Hister Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Yeah, feel sorry for those poor boys in the truck, ugh. Don't know why I'm cheering for your side Bill, funny how this happens. Especially so since my grandfather was "fighting" on the allies side. Would have been as easy to cheer for ND's troops but my brains went for the other option. Maybe because you got more tormented in the battle then ND. I must say up to now I haven't really understood how real fighting looked like from the tactical point of commander's view. Now I know (well I tend to make myself believe I do). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 2, 2012 Author Share Posted September 2, 2012 The Thirty Fifth Minute - Part One The Run for the Hill The Sherman ND attempted to counter-attack my run for the Hill last turn and got a new vision hole for his efforts, received another before disappearing behind his smoke screen. This tank continued to reverse throughout the turn and if it continues to do so it will come into the sight of my tanks on the other side of the map. My consolidation on the objective continues. I now have an Italian HQ unit, the original squad that made the dash, the R35 and the German Platoon HQ (which will disembark next turn). In addition I have two more German Infantry Squads on the way. It's going to be very hard for ND to push me out of this position now. Spotted ND's final Pack Howitzer... I am planning an attack on this gun in the next few turns, if my artillery doesn't get it. For now I just want to pin him so will be placing as much small arms fire on it as I can. One of my Grilles fires another round at the only part of the Villa that was visible through the dust.. hopefully ND still has troops on the front of this building and could feel it. This composite image shows 1- firing, 2-round in flight, and 3-impact 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 2, 2012 Author Share Posted September 2, 2012 The Thirty Fifth Minute - Part Two I did not panic when ND's tank took out my truck last turn... I unloaded everyone else and ran for the gully. The Sherman bags a kubelwagon this turn, but I succeed in getting my Pz-IV into a good hull down firing position, spotting and putting a round on target. This composite image shows 1- firing, 2-round in flight, and 3-impact On the forgotten front, I really think ND missed my two missed shots at his Sherman last turn, as there was no reaction from that tank at all this turn as my Pz-IV put round after round into the beast. I'll let the pictures tell the story: What's that? Is the wind starting to change? I sure as hell hope so. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 What's that? Is the wind starting to change? I sure as hell hope so. Damn Bil, you seem to be ventilating his Shermans for him all over the place. Looks like you killed the one and two others have got to be in a bad way. This doesn't bode well for ND, the balance of firepower capability is swinging heavily your way. If he doen't find a way to shut down your Pz overwatch he isn't gonna have much left to protect that infantry. I wouldn't rest yet, but looking back not too long ago the odds of you achieving your objective have increased dramatically - says a lot for perseverance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snake_eye Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Good show. Looks promising, I could not think that the troop built up near the summit would have gone the way it did, so quickly. Staying tune for the villa assault. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Bil Hardenberger, Knowing what I know of the real world lethality of PzGr 39, I think you have a strong case for sabotage in the munitions factory! One penetration should've been enough to force abandonment, let alone requiring three. And a Panzer IV/G is at least as nasty as a Panzer IV/F2, the "Special" which kicked butt in North Africa. You seem to have encountered a new variety of Sherman--asbestos coated, so it doesn't burn! Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hister Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Not all Sherman hits result in them going ablaze. As it was historically wasn't it? Bil, battle is at the point where you should keep the focus - in times like these it is a big danger to get more relaxed and then make stupid mistakes that cost you the win. But you already know that better then myself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 2, 2012 Author Share Posted September 2, 2012 I hear ya John... I've had 6 penetrations on three different Shermans... only one of which resulted in a kill. Still I have faith that the numbers in game are accurate and reflect reality so have no complaints. Hister, roger that, I will maintain focus sir. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heinrich505 Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Bil, Things are looking a lot more promising than they were a little while ago. That truck charge was wild - the picture of the burning truck was sad though. Looks like you are getting the better of the Shermans, finally. Remember to watch out for those super-heroic T-30s that are still lurking. They could resume their nasty ways. Heinrich505 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 2, 2012 Author Share Posted September 2, 2012 Bil, Remember to watch out for those super-heroic T-30s that are still lurking. They could resume their nasty ways. There is only one left and it hasn't been seen since ND pulled it off the hill next to the Villa. I suspect it is hiding behind the Villa currently. The battlefield environment might be a tad too volatile for ND to bring that thing out to play again anytime soon... it is not the bogey monster it was when my Italians were trying to take it on. I expect ND to use the T-30 and whatever infantry he can pull together in an attempt to clear the Hill objective after my artillery stops falling. That truck charge was wild - the picture of the burning truck was sad though. Yes it was.. but that squad is but a minor part of my force so its loss will have little to no impact on whether I can achieve my objective or not. I'm just thankful it was only the one truck. And now that Sherman is in trouble... if I can kill it it will be more than a fair trade IMO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 The Thirtieth MinuteI am still waiting for my 105 to start falling.. they have been spotting for several turns now... I cannot make my push until these rounds are falling on the Villa. Of course now disaster strikes... my FO team gets caught in the mortar barrage on the little copse of trees where my HMGs are also located. They take the one casualty I cannot afford.. the observer lies dead. That means of course that I now have no control over where my 105 rounds will fall. I can only hope they will still fall on the Villa.. if they do not then I have doubts that my plan will be successful. question for ya, your FO died a while back and your arty not only cycled through spotting but went to FFE? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 3, 2012 Author Share Posted September 3, 2012 question for ya, your FO died a while back and your arty not only cycled through spotting but went to FFE? Affirmative. It was very late, but its falling. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 ...a Panzer IV/F2, the "Special" which kicked butt in North Africa. But was slightly inferior to the M4 Sherman. The advantage then swung back and forth a bit as newer versions appeared but then settled permanently with the Sherman once it got water storage and the 76 mm gun. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Michael Emrys, I was referring only to the Panzer IV/F2's firepower, not the overall tank. The gun was a 7.5cm KwK 40 L/43, and the Panzer IV/G was, from a cannon perspective, identical and actually WAS the Panzer IV/F2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_IV Am therefore surprised it's proven so difficult for Bil Hardenberger to kill early Shermans. My understanding was the cannon did an excellent job in North Africa, and short of an 88 on a Tiger, was the only tank cannon which could deal with the Sherman from tactically useful ranges on open ground. Now, maybe he just got lousy "die rolls" under the hood on each penetration, but Shermans were called Ronsons for a reason. These lighters are clearly defective! Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 3, 2012 Author Share Posted September 3, 2012 Am therefore surprised it's proven so difficult for Bil Hardenberger to kill early Shermans. My understanding was the cannon did an excellent job in North Africa, and short of an 88 on a Tiger, was the only tank cannon which could deal with the Sherman from tactically useful ranges on open ground. Now, maybe he just got lousy "die rolls" under the hood on each penetration, but Shermans were called Ronsons for a reason. These lighters are clearly defective! John, why so formal? Please, call me Bil. All of these penetrations were against the frontal armor of the Shermans... plus they were primarily also fired at an uphill target and I'm not sure but I would guess that there was some angle to each Sherman and that each round that hit and penetrated was not attacking the armor as if at 0°. All of this is taken into account by the game engine and I would bet that on some of these penetrations the Shermans might have only known they were hit, but not that they were penetrated.. its probable that some of these penetrations had so little momentum left that interior damage was minimal. This is in accordance with this quote from Charles from my previous BETA AAR: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1239443&postcount=303 Granted that was from 1944 and outlined Pz-IV v M4A3 primarily, but the data would be very similar for this fight as well against early Shermans. I do not think the armor improved that much until the Jumbo. As for the Sherman not brewing... for a frontal hit I think this is also a die roll, that would get higher if the Sherman is penetrated from the side or rear, where the real combustibles are located. I wouldn't count on setting a Sherman alight from a frontal penetration. If I could get a flank shot at one of ND's Shermans I bet it would die faster and would burn more easily. Kindly ask him to turn one of them 90 degrees for me and we'll find out. Bil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Bil, I think you've missed out on some very groggy discussions on German APHE combat performance. Please see my comments here http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=105933&page=2 as well as what Argus Eye has to say here in response to the same basic information http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=106028 Believe you'll find these both informative and thought provoking. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 3, 2012 Author Share Posted September 3, 2012 Bil, I think you've missed out on some very groggy discussions on German APHE combat performance. Please see my comments here ... as well as what Argus Eye has to say here in response to the same basic information ... Believe you'll find these both informative and thought provoking. Yep I definitely missed those threads John... I am a tactics and battlefield command guy, I don't really get into the detailed minutia as outlined in the threads you linked... as long as the battlefield effects are close to what I expect then I am fine with the simulation. Also, I trust Charles's work on gun effectiveness v armor... I know where the basis of the data comes from and it is from a most respected source. That being said do I think crews should be more prone to bail? Absolutely... I think after one or two penetrations a crew should be very likely to un-ass the vehicle... even after a few good solid hits (but no penetrations) there should be some slight chance, if there is a casualty then there should be no question.. that crew is going to bail and save themselves and attempt to save their injured crew member as well. So while I trust the gun v armor data in the game, I do not think the effects of AT fire are harsh enough on the psyche of armored vehicle crew members. That however is not the same thing as what you have been saying that the Shermans should have brewed up on the first penetration. Bil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Bil, The major point is that if PzGr 39 penetrates even halfway through the other side and detonates, tank and/or crew are in a world of hurt, as detailed in what I provided. The projectile was so lethal that Major Jarrett risked life and limb to provide it to the British before Gazala, giving the Grant the punch it would otherwise have lacked. So, I'm not talking about the penetration modeling here, I'm talking about the modeling of terminal effects, where I think a case can be made things are off. Something else I totally don't get is how BFC can model all the angles, including terrain slope and elevation differences, when an armored target's engaged by, say, a cannon, yet mysteriously has no gun elevation model at all, whether for depicting the effects of limited gun depression on AFV exposure or or elevation limits on upper story target engagements in city fighting? Given the first game was all about such encounters, I really don't see why this hasn't been addressed. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 That's an issue all the way thru CM2. Some aspects appear to be modeled to high fidelity, other aspects are completely fudged. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew H. Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Something else I totally don't get is how BFC can model all the angles, including terrain slope and elevation differences, when an armored target's engaged by, say, a cannon, yet mysteriously has no gun elevation model at all, whether for depicting the effects of limited gun depression on AFV exposure or or elevation limits on upper story target engagements in city fighting? Given the first game was all about such encounters, I really don't see why this hasn't been addressed. Regards, John Kettler That's an issue all the way thru CM2. Some aspects appear to be modeled to high fidelity, other aspects are completely fudged. IIRC, I think Steve or a beta tester once posted that they had difficulty getting the AI to understand how to behave correctly when there were elevation issues. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 4, 2012 Author Share Posted September 4, 2012 The Thirty Sixth Minute ND moved his Sherman back a few meters and popped smoke (blue circle)... my Pz-IV failed to get a shot off before it had disappeared behind the smoke and dust. However, my tank still had a good spot on his Sherman's final position before the smoke took hold.. so I think I need to hold that Pz-IV in place for a bit and perhaps I'll be able to get a shot off at it once the smoke clears a bit. This image, a composite, shows the Sherman's original and final position. The reinforcements continue to stream towards the Hill objective (A). However, some of these troops are slated for my move around the smoke screen and will join with my other Infantry Platoon in getting a toe hold in the Villa (. Now that the smoke screen is fully developed and the Sherman has backed off, I am ordering my other infantry force toward the Villa, they will be joined by some of the units now heading towards the Hill as discussed above. I am also sending a Pz-IV and a Pz-III or two to join this force to try to get the Sherman on this side of the Villa. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 That being said do I think crews should be more prone to bail? Absolutely... I think after one or two penetrations a crew should be very likely to un-ass the vehicle... even after a few good solid hits (but no penetrations) there should be some slight chance, if there is a casualty then there should be no question.. that crew is going to bail and save themselves and attempt to save their injured crew member as well. Maybe. But I would give them as a first priority popping smoke and attempting to reverse out of the situation. Only if immobilized or on fire would I have them always bail out immediately. I would also in all events put them in a much reduced morale state and keep them there for a good long while. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted September 6, 2012 Author Share Posted September 6, 2012 The Thirty Seventh Minute My infantry starts its move towards the Villa. Meanwhile a Pz-IV begins its Sherman hunting run... ...while more infantry streams towards the Hill. A Pz-III is already on the scene. There are still 48 rounds to fall from my 105 barrage, so I have a few turns yet to build up before I can start to maneuver safely without suffering fratricide. Across the map, ND's remaining Sherman on the southern ridge, who cannot see my tanks, lays a smoke screen in front of them. The arrow indicates the direction of the wind, so this is a nuisance at best. I can maintain my coverage of this side of the Villa by simply moving my other tank under the smoke screen. I believe ND is going to try to extricate the Sherman that I penetrated twice and that is a sitting duck under my artillery barrage and could be in sight of a Grille soon as the smoke starts to shift. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baneman Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Love seeing a plan come together. Nice work. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Bil, Puts the "A" in assault--uphill no less! Shermans in your battle seem to be highly resilient, but this is nowhere nearly the case in BigDork vs Tiresias. What seems to be generally true is that there are far fewer outright brew-ups in CMx2 than there were in CMx1. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.