PIII v. T34: An ASL Veteran's Perspective

[Jean Lafitte]

I bought Advanced Squad Leader in 1985 and played it extensively over the years. ASL gave me my "baseline feel" for how east front AFV fighting should feel in a game like CMBB.

In CMBB, the Soviet T34s frontal armor seems too vulnerable to German Pzkw III lang and kurz AT rounds, especially at ranges above 600 meters.

I agree with those who encourage the Battlefront folks to take another look at this and address this perceived problem in a future patch of CMBB.

I know that there are extensive posts and threads on this topic. I simply wanted to add my 2 cents worth.

Thank you.

[CombinedArms]

When I first got CMBB I thought T-34s lost too often to PzIIIs, as well. Then I ran some tests and found that I had to change my tune. I don't recall all the details, but the gist was that at ranges of about 600m, the T-34 beat even the long 50 in the PzIII fairly consistently. Tests suggest that neither tank kills the other with ease--there are many bounced shots, sometimes lasting over 3-4 minutes, but that the T-34 will usually win eventually.

I just had this confirmed in a PBEM game when I had 9 T-34s blazing away at 4 PzIIIs at 550m and suffered no T-34 losses, though there may have been 15 bounced shots. At the same time, the PzIIIs suffered just one or perhaps two losses--I may have killed one tank that now shows as immoblized.

Anything like a PzIII kill of a T-34 at 1900 meters, cited on another thread, would have to be considered a fluke....

All in all, I'd much rather have a T-34 than a PzIII in almost any situation.. But I'd also take a PzIV long over a T-34/76 in any kind of long-range duel because of the greater accuracy and penetrating power of the gun. A PzIVG/H/J kill at 1900m I could easily believe.

[manchildstein (ii)]

welcome aboard

--600 meters --

so are you talking range 13-24? 600 meters would be range 15 in asl... oh did they break that down into something like 13-18 and 19-24 from the 13-24 of the original?

at range 15, what did a german PZ IIIG/H need to roll in order to hit and then kill a t-34 in asl?

now an asl or sl 'firing phase' (prep or defensive fire) would be an abstraction of 6 or 8 - 'panzer III type' - shots, right?

[ASL Veteran]

I feel obligated to chime in on this thread just to avoid any potential confusion . Much as I love ASL, the armor rules in ASL were abstracted in the extreme. I'm not sure that ... where armor is concerned anyway .... ASL is a good baseline for anything. ASL does infantry fighting very well, but armor was always a bit of an afterthought in that game. I think Tobruk did a little bit better from an armor perspective, even though the turn based format just doesn't do it with armor. Combat Mission is the "King of Armor" as far as I'm concerned. They hit a home run with armor on their first try.

[CombinedArms]

Note: Also posted on the "Crappy Russian Tanks" thread. Sorry for the duplication, but it seemed equally relevant here.

***

I thought the reported PzIII kill of a T-34 at 1900m was a bit of a fluke. I suspected that a long PzIV might, on the other hand, rule in this context vs T-34s, so I did a test of 4 PzIII Ls and 4 PzIVGs vs. 8 T-34/76s (1943 model/late) on 8 separate test tracks on dead flat map.

The test lasted five turns and the T-34s acquited themselves quite well. There were no PzIII kills of T-34s.

Test Log:

1st round: No kills on either side. One T-34 shocked by partial penetration from a PzIVG.

2nd round. 2 T-34s KOed by PzIVGs. I PzIV abandoned, one gun damaged. I PzIII immoblized.

3rd round. No change.

4th round. No change.

5th round. Gun damaged PzIVG killed. Immoblized PzIII abandoned.

Total effect:

2 abandoned T-34s (both by PzIVGs)

6 T-34s Ok

========

1 abandoned PzIIIL

3 PzIIILs OK

--

2 dead PzIVs (1 abandoned, 1 KO)

2 PzIVs OK

Conclusions:

1. PzIIILs cannot easily kill T-34s at 1900m. None was killed in 5 turns of trying. Many, many bounced shots, but no kills.

2. The PzIIIL is also hard for the T-34 to kill at that range. It has pretty good armor vs. the 76mm gun and only one was killed in five turns--again, many bounced shots--and that a tank that survived from turns 2-4 immobilized before finally being abandoned by its crew.

3. PzIVGs and T-34s can kill each other more easily--the PzIVGs lighter armor but better gun makes it both deadlier and more vulnerable in its duels at that range with the T-34. Still, killing the PzIVG is a bit of a challenge for the T-34 at that range. A gun damaged one survived for several turns and only died on the 60th second of turn 5.

4. All in all, the T-34/76s won the encounter--killing three tanks and losing just two. It could have gone the other way, but it seems that the T-34 can hold its own in such situations.

[ February 03, 2003, 10:38 PM: Message edited by: CombinedArms ]

[aka_tom_w]

When I first started reading about Combat Mission on this forum (the old CMBO forum) I recall some comments from Steve and Charles about how BAD the armour penetration model in SL and ASL was AND that they wanted their game to reflect reality with MUCH great fidelity. So they have a TOTALLY different armour penetration model (the CMBB one is modeled on REAL world physics)

I never played ASL but from what I have read about it, it should not be used as the baseline of what you think is correct and historically accurate in CMBB because it lacked accuracy and fidelity in its armour penetration model.

I have no doubt BFC has their facts right on this issue in CMBB (IMHO)

-tom w

[medlinke]

If you review the designer notes for ASL you will find a discussion on the "realism" of the series. Ultimately sacrifices have to be made to allow for the game to be played. Very complex armor rules weren't meant for a board game unless that was all you intended on doing. Numbers can only abstract so much before you need tons of charts, diagrams, and special circumstances to govern play.

In CM you don't have to worry about it. The computer handles those calculations and can provide a much richer simulation of the various conditions that might be encountered.

Over the long haul I suspect that any general trend found in "real" warfare can be found to be generally the case in CM. The game isn't meant to be judged over a series of battles in one or two days, but rather over a long period of time.

Consider the similarity to baseball statistics. How many pitchers have been on pace to win 20 games in a season? How many actually accomplish it? Looking at a single season one might surmise that pitchers who are on track rarely fail to win 20. But over a number of seasons things seem to balance out and present more normalized results.

In CM, you can play 500 games and only see a shell ricochet into a building and catch it on fire 1 time. In other player's experiences that may happen more often. Does that mean that it happens too little or too much? Hard to say. Though I suspect over the hundreds of thousands of times the game has been played a very normal pattern of even the most remote incidence will occur appropriate to its real life counterpart.

Keep that in mind as well.

[Hans]

T-34 versus Pz III

I think the problem may be one of perception and the game environment. If I read them right the posts above say that at long range a T-34 is fairly invulnerable while at close range a T-34 starts looking like a Swiss cheese.

I would say that during the actual war most engagement took place at longer range than what are normal in CMBB.

Just a thought

[von Lucke]

This (and the several other, similar threads) is beginning to remind me of the venerable CMBO "No-King-Tiger-was-ever-Killed-by-a-Front-Turret-Penetration, so-Why-Does-it-Happen-in-CMBO?" threads that used to pop up at regular intervals.

Just because it never happened, doesn't mean it couldn't happen.

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by von Lucke:

[snips]Just because it never happened, doesn't mean it couldn't happen.

Rats.

There goes my "No Tetrarch was ever killed by a long 88, therefore Tetrarchs are invlunerable to long 88 fire" argument.

All the best,

John.

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

[snips](the CMBB one is modeled on REAL world physics)

Really? (asked a spokesman for Mr. Picky). And there was me thinking it was based on the de Marre equations with some suitable tweaks, which is not what I would call physics-based modelling.

I suspect that the computational overhead for a finite-element-cum-CFD penetration model would be quite noticeable.

All the best,

John.

[ February 04, 2003, 06:25 AM: Message edited by: John D Salt ]

[RSColonel_131st]

Excuse my rather naive viewpoint, but from reading the tables provided with the unit infos...

The T-34 has 70mm round armor, the PIIIL has 50 standard + 20 round. At 1000 meters, both can penetrate around 70mm.

The two, judging by this data alone, are pretty much equal at standard combat ranges it seems.

In my current PBEM with Sgt.Goody we have plenty of PIIIL and T-34 early 43 models. I see any direct engagement between two of them as a 50/50 chance and therefore try to avoid it.

So, in other words, where would the T-34 Advantage against the PIII Guns come from?

[kipanderson]

Hi,

If you line up ten T34/76s and ten MarkIIIs with 70mm armour at any range over 200m, the T34s will win. I am talking the M43 model T34 that was around when the MarkIIIs with the 70mm armour roamed the world.

The only way the German 50mm Lang gun can penetrate the T34 is if it hits the centre section of the turret mantel. Neither the standard APCBC round, nor the Tungsten round, can penetrate the sloped, frontal armour of the T34. Including the more sloped parts of the front turret of the T34.

The early Soviet 76.2mm APBC rounds, with the large HE fill, that were around until about mid 43, cannot penetrate the 70mm front armour of the MarkIII. However, the MarkIII has one fatal flaw, 50mm lower front hull armour. This can be penetrated by the 76.2mm gun at any range.

It will take time, and it is no massacre, but line up ten T34s opposite ten MarkIIIs, and the outcome is not in doubt. After two minutes blasting away at each other, 2-4 T34s will have been lost, and 4-7 MarkIIIs.

If you mix the forces as they actually operated during the first six months of 43 it is a very even battle.

Take eight MarkIIIs with long 50mm gun and 70mm armour, four MarkIVs with L43 gun, and four MarderIIIs on the German side. On the Soviet side have sixteen T34s. You will find the battle could go either way. Very evenly matched.

Remember, the StugIIIs did not tend to operate with Panzer divisions at this time. Later in the war when they did, the Soviets had tungsten rounds for the 76.2mm guns that could penetrate the StugIIIs at up to 500m plus. Also, of course, vehicles such as the SU85 coming through.

All the best,

Kip.

[CombinedArms]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

Hi,

If you line up ten T34/76s and ten MarkIIIs with 70mm armour at any range over 200m, the T34s will win. I am talking the M43 model T34 that was around when the MarkIIIs with the 70mm armour roamed the world.

[snip]

It will take time, and it is no massacre, but line up ten T34s opposite ten MarkIIIs, and the outcome is not in doubt. After two minutes blasting away at each other, 2-4 T34s will have been lost, and 4-7 MarkIIIs.

[snip]

All the best,

Kip.

A few months ago, I did very similar tests and arrived at very similar results. My tests were at about 600-800m, IIRC.

[Jean Lafitte]

Thanks, everybody!

I'm learning a great deal here.

More comments, please!

I am definitely re-considering my position on this issue.

[mididoctors]

Originally posted by Hans:

I would say that during the actual war most engagement took place at longer range than what are normal in CMBB.

Are you sure of this.....german inf survey found combat occured at much closer ranges than first expected....as for afv combat i know not of.

Boris

London

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by John D Salt:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

[snips](the CMBB one is modeled on REAL world physics)

Really? (asked a spokesman for Mr. Picky). And there was me thinking it was based on the de Marre equations with some suitable tweaks, which is not what I would call physics-based modelling.

I suspect that the computational overhead for a finite-element-cum-CFD penetration model would be quite noticeable.

All the best,

John. </font>

[ASL Veteran]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

But you have to admit it is WAY better than SL or ASL?

-tom w

Mr Picky would point out that you've never played ASL or SL.

[Kanonier Reichmann]

I wanna meet this Mr Picky. He sounds like a veritable ball of fun.

Regards

Jim R.

[Panzer76]

I was browsing through the book shop today, and found a book about the T34. In the combat section it had several examples of where the PzIII (didnt specify type, but mentioned they used PzGr 40) first met the T34. It stated that they just *turret* richocets, and the T34 drove straight through their line and on the way litterly over ran a 37 mm Pak. It was only stopped by shoting at the rear by a 100 mm field piece.

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Panzer76:

It was only stopped by shoting at the rear by a 100 mm field piece.

Not that anyone draws the wrong conclusions from that - the 10cm K18 could probably defeat the T34 from any angle.

Penetration:

10cm Panzergranate rot(weight 15.7kg)

mittlere Ladung: 602m/s MV (682?), 500m 112mm; 1000m 100mm armour penetration

grosse Ladung: 822 m/s MV, 500m 155mm; 1000m 138mm armour penetration

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by Andreas:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Panzer76:

It was only stopped by shoting at the rear by a 100 mm field piece.

Not that anyone draws the wrong conclusions from that - the 10cm K18 could probably defeat the T34 from any angle.

</font>

[offtaskagain]

The 105 howitzer firing HE is perfectly capable of taking out the T-34, so it's higher powered cousin should certainly do the same.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by ASL Veteran:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

But you have to admit it is WAY better than SL or ASL?

-tom w

Mr Picky would point out that you've never played ASL or SL. </font>

[Andreas]

Originally posted by panzerwerfer42:

The 105 howitzer firing HE is perfectly capable of taking out the T-34, so it's higher powered cousin should certainly do the same.

Well, with the right rounds, and at not too much distance, yes the lFH8 should be able to do the job. If I get the choice, I'd pick the K18 anyday though. Actually, if I get the choice I'd pick a job in the administration department of the replacement depot in Oldenburg