that the 2 Panther repair companies repaired on average 25 Panthers per day during Kursk. During the first 5 days the repair companies of the Panther Rgt received 81 Panthers damaged by other than enemy action. Most needed new engines and had defects in their hydraulics. Before the battle and up to 9 July 6 Panthers had destroyed themselves by internal fires and combustion. 16 Panthers were returned to Germany as they were beyond the maintenance capabilities in the army (these were not counted as losses I believe). After 20 July when the Germans retreated from their gains in the Kursk salient Jentz's book states the 4th Pz Army Quartermaster (Abt 5) reported that only 7 of 56 burned out panthers could not be retrieved and were destroyed to prevent their falling into Soviet hands. But it does not state if these 56 were enemy damage or a combination of mechanical defects or enemy action. Probably both. Om 20 July this same office OQuAbtV reported 41 Panthers operational, 85 in short term repair, 16 to be returned to Germany. It should be noted that the reports between the QM and the Ops section were most often different because their reports went in at different times of the day (hee, hee how well I know this as I was in maintenance in Vietnam and such reporting was a constant MF headache and I was reporting on heavy engineer equipment for USARV). A number of Panthers were damaged by mines but most were short term repairs. Some sources say in the first 3 days only 2 Panthers were total losses due to enemy fire. The reports indicate the Panther's front armor was basically proof against the Soviet 76mm tank and antitank guns but the sides were very vulnerable (unlike the Tiger). All that I can find seems to indicate most Panthers at Kursk were lost to defects in this new panzer that was rushed into service before it was ready. As I mentioned above Pz Bde 10 reported a need for 44 replacement Panthers and most of these were battle losses, destroyed because they could not be retrieved or completely destroyd by engine fires not from enemy damage (there were it seems 6 of these).
  15. Thanks to Sneaksie and InfraScope. Just what I needed. Probably cannot do Kubinka but will see if its possible. Borodino looks very interesting !
  16. I can't give you a specific example and I've read Glantz's monster book on Kursk. Since the Germans were advancing they had some opportunity to retrieve their armor (btw, in the 60's in Germany I was a plt ldr in a 7th Army "Dragon Wagon" company doing just that in exercises) and German overall total armor losses were not very large. They would in most cases retrieve only vehicles that could be repaired since this was a combat situation. But in the subsequent Soviet counterattacks after what the Germans consider as Kursk certainly they overran some Ger units. But that's not the point. This game is more tactical in nature and div arty is mostly off map and rightly so. CM had these vehicles as well and I'm really not bitching just making an observation. I don't think they add much but they are great graphically. A quick ck of losses frpm Zetterling & Frankson's Kursk 1943: A Statistical Analysis. This book gives actual German losses from unit original reports (these reports were used to obtain replacements so they appear true). The II SS Pz Korps and "GD" report all their equipment losses (pgs 124 & 125) along with 2nd Pz Army and 9th Army as well as Army Det Kempf and the other 4th Pz Army units. I'll just give GD and II SS reports. Actually some of the others even are more complete as far as small arms and mortars are concerned. GD report for 6 July thru 17 July show no arty losses - towed or SP. They show total losses (destroyed by enemy action, blown in place, abandoned) as 3 Pz III's, 16 Pz IV's, 1 Stug, 44 Panthers (Panther losses were reported by 10 Pz Bde not GD), no Tigers. Also 32 motorcycles, 28 cars, 31 trucks, 9 nonarmored halftracks, 4SPW ( 250 & 251) and 1 Marder II. GD personnelm losses (again, reported to get replacements) were: 364 KIA, 1859 WIA, 68 MIA, Total 2291. Although this game doesn't portray II SS Pz Korps their equipment losses were reported thru 23 July: 5 Pz III's, 23 Pz IV's, 3 Tigers, 5 Stugs, 2 15cm Howitzers, 2 10.5cm howitzers, 16 7.5 Pak's, 2 7.5cm SP Pak's (Marders?), 3% of all MG's, 3.5% of all 5 cm Paks, 3% of all motorcycles, 4 % of all trucks & cars,, 4% of all towing vehicles, and 8% of all SPW's. Personnel losses were 1487 KIA, 6442 WIA, 166 MIA, Total 8095. Remember II SS Pz Korps was roughly 3 times larger than GD, a single elite division, and had Das Reich, LAH and Totenkopf and Korps troops.
  17. Might be going to Moscow and then by boat up to St Petersburg this summer. Can anyone advise me of websites or locations of WW2 military museums in the Moscow area (even eras other than WW2). I can probably find the websites but thought if someone from 1C or someone else has personal knowledge it might be helpful. I'm aware of Kubinka but have no chance to go there this time. Thanks....
  18. What are the "Wespe" and "Hummel" doing in this game ? These are DIVISIONAL arty SP pieces for motorized/pz divisions. They should be off "board" with the other div arty. They have no business being situated forward so as to coming under direct fire.
  19. Thanks for the idea of changing the game's preset ammo loads for the German APCR rds. I wasn't aware I could change the game's campaign units in the ME. Yep, 40 rds per PzIII (L42 gun) is a bit too excessive (but the Wehrmacht tank crews would've loved it for a sure-fire short range kill).
  20. Not only are they great they are realistic. I still play them. I played a Simple Editor tank battle with only Pz III's ( L42 gun) and a couple IIs against T70's and T34's and was shocked at the ease I had taking out the T34's. Then I realized the PzIII (L42) ammo load was 18 APCBC PzGr39 and 40 rounds of two different APCR PzGr40 rds !! There was HE and HEAT as well. I then went back to CMBB and the oly APCR PzGr40 I could find were 1,2 or 3 rds in Marders, Pz III (L42) and the 5 cm Pak. This is realistic and historical. The graphics are very nice compared to CM but I agree with "Deputy" that function or game play is more important. I also like the infantry graphics and their weapons choices but find the full names for each just unnecessay and silly. You have to need to manage down to that level. A better system for controlling squads needs to be used rather than managing each soldat.
  21. Soviet tank ammo looks right as far as I've checked. At this time (Jul 43) only the 45mm tank gun and its antitk gun equivalent had APCR.
  22. After using the SE to make my own small tank battles I was surprised when I looked at the ammo for the panzers. There are simply too many APCR (40 & 40/1) rds available. The PzIII with the L42 gun has 40 of the 2 types of APCR and 18 APCBC (in the SE scenario I developed). The others are not so bad: Pz III L60 16, PzIVF2 9, Panther 9 and Tiger 8. There are some differences between the various models of the III and IV I'm not adding here. The APCR rds were distributed in very small numbers. Probably 4 would be a good number. Possibly, if available, a few more would be given to the 50mm pz and pak gunners. Remember in 1943 German lost imports of tungsten (mostly Turkey) so the APCR was in critical supply. During Kursk it was in short supply but possibly not critical yet. By 1944 it was not supplied in the West at all except for the 5cm Pak. Also there is no need to list APCR 40 and 40/1 as the slightly better 40/1 rd (more streamlined 40/1) terminology was changed by 1943 as the stocks of the 40 model had been used. Thereafter, it was just called PzGr40. The other loadouts seem OK and I didn't ck the Marder type pzjaegers or Paks. Penetration tables look good also. Oddly enough the APCR availabilty is about right in the very old Combat Mission series. I haven't checked the T34 in game yet. However, there was no APCR rd for the T3476 until October 1943 and only for selected units. By spring 1944 each T34 was supplied with 4.
  23. Yes, Tiger sound cuts in and out. Tanks knock down large trees with impunity and do it repeatedly unless you the plyr have time to drive each one. Tankers would not knowingly knock down large trees. That could easily cause vehicle or component damage. The game should direct tanks to steer around large and medium size trees.
  24. Same here. Was just starting the campaign (Ger side) and after a couple of missions my screen now locks up when I go to "Saved" and click on "LOAD." I can only get out using Ctrl-Alt-Del. I like Simple Editor for purely tank engagements ( I looked into this because of the complaints by some about "no tank battles.") but it doesn't seem to work as well with inf and towed arty I think because you'd need to go into the Mission Editor to be able to address movement schemes for them. Anyway perhaps I'm missing something and will continue fooling around. Despite putting in time limits the SE games seem to often come to an end before my set time put in the editor is up. That is an issue in the MG also. I'd just prefer like in thje Total War series where you get a choice to end battle or continue.
  25. I'm finding the Simple Editor very nice and easy to use. If one is looking to have some interesting short all armor meeting engagement battles ( ala Prokhorovka) it can be easily done by using a map that has a nice open area with no antitank ditches or trenches. The map editor permits you to select the area of the map you want to use. You can select any type units you want for each side plus support and go to it. Btw, the aircraft appear very lethel - maybe too lethel against armor. The tank gun fire from Panthers and Tigers is very telling and devastating. No complaints there. Lots of fun. Now back to the campaign!
×
×
  • Create New...