winqvist

Idiotic infantry when acting on their own, when commanded by a player there are huge variety of things to do with them. Modelling seems to be good, graphics are real eyecandy. Russian infantry have too many automatic weapons and propably at-grenades compared to the historic facts -> Unrealistically high firepower. Overall, good, challenging and fun game to play. Ps. Russian campaing has a scenario called "surrounded". That is propably the best wargame scenario what I have ever played, yet.

Hello Everybody. Time to raise my old topic. I found some new information of soviet formations armed with automatic weapons, especially with smgs. Like i've stated before, soviet formations have way too many smg's in their inventory in the early stages of theater of war. This mistreatment of Germans and favoring of Russians gives too much firepower and unfair edge for the Russians. Last few days i've been playing entirely Russian campaign and I have to say that the Russian firepower is way too high compared to the realistic figures. D. N. Bolotin 1995: Soviet small arms and ammunition: -Page 91: "Mosin-Nagant rifle performed reliably throughout the Great Patriotic War. Though the importance of smg and then assault rifle grew as the war progressed, the effective range of of the former was too short to be universally effectual and the latter was never available in sufficient quanity." -Page 91: "Output of Mosin-Nagant rifles and carbines in 1942 exceeded that of Tokarevs elevenfold" -Page 54. This quote shows the lack of smgs during the early staged of barbarossa, and it also points out that most of the soviet troops were still in 1944 armed with M1891/30 Mosin-Nagants: "By the beginnig of 1944, therefore, soviet front line troops had nearly 26 times more smg's than had been available three years earlier. It had became possible to arm one platoon in every infantry company entirely with smgs, and one company in every infantry regiment" Anton Shalito, Ilya Savchenkov & Andrew Mollo 1993: Red Army uniforms of World War II. -Page 54. Following Quote gives quite exact numbers for smg and rifle rations in different formations in 1943 and beyond: "Ppsh41 smgs were lavishly issued to the motor Rifles (Tankoviy desant, Tank riders) as the war progressed - 57 smgs and 27 rifles, per company, instead of the normal infantry ratio of 12 smgs and 85 rifles plus nine DP lmgs" Not all the soviet troops were Tankoviy desant, but incorrectly in TOW it seems to be so! Are all the germans armed like panzerjaegers, waffen SS or Fallschrimjaegers? No way! I Wonder when the developers will fix this unfair and ridicilous thing and why it was made so to the game in the first place? Correction? Propably never. In the end, this is a russian game. They have favored their own equipment delirebately and they won't gonna fix it. [ April 06, 2008, 11:46 AM: Message edited by: winqvist ]

I definetly agree with you Slaphappy about the infantry gameplay. What annoys me most is the unordered actions of all units. Especially with tanks, which are important for your mission. Once you have find good, protected and as safe as possible positions for your tanks, one of the starts to: 1. Disobey halt, keep position, defend etc. orders and starts to advance madly over open gound and becoming target practice drone for enemy at-weapons. 2. Starts to turn over for no reason and to expose weaker side armor to the enemy. We need AI fix as soon as possible.

Maginot line? My opinnion is that the game and Infantry gameplay are great. Following improvements would be nice, I would love these: Mortars, rifle grenades, maybe mines, maybe flamethrowers, engineers, molotovs and all sorts of handy equipment for infantry. Are the satchel charges, Geballte ladungen and hafthochladungen modelled for the germans? How about bayonets and hand-to-hand close combat. Ability for infantry to over-run enemy units and support weapons.

Your welcome Uwe. Not only too many smg but too many semiautomatic SVTs also. If we compare the manufacturing numbers (2 millions vs. at least 13 millions), six rifles out of seven should be Mosin -nagants on the russian side. 6:1 Ratio to Mosin-Nagant against SVTs. Now it seems to be that three Soviet riflemen out of four are carrying SVTs in game. EDIT: Actually "only" half of the Soviet riflemen have SVT's in the formations of 1941. And to be picky, russian ingame characters should also have their Mosin-Nagant spike bayonets fixed, like their military regulations ordered at that time. Soviet russia didn't bother to manufacture scabbards for the Mosin-Nagant bayonets. Again Uwe, i'm pleased to help you. I wish to you and all the other people happy holidays, new year moments with TOW. See you at the Forum. Salute! [ December 25, 2007, 03:59 PM: Message edited by: winqvist ]

That might be the same reinforced plate which makes small part of the front hull armor 96-108mm thick. Can't really say. If I remember right, Tiger I had something like 100mm of front hull armor, more than that on front turret mantlet, and little than that in the sides and rear. Not so exceptional especially on late war standards, but good all-around protection, more than enough against low-velocity 75/76mm guns allied used on T34s and earlier Shermans. And of course Tigers armor was excellent on 1942-43 standards when first units appeared to the frontlines.

Hey Uwe, You asked me if I have any information of russian infantry units weaponary during 1941-1945. I have some info, but I don't have any sources. All the following is "hear-to-say" information and I don't have any proofs for historical accuracy: 1. Russians replaced some mosin-nagants in infantry squads with ppsh41 smgs during the mid years of the war. They modified their doctrine so that Red army concentrated even more for close combat encounters and they decided to maximize their short range firepower. 2. Russians formed specialized assault battalions for assault spearheads, armed only with smgs and loads of hand grenades. These battalions co-operated closely with tanks. 3. These exclusive experiments with smgs inflicted some of probles like the lack of middle and long range firepower and inflicted a lot of misfirings and friendly casualties among the own troops. For these reasons, soviets increased again the use of rifle caliber weapons later in the war and this led to the development of sks45 rifle (with german influence of StGs of cource.).

Sorry to say Sneaksie, but allied weapons are not my expertise. I know best soviet weapons and I have some information from German and Finnish small arms. Im far from expert when talking about Tanks, especially allied tanks. My sources indicate that M4a3e8 (Which might be the same as Sherman 76) had in the thickest areas front hull armor of 96-108 mm and it had extra armor plates added to to the front hull. This source might not be valid or accurate, but it's best what I have. http://www.wwiivehicles.com/usa/tanks-medium/m4a3.asp

More information from the book "George Markham: Guns of the reich - Firearms of german forces 1939 - 1945. Arms and armour press 1989." - "By late 1930s, Russian rifle division were simply hordes of riflemen rather than the sophisticated mixture of rifles, automatic and support weapons that characterized Wehrmacht equivalents." (Page 28) - "As more than one Russian commander remarked, a rifle is a rifle, and the concentration of such weapons permitted commanders to develop particular form of warfare; this they did with increasing skill and the manipulation of rifle required no sophisticated training. When the strenght of division fell trough combat or natural wastage, new riflemen could be provided from the vast Russian manpower reserve with a minimum of delay." (page 28) - "Whether the SVT was ever considered for universal issue is moot, as it seems to have been confined to NCOc, snipers and elite units such as Russian Marines. The jam-prone Tokarev was too complicated for average russian soldier's grasp of preventative maintenance; However in the hands of better trained Wehrmacht personel, the gas-operated SVT was much more popular than the 'perfected' Gewehr 41." (Pages 28-29.) This "elite" theory seems to be realistic. Finnsh troops destroyed Russian Skibrigade of approx. 1800 men, commanded by Colonel Vjatsheslav Dmitrievitsh Dolin, in the fierce forest battles of the Kuhmo region in 12-16.02.1940. This Dolin's skibrigade was formed from 9th, 13th and 34th skibattalions and reinforced with one NKVD company. Brigade was armed with SVT38 and AVS36 rifles, which failed to work in the freezing frost because the factory lubricants of the rifles freezed up. And finally some lines from PPD40 smg's... - "German mp38 and mp40 were not only technically superior to the russian ppd40, rarely seen in july 1941, but were also available in far greater numbers." (Page 30)

My most authorative sources of information of soviet small arms: "Sotilaskäsiaseet suomessa 1918-1988, osat I-III" (Military Small arms in Finland 1918-1988, parts I-III.) Author: Markku Palokangas Publisher: Suomen asehistoriallinen seura / The arms historic society of Finland, 1991. English translations: Robert Hutton, David J. Penn, Herbert Woodend And "The ak47 story" Author: Edward Clinton Ezell Publisher: A Stackpole book, 1986. Following production figures are from these two books. Most of them are from the Markku palokankaas's book number III where weapons are sorted by model.(when there's no source of data) and few lines from Edward Clinton Ezells book (When the source of data is written). These figures correct some mistakes and errors I mentioned on my earlier message. 1. MOSIN NAGANT M1891/30G: From 1934-1937 100 000 - 300 000 rifles per year. From 1937-1940 about 1,3 milloin rifles per year. From 1940-1943 at least 8.6 million rifles. Total Production: 13-17 million pieces. These figures don't count the Mosin-Nagant models older than m1891/30g which were on stocks and use at the 1939-1945. EDIT: Older Mosin-Nagants like M1891, M1907 carbine, M1891 Dragoon rifles and Winchester M1895 were used by Red armys 2nd line troops and partisan formations. Partisan troops even used occasionally older Berdan 1871 rifles. 2. M38 Carbine: Produced 1938-1943 about 2 million rifles. 3. M44 Carbine: Production started at february 1944. Same time M38 Carbine and M1891/30g production ceased. Numbers of rifles produced between 1944-1945 is unknown. 4. SVT 38 & SVT40: Svt 38 numbers unknown to me. Svt40 and Svt40 snipers versions total production from July 1st 1940 to the end of 1942 was 1 377 000 rifles. Production declined dramatically after 1942 but continued until 1945. Total production for Svt38 and Svt40 did not exceed 2 million rifles. (Edward Clinton Ezell. p: 93.) All the rifle production declined after 1942-1943 when the production of smg's increased. 5. PPD 34/38: Production between 1934-1939 was 4173 weapons. 6. PPD40: Produced 1940-1941 maximum of 100 000 pieces, propably less than that. 7. PPsh41: Production 1941 was 92 779 weapons, 1942 1 499 269 weapons (Source: Markku palokangas). Produced between 1941-1945 more than 5.0 million weapons. (Edward Clinton Ezell p. 106) Other questions, I really can't awnser realiably. As far I know, Mihail Kalashnikovs one motivation to invent ak47 was the red armys lack of automatic weapons during the early stages of Barbarossa compared to the wehrmacht. (Edward Clinton ezell p. 104) As far as I know, soviet infantry doctrine did'nt rely on smg's before the late 1939-1940 when they countered finnish troops using smg's on the fierce battles of Winter war 1939-1940. Finnish troops used smg's as squad support weapon in infantry squads and in small, 4-5 men assault teams in forest battles, night encounter and on counter attacks when attacked enemy fortifications and positions. Infact, soviet 70 round drum magazine seems to be copy of finnish 9x19mm Suomi smg's drum magazine. Soviets also had plans in the early 1940s to replace 30% of mosin-nagants in infantry formations. These figures were rarely met in reality. Unfortunatetly, I don't have any source to indicate this information. EDIT: plans to replace 30 % mosin-nagants with SVT rifles. For your awnser how the soviets equiped their forces on the different borders I cannot really awnser. Propably no one can awnser that, because that kind of information was propably classified as top secret information in the closed, militarized society like soviet union was in the change of 1930's and 40's. Some conclusions can be made from stories we all have heard, read from books and seen from the movies. Some Soviet formations did'nt have at least too many infantry small arms in stocks at june/july 1941 if one thirds of the men were equiped with rifles, one thirds with rifle ammo and one thirds with molotovs. [ December 25, 2007, 03:24 AM: Message edited by: winqvist ]

I think TOW has enormous potential in the future, especially with infantry warfare, which is at my point, most entertaining and challenging. For the sales numbers, One reason might be poor reviews. In Finland, most criticided feature was poor AI actions, repeating missions and too detailed command system. Like Stoppelhopser said, No.2 from bazooka team should automatically give spare ammo to the bazooka operator when he runs out of ammo, not only to do so when commanded. As other people have said before, we should see more dug in, prepared or camouflaged fire positions for heavy/support weapons. No commander would'nt place at-gun or mg so open as in game and no gun crew would'nt leave their weapon so woulnerable. And we definetly need mortars for infantry support. Mortars would provide instant fire support to the infantry and that way improve and give more depth to the infantry gameplay. I would prioricy mortars before allready present airplanes. I believe future patches will solve many of these problems. After the patches, developers should get more re-reviews from authors to get more higher review points and to get more buying customers.

Salute Uwe! Thanks for a quick reply. I have to admit that you are most propably right. Gun stats are really not my speciality and I don't have any good statements to argue with you. You have convinced me because your sources of information seem to be much more detailed, accurate and authorative. All these years and thousands of gaming hours with various wargames I have lived with false information and I have thought that 75L48 pak's/kwk's are more powerful than they really were. What do you (and other people) think about the statements from the soviet automatic small arms I mentioned? Ps. My mis take. Svt38, not Svt39.

Excellent game. Best tactical simulation for a long time. I've played few single missions plus the tutorials and I've made few observations: - 7,5cm (L48) Kwk 39 has too poor penetration. At the single mission "steel torrent" the game gives the penetration ~90-100mm from the 100m distance. Other sources give much more for the same gun and for the same ammunition (panzergranate 39). for example, 144mm in the "wehrmach anti-tank gunnery data" website. http://www.miniatures.de/int/shells-german.html And Wikipedia says this: "With the KwK 40 L/43 and L/48 the tank carried 87 rounds. The standard Panzergranate 39 APCBC shell weighed 6.8 kg, had a muzzle velocity of 750 m/s and could penetrate 85 mm of rolled homogeneous armor plate at 60 degrees from horizontal at 1,000 m." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_IV#Armament Only difference betweem kwk 39 and kwk 40 was that kwk 39 did'nt have muzzle break while kwk 40 did. - Stug III E's and later models don't have MGs. - Russians use too many automatic small arms and too little mosin-nagants compared to the manufacturing numbers, especially on the early stages. At least half or 2/3rds of the squad and even more on the early stages should have Mosin-Nagant 91/30 as their primary weapon. Some figures: 1. Mosin-Nagants: over 17 millions made. This figure goes only to the model 91/30. It doesn't count model 38 and 44 carbines. 2. Svt39 & 40 + avt40: about 2 millions made 3. ppd 34/38/40: about 1 million made? 4. Ppsh41: over 6 million made Thanks. Now it's your turn to nail me down.