Generaloberst Guderian

Definately not an exploit, especially considering the rarity. Furthermore, in war there really isn't any notion of "exploits", things that are inherently unfair to the enemy is really just good strategy. Superweapons didn't win the war for Germany in real life, and if you make use of Soviet strengths rather than try to stick it out in a one-on-one fight, your opponent will be forced to continuously attempt to overcome unfavorable odds. Also, don't forget other weapons, especially when on defense. Mines, roadblocks and well hidden AT guns can force Tigers onto soft ground where they bog easily. If by chance you can get it immobilized, you can take advantage of its slower turret by offering it targets from different angles.

I read several articles about that...seems to be a relatively easy process, although I had heard that one of the reasons for the conversion was that too many Germans carrying captured guns were being killed by friendly fire, as anyone who saw a PPsH shot on sight, namely due to fear of partisans etc. The 9mm coversion on the other hand used the straight MP-40 mag, which was quickly recognizeable to all German soldiers and helped mittigate the problem. Damn its early in the morning.

Fair enough, those are all good points. The real difference at range, is as you point out, the semi-automatic fire, which was something I overlooked initially. Some of the later model PPsH did not have a selector switch and were full-auto only, as was the one I fired at the Greater Pittsburgh Gun Club. Until you pointed out the semi-auto feature I didn't realize that was one of the gun's capabilities. My real argument against the weapon was that without the selector switch, the weapon cylces too fast for really effective shooting at longer ranges, wheras the slower ROF (thanks to the telescoping closed bolt) of the MP40 makes burst firing easier when accuracy counts. Its slow enough that with a bit of trigger work you can fire one round at a time, much in the same way that soldiers could shoot a single round with the full-auto M1918 A2 BAR. That, and getting sprayed in the face with hot cartridges isn't fun, no matter what you are shooting, and my guess is that most Russian soldiers were not wearing eye protection.

You're right, that is what he said. I apologize, there really isn't much point in arguing about such things anyway. The fact that the Russians produced 5x as many PPsH 41s than Germans did MP40's makes it a more successful weapon right there, so in the greater contex of the war, you are probably right on that count. My assertion though, was not that one weapon was better than the other, and I acknowledged that both weapons had their own unique advantages and disadvantages. I simply don't think, that given what I know about both guns, and my experience with each, that German squads should get roughly 70% of the firepower from their SMGs when the disparities between the PPsH and MP40, if any, were not nearly as significant or as decisive as the disparity between the 98k and semi-automatic rifles such as the SVT-40 and the M1 Garand.

I really don't think its that clear cut. I know that Germans captured and used them all the time, but I really think that is just as much personal preference and field adaptation that it is a theoretcial advantage of one over the other. For starters, muzzle velocity with small arms is not necessarily the biggest consideration, but rather muzzle velocity relative to the mass of the round. The 7.62 round naturally has a higher velocity as it weighs less while using only slightly less powder. Most 9mm ammuntion is 115+ grain, whereas all the Tokarev ammo I've seen is 85 grain, but it is much smaller. And while the muzzle velocity of the Tokarev round might be similar to that of the .357, the magnum round, take my word for it, is much heavier and is in a completely different class of ammunition. I've actually seen lever-action rifles that have been chambered to fire .357 and .44 magnum round that compare favorably to traditional Winchester .30-30 rifles. The Tokarev round on the other hand, is more or less just a pistol-type ammunition. .38 ammuntion is actually larger and heavier than 9mm Luger, with .38 being generally 10-11 grams and 160 grain and 9mm being 7.5 grams and 115 grain Regardless of all that, a full wooden stock is nice at times, but given the range of the weapon, isn't much more advantageous that the weight saved by the folding metal stock. The PPsH also fires from an open bolt and can go off if it is dropped, whereas most of the saftey issues in regards to premature firing in the MP38 were fixed in the MP 40. Another step that the Russians took to complement the high ROF was to develop the 71 round drum. I can tell you right now that they are difficult and time consuming to load with ammunition, are prone to getting filling with dirt and other debris, and are in general less reliable than the shorter stick/box magazines. I'm not saying that the MP40 didn't have drawbacks--it did. What I am saying is that I think it was all in all a more well rounded firearm, even if it was outclassed by the PPsH in close combat.

The SMG firepower values are interesting, and personally, I disagree with some of them. For example, the MP40 from a Rifle '41 squad has a firepower rating of 36 @ 40m and 9 @ 100m. The PPsH on the other hand, has a rating of 50 and 11 respectively. Now I've fired both weapons personally, and don't think that these values accurately reflect each gun's capability. First off the PPsH is a very rapid fire weapon that shoots 7.62 x25mm Tokarev rounds from an open bolt. The ammunition is small enough that there really isn't any appreciable recoil, but that being said, it is not a terribly accurate weapon, and is difficult to fire in burst of less than 3-4 rounds. Furthermore, you find yourself working through the 35 round box magazines very quickly. Despite these inherent flaws, it is a very formidable weapon at close combat ranges. Were I writing these values, I would probably raise its close range firepower, but reduce its longer range effectiveness dramatically. The MP40 on the other hand, is a very controllable and well rounded weapon that holds up pretty well over a longer set of distances than the PPsH. The 9x19mm Parabellum round is considerably heavier than the Tokarev ammunition and has less of a drop over range. The story of the Thompson and the M1911 proves that stopping power and lethality is an important consideration in combat and I would probably increase the firepower of the MP40 to reflect this. I would also increase its longer range power, as I know it would fare better at 100m that a PPsH. In the end, both guns are very serviceable, and I'm not sure if one is clearly "better" than the other. Sometimes with the PPsH you get hit in the face with your spent casings, and the finish and quality of the weapon is generally lower overall, but there really isn't any gun I'd rather have in a close assault.

The quality of the troops using them also seems to play a HUGE role in how accurate they are. In the tests I did, "crack" tank hunters were able to hit much more reliably and more often than regular counterparts, often scoring 3 direct hits at range in less than 15 seconds.

That would add a whole new dynamic to it, so long as they don't make communication loss a random thing, but rather the actual result of artillery fire.

I'm not sure about the number of aircraft that can simultaneously attack, but I'd imagine 5lb bombs would be used for anti-personnel use. Considering the scope and focus of CMBB, they probably wouldn't include any anti-runway munitions (if there were any at the time, I don't know) given that this is a more tactically oriented game, and runways are opererational/strategic targets. The problem with a multiple-bomblet type setup is that in this case, the plane is only carrying 240lbs of explosives, whereas a modern cluster bomb is much heavier in and of itself. I guess you just need to hope for the bigger bombs.

I dunno, the Panzerfaust 100m is a tough one to counter if you're facing them in large enough quantities. While I've always had good results with them, it seems that sqauds fire them in excess, often times hitting an enemy 4-5 times from 3 different directions. Naturally any enemy facing such an onslaught is immediately destroyed. The problem though, is that there are no more Panzerfausts left for, well...the rest of the Red Army, and often times what I thought was going to be a great compliment to my AT defense turns into a "one hit wonder".

Also, consider when the enemy comes into your arc, and your LOS. If possible position the team so that the enemy tank won't come into LOS until it is already close enough to be targeted. In a 1941 QB I was playing, I had good success using this tactic, and destroyed 2 T-34/1941s using Panzerwurfmine (which seem to be a pretty much garaunteed kill).

Here is the distinction: The German word for "geologist" is "Geologe". "Geländeerkundung" is a compound word coming from "Das Gelände", meaning terrain, and "Erkundung" meaning reconnaissance.

Hmm...there probably is a way, assuming you know the average spread covered by a target area. I suppose what I could try to do is call in an artillery strike in an open field, and then using a quick vehicle and the LOS tool, I could measure the width and lenght of the affected part of the map. Then I could calculate the total area, and divide the firepower by that number, thus giving us a firepower/sq meter value, or something along that line. I'll get back to you if that turns out to be a practicable method.

I think you're definitely right about the heavier caliber artillery, especially the on map 150 L/12. The real difference lies in the relative blast power of each weapon system. Rather than trying to assess the value of different calibers via speculation and anectdotal experience, I've attempted to compare their relative power quantitatively. I went into the editor and recorded the blast values and ammunition for each type of German artillery observer. I then multiplied the blast value by the ammunition count. This value, which I've called firepower, should represent the maximum HE support that each observer could bring down upon the enemy, assuming perfect accuracy. Keep in mind however, that rocket artillery etc is not at all accurate, and if anyone can think of a good way to do it, we could develop some type of firepower correction modifier to account for intrinsically poor accuracy: </font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Caliber: Blast: Ammo: Firepower 75mm 45 25 1,125 81mm mtr 26 150 3,900 105mm 114 60 6,840 150mm 299 35 10,465 170mm 452 20 9,040 210mm 708 20 14,160 240mm 957 18 17,226 158rkt 202 108 21,816 280rkt 633 72 45,576 337rkt 377 72 27,144</pre>

I attempted to do a quantitative comparison of different calibers but couldn't post it so that it was legible. If I can figure out a good way to display the results I'll get back to you.

Great pictures! BTW, I was wondering if any of you knew of German units with G/K 43 Rifles in CMBB. Maybe I just haven't been paying close enough attention, but I've yet to run across German infantry with semi-auto rifles.

Indeed, a very interesting AAR!

Well not to get too off topic, but I read a couple of weeks ago that 68 M1s have been damaged so badly by infantry attacks that they have been sent back to the US for repairs. Apparently no provision was made for protecting the engine compartment against a succession of AT rockets. In addition to actual tanks, don't forget that the Germans also had a variety of "interim" tank destroyers, such as the Marder I-III series as well as the Nashorn. If you've ever played with these in game, you know that they are imperfect solutions at best. They're good killers at range, but can't really hope to withstand any return fire. Thus, to use one well you really need to set it up so that you are only engaging a handful of targets at a time.

I think my most satisfying string of victories was in the CMBB scenario "A Warm Place to Sleep" in which a weakened German armor/mechanized force consisting mostly of Pzkpfw. IIIs and 38(t)s needs to capture a Russian farmhouse in order to escape the cold. The Russians counterattack with a mixed armored force including some T-34/1940s and due to lucky positioning an panic under fire by the AI, the strongest part of their force charged right past my lead ambushing 38t and got taken out with 37mm shells to the rear.

I guess the idea with Abrams is that it can kill any target from beyond the enemy's engagement range. That and who knows what really happens when a 120mm depleted uranium round hits something. My instincts tell me that even with armor it'd be hard to shrug something like that off.

While I agree that the Tiger is a good tank, I've found the Panther to be much more lethal when used correctly. The 75mm L/70 is a very accurate and powerful gun, and I've seen it used to quite good effect against just about every type of Soviet armor, including the heavier stuff like JS-2s. Furthermore the front of the tank is extremely well armored, and I've had Panthers survive 122mm hits to the front turret from less than 100m. This means that if you can get a Panther placed in a good vantage point, you can hold out against a very sizable Soviet force for some time. As for the shot trap, I was playing the HSG The Panthers Roll scenario, which was discussed here about a week ago, and lost 2 Panther A's due to that flaw. Just to avoid refuting everything I just said, let me preface by telling you that I destroyed 51 Soviet AFVs while losing only those two Panthers and a Jagdpanzer IV. What basically happens is a shell hits the manlet and gets deflected down into the superstructure. In both cases I witnessed the message "Side Turret Partial Penetration -- Knocked Out" was displayed, and visually it looked as if the tank had been stuck by an HE round. It can be annoying to deal with as the turret sides themselves are, in theory, fairly capable of withstanding most projectiles. As far as smoke goes, its still not a perfect solution. If I was commanding the Panther and saw you laying out a smokescreen, I'd expect the flank attack and attempt to reverse into a better position.

I'll be dammned. Thats a bad piece of luck there, especially considering the position you caught that Panther in...

It was slow going, although the Russians obviously did keep gaining ground. Keep in mind that CMBB is only a tactical simulation and doesn't take into account the larger dynamics of grand strategy and logistics. That being said, when you do get into a tactical engagment in which fluid reinforcements etc aren't available, the going is extremely tough. The front hull armor of a Panther is 82mm @ 55 degrees and the front of the turret is exceeding well armored 100mm+ (curved). At long ranges the Panther is literally invulnerable when faced with the T-34 M43 and even at 100m, a flank shot is not a garaunteed kill. The IS-2 on the other hand has better shot at all ranges, but in all of the tests I conducted, the Panther won consistenly at 1000m and at all closer ranges fared pretty well, with the deciding factor seeming to be which tank fires first. My suggestion: "Hail" fire sometimes causes immobilizations. If you can hit the track and force the Panther crew to rely on the turret rather than the front plate for protection, you may have better luck. Don't forget that the Panther A is somewhat vulnerable to a side turret hit, as the design lends itself to redirecting errant rounds down into the turret ring rather than off the face of the armor.

I was playing Operation Mobile Defense and was able to use the Puma armored cars with the 50mm L/60 to great effect, destroying much of the Russian tank force in a point blank, narrow-angle ambush. I inflicted such heavy losses during the first battle that I was able to destroy 58 Russian AFVs while losing only 4 of my own after the entire engagement played out.

Right, it seems like when smoke is an intrinsic part of unit functionality (smoke dischargers on tanks, for example) then that stuff is taken care of automatically by the engine. In short, there is no "Smoke" order for infantry as there is for tanks and guns with smoke shells, which are denoted by "S" in each units ammo counter.