Tiger tanks in the Eastern Front, what some crews had to say.

[Amidst_Void]

This is my first post in this forum, I've been off-and-on for a year now, not really posting anything. I don't really have a question, rather, I wanted to direct you to an interesting (possibly not accurate) site highlighting the Tiger I (yawn ).

http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1.htm

If you make your way to the bottom there is a section titled "The Tiger I in action". This is a description of the Tiger tank from Tiger crews in the Eastern Front. What's interesting from these accounts, to me any way, is the pure power described. These Tigers, although not invulnerable, could only be characterized as raging bulls, they were truly gigantic in all features. I'm really looking forward to using these tanks in CMBB, it'll be fun using them to their full pottential, that being range, firepower, and survivability. The way I see it is that the Tiger I of the Eastern Front is a different beast than the one we are accustomed now.

Again, I just wanted to comment rather than ask. I'd like some oppinions on the "The Tiger I in action" section.

[MikeyD]

Tigers were rare and valued on the front, especially during the long retreat after Kursk. A lone pair of Tigers would often be called upon to anchor the front at a strategic spot, allowing their fellows to retreat. I don't know how often Tigers actually got to be used in complete company-sized formations like the training manuals demanded.

[Mattias]

In the book "Tiger, the history of a legendary weapon" Egon Kleinie and Volkmar Kühn gives a pretty comprehensive history of the sPz Abteilungen that employed most of the Tigers. Judging from this book the Tigers where indeed formidable when employed correctly and, at least in 1943, often too much for the Russians even when not used by the book.

Try placing 2 Tiger I's at, say, 1800 meters range from 25 standard M4A3's and you'll get an indication of how they will dominate the field in 1943 and onwards into 44.

They where not invincible of course but they had an enormous staying power and packed a mean punch.

M.

[The Commissar]

Mattias,

I just performed the test you recommended.

Using regular Tigers (not the late version), and M4A3 Shermans, I the 2 cats against the 25 Shermans at an initial range of 1800 metres.

The Shermans immediately popped smoke, and continued doing so for the rest of the game.

During the course of the game, my Tigers only managed to hit 7 Shermans, while exhausting their total supply of AT ammunition and half of their supply of HE ammunition. On turn 30, one of the Tigers was gun damaged, immobilized, and abandoned. I got a total vic because the Allies never dared to advance.

Interesting results, to say the least. Seems its very hard to hit even with "superior German optics" at ranges of over 1000 metres. Also, did the Soviets have smoke rounds for their tanks? I would imagine the Allied casualties would have been higher without them popping smoke endlessly.

[Guy w/gun]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Commissar:

Mattias,

I just performed the test you recommended.

Using regular Tigers (not the late version), and M4A3 Shermans, I the 2 cats against the 25 Shermans at an initial range of 1800 metres.

The Shermans immediately popped smoke, and continued doing so for the rest of the game.

During the course of the game, my Tigers only managed to hit 7 Shermans, while exhausting their total supply of AT ammunition and half of their supply of HE ammunition. On turn 30, one of the Tigers was gun damaged, immobilized, and abandoned. I got a total vic because the Allies never dared to advance.

Interesting results, to say the least. Seems its very hard to hit even with "superior German optics" at ranges of over 1000 metres. Also, did the Soviets have smoke rounds for their tanks? I would imagine the Allied casualties would have been higher without them popping smoke endlessly.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lol...I just did the exact same thing! MY results were quite similar: Eight dead Shermans, exhasted AP load in the Tigers. What was remarkable was the fact that at ranges between 1800m-1300m, the Shermans scored more hits than the Tigers did! And as Commissar pointed out, the Shermans popped smoke continuosly.

If I recall correctly, optics are NOT modeled in CMBO. Because if they are, those Tiger crews must be lowsy shots.

(by the way, the Tiger crews were crack!)

[ 09-27-2001: Message edited by: Guy w/gun ]

[The Commissar]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Guy w/gun:

Lol...I just did the exact same thing! MY results were quite similar: Eight dead Shermans, exhasted AP load in the Tigers. What was remarkable was the fact that at ranges between 1800m-1300m, the Shermans scored more hits than the Tigers did! And as Commissar pointed out, the Shermans popped smoke continuosly.

If I recall correctly, optics are NOT modeled in CMBO. Because if they are, those Tiger crews must be lowsy shots.

(by the way, the Tiger crews were crack!)

[ 09-27-2001: Message edited by: Guy w/gun ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I sure do hope optics are modeled in CMBB. I can understand BTS not wishing to get involved in a heated debate with grognards, because optics of most Western countries were close to being equal, and some people say, the same. On the Eastern front, the Soviets didn't have time to develop such conviniances as good optics when the Nazis were knocking on their door, so the difference will be huge.

I think they mentioned this being included, right? Sure hope it is.

[Jeff Duquette]

never mind just looked at page 2

[ 09-27-2001: Message edited by: Jeff Duquette ]

[Guy w/gun]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Commissar:

Well I sure do hope optics are modeled in CMBB. I can understand BTS not wishing to get involved in a heated debate with grognards, because optics of most Western countries were close to being equal, and some people say, the same. On the Eastern front, the Soviets didn't have time to develop such conviniances as good optics when the Nazis were knocking on their door, so the difference will be huge.

I think they mentioned this being included, right? Sure hope it is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

From what others have said, yes they will be modeled in CMBB. I'm guessing that one of the reasons they weren't modeled in CMBO has to do with the ranges in the game. Presently tank combat usually happens at no more than 800m. At these ranges I guess optics don't play as big a part. As has been discussed before, this will probably change in CMBB.

By the way, from what few accounts I've read, Tigers hitting T-34s at 1500m was very common. Does that concur with what other people have researched?

[Amidst_Void]

Here's the deal with the 88's in CMBO.

The 88mm Flak is, dare I say, sh*t. I did a little test with these flaks. I placed a huge ridge on one end of the map and placed 3 VETERAN 88mm flaks over the edge within woods. I placed 20 Shermans of various types (including 2 Jumbo's) scattered roughly 2000 meters away (1,600 being closest Sherman). The Shermans were on flat ground, no hills at all just out in the open.

At turn one the three flaks had no hits, they were way off target most of the time. During the next 3 turns the 88's scored about 3 hits with no Sherman's KO'd. These flak 88's are flat out horrible from afar, they are just plain inaccurate!

I did the same test with a standard VETERAN Pak(48?) 88mm cannon. These cannons are great at distance stone throwing. In 6 minutes (turns) all 20 Shermans were dead. These 88's are the real deal, they are worth the price. Every turn had at least 2 Ko'd Shermans.

[Warmaker]

Can't wait for CMBB. Hit up 1943, paint up that Tiger, and start getting to work!

Of course, for a good rush, playing against the T-34 in the early years will be exciting enough!

[Mattias]

Well I don't know, is it all down to luck or what?

I ran the scenario again and ended up with 2 immobilised Tigers (8 and 15 HE left) and 23 Shermans knocked out after 30 turns.

I ran it in farmland, flat, open, which as you know gives some little cover here and there. I used this cover to the best of my ability while closing in on the M4's. Thus the Tigers had the advantage of a human mind vs. that of the AI.

I had to close in to just above 600 meters to get the first shot hits that the incessant (and definitely unrealistic) smoke throwing of the Shermans require.

Once the AP rounds where exhausted it turned out that the HE rounds where quite capable of destroying a Sherman from the side and from the front in the case of lower hull hits. As the T-34 is less heavily armoured I suspect they will be even more vulnerable in this respect.

All through this the Tigers where hit repeatedly, shrugging off all hits except the two immobilising hits. Damaging hits like those where the order of the day back then, so it would have been much more of a surprise had they not occurred in a 2 vs. 25 engagement.

I guess I was lucky not to have the guns damaged but it was the resilience of the Tiger that allowed me to even have a chance at that kind of luck. The fact that there were no gun hits scored on the Shermans didn't really matter after all.

When the long range fire formulas is improved and the ability to fire unlimited number of self defence smoke grenades is toned down the power of the Tiger will be even more clear, even if no further improvement is done to the armour effectiveness of the tank.

And to Guy w/gun

The unit diaries and reports are littered with references to the ability of Germans tank to score long range kills on a regular basis. For example:

(Report from Oberst Decker, commander of one of the early Panther units)

"The main gun is exceptional. Up till now the Regiment has knocked out 263 tanks. Russian KW-I tanks were knocked out at ranges of up to 3000 meters and almost all of the Russian T34 tanks at ranges of 1500 to 2000 meters."

(Guderian reporting on the operations of Pz Reg. (Panther) von Lauchert)

"As of 10 July, 140 enemy tanks had been shot up. The average range was 1500 to 2000 meters. Also, one T34 tank was destroyed at a range of 3000 meters."

Panthers, for sure, but those were just a pair I looked up right now. To score those 1500 to 2000 meter kills around 3-4 shots tops where expected (I've got the quotes somewhere here)...

etc etc really..

No matter how good they were though, they could still not alter the final outcome of the conflict.

M.

[Andreas]

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

I had to close in to just above 600 meters to get the first shot hits that the incessant (and definitely unrealistic) smoke throwing of the Shermans require.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why do you think that is unrealistic?

[Mattias]

Simply because they do it again and again and again and again with 100% blocking and virtually instant smoke.

WP is good (it has to be WP after all) but unless you fire pretty much all you have in one go you will not get the kind of total cover you get in CM. And if you do fire all you have in one or two spreads then you will run out of ready grenades very quickly.

On a related note... Where are the smoke grenade launchers mounted on the US Shermans? I looked through my books and in the 40-50 shots I could only see one vehicle (British) mounting visible launchers. Most shots in the hardware books are factory vehicles of course but not even on the combat shots are the launchers readily discernible, if they are indeed there.

I don't know to what extent they where actually mounted, my main argument against the representation in CM is still one based on feeling and the reasoning presented above.

M.

[Andreas]

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

On a related note... Where are the smoke grenade launchers mounted on the US Shermans? I looked through my books and in the 40-50 shots I could only see one vehicle (British) mounting visible launchers. Most shots in the hardware books are factory vehicles of course but not even on the combat shots are the launchers readily discernible, if they are indeed there.

I don't know to what extent they where actually mounted, my main argument against the representation in CM is still one based on feeling and the reasoning presented above.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll post a picture of some South Alberta Rgt. Shermans with clearly visible launcher tonight. It was mounted above the main gun, at the mantlet. There are about 8 or 10 rounds in the mortar, at least. There is also a para on how they were used.

I will have a dig through my other books looking for them.

[Mattias]

Thanks, get all you can. The British launchers I saw where of the type used in the desert, two rather largish looking launchers mounted on each side of the turret. I only saw them in one photo mind you, plenty more British Sherman pics without them.

In particular I would like to see the devises used by the US army.

M.

[Andreas]

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

In particular I would like to see the devises used by the US army. M.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry mate - can be of no help there.

[MikeyD]

Sherman smoke launchers (as well as Staghound, Churchill Cromwell, etc. etc. etc.) were internal, firing through a simple hole in the turret. From inside it looked like a big flare pistol screwed to the interior roof.

[Mattias]

Just like the German Nahverteidigungswaffe then?

Odd, never hear that before..

M.

[Andreas]

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

Sherman smoke launchers (as well as Staghound, Churchill Cromwell, etc. etc. etc.) were internal, firing through a simple hole in the turret. From inside it looked like a big flare pistol screwed to the interior roof.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not the ones in the South Albertas. Also not like the ones seen on the Daimler in the IWM, although that maybe a post-war addition.

[Måkjager]

I have just run a test using 4 VET Tiger 1s against 24 M4A3.

Open Farmland , gentle slopes , Clear , 30 turns...

In the first turn the Tigers fired a total of 8 AP rounds....result 7 misses and a 1st round hit at 1352m which ko'ed the M4.

Got to the end of T-30 with the following results.

Tiger I -3 kills-Gun out

Tiger 2 -6 kills

Tiger 3 -6 kills

Tiger 4 -9 kills ( Iron Cross me thinks )

Only 3 rounds of AP left to one Tiger...all others HE only. I also had 2 instances of double hits on the same M4s by 2 Tigers.

About 1/2 of the M4s were destroyed at around 1000m-1300m range...then with the constant smoke i had to close up with them. ....nearest shot was with a HE round at 30ms - lower front hull kill.

Would it be fair to say that seeing as the 88mm gun in the Tiger was developed from the Flak 18 some of its "flaws" may seem to be present in the experience of the game users.

What i mean is the Flak was designed to engage aircraft through MASS BOMBARDMENT , throw up enough flak and you will hit something. This tactic will also give you the best results against armour ..if you are lucky to have Tigers present in numbers.

Hit the enemy with the mass fire power of the Tiger , concentrate its firepower on the most likely kills...whittle down the enemy..use its armour and mobility to keep it at a distance where it does not fall prey to flank shots.

In my mind i visualise the Tiger / Tiger II / Panther / Ferdinand and Jagdpanther in the following manner.

These vehicles are both the Lance and Shields of Knights in an age long gone.

The Lance in this instance is the main weapon...the 88mm or 75mm long barreled guns . Its best attribute is its long range piercing power that can reach the enemy before he can reach and hurt the vehicle.

Combined with the heavy/sloped armour( Shield ) it gives the Pz. commander a certain confidence within certain rule's that he can come out on top of combat engagements if the rules are applied correctly.

With the combination of gun/armour allied to the timely use of movement( both forwards and back ) to ensure a proper buffer zone remains between the enemy and his vehicle's, these vehicle can and will dominate a battle field.

As for inaccurate 88s could it be possible that BTS has modelled gun barrel wear into the game ???

Regards

Måkjager

[Vergeltungswaffe]

I would be curious for someone who has the time, to run the same 2v24 test with a few german sharpshooters placed about halfway between, to influence spotting.

If you do it, let us know.

[The Commissar]

Mattias,

The difference between our results is easily explained.

1) I used the scenario editor to create a perfectly flat field, with no terrain features. I placed 25 Shermans on one side, and 2 Tigers on the other, with a VL, to lure the Shermans to advance.

2) I did not command my Tigers to pick targets or to move. Because I felt this was a test of the game mechanics (the optics and gun on the Tiger), and not my skill as a player, this would desrupt the test (as it did in your case).

3) My Tigers did not close in, although with the help of their smoke, the Shermans were able to. This allowed them to score hits on my machines and actually cause damage. Thus, once more, my Tigers were on their own.

Another interesting bit is when I played the same "battle" from the Allied side. Starting out at the 1800 metre range, I lined my Shermans up in a column, 4 tanks wide per line, and rushed the Tigers head on while ordering to lay down smoke.

The result was a landslide. Using their smoke mortars, the Tiger's line of sight was completely covered. While the enemy tanks slowly advanced out of the smoke, one was given several flank shots and had its gun damaged. Later on, my Shermans sped by its flank and KO'ed it. The other machine decided to stay where it was after seeing the onrushing Shermans, and was overwhelmed. It didn't get a shot off before recieving some 8 nearly simultaneous hits in 3 sides of its hull and turret, KO'ing it.

This makes me wonder why the Soviets didn't seem to use smoke. For had they used their immense atrillerly capabilities to cover the enemie's LOS with smoke, they could have surely made the advance to as close as 500 metres before the enemy could get out of the smoke and place a bead on the Soviets, giving even the T-34's a good chance of victory.

I think the Soviets learned their lesson though, and smoke was an important part of the doctrine of the cold war days.

[Guy w/gun]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Commissar:

Mattias,

The difference between our results is easily explained.

1) I used the scenario editor to create a perfectly flat field, with no terrain features. I placed 25 Shermans on one side, and 2 Tigers on the other, with a VL, to lure the Shermans to advance.

2) I did not command my Tigers to pick targets or to move. Because I felt this was a test of the game mechanics (the optics and gun on the Tiger), and not my skill as a player, this would desrupt the test (as it did in your case).

3) My Tigers did not close in, although with the help of their smoke, the Shermans were able to. This allowed them to score hits on my machines and actually cause damage. Thus, once more, my Tigers were on their own.

Another interesting bit is when I played the same "battle" from the Allied side. Starting out at the 1800 metre range, I lined my Shermans up in a column, 4 tanks wide per line, and rushed the Tigers head on while ordering to lay down smoke.

The result was a landslide. Using their smoke mortars, the Tiger's line of sight was completely covered. While the enemy tanks slowly advanced out of the smoke, one was given several flank shots and had its gun damaged. Later on, my Shermans sped by its flank and KO'ed it. The other machine decided to stay where it was after seeing the onrushing Shermans, and was overwhelmed. It didn't get a shot off before recieving some 8 nearly simultaneous hits in 3 sides of its hull and turret, KO'ing it.

This makes me wonder why the Soviets didn't seem to use smoke. For had they used their immense atrillerly capabilities to cover the enemie's LOS with smoke, they could have surely made the advance to as close as 500 metres before the enemy could get out of the smoke and place a bead on the Soviets, giving even the T-34's a good chance of victory.

I think the Soviets learned their lesson though, and smoke was an important part of the doctrine of the cold war days.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I did exactly what you did, hence our similar results. The only moving I did was advancing the Tigers ahead about 400m. I found that at after 10 minutes at 1800m, they weren't scoring any hits. And as I said before, one of the Shermans actually got a hit in at 1800m! (Someone PLEASE rationalize that one!)

I also played the allied side. All I did was order all the Shermans to drive straight forward in a column, directly at the Tigers. What happened was pretty interesting. The Shermans hailed the Tigers with a mixture of smoke shells and AP. The smoke caused momentary interuptions in LOS, allowing the Shermans to close unharmed. The constant rain of 75mm AP damaged guns, immobilized, and basically rendered the Tigers useless. By the time it was over, there was one KOed Tiger, one abandoned and 4 dead Shermans.

[Andreas]

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

Sherman smoke launchers (as well as Staghound, Churchill Cromwell, etc. etc. etc.) were internal, firing through a simple hole in the turret. From inside it looked like a big flare pistol screwed to the interior roof.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, there I go, eating my words. Bugger. Working from memory is always beaten by having the book in front of me. The picture is showing a B Squadron South Alberta tank (well, part of it anyway) somewhere near Oldenburg in the last days of the war. The caption identifies the smoke launcher as a 'contrivance', suggesting it was a field modification.

Anyway, here it is in all its glory:

IF geocities works for a change, that is...

[Mattias]

Germanboy and Guy,

Read you both load and clear, I figured your tests where based on long range gunnery over a "clean" field. And running it the same way I would most likely encounter the same results as you.

However, my original "test" never intended to cleanly dissect the mechanics of the game. It was set up to test the CM engines ability to simulate a real life engagement I had just read about in the book that I mentioned in my original post.

[describing it as I remember it, I can't find the exact description now]

It took place somewhere in the Baltics, in the spring of 1944. Two tigers manned by experienced crews where faced with between 20 and 30 enemy AFV's, mainly T34's but a number of SU-122/SU-85 types where also spotted.

The opponents sighted each other at a distance of just under 2000 meters. The Tigers began to close the range moving, stopping, shooting and then moving again. They got as close as 400 meters before reversing again. For about 30 minutes the engagement raged back and forth like this before the remaining Soviet vehicles retreated. 20 Soviet were KO'd or abandoned while the Tigers remained capable of fighting, both were pretty battered, on of them immobilised, but they won the field that time.

The story does not say anything about the actions of the Soviet side, how they maneuvered, if and how they fired smoke or tried any kind of special tricks.

I am pretty sure that your successful "counter attacks" with the Shermans can be attributed to the terrain in which you fought. It allowed you to execute a broad front advance over terrain that was uniformly passable at high speed for your tanks. There were no other Germans nearby, real, suspected or just feared.

In the real battle I imagine that there were large sections of the battlefield that was clearly impassible by trees or rugged in a way that prohibit rapid straight movement, even for a T34. real life terrain also pretty much always obscures the LOS more or less, seldom if ever could all the Soviet vehicles fire their weapons in concert.

etc etc really... There is literally a world of a difference.

I would love to be able to read the Soviet perspective on this particular engagement, and indeed the dozens of other engagements described in the book.

Oh, and this was not in any way intended to argue against your tests Germanboy and Guy, just to clarify my line of thought!

M.