Darkmath Posted March 19, 2005 Share Posted March 19, 2005 Reco. Vehicule Pumas PSW 233 appeared frequently in Western Front and Eastern Front. So,IMO,it is unlikely that they are away from Italian Front. Why they did not include them? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted March 19, 2005 Share Posted March 19, 2005 King Tigers also appeared frequently in the Western and Eastern fronts, in fact in greater numbers than Pumas, and you don't see any in CMAK either. Neither one saw any action in the Italian theater. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 Or North Africa either. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 They only made 101 Pumas. None were in the Med theaters. -dale 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkmath Posted March 20, 2005 Author Share Posted March 20, 2005 In CMBO scenarios , I have encountered more Pumas than Tiger II!!! The high fuel comsuption of KTs can explain their rarity. But KTs production is about 4.5 times the Pumas prod! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soddball Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 Rarity is not included in CM:BO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Which is why it was included in CMBB and CMAK The Germans had very little armor in Italy compared to either Western or Easter Fronts. The terrain was so good for infantry, why waste the armor there? One interesting "rarity" exception in Italy was the Elephant. Never seen on the Western Front and only seen on the Eastern Front for a tiny amount of time. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Probably because someone figured it was nicer to do engine repairs while standing in the sun, sipping Chianti and flirting with Grazia who just brought you some pasta Bolgnese, instead of doing engine repairs in knee-deep mud, driving sleet, and eating Borschtsch served by Olga. Makes sense to me. Not that there is anything wrong with Borschtsch, if you lost your tastebuds already. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Originally posted by Andreas: Not that there is anything wrong with Borschtsch, if you lost your tastebuds already. Be careful. Berli might be listening. :eek: Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: Which is why it was included in CMBB and CMAK The Germans had very little armor in Italy compared to either Western or Easter Fronts. The terrain was so good for infantry, why waste the armor there? One interesting "rarity" exception in Italy was the Elephant. Never seen on the Western Front and only seen on the Eastern Front for a tiny amount of time. Steve Yea, not much room to move around when going up the boot, also not much to defend. Anyone know how much armor the Germans actually fielded and lost in the Italian campaigns? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 There were actually quite a few mobile divisions in Italy, particularly early on. They tried major armor counterattacks to crush the Salerno landing, and later to reduce Anzio (which instead just successfully contained it). The PzGdr divisions were used there more heavily than the PDs proper, however. The mobile divisions included - PD Goering, 16th PD, 26th PD, 3rd Pz Gdr, 15th PzGdr, 29th PzGdr, 90th PzGdr, and 16th SS PzGdr. 16th PD was in the sector of the Salerno landings and counterattack the same day. Reduced, it was also there for the major counterattack which came a bit later, after other formations had time to arrive. The Salerno counterattack proper included 16th PD, 26th PD, 3rd PzGdr, 15th PzGdr. PD Goreirng was in theater, but defending in the toe against the Brits. Anzio included PD Goering, 26th PD, 3rd PzGdr, 29th PzGdr, and 16th SS PzGdr. 15th PzGdr fought in the south at the Cassino line (US sector) in the same period. Later, 3rd and 15th PzGdr were withdrawn to Lorraine to stop Patton, after the fall of France. PD Goering was sent to Poland after Bagration. At the Appenines line the Germans still had 26th PD, 29th PzGdr, 16th SS, and the 90th PzGdr. 16th SS was sent to Hungary in February 1945. Other major specialist forces for the Germans in Italy were the 1st FJ corps including 1 FJ and 4 FJ divisions, and a mountain corps that had (at various times) 5th, 8th, and 57th GBJ divisions. There were also a dozen or so infantry divisions. Total German losses in Italy were on the order of 400k, about half of them missing (PW or KIA but unrecovered etc). Basically they held Italy with a force stiffened or led by high quality infantry and Pz Gdrs. But 8 mobile divisions, even on a rotated basis with 4-6 of them at a time present, was not a small commitment, and they launched corps and larger mobile force counterattacks on two occasions, and generally had mobile division "linebackers" to react to Allied attacks, deliver local counterattacks, etc. [ March 21, 2005, 08:11 AM: Message edited by: JasonC ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 cool, thanks for the info. I didn't realize the extent of their deployment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Originally posted by JasonC: a mountain corps that had (at various times) 5th, 8th, and 57th GBJ divisions. T The 8. and 157. Gebirgsdivision (there was no 57.) are the same unit. The 157. was raised in Jan 44 from 157. Reserve Infanteriedivision and renamed 8. Gebirgsdivision in 1945. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 I am led to believe that 1 SS PD was in Italy for a bit in 1943 also. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Jentz has some info on German tank strength in Italy at various dates, that is total strength, half it for operational if you feel generous : 21. January 1944 Pz III 105 (14 Fl; 46 50L60; 45 75L24) Pz IV 171 (11kz; 160lg) Tiger 8 PzBef 6 Stug 138 Total 428 15 March 45: Stug 67 IVlg 131 Flakpz 21 Panther 26 Tiger 36 Total 281 On 31st December on the eastern front: Total 2,053 (operational 1,043) On 31st May 1,370 total plus 176 Stugs. 15th March 45 Stug 545 IVlg 603 PzIV/70 357 Flakpz 97 Panther 776 Tiger 212 Total 2,590 On 10th June 1944 in the west (excl. Italy) Pz III 39 Pz IV 758 Pz V 655 Tiger 102 Stug 158 Captured 179 Total 1,891 On 31st May 1,355 (excl. Stugs) 15th March 45 Stug 126 IVlg 59 PzIV/70 77 Flakpz 41 Panther 152 Tiger 28 Total 483 I could not find the numbers for the Ersatzheer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Thanks for the BGJ correction Andreas, and for the tank figures. The most relevant dates for German AFV strength in the theater would be September 11 1943 (day before the Salerno counterattack) and 3 February 1944 (day before the Anzio counterattack). Obviously their strength at other times is also interesting, particularly if near the dates of Allied offensives. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 Yes, I didn't mean to imply that the German investment in Italy was small. It was by no means that. However, as I said... compared to the other fronts it was very light on armor. Especially Panzers vs. Assault Artillery (StuGs). StuGs were better suited to the kind of defensive battles that were fought there anyway, so operationally there was probably less of a difference than there might otherwise have been. 1st SS was sent to Italy as a kneejerk reaction. They did some questionable security operations and then were redeployed without entering into combat with the Allies. Back to the question about Pumas... there were very few to begin with and their deployment was restricted (in theory, at least) to the Aufklärungs battalions of full Panzer divisions. Since most of the armor in Italy came in the form of PzGren divisions and independent armor units, the Puma obviously should not have been in theater. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: 1st SS was sent to Italy as a kneejerk reaction. They did some questionable security operations and then were redeployed without entering into combat with the Allies. I found this: July 1943 when the Italian Government disposed of Bennito Mussolini ,Hitler orders the LSSAH to Italy but leaves its Tanks behind for the 2nd and 3rd SS Divisions. The Division disarms Italian troops in the Po valley and is involved in some minor skirmishes and is then transferred to the Balkans and then back to Russia. It appears they didn't even bring their panzers with them! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 From the useless trivia department: The Puma in CMBO has the distinction of being the first vehicle in CM to have fired a shot in anger. The Alpha battle 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.