Jagdpanthers identified as Panthers?! How has this been missed?

[Ex Bellator]

In our regular Sunday afternoon TCP game my buddy decided to go for the uber-cat and bought a Jagdpanther to the field. We normally stay away from the very heavy stuff so I hadn't seen this problem before.

For about half of a 37 turn game he kept it in full view at the back of the map dominating the objectives, sensible chap. However my VETERAN troops of all kinds for the whole period were reporting it as a 'Panther'. At the end of the game I had squads just 68m away from it and they still reported it as a 'Panther'.

Obviously I know that it wasn't fully ID'd (which I also find very odd at 68m) but why on earth is a Jagdpanther being reported as a Panther of all things? Surely 'Assault Gun' is much more appropriate, a Jagdpanther looks like a Panther in the same way that I look like Jennifer Lopez

This single thing lost me the game, and I suspect it may cause the AI problems as well. Obviously I had AFVs (ISU's and T-34s) which could get through a Panthers front turret, so deployed them for a mass attack and even opened up with a pair of 76.2mm AT guns with Tungsten at the weak 'front turret'. My buddy couldn't believe what I was doing, and the air turned blue as I repeatedly bounced off the front of the 'Panther' at ranges between 100-300m while he shot everything to pieces.

So then the problem is that a totally inappropriate depiction of a huge turretless tank hunter with impregnable front armour and uber-gun has been put into CMBB. Aside from confusing human players who are confronted by a mere 'Panther', I will happily bet that the AI will try and take them on frontally as well.

As I doubt that BFC will care to fix this before CMAK, the moral of the tale is to buy Jagdpanthers when you can, and also that the medium turreted tank that you are looking at from close range is actually something utterly different.

[Vergeltungswaffe]

I would be willing to bet that an enormous number of WWII Soviet soldiers couldn't have told you what kind of German armored vehicle they were looking at if they got to climb on it.

A great many were completely illiterate, so even a guide would have meant nothing, as the words under the picture/drawing would have been incomprehensible.

Plus, maybe the Germans had lots of foliage lashed on. Since the Jagdpanther was built on a Panther hull, I don't think its a ridiculous stretch to call it that at all.

Maybe I'm different, but I like it when that sort of thing happens. The true fog of war.

Anyway, just my .02, not a flame.

[Ex Bellator]

Here we go...

[Abbott]

Well Rex, I agree with Mr. V. above. It does not seem like much of a stretch to me either. I certainly agree with most troops being unable to identify most armored vehicles. I experienced that myself first-hand, I being one of the few who could do to my interests.

[Sardaukar]

Well...it was very common for US troops to mis-ID Pz-IVs as Tigers, and they had lot better education than average Soviet grunt. Maybe Assault Gun ? or Tank Destroyer ? might have been more appropriate, but I have to agree with above posters too.

Cheers,

M.S.

[Ex Bellator]

Oh c'mon guys. Do you think that of the hundreds of men I had looking at it, one of them might at least have seen a TURRET before?

I'm lost for words at the moment if you think this is acceptable. Let's take a few more posts and see.

[Abbott]

Oh c'mon guys. Do you think that of the hundreds of men I had looking at it, one of them might at least have seen a TURRET before?

Out of those hundreds of Russian troops, how many do you think had ever heard the word panther outside of a cat?

Private reporting Comrade!: There is a BIG TANK KILLING us out there sir!

Comrade officer (with pistol): What kind of big tank? Is it a Panther?

Private (scared of his comrade’s pistol) No sir! I have seen no animals on the battlefield sir! Just a big tank!

Comrade officer: Does it have a turret?

Private (shaking) A what sir?

Comrade officer: You know a turret! A thing on top that turns!

Private (making water in his trousers): I saw nothing turning and no cat’s sir! Just a big tank killing us!

Comrade officer:(aiming pistol) Hmm, maybe it is one of those Jadgpanthers then? Private, take two men and this grenade and stop that BIG TANK, even if it kills you! If you do not I surely will! Dismissed!

[Madmatt]

There are many factors in the game which affect what units are misID'd as but the most prevalent is commonality. It will usually error in favor of a unit which is more common or likely to be encountered.

As to soldiers knowing better, well I can offer up this tidbit from real life. On a trip to Fort Knox last year it was not at all uncommon for a dozen uber-grogs look at the same vehicle up close (even walking and climbing on it!) and coming up with 12 different ideas on what it was.

As to your specific situation, I dont find it hard at to accept that units would confuse a Jadgpanther with a Panther. Same gun, same suspension, same chassis, similar size, similar profile from certain angles.

In fact, looking here at the Encyclopedia of German Tanks I can see how the two could get confused in the chaos of combat.

Attacking a Panther from the front, even in the best situation is dangerous though so I can't agree that this mis-ID cost you the battle. And if it did, well, welcome to war.

Madmatt

[ August 10, 2003, 05:11 PM: Message edited by: Madmatt ]

[lcm1947]

Sorry Rex I agree with the others. I can see quite easily how a Jagpather would be confused with a Panther. Especially at certain angles and in the heat of battle.

[General Lee]

I would have to agree with rex that this occurance is a strech. Most soviet officers were educated and possessed id charts of german armor. And it seem that with all the posts on this site that have to do with realistim qustions and such, there is always a post that says.....A great many were completely illiterate, so even a guide would have meant nothing, as the words under the picture/drawing would have been incomprehensible... Do we really think that battlefront took into accout a soldiers literacy....in vehicle ids',no they did'nt. It's most likly a f*** up in the game. Lets face it, no program is perfect and as we all know there are parts of the game that are messed up but just part of the program and engine.

[Michael Dorosh]

Rex, have you ever actually seen a photo of a German tank in the field after 1942? Once the Allies had air supremacy - even before, really - they made extensive use of natural foliage. Those pretty little mods on your hard drive give no idea of how much serious thought went into camouflage and concealment. That means making it hard for the enemy to see what kind of vehicle you're driving. Foliage as camouflage isn't modelled into CM, as you well know.

Much ado about little.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by General Lee:

I would have to agree with rex that this occurance is a strech. Most soviet officers were educated and possessed id charts of german armor. And it seem that with all the posts on this site that have to do with realistim qustions and such, there is always a post that says.....A great many were completely illiterate, so even a guide would have meant nothing, as the words under the picture/drawing would have been incomprehensible... Do we really think that battlefront took into accout a soldiers literacy....in vehicle ids',no they did'nt. It's most likly a f*** up in the game. Lets face it, no program is perfect and as we all know there are parts of the game that are messed up but just part of the program and engine.

You can be as educated as all get out; if a tank is under a clump of branches and all you see is wheels and a gun, you use that for your ID. As Madmatt points out, under a clump of branches, a Jagdpanther and a Panther would be identical.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Rex Bellator:

Surely 'Assault Gun' is much more appropriate, a Jagdpanther looks like a Panther in the same way that I look like Jennifer Lopez

Your eyes aren't as pretty, but you do have that battleship of an ass that is her trademark...

[Sardaukar]

Originally posted by General Lee:

I would have to agree with rex that this occurance is a strech. Most soviet officers were educated and possessed id charts of german armor. And it seem that with all the posts on this site that have to do with realistim qustions and such, there is always a post that says.....A great many were completely illiterate, so even a guide would have meant nothing, as the words under the picture/drawing would have been incomprehensible... Do we really think that battlefront took into accout a soldiers literacy....in vehicle ids',no they did'nt. It's most likly a f*** up in the game. Lets face it, no program is perfect and as we all know there are parts of the game that are messed up but just part of the program and engine.

Most Soviet officers were educated indeed..that's Platoon Leaders and Company Commanders. Count how many you have those in game compared to grunts. Not to mention individual thoughts and actions were definitely not encouraged in Soviet military, not even late in war.

Cheers,

M.S.

[Other Means]

i'm impressed with the way CMBB handles mi-id's. i had no idea it went to that much trouble.

but...i think if you're taking fire from a tank & you're a soldier - it's a Tiger.

if you get knocked out by an ATG and you're a tanker - it's an 88.

would it be possible to take in to account the psychological effects in CMAK? instead of doing a look up for what the mis-id is on the rarity table (i assume) make a look up on a seperate "what they would be scared of table".

[Bastables]

But although Panzers were mis-id as Tigers, the Soviet reports tend to mis-id all assault guns as Ferdinand’s.

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Rex, have you ever actually seen a photo of a German tank in the field after 1942? Once the Allies had air supremacy - even before, really - they made extensive use of natural foliage. Those pretty little mods on your hard drive give no idea of how much serious thought went into camouflage and concealment. That means making it hard for the enemy to see what kind of vehicle you're driving. Foliage as camouflage isn't modelled into CM, as you well know.

Much ado about little.

Err disagree, steps such as welding points to attach foliage was not undertaken until and after Normandy '44 on the western front. Even in 1945 and 44 foliage was never a paramount consideration on the eastern front because the VSS was never able to achieve the air supremacy that the western allies enjoyed. Pics from the east have foliage conspicuous in its absence on AFV.

[Abbott]

Originally posted by General Lee:

I would have to agree with rex that this occurance is a strech....

...It's most likly a f*** up in the game. Lets face it, no program is perfect and as we all know there are parts of the game that are messed up but just part of the program and engine.

Actually General Lee you are way off here. As late as the 1980’s US Army books and pamphlet’s on the subject were for the most part written so a soldier with a 6th. Grade education could comprehend them. I do not know how much this has changed in the 1990’s+ if at all. I am sure someone with the needed first-hand experience will be along shortly to tell us.

Most often in the field one’s identification of an enemy AFV’s comes after the muzzle flash. Then the ID is Enemy AFV. It could be as good as “I saw some BMP’s and T72’s over that rise sir”! Not “I saw BMP’s, two T72’s and a T80”. Nobody but us Wargamers care about that much detail. If it is a tank you move assets in to kill it, the later troops can get its VIN number.

[ August 10, 2003, 07:48 PM: Message edited by: Abbott ]

[leakyD]

If soldiers are supposed to be so good at target ID, then please explain the high degree of fratricide in the last two Gulf Wars.

A buddy of mine was waxed in GW1. Apache pilot at night targeting a Bradely. Bradely's and BMP's have significant differences in silouette (sp?). What happened? Who knows. Would not want to have been at that gunners debriefing session!

So, not much has changed in 60yrs.

Highly trained professional soldiers (and, as a matter of fact, most people) tend to dork under pressure. It's called stress.

Stress kills.

[White Phosphorus]

Soviet misidentification.

Tank = Tiger/Panther

Stug = Artshturm

Non-stug assault gun = Ferdinand.

How could they manage to misidentify an assault gun as a panther?

Also, has anybody actually seen any concrete numbers on the literacy rate of the red army?

[tools4fools]

Hey,

My grandfather who was in the Whermacht mentioned tanks about two times. From 39-45.

Later in the war he was in Finland with probably much less Russian tanks around.

But still, the only two occasions, where those tanks were sure a real danger to them, when I asked him if they were T-34's (all I knew at the age of 16) he never said "yes" or " "no".

Guess it din't matter. Big steel monsters.

Now I wonder how often Russian soldiers encountered German tanks - considering that there were even less German tanks around compared to Russians.

The foliage thing makes sense too.

Knowing the war (which you sure do) you as a veteran commander should have known that it *might* be an Uebercat, maybe even a KT, reacted accordingly and saved a great many lives of your soldiers....

Marcus

*****

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Bastables:

[QB]Err disagree, steps such as welding points to attach foliage was not undertaken until and after Normandy '44 on the western front.

Jagdpanther didn't see action until June 44 at the earliest. :confused:

Even in 1945 and 44 foliage was never a

Never?

paramount consideration on the eastern front because the VSS was never able to achieve the air supremacy that the western allies enjoyed.

Did the German troops on the ground know that?

Pics from the east have foliage conspicuous in its absence on AFV.

We're probably looking at different books.

Try Squadron Signal's PANZER GRENADIER DIVISION GROSSDEUTSCHLAND

Specifically p. 152 (caption: This Tiger I. seen in East Prussia is a late production version....Again camouflage netting and foliage are necessary because of enemy air superiority."

P. 147 (bottom)

P. 146 (bottom)

P. 142 (bottom - caption" A heavily camouflaged Sdkfz 251...increasingly effective air support necessitated the use of heavy foliage to camouflage GD's vehicles....")

P. 137 (bottom - caption "The vehicles are Sdkfz 251 ausf D's, well covered with foliage as were most of the vehicles seen here.")

p. 134 (top)

p. 134 (bottom)

See also GOD, HONOUR, FATHERLAND: A PHOTO HISTORY OF PANZERGRENADIER DIVISION "GROSSDEUTSCHLAND" ON THE EASTERN FRON 1942-44

p. 223 (top)

p. 222 (top and bottom)

Granted, foliage was not an option on the Steppe or in the desert, but there is sufficient photographic evidence to suggest that "never" may be an exaggeration.

Not to mention PK dudes probably preferred pictures of tanks to pictures of tanks hidden by branches.

[Ex Bellator]

Wow, this is turning into a hot topic

To all those who say this could happen and isn't a problem I'm afraid I still vehemently disagree.

Some have said that from a certain angle a Jagdpanther can look like a Panther. May I respectfully remind them that I had hundreds of men on the field, Veterans at that, it was clear, the Jagdpanther was almost constantly moving around on the top of a small hill and eventually came down to within 70m of my lead troops, my men were taking views from many angles, all 360 degrees by the game end and probably 180 degrees on any particular turn, we were at an average range of 150-200m, many had binoculars, some had gunsights, and yet after 20 plus minutes of everyone watching it swanning around from all angles I'm expected to believe that the prevailing opinion was that it was a turreted medium tank :eek:

We all love the Mis-ID feature in CM, no one would ever wish to be without it, but I'm afraid in this particular case (like choice of the Gun Tractor for an unspotted Halftrack, remember the fun I had with that) BFC have chosen the wrong unit to show, it should obviously be shown as an Assault Gun, or better yet a new category of Tank Hunter.

I have just done a quick test scenario where I purchased a whole variety of German AFVs in 1945 and had a Veteran infantry platoon sat on an open flat map trying to ID them at around only 150m range. Most of the estimates were eminently sensible...

PzII = Light tank

Hetzer/Stugs/Jpz/PzIV-70/Brumbar = Assault Gun

Marder/Nashorn/Hummel = SP Gun

PzIV = PzIV

PzIII = PzIII

Panther = Panther

Tiger = King Tiger

and then we get the silly ones

Jadgpanther = Panther

Sturmtiger = King Tiger

Jadgtiger = King Tiger

It is obvious that anything with Tiger or Panther in it's name is classed as it's tank namesake when not fully ID'd. I really cannot see how any of those three when looked at from 150m away especially with binoculars could be mistaken for a turreted tank by all kinds of onlookers and from all sorts of angles.

However in the case of the Sturmtiger and Jadgtiger it isn't such a problem because the gun and armour on a possible King Tiger is enough to scare any unit away from trying to take it on. However, the Jadgpanther crew is laughing, everyone apparently thinks that it has a nice soft turret sat on top of it will stand around trying to get through it and wondering why they just seem to be getting upper hull ricochets.

I'm afraid it did cost me the battle, as I was assaulting I was quite happy to trade probably a couple of ISUs for what appeared to be a Panther by penetrating its relatively weak front turret, so had no hesitation in trying to overwhelm it frontally. I don't care about losing, never have, but it shouldn't have happened.

Some people have already gone down the wrong track completely, Mis-IDing was certainly very common and no-one says it wasn't, but if you think about the examples we all know then turreted AFVs got mis-ID's as turreted AFVs, and the constant tendancy was to exagerrate the threat, not downplay it.

[Col Deadmarsh]

Originally posted by Abbott:

Private reporting Comrade!: There is a BIG TANK KILLING us out there sir!

Comrade officer (with pistol): What kind of big tank? Is it a Panther?

Private (scared of his comrade’s pistol) No sir! I have seen no animals on the battlefield sir! Just a big tank!

Comrade officer: Does it have a turret?

Private (shaking) A what sir?

Comrade officer: You know a turret! A thing on top that turns!

Private (making water in his trousers): I saw nothing turning and no cat’s sir! Just a big tank killing us!

Comrade officer:(aiming pistol) Hmm, maybe it is one of those Jadgpanthers then? Private, take two men and this grenade and stop that BIG TANK, even if it kills you! If you do not I surely will! Dismissed!

I've heard better dialogue in Godzilla movies...

[Abbott]

I'm afraid it did cost me the battle, as I was assaulting I was quite happy to trade probably a couple of ISUs for what appeared to be a Panther by penetrating its relatively weak front turret, so had no hesitation in trying to overwhelm it frontally. I don't care about losing, never have, but it shouldn't have happened.

I have never played a game of CMBB without extreme fog of war turned on. I certainly enjoy not knowing exactly what I am facing. It is all part of the fun. I also know that very few people can ID an AFV correctly. Even less when under fire. The colossal amount of differing AFV’s involved on the Eastern front would take that to an extreme not found anywhere else in history. To us as Wargamers knowing an assault gun from a tank is a normal everyday occurrence. Not so with civilians pressed into service or even the average military personal. I think BFC is right on the mark with its show of misinformation, it adds so much to the game.

Maybe you should consider turning off the Fog of War settings for your future battles to enhance your enjoyment of the game?