Myth of Invincibility Scenario.

[Melchior]

An overly optimistic description of the general success of German counterattacks, at least in the second half of the war. They succeeded occasionally, but failed at least as often: Mortain, Arracourt, Operation Nordwind, Lake Balaton... I could go on.

That assessment isn't wrong either. While operating on an offensive mindset even while nominally fighting defensively German leadership was often inclined to conduct piecemeal attacks on ambitious objectives. While this attitude worked great in 1939-41 it started to become a liability as support options dwindled and the seriousness of losses grew. Glorious Death Rides especially became the norm in the Heavy Panzer Brigades, which would often smash right through Allied lines only to maroon themselves kilometers behind the front after their infantry screen was eroded away and they ran out of gas and ammo.

The German Army never had enough ARVs and the sheer weight of vehicles like the Panther and Tiger sure didn't help the recovery situation either.

[Champagne]

I own every Battlefront CM product, except for the Shock Force modules. I plan to keep buying these great conflict simulations.

Great work, Battlefront. Thanks.

[YankeeDog]

Glorious Death Rides especially became the norm in the Heavy Panzer Brigades, which would often smash right through Allied lines only to maroon themselves kilometers behind the front after their infantry screen was eroded away and they ran out of gas and ammo.

They didn't even have to run out of gas or ammo. On the defensive Panthers and Tigers did pretty well much of the time. But this is not all that surprising considering the advantages the defender has. On the offense, though, their only significant successes were against infantry defensive positions with only modest AT assets (e.g., early stages of the Battle of the Bulge). Even when gas and ammo were not an issue, they usually failed pretty spectacularly once they ran into Allied units with credible AT assets, on the East front or West -- Mortain, Arracourt, Lake Balaton.. the record of the "Heavy Cats" on the advance is not good.

[Melchior]

I heard Bazooka teams were an often used tactic to hunt errant Panzers that had broken through the line. Clearly the Bazooka's problems were never so severe that it was worthless. Troops complain about everything though and the Bazooka would have had a bad reputation even if it fired homing smart rockets.

Reality was by 1944 the Allies were too redundant and too battle wise for a Panzer breakthrough to simply collapse the whole front as it did in 1940. Even if it got very deep. Operation Barbarossa likely failed because the Red Army didn't collapse as the Germans had hoped it would. While many Russians did surrender, many also didn't, and the small pockets of resistance trapped behind German lines would totally throw off a Blitzkrieg's fragile timetables. That was just what happened at the Bulge after all. It just threw the Germans off balance so much when isolated enemy units chose to keep fighting instead of routing.

[TimoS.]

Problem is not the Bad Modelled Tiger/Panther. Its the Testrange Hit% and the Small Maps that make those T34/85 shine on Engagement Ranges (because of small Maps and almost no Tankcombat on +800m) that occur almost every Time.

The Good German Optics/Training and that overall (Russian and German) Hit% taken from some Testrange Hit% Sources doing right that. No Matter if Tiger/Sherman/T34 on Short Ranges. The one who First Shoots wins.

Diffrent to CMBB. But thats another Story.

On the other Hand the Costs for a Panther are very low compared to T34/85. Pointswise its a 2:1 Ratio

Thats the Biggest Problem for me on that Late War Releases so far. All Guns Blazing. And on Short Ranges its just gambling.

[sburke]

Problem is not the Bad Modelled Tiger/Panther. Its the Testrange Hit% and the Small Maps that make those T34/85 shine on Engagement Ranges (because of small Maps and almost no Tankcombat on +800m) that occur almost every Time.

The Good German Optics/Training and that overall (Russian and German) Hit% taken from some Testrange Hit% Sources doing right that. No Matter if Tiger/Sherman/T34 on Short Ranges. The one who First Shoots wins.

Diffrent to CMBB. But thats another Story.

On the other Hand the Costs for a Panther are very low compared to T34/85. Pointswise its a 2:1 Ratio

Thats the Biggest Problem for me on that Late War Releases so far. All Guns Blazing. And on Short Ranges its just gambling.

There are quite a few large maps for long range engagements. Try Studienka. I have got a Panther that has taken on a couple T34s and ISU 152s. It is a little banged up but the opposition is flaming wrecks. The engagement range for this particular unit has been between 800 and 900 meters. I am lucky the fighting position is slightly higher so I expect I am getting some additional protection from the angle. Maybe not much, but that Panther is still alive and the enemy isn't.

[Champagne]

There are quite a few large maps for long range engagements. Try Studienka. I have got a Panther that has taken on a couple T34s and ISU 152s. It is a little banged up but the opposition is flaming wrecks. The engagement range for this particular unit has been between 800 and 900 meters. I am lucky the fighting position is slightly higher so I expect I am getting some additional protection from the angle. Maybe not much, but that Panther is still alive and the enemy isn't.

There are many variables, all realistic, and all contribute to make RT something that we are lucky to have to add to our education and fun.

I'm very thankful for Battlefront. I'm also thankful for the great input into this thread. I have not contributed much to the thread, so, that's why I thank those who have.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Problem is not the Bad Modelled Tiger/Panther. Its the Testrange Hit% and the Small Maps that make those T34/85 shine on Engagement Ranges (because of small Maps and almost no Tankcombat on +800m) that occur almost every Time.(

There are a lot of maps in excess of 2 km per side in CMRT, and also CMBN.

I am almost certain that tank gunnery accuracy in CMx2 is NOT practice range accuracy. I don't think it's even close. For the 88 mm KwK 43 L/71 on the King Tiger, the expected first shot practice range accuracy at 1000 meters was officially 100%, combat accuracy 85%. Line up some T-34s 1000m away from some KTs and test the first shot accuracy in CMRT, then come back and tell us that it's "Testrange Hit%"

[petergottlieb76]

I just played this through and didn't notice anything that made me think something is balanced differently than it used to be. I did restart once about five minutes in and that did give me some initial information about the axis of the Russian attack which no doubt made my set up the second time more effective, but with that caveat, the German equipment definitely maintains its edge over Russian, so long as it's well placed. I destroyed 23 tanks for the total loss of two Panthers, with two more Panthers combat ineffective due to weapon damage. The jadgpanzers actually proved to be very survivable in my play through - get them hull down and they are really hard to hit. At certain angles, the T-34 85s turret could deflect 75 L48 rounds, but the German armor definitely did better against the Russian 85mm and 76mm guns than the Russian armor did against the Germans, and the 88 is still king of the battlefield against t-34 series tanks. It was interesting to me to see just how many Russian tanks got destroyed by penetrating shots to the front mantlet.

I wonder if the difficult with this scenario is more about resisting the urge to push your armor too far forward to claim the objectives, instead of putting it in overwatch while pushing your infantry forward. At under 500 yards, tank losses seem to be pretty much 1 for 1, but if you can stay further back, stationary, and unbuttoned, it wasn't too hard to really shoot up the Russian armor.

[Oddball_E8]

I just played this through and didn't notice anything that made me think something is balanced differently than it used to be. I did restart once about five minutes in and that did give me some initial information about the axis of the Russian attack which no doubt made my set up the second time more effective, but with that caveat, the German equipment definitely maintains its edge over Russian, so long as it's well placed. I destroyed 23 tanks for the total loss of two Panthers, with two more Panthers combat ineffective due to weapon damage. The jadgpanzers actually proved to be very survivable in my play through - get them hull down and they are really hard to hit. At certain angles, the T-34 85s turret could deflect 75 L48 rounds, but the German armor definitely did better against the Russian 85mm and 76mm guns than the Russian armor did against the Germans, and the 88 is still king of the battlefield against t-34 series tanks. It was interesting to me to see just how many Russian tanks got destroyed by penetrating shots to the front mantlet.

I wonder if the difficult with this scenario is more about resisting the urge to push your armor too far forward to claim the objectives, instead of putting it in overwatch while pushing your infantry forward. At under 500 yards, tank losses seem to be pretty much 1 for 1, but if you can stay further back, stationary, and unbuttoned, it wasn't too hard to really shoot up the Russian armor.

Yeah, the main difference between russian armour and german armour at ranges above 700 meters is usually not that the germans are invulnerable, but that the germans knock the enemy tanks out with one hit while the russians might take out a panther or a JPz after 4-5 hits.

If they do get lucky they might get it on the first hit too tho, but on average, it takes alot more to kill the panther than it does to kill the T-34.

On a sidenote, my friend tried the tutorial campaign and in the last battle his IS-2 survived 9 riccochets and 5 penetrating hits from the front by a tiger at around 500 meters... Sure, the tank was useless and most of the crew dead, but it was still running. The crew bailed twice but got back in when ordered to after they recovered.

It had a destroyed radio, destroyed optics and destroyed weapon controls. It had somehow lost all the ammo too so it couldn't even shoot the bow mg (that might be because of destroyed weapon controls tho).

But it served well as a distraction for some of the enemy tanks

Just goes to show that unexpected results do happen from time to time.

[Mr.X]

Only 20 - 30% of knocked out tanks in WWII were total losses...in many cases, they only had to repair some small damages and to clean everything from blood and parts of human bodies and to put in a new crew...

Regards

Frank

[Melchior]

Well, substantial numbers of vehicles might be lost permanently if the front was overrun or recovery vehicles were unavailable. It also didn't help that most tanks in WW2 had no substantial protection for their ammo. If the main gun ammunition cooked off the tank was a total loss no questioned asked. That being said, tanks would indeed be recovered and sent back into action as soon as they could be re crewed, sometimes without even repairs. I heard of an instance somewhere on the eastern front where a Panzer III was knocked out 4 consecutive times in one day. Don't quote me on that though.

[pnzrldr]

FWIW 3 of my 4 Jpz IVs survived this scenario (Total German Victory), despite losing both my Tigers. They KO'ed a combined 14 Russian AFVs. You must play Jpzs as tank destroyers. Hide them deep in woods, or on reverse slopes behind villages, to peek through gaps between buildings. If you find the right spots for them they are lethal, but they are not intended to go toe-to-toe with tanks from the front (unless they are Jagdtigers!). The key to winning this scenario as Germans is in the mission brief - defend. Defend until there are no more Russian tanks or assault guns. Then mop up the INF, seize the OBJs and await the Russian AI surrender.

[Oddball_E8]

FWIW 3 of my 4 Jpz IVs survived this scenario (Total German Victory), despite losing both my Tigers. They KO'ed a combined 14 Russian AFVs. You must play Jpzs as tank destroyers. Hide them deep in woods, or on reverse slopes behind villages, to peek through gaps between buildings. If you find the right spots for them they are lethal, but they are not intended to go toe-to-toe with tanks from the front (unless they are Jagdtigers!). The key to winning this scenario as Germans is in the mission brief - defend. Defend until there are no more Russian tanks or assault guns. Then mop up the INF, seize the OBJs and await the Russian AI surrender.

You lost that many tanks?!?

You are hereby demoted from Panzerleader to Panzerpanzy!

[c3k]

Just played a battle where 9 T34/85's stumbled upon a single Panther at ~250-300m.

The Panther knocked out 3 of my T34's. (They were glad to absorb the Panther's fury for me, so that I might destroy the hitlerites by other means. My men are always glad to do this for me. )

One of my flanking T34's got two hits through the side of the Panther's turret, knocking it out with the first penetration. Between the first penetration and the second, the Panther showed that it was still operational (death clock). My remaining T34/85's fired about 4 shots, each of which ricocheted off the glacis. (The Panther was on a slight incline, which added slope to the glacis.)

The results certainly seemed about right.

[A co]

Reviving this old thread- Has anyone played this scenario H2H? I can't quite tell if all the previous posts are talking about fighting the AI. And has anyone won as the Germans against a human opponent? And how did you do it?

I'm not going to say why I'm asking...

[A Canadian Cat]

I am currently playing as the Russians. It is not over yet but it is looking good for me. However my opponent did manage to loose two Panther's early moving them around. If I had to deal with four of those things in my initial assault things could have turned out differently.

[Placebo]

You might be ageing like me and misremembering things, do you remember the up roar when Tiger I's drivers front plate was penetrated by 76mm Shermans in the CMBO demo, or the shock postings of Sherman 75mm penetrating StuG's at sub 600m in chance encounter demo?

I still have very fond memories of those CMBO demo battles, did anyone ever remake them for CMBN?

[JoMac]

Reviving this old thread- Has anyone played this scenario H2H? I can't quite tell if all the previous posts are talking about fighting the AI. And has anyone won as the Germans against a human opponent? And how did you do it?

I'm not going to say why I'm asking...

Yeah, I'm sure these Scenario's were played against the AI. Unfortunately, the results would be much different if played against a Human Opponent...Think I have an idea why you were asking.

[cjslax6]

Reviving this old thread- Has anyone played this scenario H2H? I can't quite tell if all the previous posts are talking about fighting the AI. And has anyone won as the Germans against a human opponent? And how did you do it?

I'm not going to say why I'm asking...

In our battle I shall be the first to win as a German!

[Ultradave]

Reviving this old thread- Has anyone played this scenario H2H? I can't quite tell if all the previous posts are talking about fighting the AI. And has anyone won as the Germans against a human opponent? And how did you do it?

I'm not going to say why I'm asking...

Playing it right now. Lots of tank carnage on both sides (I'm the Russian in this one). So far I really like it. I've made a couple of foolish moves that cost me, but I also was set up well to deliver a few costly blows of my own (at least as far as I can tell).

Good scenario. So far the best one I've played of RT (when I say best, I mean that I like it the best, not to offend any designers out there).

[normannobrot]

has anyone read books on the penetration values of russian late war weapons? the t34/85 within 1000 m could easily be deadly to most german tanks, it was to be fair a very good weapon and is why amongst alot of other values at that point it was a tipping point added to many.. Don't winge and moan about the german tanks are weaker etc....russian's had alot more heavy tanks and assault guns that were much better matched than there allied counterparts...

[gcrain]

I learned about tactical warfare on the East Front from reading books and playing board wargames. Advanced Squad Leader is a game that I played for almost 20 years.

The reason why my first impressions of RT are surprise and mild shock is because I don't believe that my "education" was very sound. Reading books and ASL? ASL didn't model tactical war on the East Front with nearly as much detail as CMRT.

When you get your main impressions of East Front tactical warfare from Advanced Squad Leader, which was designed back in 1985, it's no surprise that I am surprised and a little shocked.

Yes, I do need to plan more for flank shots. In ASL, the Panther and the JgdPz IV are invincible in a front on front battle with T34/85. That's probably a wrong lesson that I learned.

Thanks to the poster who mentioned that the game scenarios don't happen at ranges that allow German tank guns to shine. That is a Truism that I will have to remember.

My impression has been the opposite, in fact we had to ban the Panther and go to short 76 rules because we felt the Panther vs the T34/85 was heavily imbalanced in the Panther's favor.

My editor tests seem to confirm this. With experience, morale and leadership equal the Panther wins handily. Also at equal morale levels the Russians seem much more likely to jump out of their tanks and run for mother Russia.

It's almost a no win scenario, if you go for high experience T34/85s they seem to get more turret hits and much better chance of penetrating. But since the Germans still have the edge you need greater numbers and therefore lower experience but then the results are even worse. As you may have gathered the Russians need to hit the turret where the Germans can penetrate the T 34 just about anywhere. Also the Panthers seem to fire quite a bit faster so after the initial salvo the odds tip even more heavily in the Panthers favor.

One thing I did notice was the T 34/85s seem inconsistent in their penetration and they don't carry any sort of sabot round. Apparently they have different kinds of ammo and it does not show in game so you never know what they are using.

My recollections from that scenario was that it was the SU 76M sabot round that caused me the most grief. I lost the Panzer IVs but my Panther's decimated the T34/85s.

I dont recall the 76mm sabot round being as deadly as it has been to me in games. I now worry ore abou those more than I do the 85mm gun.

[Baneman]

has anyone read books on the penetration values of russian late war weapons? the t34/85 within 1000 m could easily be deadly to most german tanks, it was to be fair a very good weapon and is why amongst alot of other values at that point it was a tipping point added to many.. Don't winge and moan about the german tanks are weaker etc....russian's had alot more heavy tanks and assault guns that were much better matched than there allied counterparts...

In a QB I'm playing right now, I've lost 2 Panthers to the same T34/85 ( it got off the first shot both times - better spotting, possibly better experienced than my Regular crews ). Both Panthers (G's) took the round through the glacis MG bulge - according to the hit decal - and were immediately destroyed.

[Sgt Joch]

has anyone read books on the penetration values of russian late war weapons? the t34/85 within 1000 m could easily be deadly to most german tanks, it was to be fair a very good weapon and is why amongst alot of other values at that point it was a tipping point added to many.. Don't winge and moan about the german tanks are weaker etc....russian's had alot more heavy tanks and assault guns that were much better matched than there allied counterparts...

Dunn, "Hitler's Nemesis", p. 156 gives some info.

The 85 mm gun on the T34/85 could penetrate up to 138mm of armor at 500 meters and 100mm at 1,000 meters.

In comparison, the 76mm Sherman could penetrate 212mm of armor at 500 meters and 179mm at 1 km.

I was surprised to find out that many Russian tankers preferred the 76mm Sherman to the T34/85 and in 1945 when it was widely available, many units traded in their T34s for Shermans.

I visited the Canadian War Museum a few weeks back. They have a Panther, Sherman and T34/85. I was surprised to see that the Sherman and Panther are both really big tanks, the Sherman looks as tall as the Panther while the T34 looks a lot smaller.