Pupchen vs PanzerShreck

[dano6]

Just performed a test with the pupchen versus the sherman. 10 Shermans versus 10 pupchen. Range of engagement 360-500m. Result Pupchen 10 - Shermans 6. That is the Pupchen destroyed all the Shermans at ranges from 360m all the way to 500m. I actually had a pupchen take out a Sherman on the first shot at 499m. 18% chance to hit at max range. I believe that a weapon that can completely destroy a fairly sizable force 1780pts. vs. 100pts is not fairly accounted for in the game. If this weapon was as effective as it is in the game, you would think that the Germans would have kept manufacturing it as it is perfect for defense. 5 times as much ammo as a schreck 4 times the effective range as the schreck. No way you get 18% hit chances over 100m with the schreck. This is the Super Weapon the Germans were looking for to stop the US in their tracks. I just wonder why they weren't supplied to every unit everywhere if they were that cheap and they were as super-effective as shown. Please anyone take the challenge I bet the pupchens dominate as long as long as you are in range.

dano6

[Kevin Peltz]

Scott Clinton:

Actually, it wasn't recoiless. It had a breech block that the rounds were loaded through that closed as usual. This of course trapped the propellant gases and gave the added range when fired. I believe that what the Puppchen is firing is basically the same round as what the Panzerschreck used- but I may be wrong on this point.

[Guest Scott Clinton]

Kevin:

You are quite right!

I should have written: "Rocket propelled". Rockets are (IMO) by their very nature generally inaccurate over long distances (unless they are guided...then they are really missles). This was doubly true in WW2 IMO.

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

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

[killmore]

Maybe I should not have open my mouth. Now the secret is out. I no longer use my super-pupchen-rush gamey defense against allied hordes.

But seriously for 10 points this is incredible gun. Even for 25 it would be worth it.

By the way I believe this is first time Fionn agreed with me (at least partially)

[This message has been edited by killmore (edited 06-27-2000).]

[Kevin Peltz]

Just for general information, here are some stats for the Puppchen ("Dolly"):

8.8 cm (fired the same round as Panzerschreck, but with a slightly more powerful motor)

Weight: 315 lb

Length: 9 ft 9 in

Barrel length: 63 in

Projectile weight: 5 lb 13 oz

Traverse: 65 deg

Elevation: 23 deg

Muzzle velocity: 475 fps

Maximum range: 765 yds

Penetration: 100mm

This is from one source, others will vary, naturally. There is a photo in this book of one captured in Italy, plus I have seen a German training/propaganda film illustrating the use of Puppchen and other AT weapons (including the Hafthollandung) on the Eastern Front. Production figures quoted as "relatively few." I will just use Puppchen sparingly whan I get the chance to use them, I think. One in a scenario would be enough- but to each his own...

[Zackary]

If Combat Mission offered a limited strategic-level component, meaning the player controlled regional force allocations, theater deployments, and other campaign elements, in addition to its current tactical side, but with no decision-making on economic factors and production controls, I would say that in-game unit-pricing should be primarily reflective of historical and regional availability, with little or no regard to either combat effectiveness or the cost of production.

If Combat Mission had a complete strategic-level side, meaning the player also directed economic factors and production controls, I would say that in-game unit-pricing should be primarily reflective of the actual cost of production, modified to reflect regional availability, and no consideration to combat effectiveness. As an example, if no Puppchen or Elefants had been allocated to a player's division, the player could not buy those items for a tactical mission at any price. If only 5 Puppchen or 1 Elefants had been allocated to the division, the in-game unit-price would be skewed higher to reflect the difficulty of obtaining the scarce asset. Alternatively, divisional scarcity could be reflected by a random chance that a scarce unit will or will not be available to the particular company or battalian.

Given that Combat Mission is a small unit, tactical combat game only, in my view, pricing should be reflective of combat effectiveness only. The purpose of establishing Axis/Allied point-levels and unit-pricing is to allow for the players to match up on equal footing. If unit-pricing truly reflects combat effectiveness, the ahistorical availability of Puppchen, Elefanten, and Me-262's would be irrelevant to game play. Stiving to model historical availability by skewing unit-pricing is like using a sledgehammer to drive a push-pin in a cork board.

The real question about the Puppchen is whether Combat Mission correctly models its combat effectiveness, and if so, appropriately prices it. In the real-world, the Germans apparently ditched production of the Puppchen in favor of the P'schreck following a cost-benefit analysis. Either the Germans, or BTS, missed the boat. Of course, it could be that because Combat Mission games are usually balanced, when historically, the Germans tended to be at a disadvantage (recognizing that Germans frequently achieved local superiorities at CM's scale), skews the effectiveness of weapons. I.e., weapons may not have been as effective in the real world because of the mismatch in men and material, whereas they are much more effective in a theoretical world of equally matched opponents. If this is the case, however, then I recommend BTS adjust the unit-price of Puppchen and other such units to reflect their theoretical effectiveness. This would better reflect the purpose of unit-pricing and the goal of balance in player to player games.

If unit-pricing is approximately accurate, concerns about ahistorical use evaporate. You won't stock up on an historically unavailable piece of highly effective equipment, because its high effectiveness is reflected in its price.

Your thoughts and criticisms are welcome.

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

Zackary

[Talenn]

So from everything here, I'd wager that most folks are in favor of increasing the point cost of the the gadget, yes?

To me, that seems like a fair solution to the problem unless something is discovered in the coding that is making these things more effective than they should be (ie..bug fix).

I just got my copy of CM yesterday (love it!), and I'm relatively new to the CM community so I dont know how responsive BTS is to such issues. Anyone else?

Thanx,

Talenn

[Jarmo]

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

I'd wager that most folks are in favor of increasing the point cost of the the gadget, yes?

I'm relatively new to the CM community so I dont know how responsive BTS is to such issues. Anyone else?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

From what I've heard, I'd say it's too inexpensive, but I don't have the game yet.

BTS has been very responsive before. So if we

just keep bitching about this, maybe they'll change the pricing, or effectiveness of the thing.

Or maybe they'll just change their tactic, tell us to sod off, and go to drink beer on the beach.

[Guest Scott Clinton]

I agree with Zacary.

To use the reasoning that cost should be based on 'rarity'...are you guys ready for Panthers to cost about 10 times as much as a Sherman?

But most importantly, I think 'we' should hold off calling for ANY unit's cost to be adjusted until we have had...MORE THAN A FEW FRIGGIN DAYS TO PLAY THE GAME!!!!

Seriously, why don't 'we' all just wait a few weeks (at least) before we call for point adjustments?

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

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

[This message has been edited by Scott Clinton (edited 06-27-2000).]

[dano6]

Actually Scott this is one case where the pts. don't match the effectiveness. At 400m these things have a good chance of killing any allied tank.(typical hit percentage with regular crew at 400m: 25% at 300m:50% at 200m:60% these go up with higher quality crews) I think that this weapon is far more effective than the schreck and within 500m it is more effective than the 75mm AT gun. Either the game has the effectiveness wrong or the cost of the unit is wrong as Jarmo and others have said. I feel that this unit should be adjusted into the 35pts range range to reflect effectiveness. I am just curious why the Germans abandoned this weapon if it is as effective as the game shows. There were plenty of AT ambushes set at 200-400m by the Germans.

dano6

[Guest Scott Clinton]

dano6: And how many days of analysis did you do to reach this conclusion???

That is my point. You may be 110% right on this issue, but BTS and the Beta testers have had it for a LOT longer than you or I and they set the price where it is now.

Why don't 'we' just play the game for a little while longer before we start making calls for changes on stuff like this? All 'we' are basing this "point adjustment argument" on is subjective after all, right? There are no hard formula being issued here, just speculation based upon a few days of playing. No matter how strong anyone may think these 'tests' are, they are based upon isolated examples and the resulting argument to alter the game is speculative.

Lets get some more time under our belts before we start 'monkeying' with point values. That's all I am trying to say.

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

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

[Fionn]

Personally I'm pretty happy that the Puppchen is priced about right..

Play with it some more and you'll start finding out its HUGE limitations ... Seriously, it isn't the AT killer you guys are making it out to buy. It is a pretty poor weapon which ONLY if used with great skill can achieve kills.

[Sten]

I'm mainly with Fionn here.

The Puppchen is good, but not as good as you guys make it out to be. I've fooled around with in some, and maybe ther ought to be small tweaks (methinks both raising costs and lowering efficiency somewhat), but nothing major.

My $.03 (Illusions of grandeur)

Sten

[killmore]

I don't know about that. My skill is poor compared to Fionns and I was able to crush Sherman attacks repeatedly with 9 pupchens.

You just have to position it right. But with 9 of them for the 90 points it is much easier then positioning 3 AT guns.

It is all about defensive positions.

Sure it is not for city use - but for defense with LOS under 150 meters (hilly, foresty terain or at night) with some choke points it is a WUNDER weapon. I had incredible success with them. Sure 3 of them miss but I don't care because 4th one got the kill and ammo is plentifull.

Here comes C&C Level 1 AT-Pupchen rush...

[dano6]

Fionn, come now, in the game if you test it, it is a very effective tank killer. Especially at shorter ranges(400 or closer) If hit you are pretty much dead and as I have stated, % to hit with regular crew is 25% at 400m, 50% at 300m and 60% at 200m. These go up with the more experienced crews. Actually having to be exceptionly skilled to kill a tank with these, I don't think so. Just hide them until a tank is in range and then open up. At the price involved 4 against 4 tanks in the open will almost always net 4 kills with maybe 1 pupchen killed. Now if ranges are over 400m you hide them until you get a shot. The only thing is you have to cover them with infantry just like any AT guns. So I don't think you have to be defensive genius to get these thing to work. And at the bargain basement price, you can afford to waste a few. The only thing the US has close to this is a 57mm AT gun and it costs 47 pts. Now where is the parity.

dano6

[killmore]

Never tried to use them at longer ranges. Maybe I should try!

Dano6 if they are so effective at 400 meters... WOW.

Maybe I should start thinking if I can use these in offensive roles...

Too bad there is similarly effective AntiInfantry Super weapon.

[Jarmo]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scott Clinton:

But most importantly, I think 'we' should hold off calling for ANY unit's cost to be adjusted until we have had...MORE THAN A FEW FRIGGIN DAYS TO PLAY THE GAME!!!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I actually had the game I'd be playing it, not hanging on the board

But my main point was that IMHO, cost should be based on manufacturing cost, and "crew cost".

Good points have been made against this, however. Maybe current way is the best.

Seems awfully lot like CC2, though.

Anyway, I'll be quiet for a while.

[Kevin Peltz]

I think in the case of this particular weapon, it simply depends on whether you want to play realistically in terms of how available it would have been vs the scale of the game, or not having to worry, and just having fun with it. When compared to the hundreds of thousands of Panzerfausts, and thousands of Panzerschrecks used, the Puppchen was small potatoes numerically speaking. If anyone on this forum wanted me to play them as the Germans, and I could pick my equipment, I would limit myself to one of these in a scenario, possibly two, if it were a very large one.

For me, it is not the cost or the effectiveness, it's historical availability- I wouldn't choose 36 King Tigers for the same reason, even if I had the points to do so. On the other hand, if one of you said, "Let's see what happens if...," then super, let's go- just as long as we are aware of what type of play we agree to beforehand.

[Guest Big Time Software]

I've made some tweaks to the point values of several units, the Püppchen being one of them. It's more expensive now, at 18 points.

But before you sing the praises of the Püppchen too loudly, consider that its only real use is against tanks; it's not much help against infantry. And even against tanks, it's considerably less accurate and shorter-ranged than an AT gun, and has a lower rate of fire. And it's not mobile like a Panzerschreck.

They're really not superweapons.

Charles

[Phoenix]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

I've made some tweaks to the point values of several units, the Püppchen being one of them. It's more expensive now, at 18 points.

But before you sing the praises of the Püppchen too loudly, consider that its only real use is against tanks; it's not much help against infantry. And even against tanks, it's considerably less accurate and shorter-ranged than an AT gun, and has a lower rate of fire. And it's not mobile like a Panzerschreck.

They're really not superweapons.

Charles<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Man, I tell you my experience with them continues to be incredible.

450 meter FIRST SHOT kills! This is from a regular Werhmacht crew too.

Didn't Squal Leader have some rarity rating? I think it would help me (the non grog) design scenerios. Would it be realistic for 2 or 3 or 4 of these things to be deployed along with a company of infantry??

[Guest Scott Clinton]

I tried them last night with Regular SS troops. They hit about < 50% the time on clear shots at Shermans and halftracks all <300m

Hell I had one miss four shots in a row at a halftrack starting at 200m and ending STATIONARY at < 50m...the unit was under no fire at the time.

Apparently your mileage can vary with these quite a bit.

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

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

[Jarmo]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

I've made some tweaks to the point values of several units, the Püppchen being one of them. It's more expensive now, at 18 points.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Spoiling us rotten, aren't you

[killmore]

The trick is to have more then one pupchen firing. And at 10 pts you can afford 2 for sure.

[Freyland]

I was playing a PBEM with Darstand called "TurkeyShoot". It was supposed to be an armor battle just for kicks. I bought several very spiffy tanks and tankhunters, plus 75mm recoiless, a 8cm PAW and a puppchen just for kicks. My armor (naturally) torqued every churchill in site (hence the scenario name), but one of them snuck around the forest in the center so that all my hidden weapons could fire. The Jagdpanther fired at 500m, missed. The 75mm recoiless fired at 350 m, from the flank, exploded harmlessly on the tank. The 8cm shell flew across 375 mo of open ground, exploded harmlessly on the side of the turret. The puppchen fired a slow shell at 425 meter, directly at the turret from the front, and brewed up the churchill. Enough said.

Jonathan

Disclaimer: No turkeys were harmed in the making or playing out of this scenario. Just Darstand.

[Jarmo]

Having thought about this for a while, my effective brain has created a theory.

The reason germans abandoned puppchen might have less to do with battlefield performance than actually getting it in or out of battlefield.

Thinking about it, you wouldn't be able to use one on atteck, no time to set it up. And If a battle is lost, you'd abandon it.

Seems only time to effectively use one, would be while winning a defensive battle.

Pnazerschreck seems much better suited for german tactics.

--

..in reality only a small portion of panzers were equipped with tigers.

- CM manual.