An armor engagement between T-34/85 and Hetzers

[Chibot Mk IX]

This post covers an armor engagement during a PBEM++ game (FR Red Star A-Blazin), and since no saved replay is available, I’m relying on my memory and a final screenshot. My aim is to not only recount the battle but also pose a question: Did I make the right decision? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

How the Battle Began
I repositioned five T-34/85s from the left flank to the right. Four advanced in the front at full speed, while the fifth lagged behind by about a minute. At turn 45:00, just as the tanks crossed the center of the map (marked by a double rail track), the four leading T-34s spotted two Hetzers at their 10 o'clock, roughly 1300-1400 meters away.

Before the turn ended, the Hetzers fired multiple shots. My fast-moving T-34s swung their turrets towards the threat, managing to get off one 85mm AP round in response. By the end of the turn, a 75mm APCBC round struck one T-34/85’s front-left turret and ricocheted.

Here’s the view from the Soviet side (after the battle)

 

And from the German side:

 

The Decision at Turn 44:00
Now, with the engagement heating up, I had to decide: Should I push forward or stop and fight? Here's my thought process.

Option 1: Push Forward
If I advanced, I estimated that after about 400-500 meters, the line of fire (LOF) would be broken by a patch of woods, which would take about 90 seconds to reach. During that time, I expected the Hetzers to fire 6-8 more APCBC rounds, considering their aiming and re-acquisition times. I believed I would lose 2-3 T-34/85s before reaching cover, without having inflicted any damage on the Hetzers.

Option 2: Stand and Fight
The second option was to hold my position and engage. I had a numerical advantage, at least for the first minute, with a 4 vs. 2 matchup. The fifth T-34 would join the fight shortly, giving me a 5:2 advantage. However, I knew the Armors’ survivability was a concern. At 1300 meters, the 75mm/L48 gun could penetrate the T-34/85’s upper front hull and front turret. The T-34/85s might struggle to penetrate the Hetzers' 60mm/60-degree front armor (at least based on my experience in CMBB), but I hoped to land enough hits to either disable a gun or cause some damage.

The Decision
After weighing both options, I decided to stand and fight. I understood I might lose all five T-34/85s, but I hoped to knock out at least one Hetzer and damage the other. I ordered all four tanks to concentrate fire on Hetzer #1.

Here’s where I made a key mistake: I should have issued a “face” command, angling the T-34s' hulls to maximize their front armor protection. This oversight cost me two T-34/85s in the following turns.

Turn 44:00 - The First Minute of Engagement
As expected, my opponent’s Hetzers fired as soon as the next turn started. The first Hetzer landed a 75mm APCBC round on T-34/85 #1, penetrating the side hull and killing the commander / platoon leader, disabling the engine. The crew bailed out.

T-34/85 #2 took a non-penetration hit on the turret seam, but a subsequent round penetrated the front turret, killing two crew members and disabling the tank.

On the German side, Hetzer #1 was hit by an 85mm round 30 seconds into the turn, causing armor spalling. Another hit 15 seconds later resulted in a partial penetration. Finally, a third 85mm round struck the weapon mount, rendering Hetzer #1 inoperable, confirmed by the in-game UI.

So, after first minute engagement, I had lost two T-34/85s, but Hetzer #1 was knocked out. The fifth T-34/85 had now crossed the rail track, giving me a 3:1 advantage moving forward. It was a tense exchange with a 2:1 casualty ratio.

Turn 43:00 - The Second Minute of Engagement
The second minute started off with bad news. A 75mm APCBC round penetrated the weapon mount of T-34/85 #3, rendering the tank destroyed, though the all five crew survived.

Hetzer #2 quickly switched to target T-34/85 #4, which took a ricochet on its side turret, but the second shot penetrated the upper side hull, destroying the tank.

 

Fortunately, after several 85mm shots hit the notorious “bulletproof trees,” one round from T-34 #5 hit Hetzer #2’s upper hull with partial penetration, forcing the crew to bail out. As they exited, another 85mm shell slammed into the weapon mount, likely disabling Hetzer #2 for good.

 

The Outcome
This intense, short engagement ended with a 4:2 exchange rate, far better than the 5:1 loss I had feared. Despite this, I’ve been questioning my decision ever since: Was stopping and accepting the firefight the right call? It felt like a gamble. Should I have kept moving instead of engaging?

Another observation: Hetzers seem more fragile than I expected in CMRT. I had anticipated a gun disablement or perhaps a penetration through the lower front hull, but I didn’t expect the upper hull to be breached so easily by the 85mm rounds.
 

[Centurian52]

20 minutes ago, Chibot Mk IX said:

This post covers an armor engagement during a PBEM++ game (FR Red Star A-Blazin), and since no saved replay is available, I’m relying on my memory and a final screenshot. My aim is to not only recount the battle but also pose a question: Did I make the right decision? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

How the Battle Began
I repositioned five T-34/85s from the left flank to the right. Four advanced in the front at full speed, while the fifth lagged behind by about a minute. At turn 45:00, just as the tanks crossed the center of the map (marked by a double rail track), the four leading T-34s spotted two Hetzers at their 10 o'clock, roughly 1300-1400 meters away.

Before the turn ended, the Hetzers fired multiple shots. My fast-moving T-34s swung their turrets towards the threat, managing to get off one 85mm AP round in response. By the end of the turn, a 75mm APCBC round struck one T-34/85’s front-left turret and ricocheted.

Here’s the view from the Soviet side (after the battle)

 

And from the German side:

 

The Decision at Turn 44:00
Now, with the engagement heating up, I had to decide: Should I push forward or stop and fight? Here's my thought process.

Option 1: Push Forward
If I advanced, I estimated that after about 400-500 meters, the line of fire (LOF) would be broken by a patch of woods, which would take about 90 seconds to reach. During that time, I expected the Hetzers to fire 6-8 more APCBC rounds, considering their aiming and re-acquisition times. I believed I would lose 2-3 T-34/85s before reaching cover, without having inflicted any damage on the Hetzers.

Option 2: Stand and Fight
The second option was to hold my position and engage. I had a numerical advantage, at least for the first minute, with a 4 vs. 2 matchup. The fifth T-34 would join the fight shortly, giving me a 5:2 advantage. However, I knew the Armors’ survivability was a concern. At 1300 meters, the 75mm/L48 gun could penetrate the T-34/85’s upper front hull and front turret. The T-34/85s might struggle to penetrate the Hetzers' 60mm/60-degree front armor (at least based on my experience in CMBB), but I hoped to land enough hits to either disable a gun or cause some damage.

The Decision
After weighing both options, I decided to stand and fight. I understood I might lose all five T-34/85s, but I hoped to knock out at least one Hetzer and damage the other. I ordered all four tanks to concentrate fire on Hetzer #1.

Here’s where I made a key mistake: I should have issued a “face” command, angling the T-34s' hulls to maximize their front armor protection. This oversight cost me two T-34/85s in the following turns.

Turn 44:00 - The First Minute of Engagement
As expected, my opponent’s Hetzers fired as soon as the next turn started. The first Hetzer landed a 75mm APCBC round on T-34/85 #1, penetrating the side hull and killing the commander / platoon leader, disabling the engine. The crew bailed out.

T-34/85 #2 took a non-penetration hit on the turret seam, but a subsequent round penetrated the front turret, killing two crew members and disabling the tank.

On the German side, Hetzer #1 was hit by an 85mm round 30 seconds into the turn, causing armor spalling. Another hit 15 seconds later resulted in a partial penetration. Finally, a third 85mm round struck the weapon mount, rendering Hetzer #1 inoperable, confirmed by the in-game UI.

So, after first minute engagement, I had lost two T-34/85s, but Hetzer #1 was knocked out. The fifth T-34/85 had now crossed the rail track, giving me a 3:1 advantage moving forward. It was a tense exchange with a 2:1 casualty ratio.

Turn 43:00 - The Second Minute of Engagement
The second minute started off with bad news. A 75mm APCBC round penetrated the weapon mount of T-34/85 #3, rendering the tank destroyed, though the all five crew survived.

Hetzer #2 quickly switched to target T-34/85 #4, which took a ricochet on its side turret, but the second shot penetrated the upper side hull, destroying the tank.

 

Fortunately, after several 85mm shots hit the notorious “bulletproof trees,” one round from T-34 #5 hit Hetzer #2’s upper hull with partial penetration, forcing the crew to bail out. As they exited, another 85mm shell slammed into the weapon mount, likely disabling Hetzer #2 for good.

 

The Outcome
This intense, short engagement ended with a 4:2 exchange rate, far better than the 5:1 loss I had feared. Despite this, I’ve been questioning my decision ever since: Was stopping and accepting the firefight the right call? It felt like a gamble. Should I have kept moving instead of engaging?

Another observation: Hetzers seem more fragile than I expected in CMRT. I had anticipated a gun disablement or perhaps a penetration through the lower front hull, but I didn’t expect the upper hull to be breached so easily by the 85mm rounds.
 

I think you probably made the right call. If you had pressed on you might have lost fewer tanks in exchange for not doing any damage in return (perhaps you would be down 2 or 3 T-34s instead of 4, but your opponent would still have both Hetzers). Whether keeping an additional 1 or 2 operational T-34s would have been worth leaving the enemy with two more operational Hetzers is hard for me to judge, but my gut says that you made the least bad choice between two bad options.

This is actually an interesting case of how different capabilities in different eras can change the tactical calculus. If this had been the modern era, with stabilized guns and computerized fire-control systems, I think pressing on would have been the obvious right course of action (you would be equally capable of engaging the enemy while moving as while stopped). Moving while engaging would have been an option. But in WW2, because you don't have stabilized guns, you can either move or engage, not both.

Angling probably would have been a good idea if you think you could have done it. That's a tactic I haven't had much luck replicated in CM so far (though I haven't tried it very many times yet). The TacAI usually just points the front back towards the enemy whenever I try to angle my armor.

[CarlXII]

53 minutes ago, Chibot Mk IX said:

Another observation: Hetzers seem more fragile than I expected in CMRT. I had anticipated a gun disablement or perhaps a penetration through the lower front hull, but I didn’t expect the upper hull to be breached so easily by the 85mm rounds.
 

Atleast according to this site the armour QUALITY on the Hetzer was not the best...

 

Jagdpanzer 38 (Hetzer) - Tank Encyclopedia (tanks-encyclopedia.com)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Redwolf]

2 hours ago, Chibot Mk IX said:

Despite this, I’ve been questioning my decision ever since: Was stopping and accepting the firefight the right call? It felt like a gamble. Should I have kept moving instead of engaging?

 

 

In CMx1 and CMx2 a moving shooter getting into LOS of a standing shooter oriented toward it has a pretty good chance to win. More so than I intuitively think is appropriate, but either way that is what it is.

Carefully stopping or staying put with guns pointed is not a necessity in CM.

[Vacillator]

5 hours ago, Redwolf said:

Carefully stopping or staying put with guns pointed is not a necessity in CM.

With no evidence from my side to support this, I think I might agree.

[chuckdyke]

9 hours ago, Chibot Mk IX said:

Another observation: Hetzers seem more fragile than I expected in CMRT. I had anticipated a gun disablement or perhaps a penetration through the lower front hull, but I didn’t expect the upper hull to be breached so easily by the 85mm rounds.
 

I saw the specifications of the Hetzer it's gun is able to penetrate it's armor over all typical CM Maps. I think the 85 mm Gun is at least equal. So it can easily able to penetrate the 60 mm armor of the Hetzer. The Germans had the concealment of the terrain in their favor. It is a fair outcome IMHO.

[Chibot Mk IX]

On 10/2/2024 at 12:56 PM, Redwolf said:

 

In CMx1 and CMx2 a moving shooter getting into LOS of a standing shooter oriented toward it has a pretty good chance to win. More so than I intuitively think is appropriate, but either way that is what it is.

Carefully stopping or staying put with guns pointed is not a necessity in CM.

I don't think there is any other experiment on this besides Drifter man's Some tank duel tests (CMBN).

Table 2 and Table 3 cover this. It shows the stationary defender have a fair high chance to win in face of a moving attacker , as long as they have the same situation awareness level. 

[Chibot Mk IX]

On 10/2/2024 at 11:42 AM, CarlXII said:

Atleast according to this site the armour QUALITY on the Hetzer was not the best...

 

Jagdpanzer 38 (Hetzer) - Tank Encyclopedia (tanks-encyclopedia.com)

 

In a comparison the StuG III has very good resilience.

I saw a StuG III 's upper front hull bounced off two rounds of 85mm AP at point blank range recently 

 

[Brille]

11 hours ago, Chibot Mk IX said:

In a comparison the StuG III has very good resilience.

I saw a StuG III 's upper front hull bounced off two rounds of 85mm AP at point blank range recently 

 

In my most recent game I had this too.

I thought this would be nearly impossible for a Stug to bounce something like that.