Kv tanks during early Barbarossa, Supermen?

[TheHumanMage]

When I play well until like end of 42 but lets stick to early Barbarossa (first 3 months) I see that NO tank can even scratch it

I often play 1-2 kv vs lots of enemy tanks computers choice

But ofcurse if there are different types of troops then yes their is a chans that infantry might grenade it or that artilery might destroy it

BUT!

Point for point isnt it just to good?

It is (atleast during Barbarossa) Mike Tyson vs a Senegalese homeless beggar

[JasonC]

It is the Tiger of its day, but readily defeated. The main tank killers of the first half of the war simply aren't mounted on AFVs, they are towed.

Pz IIIs will still KO them with hail fire, also. Just hit one with a whole platoon, and you will connect 15-20 times per minute. In 2 minutes they will receive gun damage or immobilization and then bail out. But this is a secondary matter - the main way is just to use an 88 FLAK or 150mm sIG etc.

[Fußball]

5cm PaK38 will also do the trick at close ranges. Also if you are playing versus the computer that is even more testament to why the KW-I is a monster. The computer cannot simulate any effective tactics to counteract your monster unless the opponent's tank just so happens to be within effective range to penitrate your KW-I. In any situation where the computer cannot penitrate your tank's armor it will reverse/use smoke and reverse.

Tschüß!

Erich

[Xipe66]

First german tank that can take it on and win by KO (not by bailing it, or getting gun/track disabled from hail fire) is probably the Pz.III 50/L60? (e.g. empathically not during Barbarossa - just curious though)

[JasonC]

Marders, the first long IVs and StuGs, all in 1942.

On the 50mm PAK, its penetration chance is low and full KO chance lower, and it will be spotted. You want APCR, too.

The 28/20 squeeze bore is sometimes more effective. It needs a flank aspect and reasonable range - 200-300m depending on side angle - but can remain sound while shooting at those ranges, if in good cover. Penetrations aren't the hardest part, a full kill is, with those. (Small behind armor effect vs. large vehicles etc).

[PanzerMiller]

Don't forget the good ol' foot soldiers, boys...pioneers can take out anything if they get close enough (I know that's quite a caveat, but...). I just played a fun scenario from the old Scenario Depot -- Suburbs of Leningrad -- where a platoon of pioneers with PzIIIG and 50mm PAK support take on 2 KV-1s and 2 KV-2s in the early morning fog. The PAK got both KV-1s from about 150m and I was able to get close enough with one pioneer squad to knock out both KV-2s with demo charges...great fun!

Keep playin', everybody...

[The_Enigma]

pansies ... all of you! ... just work up a platoon with a few grenades and job done

j/k of course

however ive done this only twice ... both within 5 mins of each other.

A scenario i was playtesting, 2 KV1 popped up due flag misplacement right on top of one of my platoons. They where quickly ordered to charge the one which had popped up and got a couple of grenades in... a few momments later and the 2nd arrived ... quite luckly they did the same thing.

This of course much, much later after they had already spanked my tanks everywhere lol (loads and loads of rear shots)

[uhu]

I managed with 3 47mm (hungarian) AT guns - con, reg,vet - to disable 2 KV-I M41's. Yes, they were immobilised/gun damaged and abandoned, but who cares?

[MPK]

Whilst playing "Ghosts Of Napoleon"

(July '41 Op where Kreizer's Ist Moscow

Motorized clashes with 18th Panzer)

I lost one KV-2 to a grenade bundle

infantry ambush, and the other to

the 37mm on a SPW.....immobilisation

is enough, especially with Green crews,

who are just itching to bail...

[John Kettler]

MPK,

If you look at Zaloga's Osprey book on Soviet heavy tanks, you'll find that's a fairly reasonable outcome. He records poorly trained crews unnerved by even 20mm fire spanging off the armor bailing out of perfectly intact tanks. The problem was so serious high command had to completely rethink how to crew and use these vehicles. He also notes that many nonpenetrating hits got the inside armor so hot that the paint smoked or caught fire at the point of impact. Of course, then we have the KV from hell sitting on the 6 PD? MSR and impossible to bypass because of swamps on both sides of it. Rasheniye or somesuch.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Fußball]

PaK38s will clean KW-I tanks up nicely as long as you have them within 300m. Historically in 1941 there were enough Tungsten, PzGr40, rounds to go around. So with the PzGr40 you have a much needed punch to keep KW-I tanks out to distances in excess of 600m. Just keep these factors in mind when you face KWs again.

Also note that while you may not be able to KO enemy KWs; you can, however, scare the inexperienced crews into abandoning their tank. Enough partial penitrations and the crew will bail. More often than not shelling the tank enough will shake up an inexperienced crew to the point of bailing.

Tschüß!

Erich

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Fußball:

PaK38s will clean KW-I tanks up nicely as long as you have them within 300m. Historically in 1941 there were enough Tungsten, PzGr40, rounds to go around. So with the PzGr40 you have a much needed punch to keep KW-I tanks out to distances in excess of 600m. Just keep these factors in mind when you face KWs again.

That's all fine, except that there were not enough Pak 38 to go around, historically. Maybe four-six per division (TO&E was two per AT battery, but I have my doubts that this was achieved in all divisions).

Historically, KV-1 were either stopped by their own supply services not performing, or by 8,8cm Flak, 10cm K18, 15cm sIG33, 15cm sFH18, or 10,5cm lFH18 in direct fire mode. Pak38 is nice, but not a realistic option, and does not qualify for historically accurate.

Of course this was an expensive business for the artillery, due to the high profile of these guns, and their immobility.

All the best

Andreas

[Fußball]

Originally posted by Andreas:

Pak38 is nice, but not a realistic option, and does not qualify for historically accurate.

I was pointing out ways to use the PaK38 against the KW-I if need be. It is not as if I was stating that the PaK38 was the most numerous antitank cannon in service during 1941.

Unless somehow you misconstrued me stating that,"Historically in 1941 there were enough Tungsten, PzGr40, rounds to go around." as me saying historically there were plenty of PaK38s to go around. Which I was not.

Tschüß!

Erich

[Andreas]

I did not think your post was particularly clear, or helpful in term of historical accuracy, so I filled in the background to address its deficiencies.

Maybe you somehow misconstrued that as me saying that your post was factually inaccurate. Which it was not, it just completely failed to address the most important problem, if one considers historical accuracy.

All the best

Andreas

[Fußball]

Originally posted by Andreas:

I did not think your post was particularly clear, or helpful in term of historical accuracy, so I filled in the background to address its deficiencies.

Need it be? I was just adressing ways to counter the KW-I in a situation involving the PaK38. There was no need to state how many PaK38s were alotted to each division in response to my post.

Originally posted by Andreas:

Maybe you somehow misconstrued that as me saying that your post was factually inaccurate. Which it was not, it just completely failed to address the most important problem, if one considers historical accuracy.

The focus of my post was not about historical accuracy save the comment of PzGr40 being readily available in 1941. Your comment, however correct it may be, was not needed as a response to my own.

Tschüß!

Erich

[Andreas]

You were the one who brought up historical accuracy. If you are not interested in it, why bring it up? If you are interested in it, why do you think that an elaboration on it is not needed?

I think you suffer from something that is known as 'muddled thinking', but that is hardly a surprise, reading your posts elsewhere.

All the best

Andreas

[Fußball]

Originally posted by Andreas:

You were the one who brought up historical accuracy. If you are not interested in it, why bring it up? If you are interested in it, why do you think that an elaboration on it is not needed?

You must not know how to read. As I have stated already once before. The only claim to historical accuracy I made was concerning the PzGr40. ( panzergranate40 ) The tungsten APCR round and that it was readily available during 1941.

I never asked you to tell me how many PaK38s there were in a division. If I were citing how many PzGr40 shells were produced during 1941 and I were incorrect maybe then you could have corrected me.

I really do not want to repeat myself a third time. So please, while you are thinking of ways to make me look foolish, learn how to read. Now stop making yourself look like a fool on the internet and cease your senseless arguement.

Tschüß!

Erich

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Fußball:

I really do not want to repeat myself a third time. So please, while you are thinking of ways to make me look foolish, learn how to read. Now stop making yourself look like a fool on the internet and cease your senseless arguement.

Tschüß!

Erich

That's funny. I was not correcting you, and I have said so twice. I was expanding on your statement.

Get over it. Or maybe better not, it is actually amusing to see working yourself up like that. I look forward to you coming up with another post that completely misses the point. You are rather good at that.

All the best

Andreas

[MPK]

Hello John,

"If you look at Zaloga's Osprey book on Soviet heavy tanks, you'll find that's a fairly reasonable outcome"

I thought it was reasonable, too...

But it still made me grind my teeth in fury

[TheHumanMage]

Kill him Andy! He cant even spell KV

Red Army studies for the Win!

[Andreas]

We have long since settled our differences.

Perfectly good spelling of KV for a German, BTW.

All the best

Andreas

[Zalgiris 1410]

I thought it was a good little piece of Fußball idiosyncratic short hand:

KV-1; KV

KV-2; KW

Works for me, I'll go with that.

Hmmm on topic, IIRC, I've used T-38s to take out KVs, or at least make them reverse off the map or cause the crew to bail out. But I have done it, let me tell you. What I do is rush or rather basically charge a platoon or company of T-38s against 1-2 KVs, lose half of them in the process, but get enough of them under one hundred metres or even less then 50 metres away from the monster and gang bang away at it.

It's fun alright, but cos I've used high quality crews in my cancelled Czechs, inexchange for 1-2 KVs, I haven't exactly won handsomely though I must say. I recommend trying to do it at night or in a blizzard when there is no firing beyond the very reduced LOS/LOF range given those climatic conditions.

I've certainly KOed T-34s with a surging bunch T-38s, that's for sure. (Definately the 45mm turretted ones, and I think the 52mm & 65mm versions as well, but I don't think the can KO the 70mm turretted T-34s - I'll have to test check.)

[ September 24, 2006, 11:45 PM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]

[Stoffel]

I lost a KV2 to a 20mm cannon......it couldnt target the gun while round after round hit the tank frontal armor.

The regular crew bailed out after 2 turns.

[Fußball]

Originally posted by TheHumanMage:

Kill him Andy! He cant even spell KV

No! Kill him Andy! He cannot spell KW!

Originally posted by Zalgiris 1410:

I thought it was a good little piece of Fußball idiosyncratic short hand

Of course, without such differences the world of text would be so dull.

Tschüß!

Erich

[Mad Russian]

The T-34 and KV's should also be much less effective offensively.

According to Zaloga there was almost no AP ammo available for the new gun when the war started. That in most early war engagements they went into battle with little or no AP ammo and half their normal ammo allotment. Which of course means HE.