A Quick Battle AAR: Shermans vs Pz IVs, Not Your Fathers Combat Mission

[GhostRider3/3]

I predict the Shermans and M-10s will do well in this kind of terrain, with lots of cover.

Having some infantry should also help the US hold terrain, something the Germans will have trouble doing with just tanks.

Possibly, if the Axis forces can visualy identify where the infantry are, they can stand at a distance and provide DIRECT Fire on those positions.... which would suck for the infantry, even hiding in buldings, 75mm HE ammo could devestate buildings and light cover, not to mention the Ausf H had a bow mounted MG and another on its coupula = x2 7.9mm MG's min. plus 75mm. Hell in CMx1 whenever infantry took refuge in a wooden home etc.. I would save my infantry and lite them up with Direct Tank Fire, and the rapid 7.9mm would keep them supressed... mostly.

One good advantage the Shermans had was that they carried a large ammount of HE shells, which was good in the Bocage or light cover.. however I do not know what the AP to HE ratio was for them.

[Chops]

What is the Map size for this Battle?

[Barkhorn1x]

A lot of people confuse this Pz IV 75mm gun with the Panther 75mm L/70, two very different guns.

Indeed. The L/70 is freaking deadly to just about everything the Allies posses (Jumbo?, M-26?). In an overwatch/ambush poition the L/70 is deadly, and - considering that this gun equipped two vehichles with very thick frontal armor - hard to defeat.

[Barkhorn1x]

On this map, at these ranges, nobody has any meaningful advantage in terms of armour quality. I expect every tank/ TD on the map should pretty reliably penetrate any other from any aspect with one shot. Do all of the Pz IVHs on the map have very fast turrets to match the Shermans'? That could be one source of an advantage for the US side if not.

Does CMBN model turret traverse speeds?

Shermans were indeed fastest. The Mk IV/H was right behind it - the IV/J replaced the traverse machinery with an extra fuel tank (smart move?) and the Panther and Tiger were hand traversed.

[Other Means]

I had an entertaining game in CMAK where 6 M3A4s and 4 6pdrs held off a veritable horde of PzIVs.

Also the rounded turret of the Sherman is now correctly modelled.

[Sergei]

Does CMBN model turret traverse speeds?

Shermans were indeed fastest. The Mk IV/H was right behind it - the IV/J replaced the traverse machinery with an extra fuel tank (smart move?) and the Panther and Tiger were hand traversed.

Sure, like CMSF (and CMx1 before). Handcranked M10 and PzKpfw IV Ausf.J turrets are terribly slow. However, Panther and Tiger had hydraulic turret traverse, not handcranked (which was an option but not the normal method). Depending on model their speed depended on engine speed or not.

[Bil Hardenberger]

Hello Bill, and the Capt...could you tell us a little bit more about the overall map, were there any hills or defilades etc. It is sort of difficult to see if there are any from the map especially if your in overwatch.. or another advantageous position. I think I can make out a couple of ridge lines but not sure. Thanks so much, love the details in your report, cant wait for more.

Thanks.

GhostRider, I will speak to the terrain details in the following installments. It is an important aspect as to how the battle played out.

[eniced73]

I like the look of the thick forest area but how often have you guys (beta testers) played maps like this with the trees on? I am assuming it will be like CMSF where you can turn the leaves off. Or can you toggle the density? Better yet if you could toggle the transparency that would be great. Maybe a mod to be created. I mean the trees look very nice for screen shots but how annoying is it playing with them full on like the SS? How can you tell locations of forces (I know the coins but that really does not do it). CMSF usually has areas of sparse density so it is usually never a big deal.

[Bil Hardenberger]

eniced73, I will be showing how we deal with heavy trees in the game as we go along, no mod necessary.

[Broadsword56]

If the US infantry stay well under cover and concealment in the trees and hold their fire, the German tanks shouldn't spot them. But that could still be rough for the infantry if the Germans try "recon by fire" or call in some indirect artillery on the treelines.

[Barkhorn1x]

However, Panther and Tiger had hydraulic turret traverse, not handcranked (which was an option but not the normal method). Depending on model their speed depended on engine speed or not.

OMG - ASL counters are incorrect! Thanks for setting me straight.

Here is a quote from Wikipedia that I found interesting:

"The first Panthers (Ausf D) had a hydraulic motor that could traverse the turret at a maximum rate of one complete revolution in one minute, independent of engine speed. This slow speed was improved in the Ausf A model with a hydraulic traverse that varied with engine speed; one full turn taking 46 seconds at an engine speed of 1,000 rpm but only 15 seconds if the engine was running at 3,000 rpm.[64] This arrangement was a slight weakness, as traversing the Panther's turret rapidly onto a target required close coordination between the gunner and driver who had to run the engine to maximum speed. By comparison, the turret of the M4 Sherman turret traversed at up to 360 degrees in 15 seconds and was independent of engine speed, which gave it an advantage over the Panther in close-quarters combat.[65] As usual for tanks of the period, a hand traverse wheel was provided for the Panther gunner to make fine adjustment of his aim.[64]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panther_tank

Interesting that the Panther traverse was tied to engine RPM - that ain't a great idea.

[Bil Hardenberger]

What is the Map size for this Battle?

Chops, the map is 1200m wide and 1000m deep.

[GhostRider3/3]

OMG - ASL counters are incorrect! Thanks for setting me straight.

Here is a quote from Wikipedia that I found interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panther_tank

Interesting that the Panther traverse was tied to engine RPM - that ain't a great idea.

I think the Germans realized this and changed their training to actualy manuevering the tank toward where they wanted to fire in emergency, this could be done rapidly by the driver upon the commanders request... but yes...on advantage to US tanks.

[Battlefront.com]

Regarding forests in CMx2... there are a number of very nice toggle features for better visuals. However, if you really want to get the full fear factor of dense forest battles, go to Camera 1, lock onto an infantry unit on the advance, and imagine how much fun Hürtgen was for the Americans. I had a battle the other night in dense forest and it was horribly bloody. Hardly ever saw the enemy either. At least not alive. One thing I love about American rifle units is that they pack a LOT of punch when they do Area Fire

Steve

[John Kettler]

Barkhorn1x,

The IV/J was a "monkey model" wartime production version of the IV/H, one stripped of expensive to produce frills in hopes of increasing production rate. Thus, its turret was hand cranked. From here http://www.achtungpanzer.com/panzerkampfwagen-iv.htm#panzer4 (Fair use)

"Ausf J was produced in mind to simplify the production by simplifying the design of Ausf H. In general, all characteristics of Ausf H were retained including weight, speed, mechanical components and armament. The first component deleted was the electric turret drive with auxiliary generator set, which resulted that the turret had to be traversed manually by hand. Its place was to be taken by 200-litre fuel tank after the production started in July of 1944. This increased the fuel capacity to 680 litres, increasing the combat range to over 300km. It is interesting to point out that German designers decided to increase the fuel capacity at the time when German Armed Forces faced serious fuel shortage problems. Problems were encountered with new fuel tanks and installations started in September of 1944. As the production continued, more modifications were made including: deletion of turret visor and pistol ports, installation of Pilze 2-ton crane mount sockets, introduction of Flammentoeter mufflers, conversion from plate Schurzen to wire-mesh Thoma type, reduction to 3 return rollers per side, installation of Naehverteidigungswaffe close defence system and ceasing application of Zimmerit paste. In addition to new modifications, numerous changes made to Ausf G and H were also applied to Ausf J."

I'm pretty sure both the Tiger 1 and Panther had power traverse, with manual backup available in the event of primary traverse failure. M10s, though, have manual traverse. I've seen the wartime training film that proves this conclusively.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Vark]

Tiger 1 had power traverse and a manual crank for back up (2 turns per degree of traverse), the Tiger crews had to use this method, sometimes, as non-penetrating hits could knock out the electrical traverse. A thing to remember also is the superior steering systems of both tanks, where the tank could turn on the spot (care had to be taken not to damage the drive train), but in emergency combat situations US tankers were surprised how quickly a flanked Panther could become a head on Panther!

[vincere]

Tiger 1 had power traverse and a manual crank for back up (2 turns per degree of traverse), the Tiger crews had to use this method, sometimes, as non-penetrating hits could knock out the electrical traverse. A thing to remember also is the superior steering systems of both tanks, where the tank could turn on the spot (care had to be taken not to damage the drive train), but in emergency combat situations US tankers were surprised how quickly a flanked Panther could become a head on Panther!

Hmm, hope the Tac AI mirrors this with armour manned by competent crews.

[Vark]

I hope the armour system begins to simulate the ability of smaller non-penetrating hits to slow whittle away at a tank, so that it risks becoming a blind, limping, cripple. If tanks do start pivoting drastically they might run the risk of catastrophic failure or permanent reductions in mobility, (to give an extreme case Ferdinand crews were cautioned about making anything except minor course adjustments off-road, for fear of breaking tracks).

Talking of modeling, will moving tanks slew round when taking a track hit, exposing their flanks?

[MikeyD]

however the German 75mm of the PzIVH was a way better gun then the 75mm of the Sherman.

Weeell... If the PzIV gun was an überweapon they wouldn't have needed Panther & Tiger guns, would they.

[Vark]

Wasn't the situation on the Eastern Front the main driver of improvements in German tank armament?

[Michael Emrys]

Wasn't the situation on the Eastern Front the main driver of improvements in German tank armament?

Yes. Competition was fierce and evolution was rapid. In four years of fighting, AFV design advanced about as much as it did in the next 30-35 years.

Michael

[Moon]

I like the look of the thick forest area but how often have you guys (beta testers) played maps like this with the trees on? I am assuming it will be like CMSF where you can turn the leaves off. Or can you toggle the density? Better yet if you could toggle the transparency that would be great. Maybe a mod to be created. I mean the trees look very nice for screen shots but how annoying is it playing with them full on like the SS? How can you tell locations of forces (I know the coins but that really does not do it). CMSF usually has areas of sparse density so it is usually never a big deal.

You have additional options vs. CMSF: You can toggle trees OFF, you can toggle them ON, or - this is new - you can toggle TRUNKS ON, which shows only trunks (no foliage) in a certain radius around the camera.

[Gromit]

or - this is new - you can toggle TRUNKS ON, which shows only trunks (no foliage) in a certain radius around the camera.

Comes in handy to spot those pesky pink elephant trunks that would otherwise be invisible! You guys are amazing Moon!

or somefink.

Looking forward to Bil and Warren cutting loose. Are you able to see contours ok when checking out the map guys? It's hard to tell from the pic.

[GhostRider3/3]

Weeell... If the PzIV gun was an überweapon they wouldn't have needed Panther & Tiger guns, would they.

If your going to 'Quote" me then do so. We are all talking about the engagment of the OP... unless you want to start going off topic sure... we can do that and Yes the 75mm L/70 was Superior to ALL ALLied 75mm and 76mm guns. IMO.... of course. But the Topic here is in regards to the PzIV H and the Shermans in this little mock up. The 75mm L/48 proved more lethal then the Sherman 75mm, and pretty much on Par with the 76mm. However the (76mm or 17lbr of the Firefly)was by far the most Lethal Weapons platform for the Allies, being even more effective then the 88mm of the tiger, but in respect to the 88mm...when it hit you.. .YOU for sur freaking Felt it, as it was by far an extremely large AT round. So basically the Firely with its very long 76mm was the most lethal AT asset until the arrival of the Jackson...and Pershing... and other commonwealth tanks that would be upgunned with the 17lbr...as far as ground units go. It really was not until the arrival of the Pershing and the Centurian that the Western Allies had either Superior or adequate Tank assets... Tank per tank that is. The Panther was still a very capable Asset for the Axis... but that is another discussion.

[Bil Hardenberger]

Opening Moves:

Your entire ability in combat must be used to make a constant appreciation of the situation. Only in this manner can you make the correct decision during the decisive seconds and issue short, clear orders without delay. This is the kind of leadership for which you are responsible.

From the German Army pamphlet: Panzer Vorwärts! Aber mit Verstand!

Before we start into the actual game itself, I think a few introductions are in order. I am going to shut up now and let the following screens do the talking:

Company HQ:

1st Platoon:

Seems I've reached my image limit for this post... continued in my next post.