Question for JasonC re Pz Kpfw III and IV

[Gamer58]

CMFI is unique because of the simulation of Luft Infantry units and the Pz Kpfw IIIM, my favorite weapon in the game. (Big Cat battles are for Sissies - too easy!)

1. How to you defeat Shermans with the IIIM?

2. Is the Pz IV modeled in the game even weaker? (armor, not gun). It seems so. How to defeat Shermans?

3. How did they employ these weapons IRL?

4. How did LI/Heer infantry defeat enemy armor when not supported with TDs or armor? No shrecks or fausts = a very hard undertaking indeed.

[Erwin]

Generally German doctrine emphasized maneuver/mobility. That's how they overcame the much heavier armored early war Allied (French) and Soviet behemoths. ie: Flank shots.

The problem with most current CM2 maps is that most of them are still small and that hampers maneuverability. I would say that nearly all CM2 scenarios I have played feature terrain that is very unsuitable for armored warfare. (IIRC CM2 was originally designed as an small unit infantry game with occasional armor support.)

As maps get larger, the opportunities for maneuver warfare will improve.

[womble]

The Sherman is, other than the Tiger (and there were all of 17 of those), the best tank on Sicily in '43. In the same way that Shermans in Normandy have to flank the kitties, the little PzIIIs have to get around the M4s.

[snarre]

pz4 is wery well modeled in game . tjust had use it right . 80 millimetre flat front armor canot realy take hits

[MikeyD]

My advice is to use AT gun to kill tanks, use tanks to do everything else. The best way for a PzIII to kill a Sherman is to use it as bait attract him forward in the hope of an easy kill only to run up against a hidden Pak40.

[A co]

Yeah, facing Shermans with the Pz III is a losing bet. It's not impossible to KO a Sherman from the front with a 50mm gun, but your tanks won't live to celebrate that possibility. I learned this from experience- I too like the idea of fighting with the non-uber tanks, but they can't just can't slug it out from the front. I wonder how the PZ III M was doing at Kursk, facing T-34's? Not terribly well, I'm guessing.

[snarre]

in kursk main battle tank was pz 4 but earlier 42 and 41 germans used same tactic what russians used again tiger whit t 34 . sou flank them and out number them

[Michael Emrys]

(IIRC CM2 was originally designed as an small unit infantry game with occasional armor support.)

That sounds about right to me. Virtually all the time, I use armor to support infantry, taking out MG nests or hardened positions that would otherwise be difficult for pure infantry to assault.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Yeah, facing Shermans with the Pz III is a losing bet.

I'm not so sure. In GL pretty soon after it came out I set up a QB with a company of Pz. IIIs vs. a company of Shermans. I ran this three or four times and the Panzers held their own very well, causing about the same number of losses as they suffered. Finally I tried it against a company of M10s who with their more powerful gun were able to dominate their enemies. But even those had to be handled carefully. I came away from that experience with a lot of respect for the Pz. III, at least at this stage of the war. Later on, after the Sherman got the 76mm or the 17pdr it would have been a different matter. But I don't recall that those matchups ever occurred.

Michael

[womble]

ME, you were playing against the AI, though, right? Did you swap sides to see how it went each way? What were the engagement ranges? One of the FI/GL QB maps, or something sketchier?

The Sherman isn't as much better than the IIIM as a player is than the AI...

[Michael Emrys]

ME, you were playing against the AI, though, right?

Yeah, but it was the AI that was controlling the Pzs. So it was the Shermans that were enjoying the benefit of my leadership.

Michael

[womble]

Yeah, but it was the AI that was controlling the Pzs. So it was the Shermans that were enjoying the benefit of my leadership.

Michael

Now I'm intrigued. Was it an FI QB map? I don't have GL. I'm rather surprised. Did you bump the III soft factors to get a points match?

[A co]

My experience was with a platoon of PzIII's versus a platoon of Shermans in PBEM. About 400 to 500 meters range as I recall. The 50 mm shells simply wouldn't penetrate the Sherman's front armor, except in a small fraction of cases. The Panzers got about 8 or ten hits resulting in one Sherman knocked out. (Lower front hull penetration- the tank burned.) Several Pz III's were knocked out handily and I broke contact; the rest were killed by Shermans later in the battle. It was enough to discourage me from ever trying to repeat the exercise.

Statistically significant? No. An impressive lesson? Yes. Hats off to those who've had better luck.

[Michael Emrys]

Now I'm intrigued. Was it an FI QB map? I don't have GL. I'm rather surprised. Did you bump the III soft factors to get a points match?

Hmmm, I'm pretty sure it was a GL map as I played it after that module came out. But it's been a couple of years and the some of the details have faded. I do recall not touching the soft factors unless it was the pull the competency rating of the US platoon COs out of the pits. Everything else was stock.

Michael

[womble]

Hmmm, I'm pretty sure it was a GL map as I played it after that module came out. But it's been a couple of years and the some of the details have faded. I do recall not touching the soft factors unless it was the pull the competency rating of the US platoon COs out of the pits. Everything else was stock.

Michael

Cheers. I might have to give that a bash over the weekend, just to see the AI do something right...