Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Get all the latest news on Slitherine.

Moderator: Slitherine Core

Post Reply
kondi754
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3050
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:52 am

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by kondi754 » Wed Feb 06, 2019 12:53 pm

Gomez_Adams wrote:
Wed Feb 06, 2019 12:34 pm
funat wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:30 pm
Also - it's not "Soviet propaganda" that claimed Sherman was bad - it was American and British soldiers.
Absolutely correct.

Soviet propaganda talked about every tank from Lend-Lease supplies that it is bad and that the capitalists send specially defective equipment.
The truth is that soldiers of absolutely all armies complained, complain and will complain about their equipment
Believe me, Sherman at T-34 was like a Mercedes next to Moskvitch. The combat conditions were incomparably better in the American tank but the Soviet soldiers were afraid to complain, because they were threatened with bullets in their heads or a deportation to the Gulag. :twisted:
As for Sherman's self-ignition, yes there have been such cases but it has been quickly removed.
The engine of Tiger I was much more exposed to something like that. Besides, there is even the latest hypothesis about the death of Wittmann, which connects it to the self-ignition of the engine.
Last edited by kondi754 on Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

kondi754
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3050
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:52 am

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by kondi754 » Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:04 pm

Everything that has been said here is true and I do not argue with it at all.
But still, Sherman was the best tank of World War II because its main competitors were even worse.

terminator
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3070
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:48 pm

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by terminator » Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:06 pm

kondi754 wrote:
Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:04 pm
Everything that has been said here is true and I do not argue with it at all.
But still, Sherman was the best tank of World War II because its main competitors were even worse.
There’s a different model of Sherman tank, which model are you talking about ?

This one :?:

FURY REVIEW.jpg
FURY REVIEW.jpg (171.07 KiB) Viewed 4515 times

kondi754
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3050
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:52 am

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by kondi754 » Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:23 pm

I think that early Sherman models were better than T-34/76 mod.42/43 or PzKfw IIIJ/1 or PzKfw IVF2
If I had to choose a specific model, the best was so-called "easy eight" or M4A3E8(76)HVSS
Yes, "the Fury" tank was an "easy eight" 8) :mrgreen:
Attachments
m4a3e8-sherman-easy-eight-a-paper-doll-3d-model-294925-1170x1170.jpg
m4a3e8-sherman-easy-eight-a-paper-doll-3d-model-294925-1170x1170.jpg (162.25 KiB) Viewed 4506 times
m4a3e8-sherman-easy-eight-a-paper-doll-3d-model-294922-1170x1170.jpg
m4a3e8-sherman-easy-eight-a-paper-doll-3d-model-294922-1170x1170.jpg (186.8 KiB) Viewed 4506 times

JaM2013
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 542
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:02 pm

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by JaM2013 » Wed Feb 06, 2019 2:17 pm

i think the biggest misconception about tank flamability is the commonly mentioned thing about Sherman being easy to burn... Truth is, early Shermans had around 85% probability to catch fire when penetrated, which was practically very similar to every other tank in service during WW2... only late war Shermans got this down to 10-15% with introduction of Wet Stowage.. at that point, Shermans were the safest tanks of WW2..
Image

zakblood
Most Active User 2017
Most Active User 2017
Posts: 15445
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 6:44 pm

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by zakblood » Wed Feb 06, 2019 2:24 pm

i think the biggest misconception about anything to do with Tanks even matters, it's number which win wars, only better ones win battles.
The Soviet Union began and ended the war with more tanks than the rest of the world combined (18,000–22,000)
Axis:

Germany - 5562 Panzer I and II, 1306 artillery vehicles and tank hunters derivative from those tanks, 33.414 medium tanks (Panzer III, IV, V Panther and Stug, that was build on the chassis of Panzer III and IV), 2039 heavy tanks (Nbfz V, Tiger I and II, Maus), 3377 tank destroyers, 466 AA flakpanzers, 57 other full tracked fighting vehicles


Total: 55.335 tanks, tank destroyerss and artillery vehicles
In total, the Axis fielded somewhere near 71.268 tanks during WW2
The Allies fielded the astonishing number of 237.707 tanks during the war, 347.707 if we consider the Bren Carriers that were barely tanks and had only an MG, but still

In total, more or less 308.975 tanks (or again, 418.975 if we consider that Bren Carrier production) were used during the war by every nation involved. Keep in mind that lots of American tanks were shipped in Soviet Union, China, UK and to other Allied countries. The Soviet Union instead used every single tank they had on the Eastern front and, in the last stage of war, against an already weakened Japan. The disparity of forces is stunning and even tough that German tanks were usually better than the Allied ones and that the best tanks that the Allies fielded (like the Pershing and the JS2) didn’t arrive in Europe until 1945, I can totally see why Germany lost the war, in the end

kondi754
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3050
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:52 am

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by kondi754 » Wed Feb 06, 2019 5:56 pm

I'm trying to explain that the German tanks were better than the Allies only on paper. And this is not all the truth because, as the war has shown, German concept of using tanks was wrong.
Tigers and Panthers were the best stationary anti-tank bunkers, but not tanks, because their chassis was useless, because their size and weight effectively limited their usefulness on the battlefield only to such defensive situations.
I can agree with the statement that a larger number of Allied tanks (mainly US) won the war, but I can't agree that better German tanks win battles and lose the war because there were fewer of them than opponents' tanks.
They won the battles because from autumn 1943 until the end of the war, the Germans were in defensive, so Tigers and Panthers didn't have to move around the battlefield, just like during the attack. Being in constant defense, they could better use their armor and cannon, and the drive system wasn't so important.
However, when the Germans attacked as in the Ardennes, it turned out that 30-40% functioning tanks remained very fast.
The composition of Schwere-Panzer Abteilung (an independent battalion of heavy tanks) has been specially designed for 45 vehicles, so that at least 10-15 of them could run all the time, when the rest were in repair
The thing is, if the situation reversed and the Allied armies went to defense, the German army wouldn't win the war anyway, because German tanks wouldn't be able to ride 100km on tracks :twisted:

zakblood
Most Active User 2017
Most Active User 2017
Posts: 15445
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 6:44 pm

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by zakblood » Wed Feb 06, 2019 6:39 pm

paper also doesn't win wars, unless it's of the printed money type, which again the allies not only printed more of, but have vast sums of gold wealth in reserve, something again the axis didn't have, so no to little fuel, no money in the end or most of the way through the war and far behind the resources in well everything, so apart from bravery etc, there was always going to loose, no matter what wonder weapons they had, or how much better on paper there tanks were, as tbh they did have much better weapons is many ways, but overall the numbers just didn't count for losses against what the other side could keep on bringing to bare, week in and week and month out, air, sea or land, made no difference, in the numbers games

PeteMitchell_2
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1263
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2018 1:18 pm

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by PeteMitchell_2 » Wed Feb 06, 2019 6:46 pm

kondi754 wrote:
Wed Feb 06, 2019 5:56 pm
I'm trying to explain that the German tanks were better than the Allies only on paper. And this is not all the truth because, as the war has shown, German concept of using tanks was wrong.
Tigers and Panthers were the best stationary anti-tank bunkers, but not tanks, because their chassis was useless, because their size and weight effectively limited their usefulness on the battlefield only to such defensive situations.
I can agree with the statement that a larger number of Allied tanks (mainly US) won the war, but I can't agree that better German tanks win battles and lose the war because there were fewer of them than opponents' tanks.
They won the battles because from autumn 1943 until the end of the war, the Germans were in defensive, so Tigers and Panthers didn't have to move around the battlefield, just like during the attack. Being in constant defense, they could better use their armor and cannon, and the drive system wasn't so important.
However, when the Germans attacked as in the Ardennes, it turned out that 30-40% functioning tanks remained very fast.
The composition of Schwere-Panzer Abteilung (an independent battalion of heavy tanks) has been specially designed for 45 vehicles, so that at least 10-15 of them could run all the time, when the rest were in repair
The thing is, if the situation reversed and the Allied armies went to defense, the German army wouldn't win the war anyway, because German tanks wouldn't be able to ride 100km on tracks :twisted:
Actually, I did not want to reply to this “off-topic” anymore. However, while I agree with some of your statements, I still don’t (and most likely won’t) agree to some others but I will leave it to this:
1. after 1942, the Germans were outnumbered 4:1 (or more) on (almost) anything you can think of… (as zakblood mentioned above)
2. the above tank/war discussion (for various reasons and most likely without bad intentions) simplifies too many things that weren’t as straightforward in reality… but IMHO there is also no real point diving into these topics via a forum as many topics are just too complex to resolve/clarify them in a few sentences…

However, more importantly, from a PzC (I or II) perspective, it would be very interesting if the developers could study/analyze deducter’s unit revision mod (file re-attached with this post) maybe not the latest version, not sure: http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtop ... 47&t=40391

Deducter’s intention was
to make the units more balanced, historically accurate, and interesting, so that all units can serve a useful role in the player’s core.
His mod also has a very interesting pdf manual explaining the rationale behind his adjustments (i.e. to make them more historically correct), as an example I am quoting a few tank sections below. Also, McGuba and Uhu made some revisions for the Battlefield Europe mod and others, so for improving the behavior of units in PzC (I or II) it might be worth looking at their work, maybe even worth contacting them (i.e. Deducter, McGuba, Uhu) as well.
From deducter’s pdf:

8. M4 Sherman
The M4 Sherman is the primary American tank and the mainstay of Allied armored forces. There are many variants of this tank. The M4 (Sherman I) is equipped with a 75 mm gun that is highly effective against soft targets. It is also slightly more effective against enemy tanks than the M3 Lee. Its armor is good for 1942, but by 1943 it does not provide sufficient protection against the standard German 7.5 cm L/43 and L/48 guns. Its firepower is remedied in part with the introduction of better armor-piercing (AP) rounds as the war progressed.
The M4A1 has a cast hull, and while this makes it cheaper to produce, its defenses are slightly worse than the welded hulls of the M4, M4A2, and M4A3.
The M4A3 has a superior engine than the M4A1 and a welded hull.

8. Sherman Firefly
The Sherman Firefly is a M4 tank converted by the British to house the powerful QF 17-pounder. It has enough firepower to take on any contemporary German tank, including the Tiger and Panther. While the 17-pounder is potent against hard targets, it is less effective against soft targets. Also, the Firefly’s defenses are no better than that of the average Sherman.

8. Tiger I
The Tiger I is an extremely tough tank equipped with a powerful 88 mm gun. It can engage any Soviet or Allied AFV with good results.
However, it has serious mechanic troubles, especially in the snow or mud. A long drive often proved more fatal to a Tiger than combat. Mechanical reliability increases in 1944. It is also extremely expensive to produce.
The Tiger I is amazing on defense. It can reliably hold onto most positions and only has to worry about the most powerful Allied and Soviet AFVs, such as the IS-2 and Sherman Firefly.

4. T-34
The T-34 is one of the most famous tanks of all times. Counting all of its variants, it is the most produced tank of the Second World War. At the start of Barbarossa, this tank has much better armor and firepower than anything the Germans fielded. In 1941, they are very resistant to attacks by most German tank and anti-tank guns, while their 76.2 mm gun is sufficient to penetrate the armor of all German AFVs. It outclasses all German tanks until Panzer IVs with long-barreled 7.5 cm guns are introduced in 1942. Furthermore, the Soviets field this tank in ever-increasing quantities.
The T-34/40 has serious mechanical troubles, which is represented by its low fuel and ammo. Historically, many of the early model T-34s broke down while being driven to the battlefield. On the other hand, the T-34/41 has superior fuel/ammo compared with most German tanks. It also has a more powerful 76 mm gun than the earlier T-34/40.
In 1941, the T-34 has an IN penalty (-2). This represents deficiencies such as the lack of radios, poor turret layout, and the horrendous tactical doctrine of the Red Army’s tanks in this year.
Attachments
Deducter GC Unit Revision Mod.zip
(891.84 KiB) Downloaded 39 times

kondi754
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3050
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:52 am

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by kondi754 » Wed Feb 06, 2019 8:39 pm

@Zakblood
So it's impossible to separate the discussion on the quality of tanks from the quality of economies (or strictly, the amount of money ...)
Since the US economy was the most powerful in the world, and therefore an American model of management of armaments production, the American concept of a medium tank and the way of its combat use was simply the best :wink:

@Pete
Of course, I agree with you that I'm simplifying some things very much, but there is no possibility here for a scientific debate in this forum
In addition, my level of English skills is too weak for this :mrgreen:

zakblood
Most Active User 2017
Most Active User 2017
Posts: 15445
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 6:44 pm

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by zakblood » Wed Feb 06, 2019 8:56 pm

and i'm not clever enough to debate with either of you tbh, as while i can test, my history knowledge is less than both of you and i only post some minor points i find when searching for facts and details etc on given events of the past, none which maybe 100% correct either as in the end, who really knows

kondi754
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3050
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:52 am

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by kondi754 » Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:31 pm

Zak, I'm also not a specialist
I'm big enthusiast of US Army and especially Sherman tank (look at "easy eight", it's beautiful :D , one day I will buy such a tank 8) )
I read everything about this topic what falls into my hands, it's all

Kerensky
Content Designer
Content Designer
Posts: 5427
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:12 am

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by Kerensky » Thu Feb 07, 2019 12:49 am

kondi754 wrote:
Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:31 pm
I'm big enthusiast of US Army and especially Sherman tank (look at "easy eight", it's beautiful :D , one day I will buy such a tank 8) )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yt7xexSbfI

Looks like it'll cost you 600k and watch out if you live somewhere with an HOA. :mrgreen:
Or not, I mean he's right when he says they can 'try' to tow it... :lol:

AndreyBacerage
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 12:35 am

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by AndreyBacerage » Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:19 am

Its an really interesting discussion here - but please note the US army had only a 4% part of all WW2 battles in Europe - not worth mentioning that you push the Sherman here over the T-34 and Panthers and Tigers without any references.
Some really weary german divisions kick the US full equipped units months of 1944 in their butts.

funat
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri May 06, 2016 9:54 am

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by funat » Thu Feb 07, 2019 8:39 am

Exactly. Kondi is trying to defend Sherman based on overall statistics - it's like calculating living standard using nominal GDP. It just does not work that way. What counts is tank vs tank, alone in the field - same era, similar crew training. Not some better maintenance, more radios, better tactics etc. US Army had absolute air, intelligence, logistics, numbers, morale - and ALL other advantages you can think of. And STILL - they were suffering close to 1 to 1 ratio destroyed tanks in a LOT of encounters. Compare that to 1991./2003. where you have the similar situation - but on one side is Abrams and on the other T72. US Army has almost no losses. I don't need some whitewashing videos to prove it - statistics alone is enough.

kondi754
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3050
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:52 am

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by kondi754 » Thu Feb 07, 2019 9:22 am

AndreyBacerage wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:19 am
Its an really interesting discussion here - but please note the US army had only a 4% part of all WW2 battles in Europe - not worth mentioning that you push the Sherman here over the T-34 and Panthers and Tigers without any references.
Some really weary german divisions kick the US full equipped units months of 1944 in their butts.
And again I can't agree, because the tired German panzer divisions had serious problems to kick off even the US infantry division, which always had one tank battalion (50 vehicles) and a whole lot of anti-tank equipment. Please give me a specific example when some US armored division was destroyed by German tanks in 1944

@Funat
Therefore, please suggest how we should compare different tanks of World War II
How do you see this? What parameters should we take into account and which factors should we reject to be fair?
Write, please, and I will make a comparison according to your scheme.

zakblood
Most Active User 2017
Most Active User 2017
Posts: 15445
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 6:44 pm

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by zakblood » Thu Feb 07, 2019 9:41 am

for me, throw alot into the mix before any tank can be crowned best tank in WW2, as there's alot to go into before you even get close,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_Eu ... _Challenge

tank, 1st

crew 2nd

er nope, crew first, tank 2nd

then there's training and maintenance, eg supply train etc

think ammo, think fuel, think doctrine, and most of all think intelligence and recon / communication etc as it's as relevant today as it was back then.

air power, logistics, area and total war plan also all come into play, force ratio, force integrity plus force training, and least of all unit integrity, backup, R&R rota, food prep and quality eg morale.

it's always been the same, units which train, fight and eat, sleep together bond and those with higher morale, better training, better command and leadership can and have at times beat superior numbers time and time again.

so no, not one factor ever comes into play, as having the best tank in the world means little if it's not backed up with most of what's mentioned above.

PeteMitchell_2
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1263
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2018 1:18 pm

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by PeteMitchell_2 » Thu Feb 07, 2019 9:44 am

zakblood wrote:
Wed Feb 06, 2019 8:56 pm
as in the end, who really knows
Agreed... and I am very glad none of us had to live through these horrors.

zakblood
Most Active User 2017
Most Active User 2017
Posts: 15445
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 6:44 pm

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by zakblood » Thu Feb 07, 2019 9:55 am

yes as i'd be no good in battle, spend 12 to 16 hours a day in my chair, so would have to be a sitting down job

kondi754
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3050
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:52 am

Re: Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #8

Post by kondi754 » Thu Feb 07, 2019 11:36 am

Kerensky wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 12:49 am
kondi754 wrote:
Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:31 pm
I'm big enthusiast of US Army and especially Sherman tank (look at "easy eight", it's beautiful :D , one day I will buy such a tank 8) )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yt7xexSbfI

Looks like it'll cost you 600k and watch out if you live somewhere with an HOA. :mrgreen:
Or not, I mean he's right when he says they can 'try' to tow it... :lol:
yes, I used to watch the Discovery channel and a collector bought M4A2 (fully operational) for 650,000 dollars (I still have to save a little, I don't have that amount yet :wink: )
he had to fly abroad for business, so he informed his wife he had a gift for her and she had to be at home to pick up the shipment, imagine her face as she saw Sherman in front of the gate of their estate :mrgreen:

Post Reply

Return to “News & Announcements”