A Quick Battle AAR: Shermans vs Pz IVs, Not Your Fathers Combat Mission

[SleeStak]

I don't have the goods to credibly state that tankers did this or did not do this in WWII. I'm guessing they did this when they could and they thought it would help. The tankers all knew how armor penetration worked and I'm sure they would have done everything in their power to maximize their survivability when possible. I'm also sure that they didn't break out a protractor during an ambush and fought or flew based on the circumstances.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Exactly what type of tank would be a large factor, I suspect. It would make far more sense for a Tiger I , with its thick side armor, than a Panther.

[Wrath of Dagon]

? You can do this in CMSF no? I just tested this, always remember to set the face command first.

Not in we-go, he forgets the facing command once you set cover arc (if issued on the same turn).

[Erik Springelkamp]

In WEGO you can, like mentioned before, set the covered arc, and then move in such a way that you end up with the right facing (even by just reversing a tiny bit and moving back)

[Battlefront.com]

I would think that it is a fine and dandy practise in theory but in practise battles may be too fast and hectic to go by the book.

Training is simply a point to diverge from. Be it tank driving or infantry tactics, the actual implementations in the field are usually not the same. Sometimes they are better, sometimes they are just more realistic. I'm sure you guys who went through Iraq or Afghanistan could talk for ages about the difference between training and practice

Often you hear guys with military experience say this about field manual authors... "have these guys ever tried to actually do this stuff while on 4 hours sleep, bad chow, and a sore back?".

Sure, in long range engagements this angling of armour would probably get done a lot. But in a close range combat where one side or both stumbled in to the other I reckon priority was given to getting a shot off and being ready to back out of trouble.

That's it in a nutshell, I think. At the very least this is faaaaaaar more likely to be how the engagements actually played out vs. what the training manual specifies.

Steve

[Pandur]

why is everyone hung up on specifics? simply say it will never work or its not on the list to plan to allow to set hull facing with "face" command and turret facing with cover arc.

its not about tank X in battle Y here, its about the possibility to set the hull facing independent from the turret without any movement command or 60 second break and in a way it "sticks", means the TAC AI wont fiddle with either facing by itself for at least one turn.

thats a most simple thing to ask for...

[Bil Hardenberger]

MINUTE 8

1st Platoon

Now that 2nd Platoon is coming on line, I have decided to pull the HQ Tank out of the line this turn.

Tank 1 had an encounter with the second M4A3 this turn (remember the other M4A3 was engaged and repelled by the HQ element tanks over the last two turns). He fired and hit it three times (to no noticeable effect again, other than forcing it to withdraw), but I would like you to examine the screenshots below… as the Sherman reverses out of trouble, popping smoke (which they seem to have liberal amounts of) the smoke screen builds… slowly the tank is obscured from view, and finally when the tank looks like it is gone from view Tank 1 pumps one more round through the smoke and into its front hull. Immediately after this hit Tank 1 loses LOS to it.

I thought this was interesting because there had been some talk recently about firing into smoke, well in this sequence’s middle image you can see the M4A3 (almost lost to view) barely through the smoke, Tank 1 takes one last shot (bottom pic). This was, as I said, the third hit this turn on the Sherman.

Granted this isn’t exactly what some people want, firing into smoke after a unit loses sight of another… but I think it’s a realistic approximation of what the game can do in just that circumstance.

This is the only action this turn.

2nd Platoon

2nd Platoon is almost online now and by the end of the turn actually has some eyes on AA2.

In this next series of images I wanted to show you the tree toggle in action. In the top image there are actually four tanks, to examine them you can either turn the trees off completely, which to me loses some situational awareness, or you can just toggle on tree trunks (bottom image).

In a radius from where the game camera is located the trees will be shown as trunks only, while trees in the distance are still complete. This is my favorite mode when commanding units in woods.

CMBN also has heavy woods, or woods that are impassable to vehicles, this is denoted by a change of ground cover at these locations:

Next: Minute 9

[WineCape]

Interesting. I wonder how these AFV's will do at 400m distance, head on, both stationery, not hull down.

[ShakyJake]

Redken and Rocky Balboa, thanks for posting that document. I remember those butterfly diagrams, though what I'd seen was in English and likely translated from that, or another similar to that one. Realistically, though, it's one thing for an engineer like me to sit back and do number crunching on angles and effective resistances, and quite another for a man freshly drawn into the army in the early 40's and likely with considerably less education trying to decide how best to fight his tank. That training manual at least shows that there was an effort to get this knowledge to the crewmembers, from there it's anyone's guess. In this case, the sweet spots shown on the diagram work particularly well because the Tiger had such strong side armor relative to most other tanks. It might not have been considered a particularly good idea to try it with the thin-skinned PzKpfw IV's and Panthers.

Less numbers, more AAR!

[Bil Hardenberger]

MINUTE 9

Not a lot occurred during this turn; a 2nd Platoon tank sprayed the infantry contact in the woods with some MG fire. They reported seeing a two man team run off back into the woods at the end of the turn.

The only tank from the Sherman Platoon that is still visible is the M4A3(76)W, which has been sitting in the open for a couple of minutes now. I’m not sure exactly what Warren is up to with that tank. So there are four Shermans unaccounted for; two M4A3s (which I know their locations I think, I just can’t see them), and two M4A1s. I have also lost all sight of the remaining two M-10s (one of which I have never seen).

This pic is from the end of the ninth minute:

Trust me, its going to get exciting again real soon, so hang in there!

Next: Minute 10

[zukkov]

warren, you're losing you edge. quick, call in a carpet bombing raid! 8th air force was on the artillery net, right?

[Field Marshal Blücher]

warren, you're losing you edge. quick, call in a carpet bombing raid! 8th air force was on the artillery net, right?

Wait, whose side are you on? Based on the Eighth AF's track record at CAS, Bil probably wished Warren had called the flyboys in.

[gunnersman]

MINUTE 8

1st Platoon

Now that 2nd Platoon is coming on line, I have decided to pull the HQ Tank out of the line this turn.

Tank 1 had an encounter with the second M4A3 this turn (remember the other M4A3 was engaged and repelled by the HQ element tanks over the last two turns). He fired and hit it three times (to no noticeable effect again, other than forcing it to withdraw), but I would like you to examine the screenshots below… as the Sherman reverses out of trouble, popping smoke (which they seem to have liberal amounts of) the smoke screen builds… slowly the tank is obscured from view, and finally when the tank looks like it is gone from view Tank 1 pumps one more round through the smoke and into its front hull. Immediately after this hit Tank 1 loses LOS to it.

I thought this was interesting because there had been some talk recently about firing into smoke, well in this sequence’s middle image you can see the M4A3 (almost lost to view) barely through the smoke, Tank 1 takes one last shot (bottom pic). This was, as I said, the third hit this turn on the Sherman.

Granted this isn’t exactly what some people want, firing into smoke after a unit loses sight of another… but I think it’s a realistic approximation of what the game can do in just that circumstance.

This is the only action this turn.

2nd Platoon

:eek:

Well slap my ass and call me Judy.

[The_Capt]

warren, you're losing you edge. quick, call in a carpet bombing raid! 8th air force was on the artillery net, right?

Where the hell were you a couple weeks ago?

Yup, in hindsight these turns are where I clearly lost the bubble. That one tank sticking out on the far left had taken a lot of hits, had a crew cas so I was tried to pull him back and then have him cover as the 76 and other M4A3 with M10 push up the middle.

Keep in mind I had another M4 and an M10 covering the the right flank, my infantry were moving up AND I thought Bil had only 3-4 left. But I totally agree that stalled feeling was settling in and the intiative was shifting even if I totally couldn't see it yet.

[Michael Emrys]

So per my question from earlier today: Did the TC do this because they were saying to themselves "I've got Xmm of frontal armor and that enemy tank over there with its Ymm gun can penetrate Zmm of armor from a range of YYm with an armor angle of ZZdegrees"? Or was this practice of offset just basic doctrine, largely independent of the specific details of the situation?

All the calculations were done beforehand and reduced to easily learned and recalled rules of thumb, so no calculations were needed to be done in the heat of battle. This practice was then inculcated as part of training.

Were those rules of thumb always followed? Seems doubtful to me for reasons given up thread. But the Germans at least followed them some of the time. How do I know this? Because I have read accounts by Allied tankers who fought them in North Africa who mention this. IMO NA would have been a place where this would have been practiced regularly because you could see the enemy coming a good ways off and had adequate time to get set up in most tank vs. tank engagements. Don't forget, most of the time there German tanks had a slight range advantage, so they could choose their ground and get set up while it was the enemy who needed to close with them to get effective shots.

As to the question as to which tank do you orient yourself to, the answer is the closest one. That's the one that presents the greatest potential threat. If you were in serious danger of being flanked by unengaged multiple threats, it was time you got out of there anyway.

I do not know of any non-German tankers who practiced this tactic. Every time I have encountered it mentioned in print, it is always identified as a specifically German tactic. But it is entirely possible that some Allied tankers might have twigged to the tactic, recognized its advantages and put it into practice. In any event, I doubt that it would have been especially useful once the fighting shifted to Italy and the ETO. It would have still been effective in the flatter, more open parts of the USSR.

Michael

[DaveyJJ]

:eek:

Well slap my ass and call me Judy.

Nope, no way, gunnersman.

[gunnersman]

Nope, no way, gunnersman.

That's a good thing. Otherwise you would have had me worried!

[MikeyD]

But it is entirely possible that some Allied tankers might have twigged to the tactic, recognized its advantages and...

I get the impression that the high armor casualty rate demoralized the U.S. tankers. They thought every gun behind every haystack was an 88. So any textbook instructing them to angle their hull slightly to absorb AT hits would've been seen as something of a cruel joke. That's not to say it wouldn't have worked but when your life's on the line perception is reality.

[Bil Hardenberger]

MINUTE 10 Part 1

This is a pivotal turn, so let’s get right into it:

1st Platoon

Tank 1, sitting calmly in its hide position, is hunting.

Patiently he waits for his prey, in this case an M4A3 Sherman, to come back into his sights. Two minutes ago he drilled three rounds into the beast’s thick hide before it scampered out of view. Now it slowly lumbers forward again; only this time, the fourth shot to hit it in three minutes stops it in its tracks, and while the crew scampers out of the striken tank the fifth hit sets it ablaze.

“Horrido!”, he cries, softly adding “so this gun does work!”

Believe me when I say that there was much rejoicing at this result!

Company HQ Element

From their blocking position the two tanks from the Company HQ element wait for another Sherman to show itself. They know an M4A3 is out there, and they think they know where it is. It isn’t long before HQ 1 catches sight of the Sherman and within seconds puts a round into its hull.

Congratulations quickly sound over the Company radio net.

At this point I sense the wind starting to turn.

Next: Minute 10 Part 2, 2nd Platoon

[LongLeftFlank]

What's the range? I get the sense that at this point you've come close enough together that most hits by either side will be fatal, so (a) numbers ( HD position and © first shot will decide the battle.

[Bil Hardenberger]

Sorry, I meant to add those...

Tank 1's kill was at 369m

HQ 1's kill was at 543m

[Bil Hardenberger]

I will post the other half of minute 10 tomorrow at some point.

[Bil Hardenberger]

What's the range? I get the sense that at this point you've come close enough together that most hits by either side will be fatal, so (a) numbers ( HD position and © first shot will decide the battle.

As a side note... numbers were on Warren's side on this flank... I have 3 tanks to his 5 or so..

I am HD and that helped for sure I feel.

I haven't received any return fire from any of these Shermans for a long while.. that tells me that his tanks can't locate mine. The excellent hulldown positions and Tank 1's position behind the multiple treelines I feel made it hard for Warren's tanks, moving or stationary, to spot my panzers.

[Battlefront.com]

This reminds me of people who play various Villers Bocage scenarios and are disappointed when they lose "Wittmann" in the first engagement. "WHAT?!?! No way, dude, I should have rocked their world AND walked away cold as a Gurkensalat. This game is broken!". And what I mean by that is sometimes Lady Luck plays favorites in a battle and that produces some rather extraordinary results. Other times Lady Luck smiles on someone for a little while, grows bored, and then walks away. Wittmann had Lady Luck over his shoulder for the whole battle, Warren had Lady Luck only for the first 9 minutes of a battle that definitely wasn't 9 minutes long

As we look at this now we see that Bil put some of his tanks in really good positions (the one that was caught going cross field obviously wasn't one of them!). Warren got lucky for a little while with his M4A3s and had a mixed bag with the others (one M-10 gonzo, but quite a few burned up PzIVs). Now at Turn 10 it's clear two things have happened:

1. Warren's lucky streak has snapped

2. The battle isn't over yet

Steve

[zukkov]

it just occurred to me how to tell when a sherman is knocked out. they're burning. didn't the germans call them ronsons cuz they burned every time?