Sturmgeschütz III G and G(late) (grog stuff)

[Guest R Cunningham]

I had a question about the MG armament on the two StuGs in the demo.

There are the two represented, the G and the G (late).

The G is shown with a coaxial MG but no external/remote mount, while the G(late)

has both (and the Nahverteidigungswaffe).

I have the same sources you (BTS) do "The Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two" and "Der Panzer III und seine Abarten."

Spielberger says that the coaxial MGs came very late and only a very few actually got them. Jentz and Co. indicate the coax was added started in Feb 44, and the nahverteidigungswaffe and remote MG in the spring of 44. I guess it depends on your intent for the G(late) but given that the G was in production from Dec 42 to me this would indicate that the plain G should not have the coax. The G should have only the external (non remote) mount. And for flavor, maybe give it the squared mantlet and not the saukopf (photos of the saukopf seem rather rare). This is far from a critical issue, but I only looked this up after checking the details screen for each and seeing:

For the G........MG 2 Coaxial (24)

For the G(late)..MG coaxial, remote flexible (24)

It was the "2 coaxial" that caught my eye. I figured the "2" was a typo of some sort.

The graphics for the vehicles are identical except for the skirts (as far I could tell) and the G clearly shows the remote mount. Will the full release have different graphics for the two versions?

BTW I noticed the Tiger graphics are clearly of the late version showing the prismenspiegelkuppel and nahverteidigungswaffe. I assume that there will also be the regular (earlier)version without the nahverteidigungswaffe and with the older cupola.

Also, what does the 24 represent in numbers of real rounds? From a search I see that hese are "ammo units." Is this a fixed number of rounds like 25? Or does it vary by weapon/squad type?

[Guest Big Time Software]

I can answer some of this, Charles is going to have to pipe in on the rest...

Please keep in mind that we can not offer EVER vehicle and variant that the Germans had for the entire period that CM covers. It is just not possible for us to do. So if something is left out, that is the way it has to be. Hehe.. don't blame us for having a totally scatterbrained, hodgepodge production system, blame the Germans

The StuG, saukopf model was not rare at all for this time period. In fact, production was switched over 5 months prior to Normandy. So there might have been some of the older bolted mantlets in Normandy's early days, but there would not likely be any for the rest of the time period.

We are not planning on making different models/graphics for the StuG. These are VERY time consuming to make and we simply don't have enough time to get everything in. There are plenty more important ones ahead of something like this.

As for the Tiger, the entire last year's worth of production, which ended in July/August 44, had the newer copula from what I can tell. The passage of time and horrendous losses make it highly unlikely that more than one or two of the older models were in Normandy on. In June 44 the Germans had only 650 Tigers still in service on all fronts. By the end of the war it was down to 70. Interestingly, only *ONE* Tiger I E was used in the Battle of the Bulge! That shocked me when I read it! In any case, the difference between the two isn't something we are simulating, so it in fact doesn't matter.

Steve

[Guest Big Time Software]

Charles says:

I'm treating the external-non-remote MG as a "coaxial" because it has that gunner shield and I think that's what's confusing you here. A bit simplified, yes, but it ought to be good enough for now.

[M Hofbauer]

speaking of the gunner shield, I've never seen one of that edged-ones as in the game before. The ones I have seen so far were rather flat. Enlighten me please as I am intrigued.

sincerely,

M.Hofbauer

[Guest R Cunningham]

*****wow, two posts in the time it took me to write the following (some of which is now OBE)****

****If the external MG is treated in game terms as a coax does it get any accuracy benefits like a normal coax from the primary sight? Does the vehicle uffer any inefficiency in terms of the loader playing rambo and not loading the main gun?******

Ok, I'll buy off on the Tiger, but all of the pictures I see of whitman's Tiger is Normandy are of the older type.

But as far as the StuG goes, I see four possible interpretations of the G vs G (late) concept. If G(late) is defined as the loaded version with coax MG, remote flexible MG and nahverteidigungswaffe, then you can define the G as anything less than that. Three possibilities would be:

1. G (not as late as G [late]) inludes coax and remote flexible but no nahverteidigungswaffe.

2. G (less late than 1) includes coax and external flexible that is not remote and of course no nahverteidigungswaffe.

3. G (not at all late) no coax, no nahverteigungswaffe, only the external flexible MG iwth shield.

I get these possibilites from the order the Jentz and Co present the mods to the late production version. The coax was first, then the remote then the nahverteidigungswaffe (what is the abbreviation for that?!). That means that the currently modelled G doesn't fit the chronological pattern though I wouldn't rule out the possibility of its existence. I would suggest that a better diferentiation would be achieved by dropping the coax and remote leaving only an external, flexible with shield as MG armament. It would present the German player with a vehicle like the Hellcat that needs to be unbuttoned to engage infantry effectively.

As far as the graphics go I can see the impracticality of having completely different graphics for every possible vehicle variant. But it should be important to capture the major differences in the ones you have decided to model. Here we have two models of the StuG. One has more capability than the other. The external difference in the presence or absence of an external remote MG (in the current model build) is potentially very significant. Not every player has the references or acquired knowledge to know the differences in the models of the StuG. Some players will look at the graphics and accept them at face value. This can be ameliorated by detailed information in the manual that describes the models represented in the game and, like in the old Squad Leader games, which pieces represent more than one variant.

On the technical side, how hard is it to take the StuG graphic as is and swap the remote MG for an external w/shield? To me it seems a minor change. Changing the mantlet looks more involved.

[This message has been edited by R Cunningham (edited 11-05-99).]

[Guest Big Time Software]

M Hofbauer, it is the same remote controlled system that was on the Hetzer. The shield was there simply to protect the MG from damage, which is why it is so small. It was fired from inside the vehicle, but it had very limited RoF because it fired from single belts/drums (50rds, MAYBE 75rds) so it had to be frequently reloaded.

R. Cunningham, for ever general rule there is at least ONE exception, especially for the Germans. I have a picture of a Panther D being used in combat in April 1945, even though it had been out of production for almost 2 years. It came out of a tank school, which makes perfect sense. Hell, the Germans used WWI tanks stolen out of a museum in one battle in Normandy

You have misread Jentz on the StuG issue. There are basically two variants around in CM's time:

G (early) coax, no nahverteigungswaffe, only the external flexible MG with shield

G (late) coax, nahverteigungswaffe, remote-control swivel MG

The two above do fit with Jentz's description. Yes, there was an even earlier one with NO coax, but we are not simulating that one. As I said, the Germans have WAY too many variants to include all of them, so we must pick and choose. Since the one w/out coax was prior to "early 44" (i.e. before Normandy) it becomes less likely to see in combat with each passing month after Normandy.

How long would it take to make a new model/texture with a stand up MG shield? Probably not more than a hour. But I am already working 16hrs a day, 7 days a week and haven't even put in ground up vehicles like the Universal Carrier, or the 20 different (and I mean VERY different) types of German Halftracks. So while I would like to do everything, things like the MG shield on the earlier StuG are just going to have to be left out. There is no way I will get to it unless someone invents some sort of dime distortion device where hours can last for days

Steve

[Fionn]

I saw a picture of a Renault FT-17 ( two-man crew, 1 MG, built in 1917 and designed to be small enough to be able to drive down German trenches machinegunning everyone in them) being used in Normandy by the Germans.

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[Moon]

Steve, don't you know Dilbert? "Work smarter, not harder"

[M Hofbauer]

arg, you misunderstood me. Of course I know the remote-controlled external machine-gun mount on the late StuG (though I agree it's more popular from the use on the Hetzer).

What I meant is that I have never seen the same type of edgy shield used on the *regular*, *non-remote-controlled* *early* flexible external machine gun mounts of the StuG. I mean I am not saying that there wasn't I am just saying I never saw it, I associate the early StuG III external MG immediately with the characteristic flat MG shield which we can see in pic.b You yourself wrote that your "StuG III G (early)" has

"coax, no nahverteigungswaffe, only the external flexible MG with shield"

so if I understood you correctly then you mean your representation of the early StuG III G has *no* remote-controlled MG.

But in the game it shows the wedge shield of the remote-controlled MG.

I am guessing / I realize that you probably just used the same graphic representation to show both?

Now, to show people wandering into this thread what we are talking about:

pic. A: late StuG III G, showing the round Saukopfblende and the external, remote-controlled MG mount

pic. B: early StuG III G with the characteristic edgy mantlet and flat, non-remote controlled MG

I find the aspect brought forward by Mr Cunningham's very important that the crew of a non-coaxial, non-remote controlled MG-equipped StuG (btw how can an external, flexible machinegun be "co-axial"? co-axially aligned to what?) would have to unbutton to engage infantry with the flexible MG. Obviously they couldn't if the enemy infantry is close by just like in real life.

anyways,

everybody have a nice day,

sincerely,

M.Hofbauer

[Moon]

(oops, wrong thread)

[This message has been edited by Moon (edited 11-06-99).]

[Fionn]

Markus,

Good pictures of StuGs BTW.. One question, is that a penetration hole on the right hand side of the saukopf on the saukopf manleted StuG ?

Or is it just a ricochet gouge?

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[M Hofbauer]

Fionn,

I forgot to mention it in the post/picture description.

I am pretty sure it is the opening for the coaxial maxchine gun. There were two kinds of Saukopfblenden for the StuG III G (late), one which had that opening and one which doesn't. Coincicdentally the one with that opening is found on StuG III G's with the coaxial machine gun. That there were even late StuG III G's with the Saukopfblende without a coaxial machine gun serves to show that the coaxial is not such a sure thing and indicates that it was much rarer in the even earlier versions (=without Saukopfblende). But I have got to admit to BTS that pictures of StuG III G's with Saukopfblende almost always show the one with the opening and those with no opening are rather rare so I think BTS was right to model at least the LATE / Saukopf -StuG III G with the coaxial MG. Just my opinion, of couirse, since I am not a tank grog.

sincerely,

M.Hofbauer

[Guest R Cunningham]

Steve,

I may have misread Jentz and Co. (don't think so - read below), but the G portrayed in the game doesn't match what you and charles have posted.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I'm treating the external-non-remote MG as a "coaxial" because it has that gunner shield and I think that's what's confusing you here. A bit simplified, yes, but it ought to be good enough for now.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

and

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>G (early) coax, no nahverteigungswaffe, only the external flexible MG with shield

G (late) coax, nahverteigungswaffe, remote-control swivel MG

The two above do fit with Jentz's description. Yes, there was an even earlier one with NO coax, but we are not simulating that one. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The first statement implies that the G is being modeled with the external gun shield mount but because of the gunshield it is treated as a coax. There are some issues associated with modelling it this way. The external MG was operated by the loader and he couldn't load the main gun and fire that MG as well while he is unbuttoned. In direct fire situations when directed to fire on infantry and the option to use the maingun pops up, I'd say selecting the maingun rules out use of the MG. The model could follow that of the Hellcat that also can't use its MG unless unbuttoned but the hellcat CAN still use its main gun because the commander operates the external MG.

Oh, I see now, the the "2 coaxial" in the details screen is not a typo as I thought, you do have a regular coax and the guns shield MG.

I disagree with this representation and I don't believe I've misread Jentz to wit:

"Various improvements were instituted during the production run, including introduction of the saukopf gun mantlet in February 44, the coaxial machinegun early in 1944 and the nahverteidigungswaffe and remote controlled machine gun to the superstructure roof late in spring 1944."

With the dates involved one could argue that the G(late) vs G modelling is superfluous since the currently modelled G(late) version did exist by Normandy. The assumption though that all StuG III serving at and after that time frame were of that production pattern is a leap I wouldn't want to make. IMO, to make the G vs G (late) distinction one worth having other than the nahverteidigungswaffe (haven't seen it used yet-except on the Tiger) then I suggest revamping the G to delete the coax, leaving only external gun and not to treat that one as a coax.

[Regan Wood]

What is a nahverteidigungswaffe?

[Fionn]

A 92mm short-barrelled mortar available in two versions. One which only had a single projector and was rotatable and one which was fixed IIRC and consisted of multiple projectors.

it was fired by the TC when buttoned via a firing level inside the cupola and was used to kill close assaulting infantry (and works just like that in CM .. I have some great shots of a Nahverteidigungswaffe on my Tiger in action vs 2 US MMG squads.

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[Guest R Cunningham]

Nahverteidigungswaffe.

There is actually very little info available on this subject. The sources I have (and BTW I am interested in the source that BTS found that convinced them to model it) mention it in passing. One states that it launched S mines that would explode above and to the side of the vehicle. The S mine dimension give the 92mm bore size. They could be rotatable through 360 degrees but I don't know the launch angle. All of the photos of this weapon show it to be on the crew compartment roof and not by the cupola so I doubt it was fired directly by the commander. For example on the Tiger E itwas located behine the loader's hatch where the early version had the ventilation fan. You can see the weapon on the demo's Tiger. They were also used to launch smoke grenades. It was breech-loaded and I think the term projector fits better than a mortar. When you say mortar people start thinking of a bombardment and assault as opposed to close defence weapon.

I am unfamiliar with any sort of fixed mount other than the early Tiger E having fixed S mine dischargers located at the four corners of the hull.

[This message has been edited by R Cunningham (edited 11-06-99).]

[Guest Big Time Software]

Cunningham, now you see what I have been saying The two StuG's you see in the Last Defense do indeed match up with Jentz (which you said didn't before). What you missed in my last post is:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Yes, there was an even earlier one with NO coax, but we are not simulating that one. As I said, the Germans have WAY too many variants to include all of them, so we must pick and choose. Since the one w/out coax was prior to "early 44" (i.e. before Normandy) it becomes less likely to see in combat with each passing month after Normandy.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So to answer this question:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The assumption though that all StuG III serving at and after that time frame were of that production pattern is a leap I wouldn't want to make.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not taking that leap at all. There were ALL SORTS of non-current German equipment used in battle all the way up until the end of the war (I already cited an example of a Panther D in use in May 45 for example). However, we can't simulate everything the Germans had available, so the third possible StuG is not being modeled. With each passing "day" in CM's timeframe it becomes less and less likely that you would encounter earlier StuG's, including the one you mention.

Steve

[Mattias]

Ok, mostly more of the same.

Generally speaking I would really like to see to see some hard evidence when people makes statements like Saukopf shield with coax MG being more common than those without MG, AT guns not being very important on the western front and artificial light being more in use in the Mediterranean theatre etc etc. Big or small they just add confusion...

The two sources mentioned below have a lot of pictures showing StuG III G´s with the Saukopfblende and most of them do not have the coax, so please..

Now, another few pieces of wood for the fire:

1. Spielberger: Militärfahrzeuge Band 13, Sturmgeshütze

(pages 105-115)

Nahverteidigungswaffe: Irregularly (most vehicles not having it) installed in StuG´s beginning in May 1944. Standard from October 1944.

Coax: Installed in StuG´s with the welded shield from June 1944 (in the line drawing on the previous page the text states June 1943). From October 1944 also installed in Saukopf versions.

Remote MG: In troop trials April 1944

Saukopf: Beginning November 1943 but StuG´s with welded shields were delivered till the end of the war

2. Fleisher: Die deutschen Sturmgeshütze 1935-1945

(Page 98)

Supports Spielberger on the Remote MG and the Nahverteidgungswaffe. Indicates that the coaxial MG was introduced in 1944, though was requested by the troops much earlier.

And now the subjective bit:

The only real reason I would like to see a manned flexible MG on the early StuG mod is to feel the tactical impact that I has on the vehicle in combat (as have been mentioned previously in this thread).

I was thrilled by way the exposed mounting of the MG on the Hellcat forced me to carefully consider it’s deployment. Theses considerations, as it turned out, made me use the vehicle in a more “historically correct” manner.

And this, in my opinion, is where CM really shows it’s strength. When real tactics turn out to be the natural solution in the simulation as well.

M.

[Guest R Cunningham]

I understand the two variants being modelled now, but I still question that particular choice. Right now as I see it the difference between the two StuGs is minimal in game terms. The biggest difference is the nahverteidigungswaffe. Both have two MGs and the same ammo load. The MG difference should be reflected in the 360 degree capability of the remote flexible. To date I haven't seen the G(late) use that MG on targets not to its front. [edit: today I saw the remote used on targets to the flank and it sounds like an mg42.]

I understand the usage of both models with the coax, but I would prefer that the model G not get "credit" for having two coax MGs. There are too many "issues" with this arrangement. Can each coax be targeted separately? Does each MG get a better firepower rating for being a coax due to the main gun sight? Both can be fired while buttoned which is wrong.

I'm with Mattias because I want the G and G (late) to "play" differently. I should appreciate the added capability of the StuG G (late) and that it can use all weapons while buttoned. Buttoned and unbuttoned status for vehicles is a very important part of the game. I think any simplification that glosses over unbuttoned usage requirements should be reviewed.

[This message has been edited by R Cunningham (edited 11-07-99).]