Historical lie, or a joke..(german 75mmL24)

[Cpt.Kloss]

In CMBB (1941) PzIV's short barrelled 75 can penetrate T34's armour at the distance of over 600m!

If that was true, outcome of the war might have been different.In fact, in 1941 german tanks tried to close as much as possible or get a flank shot.But sadly CMBB again favourizes german equipement..:-(((

Due to better optics PzIV has even better chance in long range firefight. I do not know if one should laugh or crie - it was T34 germans initially wanted to copy.

Russian players!! Playing 1941 games beware of PzIV's L24! (german fallen tank crews must be laughing in their graves!)

German players!! 1941, no need to seek a flank shot. History lies! You can easily engage T34's in long range, frontal firefight!

Ouch...Enough for a while

[Chupacabra]

This has all been gone over before...

1) The most common German tank in 1941 was the Mark II. Try that against a T-34.

2) There's a reason the Soviets uparmored the T-34 after their experiences in 1941.

[Captain Wacky]

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=002258

[ October 21, 2002, 01:00 PM: Message edited by: Captain Wacky ]

[Nippy]

I do not know if one should laugh or crie - it was T34 germans initially wanted to copy.

Try attacking with Heavy German armor (PZ-IV and up) through mud or deep snow. Try the same with the T-34. Then you will see why the Germans wanted to copy the T-34 so much.

[Cpt.Kloss]

Originally posted by Nippy:

I do not know if one should laugh or crie - it was T34 germans initially wanted to copy.

Try attacking with Heavy German armor (PZ-IV and up) through mud or deep snow. Try the same with the T-34. Then you will see why the Germans wanted to copy the T-34 so much.

[Cpt.Kloss]

Originally posted by Cpt.Kloss:

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

I do not know if one should laugh or crie - it was T34 germans initially wanted to copy.

Try attacking with Heavy German armor (PZ-IV and up) through mud or deep snow. Try the same with the T-34. Then you will see why the Germans wanted to copy the T-34 so much.

</font>

[Captain Wacky]

Here is something interesting from the other thread by rune

"I have debated posting this, because some of you don't know me. Those of you that do, may recall I have an uncle who served in a Tiger unit at the end of the war, but did serve in Barbarossa. When this first popped up in another thread, i debated asking him about this, as he is a private man and only talked about the war ONCE since I have been born, and those who have been here a while, recall my posting about the naviswhatchamacallit, and him using it three times. The way this works, is i send a series of questions to my mom, who translates it to German [unfortunately, i neither read nor write it] who then gets the reply and translates it back to English for me [well the best she can, some technical terms are hard for her to translate]. To those who asked before, no, he has not stated what unit he was with...and I will not push the point, the man is 86 and deserving of some peace.

Question:

Was the T34 tank a tank to be feared?

Answer:

Absolutely not. The tank itself had problems and at least in the units I was in, was not feared at all. I have no idea where this myth came from, other then the sheer numbers of [unknown word] that would be sent against you.

Question: Before you served on the Tiger, did you destroy any Russian Tanks?

Answer: Yes. During the beginning of the invasion of Russia I served as a gunner on Panzer IIIs, several versions, the Russians had several early types, none of which were particually effective.

Question: Did you destroy T34s in other then Tigers?

Answer: Yes, the Russian tanks were used piecemeal [not sure of translation] and the few times they were in numbers, were destroyed easily by us, or our Antiaircraft assets. [Rune: I assume he means 88s]

Question: Could a early Panzer destroy a T34 from the front?

Answer: There were many types of T34s. We taught ourselves to shoot at the weak points. However, the gun [casing?] was weak and easily penetrated by the short and long barrel Panzer IIIs. {Rune:I assume 50mm] I have some photos still of some of the kills, taken after the battle.

Last Question: Any long range kills?

Answer: Not sure what you are asking. If you mean in the Tiger, it was a poor crew that could not kill within 3 shots at 2000 meters. There were very few poor crews in the Unit. We were taught from early war to destroy at a distance. We adapted when we found we could not destroy the T34 above 1000 meters. [i assume he meant in the Panzer IIIs]

The rest of the letter has to do with family and cousins. I have not been back to Germany since my tour in the Navy, when I was there in 1977, or was it 1978? Don't remember.

Again, I debated posting it, but I do think it has good information. Believe it, or ignore it, that is up to you. I am lucky he answered at all, as he does not like to speak of the war at all."

Rune

[Captain Wacky]

Originally posted by Cpt.Kloss:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Cpt.Kloss:

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

I do not know if one should laugh or crie - it was T34 germans initially wanted to copy.

Try attacking with Heavy German armor (PZ-IV and up) through mud or deep snow. Try the same with the T-34. Then you will see why the Germans wanted to copy the T-34 so much.

</font>

[Cpt.Kloss]

Originally posted by Captain Wacky:

[QB]http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=002258[/ QB]

thanks for a link -

perhaps front turret hit probability is too high?? -and hits that were considered "lucky" happen too often?

[zukkov]

gentleman, i just did some tests with t34s against pzrIVfs and pzrIIIhs. very interesting results though i didn't do the scientific 10 tests, only a few of each. all were done on a flat, open map in clear, warm weather, no breeze. time was august, 1941, midday.

test 1) mk3s at 1000 meters. i let the ai select all the targets. i used veteran german crews and regular russians. qty: 20 mk3s, 18 t34s/40. after 4 tests at that range, it's obvious the mk3 has much better accuracy and rate of fire. there were times that there were so many t34s being hit that the armor hit details were almost solid white across the screen. i never had much problem reading the german hit details though. after 1 turn of firing however, the t34 did manage to get the better of the mk3, though not by much. casualty rates were as low as 3 and has high as 8, though many other tanks were in various states of damage and/or panicked(or worse) moral states.

test 2) mk3s at 400 meters. all other parameters same as the first test. my thinking going in was that the mk3 would win at this range. with the veteran crews and better rof, i thought this would prove that the t34s were not modeled accurately, at least in my mind. the results stunned me. the t34s one easily all 3 times! never worse than a 2 to 1 kill ratio in every test. i was truly amazed...

test 3) mk4fs at 400 meters. only 16 mk4s because of the higher cost, but kept the 18 t34s. ran only 2 tests, but i saw enough to get the idea. in both tests, all 16 mk4s were destroyed to less than 5 losses each time for the t34s! granted the mk4 was for infantry support, but after reading the above post, i had to try it out.

i didn't do a longer range test on the mk4 and doubt i will. i'm starting to reevaluate my beliefs on the t34 in this game. i think it is most effective at less than 500 meters. the t34 has a much better chance to hit at that range and the enemy's chance of a kill doesn't improve that much over what it was at longer ranges. so perhaps it's not as undermodeled as i thought previously. any comments?

[gunnergoz]

Are we forgetting that the German tanks we speak of here all had 3 man turrets with full-time gunners and loaders? The Russian T-34 commander had to double as gunner and so aquiring targets then laying the gun and firing was a complicated drill, not easy to accomplish under fire.

The 76mm gun on the T-34 was potent at close range but most who have read about it don't give it much capability beyond that.

I have the feeling that a lot of the disgruntlement and disillusionment about the T-34 that I see in the forum, especially from newer posters, may be in part due to a lack of appreciation of the historical limitations of the design, which were only overcome with great loss of manpower in crew fatalities, coupled with massive production quantities of the tank itself.

[Cpt.Kloss]

Originally posted by zukkov:

[QB]gentleman, i just did some tests with t34s...

The fault in a game lies in T34 turret hit probalility (please, repeat test with T34 being all hull down, where all hits come in a turret)

I am very curious, but I fear that hull down does not serve your T34 well in CMBB...

[Captain Wacky]

Originally posted by gunnergoz:

I have the feeling that a lot of the disgruntlement and disillusionment about the T-34 that I see in the forum, especially from newer posters, may be in part due to a lack of appreciation of the historical limitations of the design, which were only overcome with great loss of manpower in crew fatalities, coupled with massive production quantities of the tank itself.

Those were my feelings, too. Recall all the debates when CMBO came out about why the Tiger wasn't as invulnerable super tank they thought it should be.

[rune]

Depends on the model of the T34. The model 40 only had 45mm or armor. The Russians themselves stated the T34 was inferior to the Panzer III and you can see the document on www.battlefield.ru. The later models were up-armored to 65 and 70 mm of armor, because of the problems early war.

In 1943, there are like 4-5 models of the t34/76 alone.

Lets use the table from http://www.panzerworld.net/APT.htm

Remember these are at 30 degree angle. The armor you are hitting might not be.

The 75mmL24 could penetrate 39mm or armor at 30 degrees at 500 meters. Factor in the armor was prone to shattering [also from www.battlefield.ru] so the armor is set to 90%. So realistically, depending on the angle of the strike, the 75mmL24 could take out the early T34s.

Let's look at the long 50mm.

59mm at 500 meters, depending on the ammo. Early T34s are dead meat, later ones with 60mm coould also be destroyed depending on the angle it hit. ALso factor in the armor problems cited, and I think the model 43 T34 was also armored at 90%, then kills are possible up to 700-800 meters i would guess.

These are table results, and do not even factor in brinell hardness, or other factors that rexford explains very well in the other thread.

Remember, CMBB does NOT use tables, but math formulas. The formula matches test results very closely.

As for the KV-1, make sure they are NOT KV-1S, a model where armour was dropped to increase performance. As Madmatt likes to say, the "s" designation stands for Sucks.

Try Iron Roadblock and see how the majority of early war tanks fared against the KV-1.

Rune

[ October 21, 2002, 01:54 PM: Message edited by: rune ]

[Nippy]

Try Iron Roadblock and see how the majority of early war tanks fared against the KV-1.

Try "Katukov Strikes back" as the Germans. You will gain a heathy respect for propery used T-34's.

[offtaskagain]

Originally posted by Nippy:

Try Iron Roadblock and see how the majority of early war tanks fared against the KV-1.

Try "Katukov Strikes back" as the Germans. You will gain a heathy respect for propery used T-34's.

Either that or you will learn to worship the 88.

[Michael Dorosh]

the problem remains that the player has memory enough to retain knowledge that German and Russian tank crews often didn't have. Once a CM player figures out the weaknesses of a T-34 he will always know this, even if playing a scenario in which he portrays a green German crew that had never heard of the T-34. The CM player is more likely to use tactics utilizing his own advantages that in real life that same crewman may very well have been ignorant of.

It's not a problem that can be fixed, short of letting the AI plot turns for both sides.

[Nippy]

Either that or you will learn to worship the 88.

Before or after they are wiped out in a hail of 76.2mm HE fire?

[JunoReactor]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

the problem remains that the player has memory enough to retain knowledge that German and Russian tank crews often didn't have. ...

One would think that Germans would have included "tips on engaging your new worst nightmare: the T-34" in the field manual, or whatever they call training documents in the Reich. But then again, perhaps these things were not very well known?

[xerxes]

Katukov is an interesting scenario. I highly recommend it.

I certainly felt the sting of the T-34 in that one.