Pz IV Mark H-J model vs Sherman T-34

[GhostRider3/3]

Maybe...LOL I did a search... nothing came up.. what was the other thread Corvidae, I would like to at least view it.

thanks.. 12/26 HJ

[The_Enigma]

I dunno ... instead of all the stats, gun calibers, confusion over which tanks were talking about, expectations etc

... could it be that your just a bad cyber tank commander?

[DavidFields]

After reading threads on this board for many months, and playing CM, I have been drawn to the conclusion:

Shermans where better, really better, than their reputation. "pathetic Sherman"--I think not. Indeed, I am even becoming impressed with Stuarts.

As for Pz IV tanks, would I be wrong (don't throw anything at me please) to mainly see them as infantry support tanks--and used that way in real life?

And, if one wants to continue to think that the German AFVs did very well against the Allies, at times, and if one wanted to be impressed by that, wouldn't it be better to take pride in the tactics, not the armor. Not the morale/experience even, but the doctrinaire training? (At least, when the Germans were not using Blitz tactics against a Kursk type defense)

Would I be drawing reasonable conclusions with the above, from what I have read on these boards.

And, lastly, a request for a prediction: someone who so abjectly thrills in taking 10 Tiger tanks and blowing up unlimited Shermans will last how long on these boards, either by jumping or being bounced? Not necessarily, but with what probability?

[GhostRider3/3]

No I would not say that, everyone has there days, and every scenerio is different. I just think that my experiments with both tanks give the Sherman the edge at long ranges. My next experiments will probably be at 1000+ ranges using the same crews and such. The Sherman short 75mm should not do as well as the Pz IV H or J in hit percentage given the dynamics of both tanks. Flat open terrain... no obstructions. Technicaly the Pz IV with Vetran crew should have a better hit percentage than a Green Sherman crew. if Optics, crew and weapon are all factored into the hit Percentage.

[Fußball]

Through all of the debate and confusion in this thread I have but one question...

How many more times are we going to read LOL?

Tschüß!

Erich

[zmoney]

I think what people are confusing here and in the other thread when they say that the Allies didn’t like the Sherman, are the accounts taken from Allied tankers about their experience against German heavy tanks.

Of course the tankers are going to say the Sherman was rubbish against a Tiger because it was. But I doubt that they would have wanted to be in a PZIV of any flavor against a Tiger either.

All the other accounts and books I have read dealing with Allied tank crews fight against other than heavy tank opponents, give the Sherman good marks. You have to remember that they didn’t run into a Tiger every day either. Which in CM you do.

I think another reason for this popular belief that Sherman’s weren’t good comes from German tankers. I have read and seen interviews with German tankers who were expecting the Americans to make a tank far better than they themselves had. They thought since America was a great industrial power and away from the everyday war (by this I mean the US wasn’t getting bombed out like England and Russia) that the Americans would have created some super uber tank. Which at the time the Sherman went into production it was better than what the Germans had i.e. PZIII or PZIV.

Your profile says you’re from the US are you originally from Germany? Plus I hate to burst your German loving tank bubble but the T-34 was the best tank in WW2 up to mid summer of 42.

Just a friendly warning, from your post you sound like a Nazi fan boy. People here won’t take you seriously in historical debate or game dynamics discussions if they think you are a Nazi fan boy.

Plus if Allied equipment was so inferior then how did we win the war?

Oh and LOL.

[GhostRider3/3]

Well I think winning the War is an entirely different thread. Zmoney dont confuse me with.. how did you say it.. "Nazi Fan boy" you dont know me, so to say something like that is pretty irresponsible on your part.

This thread was about the general dynamics of the game concerning the PzIV H and J vs early model Sherman... I put T-34 in the title because the barrel length is not as long as the Pz IV and neither is its velocity.

The T-34 respectavily hands down would kick the ass of any Pz IV H J. and The Pz IV H would only stand a slight better chance at long ranges and from ambush or reverse slope tactics.

As for where I live and where Im from, thats none of your business, I currently live in the US.

And its all a matter of I guess what books and who you talk to, about the engagements in WWII, both sides were bad at propaganda reports, and mis information. There are many authors im sure that write byast opinions of equipment, not fully researching or understanding the equipment they are writing about.

And if I happen to like German equipment over Allied that does not make me a Nazi either... thats like saying I like T-34's and Il2 Sturmoviks so I must be a communist.

[The_Enigma]

The T-34 respectavily hands down would kick the ass of any Pz IV H J. and The Pz IV H would only stand a slight better chance at long ranges and from ambush or reverse slope tactics.

Then way are you so miffed that the Allies could do the same? :confused:

[Fußball]

Originally posted by Jurgen12/26HJ:

The T-34 respectavily hands down would kick the ass of any Pz IV H J. and The Pz IV H would only stand a slight better chance at long ranges and from ambush or reverse slope tactics.

Depends on the T34 and the situation in question. All T34's before the T34/85 M43 are at a severe disadvantage to a hull up mid model G or higher at 600m or over. A round to the turret is the only chance a T34 will have in that case. When the T34/85 comes onto the field then it depends on who hits what first.

Originally posted by Jurgen12/26HJ:

And if I happen to like German equipment over Allied that does not make me a Nazi either... thats like saying I like T-34's and Il2 Sturmoviks so I must be a communist.

In zmoney's defense he stated,"you sound like a Nazi fan boy". He never stated you are a "nazi fan boy". In your defense, some denizens here will tag you as a nazi for liking German equipment. If they do, completely and utterly ignore them.

Tschüß!

Erich

[zmoney]

Originally posted by Jurgen12/26HJ:

As for where I live and where Im from, thats none of your business, I currently live in the US.

I could care less what house you live in or what your job is. You just claimed you were German but your profile say’s you live in the States so I was just curious. I didn’t know if you were one of those who have lived in the States for generations but were so in love with the Nazi’s that you claimed you had 1/36th German in you.

You’re right I don’t know you so I can only go by what you post. That’s why I said you were sounding like a Nazi fan boy. I was just giving you a friendly warning so that if you weren’t a fan boy then maybe you would put some thought into your post before you claim some sub par German tank should be superior to an Allied tank because the PZIV was a German tank crewed by German’s. I’m obviously not the only one to get this impression, just read the other’s responses to what you have written. Plus what does your name mean? Just a question.

You also claim to be a historian yet you can’t seem to realize that the PZIV series weren’t all that great. Game dynamics are one thing but you’re the one who brought up Normandy so don’t be surprised when people respond to your post with what happened in real life. Plus this game is supposed to be historically accurate so game dynamics and real history go hand in hand when discussing something about the game.

Lastly you claim the T-34 was able to take out PZIV’s easily, well sorry to tell you the Sherman 75mm had better anti tank capabilities than the T-34 76mm. So by you saying this, you should know, being a historian and all, that a Sherman would have been just as capable to take out a PZIV as the T-34 was.

[zmoney]

I really want to clarify, as Fußball said there are plenty of people here that are easy to write someone off as a fan boy because of stuff they post. In certain cases I think it is unfair. In fact I'm not one of those who generally lead the Nazi Fan boy witch-hunt. I just wanted to let you know how you were sounding and to be aware that people were going to think of you this way.

Plus I think everyone who has ever played this GAME have used both allied and axis equipment. That’s what’s great about this game. So I wasn't implying that since you like to play as the Germans you were a fan boy, it was just how you were implying that all allied equipment was rubbish compared to anything with a made in Germany sticker on it. If you were talking about beer I don't think you would have had much disagreement, except from some Englishman or an Irish fellow.

[GhostRider3/3]

Yes I beleive the quality of ammunition was better with the US, but again this Thread was about the Dynamics.. in game with concern with Quality of Crew, Optics, and such.

And Im more of a Historian on tactics, and Stratagey not really an Uber for every vehicle that took place in WWII.

And it sounds like we read different materials.. but thats ok Zmoney. And by the way.. many allied tankers mistook the PzIV H for a Tiger, as their silhouetts were almost the same at long ranges, therefore when there buddies were taking fire, they sometimes assumed it was from a Tiger, not the PZ IVH....

[civdiv]

I have a bunch of thought here, some germane (german? j/k) and some not.

zmoney, quit throwing around the Nazi thing, we all know where that leads. I am like 1/36th German, and I like Panthers, that doesn't mean I have a Waffen SS uniform in my closet. Once you even allude to the slur, others begin to assume. Bad combination there.

But zmoney, you are right on target with what I was thinking as I was reading this and you stole my thunder. Sure, you got a medium velocity gun on a chassis with iffy armor and you are on the attack, in bad terrain (Bocage), and you are facing even a smattering of Panthers, Tigers, 75mm, r48 and 88mm AT guns, faust and schreks and you are probably going to hate your tank. Throw in maybe one real Wittman episode and a bunch more fabrications of the effectiveness of the Tiger, add a dash of the War Department refusing to put a better gun in the Sherman and you have the genesis of the (mostly) inaccurate portrayal of the Sherman being a piece of chit.

Jurgen, part of the confusion here is you screwing up the beginning of your rant by mistating nomenclature. If you had started the discussion by correctly labeling the Shermans in question as the basic M4 with the 75mm r40 (M3) gun we would have known what you were talking about. But decribing one scenario where 4 Shermans killed 4 MkIVs, losing 2 of their own number means nothing. Run that identical situation 20 times and tell us what the results are. A data set of 1 is not sufficient to determine a trend.

The fact of the matter is that the MkIV has a better gun while the Sherman has better armor. All things being equal the overall performance versus each other should be about even. If you run the scenario 20 times and the Shermans knock out twice as many MkIVs as they lose, then we got a problem. Until that happens we don't.

[GhostRider3/3]

Excellent, I do apreciate your response civdiv and im glad you responded in reference to the game. I guess the data is different where I recieved my information on the early sherman tank.

Oh and Zmoney.. I never said all Allied equipment was rubish, true I think the German tank designs look abit better, however inefective some were... Anyways.. its late and im having a Fosters in celebration of a long weekend. Cheers!

[zmoney]

Originally posted by Jurgen12/26HJ:

true I think the German tank designs look abit better

So it all came down to looks, it always does with the much sexier German armor. Sexier as we all know equals better. Anyway have a nice long weekend.

Civdiv, I wasn't calling him a fan boy for god sakes. Some here for some reason don't posses reading comprehension skills. I was warning him because some here would start calling him a fan boy and just write him off. A warning doesn’t mean I was calling him a Nazi fan boy and I do agree it gets used to much so I was hoping he would avoid a similar fate.

[JasonC]

Anyone actually interested in the historical realities of the question would have addressed my substantive questions.

J isn't. He is spinning for national quality claims without the slightest interest in fact. No, vague impression prejudice deluded about the facts doesn't count as an interest in fact.

The claims he makes about the game are wrong, empirically. (e.g. he claims T-34s beat Pz IVs, they do not, IVs are in every respect superior to T-34/76s but not to Shermans). The claims he makes about history are wrong, empirically. (e.g. he claims he knows Germans lopsidedly outscored Shermans with IVs in Normandy, history says distinctly otherwise; he then blames Goering and fuel in the oldest and most tired excuses in the arsenal, endlessly refuted). E.g. he pretends all the German crews in Normandy should be veterans, when in fact solidly half the formations sent there were green from recent rebuilds if not recent first formation, while half the Allied armor there were veterans of the Med.

He offers nothing in defense of them but national bias. He is grinding an ax not discussing the game or history. Nor does he submit to correction, changing the subject instead.

[JasonC]

Here is a run down of the actual pre-history of the German mobile formations that fought in Normandy. Far from all being veterans, they were a mix of a few elite formations, veteran formations that had large numbers of recent replacements to fill losses, and entirely green formations with understrength cadres.

Heer -

Lehr was the best of the lot. It was formed from school units, the instructor pool, and therefore included some of the best in the force. Vet to crack. Also very well equipped.

2 Panzer was a veteran division but heavily depleted fighting in the Dnepr bend area in 1943. It was in France to refit and take replacements. Veteran and regular mixed, from a strong cadre. Some of the infantry would deserve a few greens mixed in though, given the number of replacements etc, but never a majority of any subunit.

21 Panzer was brand new, no relation to the storied DAK PD of the same number, since that was destroyed in Tunisia. It was formed in France, still training, and considered unfit for use on the Russian front. It had no Panthers and half its armor was captured French stuff, some obsolete Somua and some more useful SPA and SPAT on French chassis. Green mixed with regular, from some cadre.

116 Panzer was new as a PD, formed from a cadre of the nearly destroyed 16 Pz Gdr division and some reserve formations. Had never seen action as a unit. The Panther battalion was completely untrained, never seen one before, and the division was left in reserve while they trained. Green with some regulars in the Pz IV and infantry.

1SS was an elite formation but rebuilding in France after very high losses in Russian in 1943. It was sent to Normandy piecemeal as portions took replacements and received equipment. (e.g. 6000 men are still in Belgium on July 1). Good cadre and pick of personnel, though, so veteran mostly, with some crack and some regular etc.

2SS was worse off but in the same category. It took 9000 replacements in the first half of 1944. It was also split up with one KG left on the line in Russia as late as April 1944, while the rest refit in southern France. Half the division left there for lack of transport, took until mid July to reach the front. These run the range veteran to green, though the green portion would never be high in any subformation.

9SS had seen action before, for all of 3 months in Russia. A few relief actions around Tarnapol the main fighting. Short 1/4 of its allowed NCOs, StuGs mixed with its IV battalion for lack of enough IVs. Panther battalion barely trained before the battle. These are mostly regular, with some veteran, and green Panthers at first.

10SS same combat history as 9SS, but Panther battalion missed the battle entirely, training in Germany. Was lent the corps Tiger battalion in its place. Panzerjaeger battalion also missed the fight while training on Jagds. The IV battalion was half StuGs. This one was also understrength about 1/4 in infantry, as it had not taken replacements for Russia losses. Mostly regular, a few vets.

12SS was entirely new, never saw action before Normandy. Average age was also very low, and the cadre was only half what TOE called for (there just weren't enough sergeants etc in the rapidly expanding late war SS). The Panzerjaegar battalion was still forming and untrained on Jagds at the start of the battle. These are green with a modest mix of regulars thrown in.

17SS was also entirely new, with Normandy its first combat. Was short 1/3 over TOE NCOs. Wasn't a PD, with only 54 AFVs are the start of the battle, mostly StuG and a few Marder. Late in the battle some Jagds sent and committed independently without success. First action of the whole division they performed poorly compared to FJ in the sector, though later fought well. These start green and toughen to regular in the course of the campaign.

Not remotely uniform veterans.

[tankibanki]

Originally posted by civdiv:

zmoney, quit throwing around the Nazi thing, we all know where that leads. I am like 1/36th German, and I like Panthers, that doesn't mean I have a Waffen SS uniform in my closet. Once you even allude to the slur, others begin to assume. Bad combination there.

There's a difference, your Forum name doesn't have HJ in it.

[ October 27, 2006, 07:46 AM: Message edited by: tankibanki ]

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Fußball:

In your defense, some denizens here will tag you as a nazi for liking German equipment. If they do, completely and utterly ignore them.

Tschüß!

Erich

You'll excuse me if I call bullsh*t on this forum myth, I am sure. And if not, I don't give a hoot, and consider this as a needed jog for your and zmoney's memory.

The last person I called a Nazi fanboy happened to have a bad crush on Tigers, that is true. But he deserved that label not for his failure to comprehend stats, but for referring to other human beings (in this case soldiers and officers of the Red Army in World War II) as "little better than animals", while extolling the virtue, education, and honour of the German soldiers. The former part of this is straight out of the "Joseph Goebbels Handbook on how to refer to your political enemies", while the latter part is just a lie. And that's what got him labelled, and eventually banned. The fact that he thought it entirely possible that Tigers killed 12,000 T34s, while all Tiger claims on all fronts run to less than 10,000 has nothing to do with it.

As for the topic at hand, civdiv said all that needs to be said. Make a clear statement of what you are talking about, be sure to have your facts right, and come with a test that is meaningful, not with an anecdote of one combat that got you hacked off. Then there is something to talk about.

All the best

Andreas

[The_Enigma]

Jason:

12SS was entirely new, never saw action before Normandy. Average age was also very low, and the cadre was only half what TOE called for (there just weren't enough sergeants etc in the rapidly expanding late war SS). The Panzerjaegar battalion was still forming and untrained on Jagds at the start of the battle. These are green with a modest mix of regulars thrown in.

Would one not have any Battalion and Company (possibly some platoon leaders) commanders as Vets or Regs if dipicting this division in Normandy?

I have just finished reading Meyers memoirs and he states that the division was built around a pool of Vet WSS officers and NCOs aswell as some vet officers from Heer.

Just a though on ingame dipicition...

[undead reindeer cavalry]

i for one have been called a Nazi fan boy for a good number of times and mostly just because i don't buy into the trendy historical revisionism of "Germans were insane and sucked".

[undead reindeer cavalry]

Originally posted by the_enigma:

I have just finished reading Meyers memoirs and he states that the division was built around a pool of Vet WSS officers and NCOs aswell as some vet officers from Heer.

12th was so short of officers and NCOs that it wasn't considered capable of doing battle, though that was sort of norm for the front, like Jason pointed out.

[The_Enigma]

Originally posted by undead reindeer cavalry:

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

I have just finished reading Meyers memoirs and he states that the division was built around a pool of Vet WSS officers and NCOs aswell as some vet officers from Heer.

12th was so short of officers and NCOs that it wasn't considered capable of doing battle, though that was sort of norm for the front, like Jason pointed out. </font>

[GhostRider3/3]

Well im not discussing my view on what I think needs to be changed for CM anymore, I can live with its current dynamics. Your right I threw something out there without testing it 30 times... maybe 10 or 12... but hey! oh well.

And for those of you that are quick to judge people and call them politcal names... just becuase they either like, or respect a Nations engineering skills, you have serious personal problems. And in Reference to Germany in its years the Nazi's were the minority... I have many freinds overseas now and just because Bush is in office does not make them all Republicans.. Thats all have a great weekend.

Semper FI

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Fußball:

some denizens here will tag you as a nazi for liking German equipment.

This seems fishy to me as well. Who are you referring to?