Nashorn - why use it in CM?

[dalem]

Hmm. "Why buy a Nashorn?"

Well, because you can.

Plenty of battles were fought without the right 'balance' of equipment, and if a Nashorn is all the local armor a commander can lay his hands on, well then, a Nashorn is what the Allies would see.

I can't speak for everyone (so I won't), but I find the battles where every tank on side X is balanced by an antitank asset on side Y, or where very balanced forces face off, to be far less interesting.

What happens when an infantry company stumbles on a heavy tank platoon laager with minimal infantry support? those kinds of battles are the neat ones, in my opinion.

-dale

[Ari Maenpaa]

Nashorn is a long range sniper, but in CM he is lacking his sniperscope

I mean that Nashorn has no added accuracy bonus on longer ranges (>800 meters) when compared to allies because CM doesn't model german Zeiss optics.

At least that is my understanding. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

There has been long discussions about better german optics and in general I feel that Zeiss bonus is irrelevant, but in Nashorn's case it can make the difference.

Ari

[PatAWilson]

The only reason I would ever think about using a Nashorn is in a defensive situation where I had decent LOS. If you set it up in some trees hopefully you would be able to either kill something or force the Allied armor under cover. At very long ranges you might get better results not only in terms of penetrating power but also in terms of accuracy.

Having said that it does need LOS, otherwise it's useless. In RL the Germans did use them and in the account that I read of a Nashorn at Villers Bocage it seemed to be used pretty much like a regular tank, ie. in a very offensive minded counterattacking role. Probably not an ideal situation but one does what one can with what one has.

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Peter S:

Seriously though, Marders may be more cost effective (almost two can be had for the price of one Nashorn) but the Nashorn's 88L71 cannon is guaranteed to punch through virtually all Allied armor at all ranges. The Marder's 75L48 cannon is good, but not THAT good. On the other hand, if you're going to use 'shoot and scoot' tactics at very close ranges then the Marder is ideal, it's a cheap tank for taking cheap shots.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I use the marder quite a bit the 1 thing that hampers its use is as with any other open topped AFV is the AT-mortars units get in CM . I don't worry bout points, as I don't buy much fancy equiptment, thats why I'm so popular for PBEMs ask Bastables, .

The 7.5 cm L/48 was a more then adequate gun vs tanks, the only AFVs that posed a problem at long ranges were the heavy tanks, IS-2, Jumbo, and the heavy SU's, in fact Guderian didn't see the need of useing the 7.5 cm L/70 in the PanzerIV/70(A) as he felt the 7.5 cm L/48 was fine for the role. And no gun is guarnteed penetration in CM, I watched 5, 8.8 cm L/71 bounces last night of an 75mm M4 Sherman & an M24 at 400ms from 2 Tiger IIs, the Sherman survived 3 hits with 0 penetrations & the Chaffee, survived 2.

Their were a lot more Marders running around then Nashorns etc. I generaly try to play with what the Inf generaly had acess to for suport, and thats PAK 40's, Stug, Marders etc. I change positions after fireing a bit so I can avoid the Arty barrage that usuialy shows up in 1 turn, (less an AT mortar got me ).

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

Personally, if I'm going to spend upwards of 90 points for a TD then I'd go for the Stug IIIG; it's got a low profile, it's not an open topped vehicle, it's hide is much thicker than the Marder's and Nashorn's (therefore allowing for the chance of a glancing blow or non-penetrative hit), and unlike the Marder and Nashorn the Stug has a MG (two MGs on the Late model) for pasting soft skinned targets. The Marder and Nashorn having nothing to offer beyond their main gun and can barely withstand a dose of small arms fire and harsh language, let alone a 50mm-75mm AP or HE round.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Points arn't an issue with me, see above. I always use a Stug, Marder, or Stug Hetzer combo, Stugs do not last long vs 75mm Shermans or anything else, bounces are rare, so their survivability is generaly the same as the Marder's or Nashorns, Ie, 1 hit dead, same goes for AT guns, no matter how dug in or concealed in terrain once spotted their scrap metal.

I have seen the Hetzer survive 5 - 7 75mm hits frontaly then die in 1 hit to a 76mm Sherman, from 1200ms, the Hetzers usefulness is limited do to its low SprGr loadout, which is acceptable as its an T/D and a good combo with a Stug IV. . I guess I just like the common equiptment .

It all comes down to that you could basicly toss most of the common AFVs in CM into the useless dept, as their survivability is next to nill, but its still fun to use them even if it frustrates you to hades when they get destroyed etc.

Regards, John Waters

----------

"Go for the eyes Boo, go for the eyes!!".

[Andre76]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by paullus:

I find the Hetzer to be a much better buy than even a Stug-III.(...)Worth at least twice its weight in points.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree, but the slow ROF is a shame...

'Fire god damn it! Fire I said (BOOM!), oh well....'

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

André

[This message has been edited by Andre76 (edited 08-17-2000).]

[Andre76]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dalem:

I can't speak for everyone (so I won't), but I find the battles where every tank on side X is balanced by an antitank asset on side Y, or where very balanced forces face off, to be far less interesting.

-dale<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I agree with you there. It can get boring if one always have the "standard" tanks. And things like the Nashorn (and flamethrowers , and..) spice things up a bit.

BUT I wondered if there was good *practical* reason to buy the Nashorn over the Marder (or Hetzer, or StugIII or...)

And there seems there isn't. But as I've said before, I'm very curious how BTS is going to solve this in Russia.

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

André

[Peter S]

The 75L70 probably made the difference in countless battles where just being 'good enough' wasn't enough! By 1944 Germany's tanks were routinely outnumbered by their Allied counterparts on any given battlefield. Every little bit counts when you're trying to keep the hordes at arm's length...

100/500/1000/2000m

75L48 AP 141/130/112/91

HE 50/46/42/34

75L70 AP 173/160/145/114

HE 69/63/56/45

88L56 AP 145/143/130/103

HE 105/97/88/73

88L71 AP 220/205/188/157

HE 93/86/78/65

This comparison really puts the Nashorn's AP & HE ability into perspective. And do you think Allied tankers would have feared the Panther as much as they did if it didn't have that 75L70? With the scarcity of special AP rounds, improved and/or bigger and better cannons like the 75L70 (within reason of course, unlike that impractical 128mm monstrosity on the Jagdtiger) became a necessity.

And the very fact that those Shermans bounced several 75mm AP shells off the hull of that Hetzer says alot about that TD! A Stug with its vertical armor would probably not have withstood that sort of punishment. And a Marder would have been so much scrap metal with the first hit!

However, I can certainly appreciate your fondness for the less glamorous equipment. It's definitely nice to play with different toys every now and again...

[Guest KarlXII]

I definitively agree about the Hetzer. I just love the ricochets. But you better find a good position for it because the side/rear armour is approaching "paper thin".

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

Fire for effect!

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Peter S:

The 75L70 probably made the difference in countless battles where just being 'good enough' wasn't enough! By 1944 Germany's tanks were routinely outnumbered by their Allied counterparts on any given battlefield. Every little bit counts when you're trying to keep the hordes at arm's length...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Peter, the 7.5 cm L/48 was more then adequate to deal with Allied tanks, the 7.5 cm L/70 had better penetration but vs a standard Sherman, the diference didn't matter; an hit with either gun equaled an kill, as the Shermans armor had been designed to defeat the 1940 German 37mm PAK 36.

The use of the 7.5 cm L/70 on the Panzer IV/70 put extreme stress on the chassis and hindered its mobility which affected it operational use, hence the larger gun in this case had detrimrental effects, that wern't made up by better penetration, in this case the L/48 was the better choice.

I'm not disputing the 7.5 cm L/70's power but pointing out that the L/48 was more then adequate vs standard Allied tanks & with Pzgr.40 it could and did deal with IS-2's and Jumbos.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

This comparison really puts the Nashorn's AP & HE ability into perspective. And do you think Allied tankers would have feared the Panther as much as they did if it didn't have that 75L70? With the scarcity of special AP rounds, improved and/or bigger and better cannons like the 75L70 (within reason of course, unlike that impractical 128mm monstrosity on the Jagdtiger) became a necessity.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The 8.8 cm L/71 was definatly superior in Pen etc to the L/48 & L/70, but the Nashorn and Jadgpanther were T/Ds their ammunition load reflected this, SprGr was a secondary consideration, in fact most carried Gr.39 HL in place of SprGr rounds. The fear of Allied tankers was basicly the same with all German tank guns due to their high accuracy, and flat trajectory, as well as the thickness of German armor.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

And the very fact that those Shermans bounced several 75mm AP shells off the hull of that Hetzer says alot about that TD! A Stug with its vertical armor would probably not have withstood that sort of punishment. And a Marder would have been so much scrap metal with the first hit!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well yes it does in that instance yet I have also seen Hetzers killed on the 1st shot and Marders survive 2 76mm hits in CM, and Stug's the same. Their realy is no proof armor in CM as evident in the plethora of questionable penetrations & instances where an AFV

survived, overmatching AP rounds that shouldn't have.

Which goes back to my remark that most AFVs in CM that would be common are 1 shot 1 kill types, with some variable survival results thrown in randomly .

Regards, John Waters

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

"Make way evil, I'm armed to the teeth and packing a hamster!"

[This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 08-17-2000).]

[Dittohead]

Just for fun I set up a battle between 4 vet M4 shermans and 4-vet Nashorns at 1.5 KM.

Results as follows for ten battles.

Number shown is how many survived - time to complete.

Nash/M-4

3-0 37 sec

0-2 66 sec

0-1 63 sec

3-0 27 sec

0-3 34 sec

0-2 34 sec

2-0 26 sec

4-0 40 sec

3-0 55 sec

Nash 6 Sherman 4. Well back to real battles.

Tony

[Dittohead]

oops meant 9 battles. Must get more sleep

Tony

[Pascal DI FOLCO]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Peter S:

Ahh yes, the Hetzer, I forgot about that one. Good call. Its sloped armor really does the trick, whereas the StugIIIG's armor is about as vertical as the Tiger's. And best of all it's a steal at 75 points. Haven't seen or played with the Hetzer too much though. I just got CM and have been playing mostly Quick Battles in Summer 44. I think the Hetzer is available by Fall 44, correct?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, it's available as soon as July 44.

There's the Jagdpanzer IV also : expensive compared to the Hetzer, but less than the other "big hunter", packs a very good punch and has also a good sloped armor (front...).

And I like its look !

BTW, how to include an image in a post ???

[Andre76]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dittohead:

Just for fun I set up a battle between 4 vet M4 shermans and 4-vet Nashorns at 1.5 KM.

(...)

Nash 6 Sherman 4. Well back to real battles.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but then if back to "real life" (as in CM) you could run the same test but with no Shermans, 6 M1A3 HT and 2 Nashorn at 500m and see what the result would be... Any ami player has lot's of HT and the fact that these can take the Nashorn out means that the Nashorn is "no-buy" in my eyes. (but it's cool non the less! )

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

André