Panther under-rated?

[Barticus]

OK, so I have been playing CMBO for a few months now, but I have a problem. In the first few scenarios while playing the allies and a Panther shows up, I nearyly s**t myself and that Panther would become the focus of my attention. Now when I play, I don't give them another thought. If I have an American 76mm lying around or a Brit 17 pounder, it is a relatively easy task to take care of it. Likewise with any sort of infantry AT device (PIAT, Zook, Engineer squad). Is this right? I have read accounts from the war that the Panther could shed 76mm shells like water. I believe the exact reference used was 'ping pong balls'. If I play the germans, I go for Pz IV's for the lower cost, and they seem to be just as effective. Is anyone else seeing this, or am I......

a) Using allied AP ammunition effectively.

Just getting lucky

Now, while I would like to believe that I am a tanker's worst nightmare incarnate, common sense tells me otherwise.

Looking for input.

Bart

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

"I have slipped the

surly bonds of earth...."

[Gremlin]

From the front, Panthers can indeed shrug off rounds, though their side armor is relatively weak. And their long main gun is far more effective than that of the Pz IV (925 vs. 750 m/s, respectively).

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

New to Combat Mission?

Visit CM Boot Camp at Combat Missions for tips.

[This message has been edited by Gremlin (edited 01-31-2001).]

[jgdpzr]

There has been much discussion on various characteristics of how the Panther is modelled in CM. Particularly the quality of its armor. Some have questioned the validity of a constant 85% quality rating (Rexford has provided much info. regarding this). However, the bottom line, the Panther is no ubertank. It is, however, one of the best tanks of the war and I believe CM bears this out. The Panther is not without its problems however. It is extremely vulnerable on its flanks and its turret travese is not nearly as fast as a Sherman's.

The key to the Panther is using it so that it maximizes its strengths (high velocity gun and good frontal armor despite the armor rating) and minimize its weaknesses (protect its flanks or it is toast and try to keep the engagement ranges as long as possible). Another consideration is that the Panther was really designed with East Front action in mind. It was designed as a long range standoff weapon with greater speed, mobility, and firepower (AT) than the tiger. The shorter engagement ranges typical in the Western Front were not nearly as well suited to its strengths. You are correct in recognizing that in many ways the Panzer IV is a better fit in terms of combat in the West (in game terms this is particularly evident in the cost/value of the two). However, trust me, the Panther is much more survivable than the Mark IV.

Finally, no German tank is safe from a 76 firing tungsten and the 17 pounder really was a very powerful gun, easily the best Western AT gun of the war. The Germans had a healthy respect for both of these guns. CM demonstrates why.

[Chupacabra]

Also remember that most CM tank engagements take place at very close range, usually 500m or less.

IMO the qualitative differences between tanks are much more apparent at longer ranges.

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

Soy super bien soy super super bien soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super

[Jeff Heidman]

Also remember that their is a bug in the T penetration code that once fixed will make it more likely for the Panther to be able to shrug off those rounds to the front.

Has BTS commented on the 85% armor issue?

Jeff Heidman

[GriffinCheng+]

But most of the time, combats occur >800m does not fair very well for Panthers and actually German panzers in general. If you do a little search here, you will see that sometimes little Staurt are very leathal to these Big Cats.

There are a number of good tank slug fests and I would recommend in no particular order

August Bank Holiday

Magnificant Seven

Elsdorf - The Encounter

South of Sword

But some of them are really large.

Griffin.

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

"When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI."

"Can't get enough Tank?"

[Ari Maenpaa]

Already presented evidence seems to indicate that the current low armor quality value (85%) should be applied only to the Panther's frontal upper hull armor (glacis plate). Panther's frontal lower hull in particular suffers from the current model (i.e. in CM 1.1 it can be penetrated by US76mm with regular AP-shots up to over 1000m range).

Also historically Panther's turret speed could be considerably quicker in the hands of experienced crew. Still by no means it could match Sherman's (Panther's about 50% slower).

And there's also a bug that boosts HVAP-ammunition's penetration against sloped armor like Panther's frontal plates.

Ari

[Guest machineman]

On the scale that CM is on, turret speed is still the most arguable point on the Panther that I can see. 18 seconds as tested compared to 40 seconds in the game seems like too much of a difference, even assuming a second or two to rev the engine up and select high ratio. Other than that it was never known as a super tank, just a very good all-arounder.

"It is particularly important to ensure flank protection for the 'sensitive' sides of Panther tanks. The Pz Regt commander must always keep a reserve of tanks up his sleeve, which he can use at a moment's notice to block any threat from the flank..."

It is then mentioned to use the Pz IV as the flank protection, while the Panther presses on and drives a wedge into the enemy.

Ha, should have known Ari would be mentioning the turret speed thing as well.

[This message has been edited by machineman (edited 01-31-2001).]

[bredberg]

If you haven't read any account from the Kursk fighting, I advice you to do so.

Panzerbrigade 51(?) start-out with 200 Panthers, a couple of days later there were something like tens still operational.

Mechanical failure, mines and russian tanks have cut the numbers quite a lot.

The Panther is far from invincible, which is accurate modeled in CM.

However increasing the size of the battle (distance of first engagement) you will see the scale tipping for the Germans. Tiger, Königstiger, Panther all have a very good gun, a good front armour, that will stand most enemies guns from 1000+m.

CM2 (the russian front) would (should) show this.

Cheers Jonas

[Ari Maenpaa]

bredberg,

I think that the battle of Kursk is the least advisable account to study a typical Panther's capacity. Those early models suffered from ALL the possible teething problems one can imagine. Still the few Panthers there that didn't succumb to the mechanical problems or large mine fields were discovered to be most fearsome fighting machines. This according to Glantz's Kursk-book.

machineman,

I think that the fastest possible turret speed (360 degs at 18 secs) could only be reached in optimal conditions, not in actual battlefield. But I agree that the current 360@46 secs seems to be too slow. Probably 360@30 seconds would be appropriate if only one speed is allowed. This based on the US-army's test results which were presented in an earlier thread (It stated that Panther's turret speed was half of the Sherman's).

Ari

[This message has been edited by Ari Maenpaa (edited 01-31-2001).]

[Jeff Heidman]

Yeah, that little problem the early models had with bursting into flames when the engine was turned on definitely put a crimp in their operational record.

Jeff Heidman

[Barticus]

Originally posted by Ari Maenpaa:

bredberg,

I think that the battle of Kursk is the least advisable account to study a typical Panther's capacity. Those early models suffered from ALL the possible teething problems one can imagine.

Hmmm, all the accounts I have read of the Kursk battle(s) seem to indicate the same thing, over 50% of Panther losses were due to mechanical problems. Even in later models, the Panther was known to have a weak transmission. Also, I am not looking for the Panther to be a super-tank, just my experience within the game seems to indicate the panther losing about 50% of all encounters with 76mm armed Shermans, frontal or otherwise. I have to admit, though, that these encounters are almost always under 600 m

Bart

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

"I have slipped the

surly bonds of earth...."

[Robert Mayer]

Ivan: "Oh no, Sergei! Look at all those German tanks! How can we beat them...they're huge!

Sergei: I have a plan.

Ivan: What?

Sergei: Wave to them!

Ivan: Wave to them? You're mad!

Sergei: Not at all, tovarisch! When you jump out and wave to them, they'll come after you! To do that, they'll have to actually start their engines!

Ivan: Ah! No wonder you're a Commisar, Sergei! Vodka?

[bredberg]

Ari:

Ok, sorry, I know that there were a lot of teething problems with the Panthers - especially at Kursk - and Jeff is right about the combat record of PzKfw V would improve a lot if there hadn't been a Kursk.

My point was that there were still a number (not non-significant) of Panthers knock-out by T34/76 and other less formidable tanks.

However, from the top of my head I can't recall what you say is written in the Glantz book - I'm reading it at the moment.

(THE most fearsome or a fearsome - the later I agree on the first, no not really)

From my knowing, the most feared tank was the Tiger when it appeared in the Leningrad area in late -42.

Cheers Jonas

[Michael Dorosh]

Infantry kills against Panthers were fairly common, speaking from the Canadian perspective, but this was always a case of the Panthers getting too close - ie the confused fighting in the middle of the night at Bretteville where the Germans stumbled through the Regina Rifles' positions. The most famous example was Smokey Smith who won the VC at the Savio River in 1944 by, among other things, demolishing a Panther with a PIAT. He was 30 feet (not yards) away when he did it though.

The Panther was far from invulnerable to determined infantry.

[aka_tom_w]

I think that the Panther NOW has a better chance to hit percentage modeled than before.

you may suspect the Panther is underrated if you get too close to the enemy (under 500 m)

BUT, if you have the opportunity to get your panther hull down and can stand back more than 500 m they will KILL KILL KILL everything that moves in front of them.

I think of them as Long range dualin' tanks, once positioned hull down they are NOT at all under rated.

Try this

Go get Rune's Chance Encouter 2 Scenario

(major SPOLILER info HERE!)

(don't continue to read if you want to play this one double blind!)

OK this time the Germans get two or Three Panthers, but the YANKs get about 27 Shermans.

Try this, get those Panthers in Premium Hull Down postions, on that map due do the trees and woods there is NO opporutnity to out flank the Hul down Panthers, I've played it and the two Panthers I had hull down bagged about 12-14 Sherms each, it was like shooting fish in a barrel.

The panther is not at all underrated, they may just seem that way if you get forced into close range combat with fast allied tanks that out flank them.

The main weapon on the Panther is NOW deadly accurate, even for a reg crew they are getting WAY more first shot hits than they ever did before.

I have NO problem all with the stats used to model the Panther as it stands now,

AND yes BTS needs to incorporate the correct slope modifier caluculations for the tungsten rounds and that will afford the panther a little more surviability, but just against tungsten rounds.

-tom w

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-31-2001).]

[Ari Maenpaa]

bredberg,

You're right, 'the most fearsome' probably weren't the exact words, but I remember that Glantz stated that after the Kursk-fiasco the Panther was to become the best tank of the war. Maybe that's not exactly the same thing

all the best,

Ari

[Jeff Duquette]

Ok I did a search and couldnt find anything on this. So what is the "T penetration code"?

[bredberg]

Ari,

I fully agree with you (and Glantz), that the Panther is the most versitile (and 'best') tank of WWII.

Agile, good armour, powerful gun, indeed a very potent opponent - which can be utilized on a proper CM battleground.

However the Panther is as useless as all other tanks in built-up areas, woods or other general short LOS conditions.

The Panther is even more hampered by its slow turret, and hence should be used carefully.

Cheers Jonas

[Freak]

A note about kursk and the eastern front 1943. There is new evedence that shows, there were no panthers during the operation citadel (kursk). This link is a good read on the new findings and how it differs from previous recorded history. There seems to be a myth, nit sure who or why it was created, but a myth seems to have been created about the battle of kursk, and the russian tank brigades taking out massive amounts of german armor, including Tigers. The account, which I also have recorded in a fascinating book called SS Steel Storm by Tim Ripley, dispells this myth that russian tank brigades took out massive amounts panthers which were not even there. The myth describes the russian armor rushes making the tigers 88 and its armor a negliable factor and that the russians destroyed massive amounts of german armor. When in fact the opposite may be true.

I suggest reading this link, it is a very good read, and very interesting:

http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Cave/1761/kursk.html

Also, I would further recommend SS Steel Storm by Tim Ripley. It is an excelent book and has excelent beautiful photos. It also tells the happenings of kursk in such a way to bring out great imagery for the reader. I strongly recommend it.

Also, I do hope BTS takes a look at these new findings about the eastern front (kursk). I dont know if it will alter the game in any way, but I think the infromation is important for the game. I dont know how this would relate to the panther tank in the game but the information should be known.

There is also a wonderful book with conflicting infromation regarding the panther and King tiger turret traverse which can be found here:

http://www.sonic.net/~bstone/archives/001126.shtml

This book gets a great review by this site and it also has interesting commentary about WWII writers such as Stphen Ambrose and others. It goes on to say that that Zetterling, Niklas, the author refutes 2 pages from Ambroses "D-Day, June 6, 1944" with a 13 point outline. Interesting stuff.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Jeff Duquette:

Ok I did a search and couldnt find anything on this. So what is the "T penetration code"?

Its likely in one of the those big technical posts from our new friend Rexford.

It he took BTS to task on their tungsten penetration stats and data and Charles looked into it and agreed he had not correctly coded the slope modifier math/calcualtion for the tungsten rounds and so they seem to penetrate sloped armour better than he intended based on what he and Rexford agree are the correct slope modifiers.

Its all just a math coding algorythm thing but it should be fixed in v1.12 which they have indicated they are working on.

-tom w

[Dan Robertson]

Originally posted by Jeff Duquette:

Ok I did a search and couldnt find anything on this. So what is the "T penetration code"?

Basically I think BTS had the tungsten rounds penetrate, at slope as though they were full caliber rounds.

this is usually a penetration of

(cos angle)^(2/1.41)

due to their smaller size the sabot rounds tend to bounce off sloped armour. Beyond thirty degees is where we assume this takes place.

From a test firing of APDS rounds against slopes pf 0 30 and 60 degrees we can see that the actual value beyond 30 degrees should be

(cos angle)^(2/1.1)

I don't know about APCR but they could be even worse due to the light full size jacket bouncing the round straight off the target without even allowing the tungsten core to strike.

Post war APDS L25 and beyond are single piece tungsten-nickly alloy, these do not bounce off as much.

they react as

(cos angle)^(2/1.25)

[bredberg]

Freak:

About the Panther and it may not have been there....

There were no Panthers at Prokoharka (I never get that right) however Panzerbrigade 51 was attached to PzDiv GrossDeutschland and fought in the southern sector, along PzDiv 11 and GD.

What I recall there were around 10 knock-out Tigers at Prokoharka.

The ill-willed romours of the massive sloughter of germans cats is indeed a myth which was backed by both the russians and the germans.

The germans lost severly more Tigers when the withdraw in the later offensive by the russians.

The above is backed by Glantz (The Battle of Kursk) and Jentz (German Panzertruppen Vol 2)

/Jonas

[bredberg]

No Panther at Kursk?

Freak you should read the linked article a bit more carefully:

Qoute from Nipes article:

Only 15 Tiger tanks were still in action at Prochorovka, and there were no SS Panthers available. The battalions that were equipped with Panthers were still training in Germany in July 1943.

This DON'T mean that there were no Panthers at Kursk, only that there were no SS-Panthers, which no one has ever claimed.

There were however 200 heer-Panthers in the Panzer Brigade 51 (or Decker as Nipe writes).

Cheers Jonas

[Juardis]

Originally posted by Freak:

I suggest reading this link, it is a very good read, and very interesting:

http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Cave/1761/kursk.html

Excellent read, thanks for posting.