przy Posted July 21, 2002 Share Posted July 21, 2002 I just pre-ordered SC this morning and just found the SC HQ site and I really liked the unit mods especially Camicie Nere's, you all have done a great job! I was just curious I downloaded some and was curious if these unit mods will work with the full version when it is released? I got a kick out of Camicie Nere's French Corps and Army icons, very funny. [ July 21, 2002, 08:48 AM: Message edited by: przy ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camicie Nere Posted July 21, 2002 Share Posted July 21, 2002 Hey, thanks! Always appreciate compliments! The short answer is "I think so," per the opinion of Otto (creator of the SC HQ website.) I haven't heard from the big boys (HC or ST) on that issue, but my understanding is that the final version will have a "program files" folder into which one can install the mods. I sure hope so! I never get tired of seeing those Poilus give it up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloid Posted July 21, 2002 Share Posted July 21, 2002 Originally posted by przy: I just pre-ordered SC this moring and just found the SC HQ site and I really liked the unit mods especially Camicie Nere's, you all have done a great job! I was just curious I downloaded some and was curious if these unit mods will work with the full version when it is released? I got a kick out of Camicie Nere's French Corps and Army icons, very funny. They work fine in the Gold Demo... I've made a mix of them, and they all look good. Aloid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Posted July 21, 2002 Share Posted July 21, 2002 They will work, this is not my opinion, but fact. [ July 21, 2002, 02:03 AM: Message edited by: Otto ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Der_Waggs Posted July 21, 2002 Share Posted July 21, 2002 Camicie I realy love your Mod. I have one minor problem tho I can't see the strength values of the German tanks because of the black bakground. Is thier anyway I can make thier value show in white letters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Posted July 21, 2002 Share Posted July 21, 2002 DW, I've put you on my icq list, I'll talk to you soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briggs Posted July 21, 2002 Share Posted July 21, 2002 Yeah, I also found the current way of showing tank levels to be a bit haphazard. I changed it around a bit to something a bit more idiot-proof. I furthered butchered his fine work as you can see: I really hope he doesn't mind. By the way, I put the Tiger before the Panther, because the Panther was a better tank. (And I want to be able to see my beloved Tiger sooner) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Posted July 22, 2002 Share Posted July 22, 2002 I don't think it really matters which tank goes first, but the Panther was not a better tank than the Tiger. The tiger did however show up on the battlefield before the Panther. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briggs Posted July 22, 2002 Share Posted July 22, 2002 No, the Panther was regarded as the pinacle of German tank design. It's high velocity cannon had better pentration, and although it's armour was not as thick, it was sloped, whereas the Tiger had almost vertical armour all around. The Tiger was slow and cumbersome and it's turret had a slow traverse speed. The Tiger's Maybach engine was underpowered and guzzled gas. In comparison, the Panther had better fuel consumption, higher speed, longer range and better reliability. Although the first Panther (D Model) was a little shaky mechanical-wise, it's subsequent replacement (Panther A) fixed most of the troubles. Although the Tiger was better at fighting in open country (Thanks to almost impenetrable forward armour) the Panther was better in cities and cross country. There's more to a tank's value than it's ability to sit in a forest and dish out ass kickings; it has to be able to drive to that forest first. I love armour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Der_Waggs Posted July 22, 2002 Share Posted July 22, 2002 Cool Otto I got your req and authorized you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Posted July 22, 2002 Share Posted July 22, 2002 PL, Just a few points. The Tiger was a heavy battle tank, (59000kg). It ruled the battlefield for over two years when it was introduced. Allied tankers were never fond of any German tank, but they were terrified of the Tiger, NOT the panther. The panther was designed as a medium battle tank, (43000kg), this would account for the better fuel consumption, higher speed, longer range. It was intended to be a cheap answer to the Russian T34. Comparing the two just isn't fair, the Tiger has an uneven advantege in so many ways. The true greatness of the panther was that it had such great killing power and defensive capability desite the fact that it was a relatively cheap medium tank. This as compared to the expensive and massive Tiger. This means that you could field more panthers as compared to tigers if you spent the same number of Reichsmarks, but one on one the Tiger would come out on top. The Panther was a superior tank technically for all the reasons you listed, but the Tiger was simply better. I love armour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloid Posted July 23, 2002 Share Posted July 23, 2002 I love pictures of tanks... Aloid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briggs Posted July 23, 2002 Share Posted July 23, 2002 Yes, I know the Tiger was a better tank in toe-to-toe combat, but that's not the whole value of a tank. One must take into consideration speed, resourse consumption, everything. There is no doubt that the Tiger was a superb static defense weapon, but idealy, the purpose of a tank is to be a fast, hard-hitting attack vehicle. As much as I love the Tiger (I do enjoy it more so than the Panther) I must admit that even though is was a superior combatat, it was an inferior tank. Keep in mind that the Panther heavily influenced western tank design after the war. P.S. It's great to be having an intelligent argument. I'm so used to "No, the M4A1 Sherman is better you f*g," mentallity of the children in other game forums. Cheers mate! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted July 23, 2002 Share Posted July 23, 2002 I'd be interested in what the kill ranges were for the Tiger vs Panther - the 75L70 of het Panther wuldn't have had too much trouble wit hthe Tiger's main (100mm base) armour, but I have no idea what the 88L56 would be like vs teh Panther's sloped glacis. BTW it's always interestign to hear the Panther referred to as a Medium Tank. IIRC the IS-2 was about the same weight...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randell Daigre Posted July 23, 2002 Share Posted July 23, 2002 "The Panther was a superior tank technically for all the reasons you listed, but the Tiger was simply better." I've been an M1A1 tank crewman for over ten years. In my opinion, if a tank has: Better power-to-weight ratio Better fuel efficiency Higher speed ( especially cross- country speed) Better mechanical reliabilty Sloped as opposed to "flat vertical" armor A better gun Better optics(can't kill what you can't hit) And a less cumbersome gun-turret drive system, then how can the tank it's being compared to be "just better"? Panzer Lehr brings up the most salient point, however. The whole idea behind tanks is mobile warfare. If you make a tank that can deal death to all while standing still, but has little or no tactical or operational mobility, then some jet jockey, rotorhead (or Mustang driver) is going to turn that tank into a column of smoke and flame while the enemy tankers bypass it (laughing up their sleeves the whole time) [ July 22, 2002, 07:47 PM: Message edited by: Randell Daigre ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briggs Posted July 23, 2002 Share Posted July 23, 2002 The Panther should have little to no trouble dispatching a Tiger, as it's 75mm KwK 42 L/70 could penetrate 99mm of armour at a 30 degree from vertical angle at 1500 metres with the standard Pzgr.39/42 ammunition. With the advanced Tungsten core Pzgr.40/42, however, it could punch through 106mm of 30 degree angle armour at 2000 metres (2 kilometers). On a side note, the Panther was classed as a Medium Heavy tank. The Panther gun penetration values are as follows: Ammunition: 100m 500m 1000m 1500m 2000m ------------------------------------------------- Panzergranate 39/42 138mm 124mm 111mm 99mm 89mm Panzergranate 40/42 194mm 174mm 149mm 127mm 106mm The Tiger on the other hand, despite it having a larger calibre (88mm to the Panther's 75mm) had lower penetration values, shown as follows: Ammunition 100m 500m 1000m 1500m 2000m ------------------------------------------------- Panzergranate 39: 120mm 110mm 100mm 91mm 84mm Panzergranate 40: 171mm 156mm 138mm 123mm 110mm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fubarno Posted July 23, 2002 Share Posted July 23, 2002 In a PBEM game, if one person is using a unit mod and the other player isn't, or they are using two diferent mods, will the game still work? Nice job on the mods btw but can the French get some respect and have the white flags removed? They proved themselves in WW1 and before that. Just because they're leadership and doctrines were inferior in WW2 doesn't imply that they were cowards. Sure they can be rude to Americans and are not our most reliable allies today. They have their own agenda. What do you expect with our rap music, McDonalds all over, and Jerry Springer. But in WW2 they fielded brave units throughout the war. Free french, commando's, the Chad colony who 1st embraced Charles DeGaul and resisted the Vichy government, The French in the eastern desert who faced Rommel, and the French armored that eventually was given the honor of liberating Paris, not to mention the part that the French resistance played. I know this is a war game but we shouldn't become so removed from reality that we don't remeber our humanity. Some may laugh at a stereo-type but there is a human cost to be paid. And I know I can choose not to use The Camicie Nere's mod but from reading his posts on my many lurks at this site, I feel that he might understand the point. Don't dishonor those French who did pay the ultimate price in 1940, and beyond, in defence of their country. Don't dishonor the French families that lost loved ones. Just my opinion. [ July 23, 2002, 02:35 AM: Message edited by: Fubarno ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briggs Posted July 23, 2002 Share Posted July 23, 2002 I'll stop stereotyping the French as cowardly, obnoxious pricks when the rest of the world (ESPECIALY America) stops stereotyping every German -past and present- as Jew killing Nazis. It's rather irritating to have people ask me if my best friend (A German) is one of "Those evil Nazi guys." After the war, we should have let the Germans keep France. Just my two pence. [ July 23, 2002, 03:59 AM: Message edited by: Panzer Lehr ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PawBroon Posted July 23, 2002 Share Posted July 23, 2002 Originally posted by Panzer Lehr: ...Stereotyping the French as cowardly, obnoxious pricks... After the war, we should have let the Germans keep France.Now that's nice. I'm sure you have some serious Freudian issues about Frogs but being insulting to a nation as a whole and to those of us who happened to be somewhat French in here is a gross violation of the Forum Rules you agreed with upon registering. Go take some Dried Frog Pills and breathe in a bag for a few minutes. If it fails, then keep from posting your views about the worth of Countries... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Posted July 24, 2002 Share Posted July 24, 2002 I just can't let this one go...yet. In the Panther vs Tiger degate PL and Randell bring up some great points. Randell's list is a good short list of outstanding characteristics of a good tank. However, I can come up with a tank that satisfies all those characteristics listed, and will still be terrible on the battlefield. A few items you mentioned: Better power-to-weight ratio Better fuel efficiency Higher speed ( especially cross- country speed) -Granted, the Panther is superior here. All these are satisfied simply by the fact that the Panther is about 15,000 kg smaller than the Tiger. Certainly a small jeep would do better here than a huge SUV. Better mechanical reliabilty -I would say they were about the same when they sorted out the teething problems. Later models of the Pather were certianly reliable, but the early models were quite the opposite- I'm sure some of you have read about the Panther's debut at Kursk- due to engine problems, many of the Panthers broke down before reaching the battle. These issues were fixed, but never completely, as well, very late models of the Panther were notorious for their unreliability. Sloped as opposed to "flat vertical" armor -sloped armour alone does not a better tank make. The Tiger's armour was a tough nut to crack, even though it wasn't sloped, it was just darn thick! The Tiger is hands down better armoured than the Panther, especially from the sides, one of the Panther's notorious weaknesses, (the other is brittleness, I'll deal with that a little further down). A better gun -PL's tables, (thanks to achtungpanzer.com), do show better penetration rates from the Panther, but the Panther and Tiger's guns were quite comparable, the 88 of the Tiger actually had better penetration at long distances due to it's greater mass. The point for me here is that both guns could more that do their job, the Tiger and Panther's fearsome reputations attest to that. The guns more or less even out... Better optics (can't kill what you can't hit) And a less cumbersome gun-turret drive system, -I have to admit I can't comment on these much, as I am not familiar with these in either tank, but I can say that they both seemed to be adequate, as I can't recall crews complaining that these were issues, nor did it seem to impede them from effectivly killing enemy AFV's Back to my rant: Mobile warfare is the role of any tank. I'm just saying that the Tiger was more likely to kill tanks and survive than the Panther. I recall a story where a Tiger took over 200 hits and travelled 40 miles to get repaired. Anecdotes aside, I think the best people to comment on Tigers and Panther are those that drove them, and those who fought against them: Words from an American tanker, (Tanks or WW2 documentary): "The Panther was definetely more suited to any operation where mobility was required, and the sloped armor was an advantage. I would say, however, that although the Tigers armor was not sloped, the thickness could stop most impacts. And here's something else- only a theory- Panthers were ainly made later than Tigers... And as the war progressed, the quality of materials the germans were getting to build their vehicles was decreasing. I wonder if the steel used to make Tiger armor was of a higher quality than that used for the Panther?" Going back to the armour question - (the US tanker was right!), I read quite recently that the Panther's armour could be quite 'brittle' due to the way it was cast. I have seen photos of knocked-out Panthers in the Ardennes where the shell-holes are quite jagged. Apparently the Tiger utilised a different type of armour which was less liable to 'break'. Taken from (Thomas Jentz' Tiger I website) "The armour used on the Tiger I was highest-quality rolled nickel-steel with a 'Brinell Hardness Index' rating of 255-260. This was apparently some of the best quality armour used during the war. The Panther armour was of lesser quality - presumably because the designers hoped that the sloping-effect would offset this weakness. But this did mean that Panther armour could 'shatter' from some hits." This perhaps explains why Tigers were so eagerly sought after by scrap metal merchants after the war. For what its worth, if I had to go to war in one of them, I would trust the judgement of Otto Carius who said that the Tiger was number one, as did Wittmann, (the highest scoring tank ace of all time). Both are great tanks, but if I had to choose, put me in a Tiger. One last point, the German army would put its highest scoring tank aces into Tigers, not Panthers. Doesn't it seems that the German army thought the Tiger was "just better" as well? *PHEW* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briggs Posted July 24, 2002 Share Posted July 24, 2002 Damn, I just noticed that I hadn't given credit where credit was due. Guess I just forgot about it when I was muddling with the tables. Although yes, admitedly I would prefer to sit inside a nice protected Tiger, almost impervious to the baddies outside, for a cross country job, I'd rather be in a Panther. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Straha Posted July 24, 2002 Share Posted July 24, 2002 Camicie did not intend to offend or stereotype the French with these two tiles. In fact he already announced some time ago that there will be a version of the mod where the white flags are removed. They were only meant to fit the "Sitzkrieg", but of course seem queer in any other contexts. Straha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anoldman Posted July 24, 2002 Share Posted July 24, 2002 Hey Panzer Lehr, I like your Mod but I cant get it to work right. ANychance you can get it Strategic Command HQ and have them post it for download there? If not, could you take a minute to email it to me at kshriner@gmu.edu ? Thanks PL, --An Old Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fubarno Posted July 24, 2002 Share Posted July 24, 2002 I figured as much Straha. I think he made a great looking mod set and I want to use it too but I thought the white flags might offend or create some animosity with our French friends. I'm not French either. Just don't like stereotyping. I also didn't want to jinx my chances of turning around the invasion of France in SC with my French armies already waving the white flags. I'm a serious wargamer, you know! Panzer Lehr - You must really see the point then if you have witnessed such ignorance firsthand. The next time this happens, use the opportunity to enlighten such ignorance. No doubt the people of Germany have a heavy burden to carry and I think they have come a long way as a people to recognize and take responsibility, as a nation, for the hollocaust and the war itself. My friends from Germany and Austria told me that they visited concentration camps and had hollocaust survivors come to speak at their school. I don't think history will be repeating itself in Germany. Neo-nazi's are a fringe group like our kkk and feast on ignorance and a lack of indivuality and moral fiber. Unfortunately their may always be such kooks. Broad and disparaging racial comments are the product of ignorance and poverty. Just look at the daily news showing the Arab worlds growing hatred of America. To divert attention from their internal problems, closed society, and repressiveness, they teach in their secular and religous schools to hate America and the west. Not good company to be on a level with intellectually. [ July 24, 2002, 03:18 PM: Message edited by: Fubarno ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawkmek Posted July 24, 2002 Share Posted July 24, 2002 TIGER vs. PANTHER That's what I am talking about! We can have tank vs. tank between these two juggernauts and determine a final winner. One Panther One Tiger 1KM square map May the best cat win. Shouldn't be hard to implement. Make German Units available during the Allies unit purchase. Has potential for some interesting battles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts