Olle Petersson Posted March 22, 2001 Share Posted March 22, 2001 A couple of issues: - Tiger availability Production numbers and number of tanks within a formation isn't everything. I've got some info stating that the average Tiger technical availability in late '44 was about 33%. That means that if you have a formation of 12 Tigers, your're likely to have only 4 of them in running condition at any given time. (The others aren't available due to breakdowns or combat damage.) Technical availability of medium tanks were much better. - Troop composition (armour/infantry): See new posting below. Grunto 2 wrote: 'let's see... the tank support must be coming from an independent heavy battalion, and not one of the division's organic tank battalions (panthers and panzer IVs).'Don't use Panzergrenadiers for your infantry then, and there's no problem. Cheers Olle [This message has been edited by Olle Petersson (edited 03-23-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted March 22, 2001 Share Posted March 22, 2001 Originally posted by jasoncawley@ameritech.net: Be careful, though, if you mention a number, someone might run screaming from the forum in stark terror at the violation of the metaphysical uncertainty of all things. Well Jason, the reason I like to have you here on the board is that you make me look positively humble in comparison. Unlike you, Joe Private has not worked from spurious assumptions WRT his data, and then proceeded to insult anyone not agreeing with him. Maybe if you took a leaf out of his book, you would not face as much criticism. Or you could just stop making up numbers to fit your thesis. Last time I checked that was considered bad social science. Have a nice day. Regarding the statement about not meeting Panzer IV in PBEMs - the poster is not playing the right people. I rarely buy anything else than Panzer IV or Stugs for my PBEMs. My opponents usually do likewise. Seeing a real Tiger in a PBEM creates a lot of excitement for me, because it is a rare occasion indeed. As it should be. ------------------ Andreas Der Kessel Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Martin Cracauer Posted March 22, 2001 Share Posted March 22, 2001 If CMBO was covering all of WW2, the point about the Tiger 1 would be that is was available very early. But that has a drawback, if you take loss ratios into account, things look even worse for the Tiger 1. Loss ratios stated in this forum are in the range of 70-80% tanks/year. Using the data from http://www.feldgrau.com/afvstats.html and a loss rate of 75%/year, you come to the following numbers of tanks in the CMBO timeframe (produced tanks are in parenthesis): <table border=1> <tr><th>Month</th><th>Tiger 1</th><th>Panther</th><th>Pz IV long gun</th></tr> <tr><td>6/1944</td> <td>669.6 (1354)</td> <td>2073.7 (3642)</td> <td>2119.2 (5446)</td> </tr><tr><td>9/1944</td> <td>473.5 (1354)</td> <td>2305.0 (4579)</td> <td>2197.8 (6227)</td> </tr><tr><td>12/1944</td> <td>334.8 (1354)</td> <td>2468.6 (5517)</td> <td>2253.4 (7009)</td> </tr><tr><td>2/1945</td> <td>265.7 (1354)</td> <td>2176.3 (5746)</td> <td>1970.5 (7201)</td> </tr><tr><td>5/1945</td> <td>187.9 (1354)</td> <td>1732.2 (5976)</td> <td>1555.5 (7394)</td> </tr> </table> The program used to compute this is available on request (portable Common Lisp) and/or if you want further data computed, let me know. [This message has been edited by Martin Cracauer (edited 03-22-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warmaker Posted March 22, 2001 Share Posted March 22, 2001 Originally posted by Atlas: Source:Encyclopedia of World War II Figures are for entire war. Pz I : @ 3,000 Pz II : @ 3,580 Pz III: 5,644 Pz IV : 9,000 Pz V : 4,814 (Panther) Pz VI : 1,350 (Tiger) KT : 484 Other Assault Guns: 12,000 In regards to the PzKpfwIV and Panthers both were classified by the Germans as Medium tanks and considered the PzKpfwIV obsolete. They originally wanted to completely replace the PzKpfwIV with the Panther D/A/G. However, with it's cheaper, simpler design Germany kept on producing the Mk.IV. With the numbers of tanks produced though, keep in mind the PzKpfwIV entered service MUCH earlier, not just with the versions we see in CMBO, i.e.PzKpfwIVD. For the time alotted for production and relentless strategic bombings, Germany did quite well producing a much more sophisticated and capable panzer. As for frequency of encountering, I don't remember any stats but this is how it goes from most common to the rarest:Panthers, Tiger IE, Tiger II. As you drag on into late '44 and '45 though you can really expect to see more Panthers and fewer and fewer Tiger IE's. Since the Tiger II was taking over the heavy hitter role of the IE, you would expect to see more of it. Also the Tiger I/II are also previously posted by others that they acted like fire brigades for divisional or even corps level commands. For a division to organically have Tigers was uncommon for this reason. However, in CMBO to simulate this, if you come across German heavies bear in mind that the Germans DID NOT send these expensive assets piecemeal like a lone Tiger in support. They sent them in concentrated forces where fighting is to be quite nasty. Easy example is the Villers-Bocage operation where you take initial command of a whole Tiger I platoon lead by Michael Wittman. ------------------ "Uncommon valor was a common virtue"-Adm.Chester Nimitz of the Marines on Iwo Jima Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted March 22, 2001 Share Posted March 22, 2001 Panzer rarity. Hi, I was considering this very question just a week or two ago. Specifically, I was interested in the rarity of the various German AFVs during 1944. In order to answer the question of their relative rarity on the battlefield during 1944 I turned to the monthly production figures as found in the excellent books by Walter Spielberger and Thomas Jentz. My conclusion was as follows. MarkIV/StugIII/StugIV made up roughly 65% of total, Panther made up around 20% And the rest accounted for about 15% of the total. The figure of 15% for the “rest” increases to around 25% during the last six months of the war with the increased production of the Hertzer. All the best, Kip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:USERNAME: Posted March 22, 2001 Share Posted March 22, 2001 No need to roll dies or to make confustibated guesses. In Panzertruppen 2 they show graphs of Inventory, gains and losses for Panzer Iv, panther and Tigers. The Panther clearly had more runners than Panzer IV towards the last 6 months of the war. There nver seemed to be more than a couple hundred Tiger IIs running around at one time. And this only at the very end of the war. Panthers had around 2000 runners from May44 till the end of the war. In this period the Panzer IV was decreasing. In battles like the bulge, the panther was the majority tank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Inf Plt Ldr Posted March 22, 2001 Share Posted March 22, 2001 Production figures, like TO & E figures do not show the numbers in combat. One earlier post was for an SS Panzer formation. The "elite" low number SS armored divisions (Hitler Jugend, LAH, etc.), and units like Gross Deauchland (spelling?), Hermann Goering, and other select units, received far higher numbers of tanks, and they were much more likely to receive Panthers. Plus, regardless of Panthers assigned, how many of those were left behind in the smoking ruin of the Failese Gap? As I recall, the 12th SS Panzer, for one, suffered catastrophic vehicular losses. Players want to use the "kitties" (Panthers and the Tiger brothers) because they have a godlike resistance to Sherman and bazooka fire from the front, at any reasonable range. Wait till CM2. I'm ready to engage those Deauchland Uber Alles types with tanks that can penetrate their armor! America failed to give us a tank with an effective anti-tank capability to deal with the kitties until the Pershing. Heck, my platoon is still armed with Dragons, which cannot penetrate MBT armor from the front (the new Javalin is the first US infantry weapon to do that from a decent range). Sorry. I rant. However, numbers of Panthers reporded produced, or in elite units, or in rebuilt units prior to an offensive starting, has little bearing on the numbers of Panthers likely to be encountered on a given day. "Movin' On!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warmaker Posted March 22, 2001 Share Posted March 22, 2001 Originally posted by Thunderbird Inf Plt Ldr: Production figures, like TO & E figures do not show the numbers in combat. One earlier post was for an SS Panzer formation. The "elite" low number SS armored divisions (Hitler Jugend, LAH, etc.), and units like Gross Deauchland (spelling?), Hermann Goering, and other select units, received far higher numbers of tanks, and they were much more likely to receive Panthers. Plus, regardless of Panthers assigned, how many of those were left behind in the smoking ruin of the Failese Gap? As I recall, the 12th SS Panzer, for one, suffered catastrophic vehicular losses. Players want to use the "kitties" (Panthers and the Tiger brothers) because they have a godlike resistance to Sherman and bazooka fire from the front, at any reasonable range. Wait till CM2. I'm ready to engage those Deauchland Uber Alles types with tanks that can penetrate their armor! "Movin' On!" We were referring to the likely chances of encountering the types of Big Cats in CMBO's timeframe, not the numbers, etc. Again, PzKpfwIV's are commonplace in the Panzertruppen but in late '44 onwards Panthers became much, much more prominent. The number of Tiger IE's dwindled since the industrial switchover to the Tiger II's so the Koenigstigers should be seen more frequently if German heavies are encountered later into the war. Oh, BTW, the Big Cats' armor do hold up well enough against the Russian armor like the T-34/85. Long range capability of Russian armor wasn't as accurate so the long ranges of the German 75mm/88mm guns was a great asset. However, don't take this as a bashing against Russian armor. On the contrary, they're resilient compared to the Western tin cans. It's just they lack the reach of the German guns. Even the late war JS-II with its huge 122mm gun had a horrendous reload time but had the capability to take on any German tank. IMO though the Tiger II is still superior to it. But opinions are like @$$holes though and you know that goes. ------------------ "Uncommon valor was a common virtue"-Adm.Chester Nimitz of the Marines on Iwo Jima Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Petersson Posted March 23, 2001 Share Posted March 23, 2001 Originally posted by Guy w/gun: How the hell do you get a historically correct combined arms set up with the Germans??? How do I get a historically correct set up of AFVs and inf?(Modified repost of my earlier posting above.) German Infantry division * Fusilier battalion - 3 Fusilier companies - Heavy weapons company * Antitank battalion - Towed AT battery (ca 15 PaK40) - SP AT battery (3 StuG IIIG platoons) - SP AA battery (ca 15 SP 2cm AA guns) * 3 Infantry regiments, each with 2 battalions (= For each regular infantry battalion there are one platoon of StuGs and 3 PaK40.) German Panzer division * Escort company (as available in CM) * Recon battalion - Scout car company, with SdKfz 234/1, /2, /3 (about 10, 10, 5) (This is according to my source. Seems a bit high on Pumas though...) - Scout car company, with SdKfz 250/1, /9 (about 10 of each) (SMG teams) - Light armoured recon company, with SdKfz 250/1, /7, /10 (about 30, 5, 5) (rifle teams) - Medium armoured recon company, with 3 rifle platoons, SdKfz 251/1, /9, /10 (about 10, 5, 5) - Heavy company, with engineer platoon, ca 5 PaK40, SdKfz 251/1, /2, /9. * Panzerjäger battalion - HQ company, with a couple of TDs (same type as below) and a battery of SP quad 2cm AA (SdKfz 7/1 or, mostly for SS, Wirbelwind). - Supply company - Towed AT company, with ca 15 PaK40 - 2 SP Panzerjäger companies, with 3 platoons of TDs (StuG IIIG or Marder). * Pioneer battalion, as described in CM but with Bridging company attached. * Panzer regiment - 2 battalions of 4 companies of three platoons. * Armoured Panzergrenadier Regiment - Engineer company - Infantry gun company (SP 15cm IG) - Armoured Panzergrenadier battalion - Motorised Panzergrenadier battalion * Motorised Panzergrenadier Regiment - Engineer company - Infantry gun company (towed 7.5cm and 15cm IG) - 2 Motorised Panzergrenadier battalions (= 2 tank companies per PzGrenadier battalion = 1 tank platoon per PzGrenadier company) Source: Reverese engineering of tables in "Armies of the 2nd world war", by Greg Novak and Frank Chadwick. Cheers Olle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abuassad Posted March 24, 2001 Share Posted March 24, 2001 according 2 steve crawford's tanks of ww 2 (grange books),there were 3,126 panther gs produced, compared 2 1,354 tiger 1s n 489 tiger 2s. care to calculate the probabilities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Martin Cracauer Posted March 24, 2001 Share Posted March 24, 2001 Originally posted by abuassad: according 2 steve crawford's tanks of ww 2 (grange books),there were 3,126 panther gs produced, compared 2 1,354 tiger 1s n 489 tiger 2s. care to calculate the probabilities? People seem to be missing the table I gave in the third posting of the second page of this posting. If you take into account how long the Tiger 1 has been produced and the usual loss rate/year, you arrive at very low numbers of Tiger 1 for late 1944 and 1945. Since the loss rates were as extreme as they were, you cannot get any meaningful number without such a groth rate calculation. I could include other vehicles in the calculation as well, but so far noone cares. Besides personal issues (I am ignored, oh no! I simply wonder. You cannot prefer to calculate with useless number, do you? [not you specifically] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted March 25, 2001 Share Posted March 25, 2001 Originally posted by Lorak: Guy, My feeling would be little or no AFV's. You might have a couple stugs as infantry support. Maybe a couple half-tracks as transport. But more than likely plain old trucks. You'd have been lucky to even get trucks. Lorak Trucks! Hah. "LOOKSURY!" Back in my day etc. etc. And when you tell the kids of today they just doon't believe you... Regards Jim R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts