DLC 1940 Prediction Forum Game

[raider45]

Hi,

I choose;

5c
2a
5a

[kondi754]

Treat it as a large 'Tank-Battle!'... as a near-'Kursk' epic style conflict!.

Maybe I knew of it in some other sense?... but not as 'The Battle Of Hannut'.

It was most certainly not a Kursk-esque affair, I assure you.

No set up of Allied defenses in depth, nothing of that sort. The French were rushing into Belgium as reinforcements.

I think the battle just gets overlooked because of the main drama always focused on Sedan and the immediate aftermath of that. It would certainly be an interesting battle from the Allied perspective. You crash head on against the German advance that is rampaging across Belgium, and you think you have succeeded in stopping their advance. Only to learn the horrible truth that it was all just a diversion, and the real Panzer force is cutting you off before you even know it's happening.

But I think Hannut should be very interesting from Axis pov too
Okay, this is a diversion, but a total defeat in the north and giving the field to the French would also cause a far-reaching change of plans in the south. I have doubts whether Hitler would have allowed Guderian to attack to the English Channel from Sedan bridgehead in the event of a complete collapse of the attack in the north and even the risk of the Allies entering German territory from Belgium.

[Retributarr]

Treat it as a large 'Tank-Battle!'... as a near-'Kursk' epic style conflict!.

Maybe I knew of it in some other sense?... but not as 'The Battle Of Hannut'.

It was most certainly not a Kursk-esque affair, I assure you.
[Ret: True!... "Hannut" was not on quite the 'Same-Scale'... as 'Kursk'... however... for when it did-Occur... it was still the 'Mother of all Tank-Battles'.]

But I think Hannut should be very interesting from Axis pov too
Okay, this is a diversion, but a total defeat in the north and giving the field to the French would also cause a far-reaching change of plans in the south. I have doubts whether Hitler would have allowed Guderian to attack to the English Channel from Sedan bridgehead in the event of a complete collapse of the attack in the north and even the risk of the Allies entering German territory from Belgium.

Yes!!!... "Kondi" makes a "startling point" here!... which... . Brings to mind that these Games have "Zero-Flexibility" in them!.

If we really want an 'Interactive-intuitive-responsive' Game [Which at this time... simply doesn't exist right-now]... then as to 'Kondi's' given example... we would see a reflex-reaction-response from the "AI". The 'German-High-Command'... upon receiving this 'Bad-News',,, of the 'Powerful-French-Tank-Attack' in "Belgium'... would very-likely 're-schedule the planned' for German attack from the "Sedan-Bridgehead'. It would now be 'Put on Hold!'... delayed until further notice!!!.

So!... until the 'French-Tank-Assault' cab be brought under manageable control enough so... so as to remove the threat to the Ardenne Task Force... The German Foray into France 'Via-Sedan'... would have to be adjusted or re-scheduled to a later 'Time-Table'.

[Buffalohump]

Treat it as a large 'Tank-Battle!'... as a near-'Kursk' epic style conflict!.

Maybe I knew of it in some other sense?... but not as 'The Battle Of Hannut'.

It was most certainly not a Kursk-esque affair, I assure you.

No set up of Allied defenses in depth, nothing of that sort. The French were rushing into Belgium as reinforcements.

I think the battle just gets overlooked because of the main drama always focused on Sedan and the immediate aftermath of that. It would certainly be an interesting battle from the Allied perspective. You crash head on against the German advance that is rampaging across Belgium, and you think you have succeeded in stopping their advance. Only to learn the horrible truth that it was all just a diversion, and the real Panzer force is cutting you off before you even know it's happening.

But I think Hannut should be very interesting from Axis pov too
Okay, this is a diversion, but a total defeat in the north and giving the field to the French would also cause a far-reaching change of plans in the south. I have doubts whether Hitler would have allowed Guderian to attack to the English Channel from Sedan bridgehead in the event of a complete collapse of the attack in the north and even the risk of the Allies entering German territory from Belgium.

I will happily play your battle if it makes it. But I do not believe your idea of a successful outcome for the allies deterring Hitler from attacking through the Ardennes and crossing the Meuse at Sedan could have happened. The best I can tell the two battles seemed to have been fought almost concurrently.
I am also not convinced from reading Guderian’s own words that the modified Schlieffen plan was a feint. He states there was considerable resistance from Army High Command to Manstein’s plan to attack through the Ardennes and that only the crash of a courier carrying invasion plans caused its consideration. He also claims only he, Manstein, and Hitler believed it was possible. He states in the meeting with Hitler that General Busch commanding Sixteenth Army cried out, “Well, I don’t believe you will cross the river in the first place!”
It will definitely be an interesting battle to play. If you had not lobbied so hard for it I never would have bothered learning about it.

Regards,

[sebb81]

5A
1B

My suggestion Battle of the Grebbeberg would bring a battle against Netherlands only to PC2, I think something rarely seen anywhere before

Did kondi bribe you with something? Your votes were both of his listing.

Thank you @sebb81 for your vote
it's amazing that you only voted on my proposals

I'm awaiting my bribe

[Vorskl]

Like "Kondi said" this was the largest 'Tank-Battle" up to this date or time-period... and I for one... was completely 'Unaware' that it ever took place?. Treat it as a large 'Tank-Battle!'... as a near-'Kursk' epic style conflict!.

Maybe I knew of it in some other sense?... but not as 'The Battle Of Hannut'.

Please don't repeat Soviet propaganda, Kursk was not the 'tank battle', it was tanks against well-positioned anti-tank arty.
The true tank battle (i.e. tanks vs tanks) was the Battle of Brody (or Dubno) in 1941, hopefully we'll see it in DLC 41 E

[Retributarr]

"KURSK!!!"... What kind of Tank-Battle???:

It was referred to as 'The Largest Tank Battle' based mostly on the number of Tanks that were involved... not as to what conditions they were involved in. This 'Brody' encounter that is mentioned... had actually more Tanks involved.

According to my incomplete understanding... I will try to explain what I think to be the actual case!.

The 'Western Allies'... using the deciphered or now broken-codes of the secret German 'Cypher-Equipment'-code-named..."ULTRA or ENIGMA"... had found out that the Germans were planning a large scale attack at KURSK... to destroy the Russian Army and Tank Forces. They managed to acquire the details of the 'Plan of Attack'.

So... they relayed this information to 'KOMRAD-STALIN'... and included what they had as to what the exact dispositions and plans were that the Germans had and were going to employ. The 'Russians' now set up "Tank-Traps- or Killing Boxes" [Yes!... including lots of Anti-Tank-Guns!]... in depth!,., for the German Tanks... in order to kill their Tanks, to deal them a severe blow... or to annihilate them!. The Russians were not at-all surprised or caught off-guard, they knew almost 'Exactly' when the 'Germans' were going to begin to strike or to carry out their assault. Hence!... now the German Armored Forces were 'Severly-Decimated'... so much so as to never to carry on any meaningful offensives again!.

[FunPolice749]

My vote is going to be for 3A, 1D, 5E

3A - Eben Emael - This is my own submission but I think this has a very good chance of being an actual scenario in 1940. Eben Emael was the crown jewel in the Belgium defensive line meant to prevent German aggression. Heavily fortified and along a river, Eben Emael was said to be impregnable and if left unconquered could rain down fire on any German forces moving past it. So in order to capture the fort a daring raid was carried out by Fallschrimjager units which managed to neutralize the fort while additional Fallschirmjager captured bridges across the river. I see this as an excellent scenario that could be seen in the 1940 campaign and with AO 1939 having a modlin fortress scenario I think it's entirely reasonable to expect some scenario based in and around Eben Emael. I imagine you would have several pre placed Fallshcirmjager that land and assault various support weapons like Artillery and AT guns. Meanwhile your forces race to smash through Belgium forces to exploit the work of the Fallschrimjager before they are destroyed. You could even have some bonus objectives such as "Don't lose any Fallschrimjager" or "Capture all bridges". Overall I think there is a lot that could be done with a scenario like this that I think it has a very high chance of combing true.

1D - Spitfire as a CP reward - I see this as a highly likely thing to happen. Seeing as how there isn't many French units that could be given as a gift/reward (I guess the 2C?) I think we're going to get some amount of British equipment as rewards and I think the Spitfire is a perfect one to get. Better than anything the Germans can field for a pretty long time it would be an excellent choice to include (also if we get something like a raid on British soil then I see this as even more likely).

5E - Italy in the Balkans 1940 - Seeing as AO 1939 took us into Norway in AO 1940 I honestly see it as possible we get a 1941 scenario at the end of the campaign related to the German invasion in the Balkans. Of course with that comes the Italian forces in the Balkans. I think if anything is related to the Balkans in AO 1940 than it is essentially guaranteed to see the Italians (although they will do way way worse than their role in SCW).

[kondi754]

Like "Kondi said" this was the largest 'Tank-Battle" up to this date or time-period... and I for one... was completely 'Unaware' that it ever took place?. Treat it as a large 'Tank-Battle!'... as a near-'Kursk' epic style conflict!.

Maybe I knew of it in some other sense?... but not as 'The Battle Of Hannut'.

Please don't repeat Soviet propaganda, Kursk was not the 'tank battle', it was tanks against well-positioned anti-tank arty.
The true tank battle (i.e. tanks vs tanks) was the Battle of Brody (or Dubno) in 1941, hopefully we'll see it in DLC 41 E

Kursk was artllery and infantry battle where often tanks appeared on the battlefield but it was a typical war of attrition, an example of a material battle that was more like WW1 trench fights (like Verdun battle or maybe better example is Ludendorf's spring offensive on the Western Front in 1918)
BUT... part of the Battle of Kursk (on a strategic scale) was the typical "armored" battle of Prokhorovka (on a tactical-operational scale)
Due to the fact that there were fewer armored vehicles at Prokhorovka than at Dubno in 1941, it is believed today that the greatest tank battle of World War II (and probably in the entire history of wars) was the battle in the Dubno-Lutsk-Brody triangle and the second is Prokhorovka

[Scrapulous]

I notice a shocking lack of votes for 2D, German core fighting in China.

I would like to call attention to the fact that this electronic balloting is very unreliable, and very prone to hacking and other malfeasance. It's a terrible situation with a lot of fraud that goes on, a lot of bad votes.

I also would like to point out that I have not yet committed to accepting the results of the vote if it should happen not to go the way I want.

[adiekmann]

I notice a shocking lack of votes for 2D, German core fighting in China.

I would like to call attention to the fact that this electronic balloting is very unreliable, and very prone to hacking and other malfeasance. It's a terrible situation with a lot of fraud that goes on, a lot of bad votes.

I also would like to point out that I have not yet committed to accepting the results of the vote if it should happen not to go the way I want.

That's a result of all the fraudulent (e-) mail-in ballots. Have you noticed how many voters in this forum are not even Americans?!? I believe some of them are not even alive, but have someone else voting under their username.

[Buffalohump]

I notice a shocking lack of votes for 2D, German core fighting in China.

I would like to call attention to the fact that this electronic balloting is very unreliable, and very prone to hacking and other malfeasance. It's a terrible situation with a lot of fraud that goes on, a lot of bad votes.

I also would like to point out that I have not yet committed to accepting the results of the vote if it should happen not to go the way I want.

That's a result of all the fraudulent (e-) mail-in ballots. Have you noticed how many voters in this forum are not even Americans?!? I believe some of them are not even alive, but have someone else voting under their username.

I see INGSOC is trying to infiltrate the forum and identify those of guilty of thought crime. This is doubleplusungood. Seriously though, I am burned out on politics. It has infiltrated almost every aspect of life. Please do not let it rear its ugly head here.

[WalterTFD]

I'm feeling the 4's, for some reason.

Put me down guessing 4A, 4B, 4C.

[Kerensky]

Hi,

I choose;

5c
2a
5a

counted. This is really cementing Hannut in a leading positing

My vote is going to be for 3A, 1D, 5E

3A - Eben Emael - This is my own submission but I think this has a very good chance of being an actual scenario in 1940. Eben Emael was the crown jewel in the Belgium defensive line meant to prevent German aggression. Heavily fortified and along a river, Eben Emael was said to be impregnable and if left unconquered could rain down fire on any German forces moving past it. So in order to capture the fort a daring raid was carried out by Fallschrimjager units which managed to neutralize the fort while additional Fallschirmjager captured bridges across the river. I see this as an excellent scenario that could be seen in the 1940 campaign and with AO 1939 having a modlin fortress scenario I think it's entirely reasonable to expect some scenario based in and around Eben Emael. I imagine you would have several pre placed Fallshcirmjager that land and assault various support weapons like Artillery and AT guns. Meanwhile your forces race to smash through Belgium forces to exploit the work of the Fallschrimjager before they are destroyed. You could even have some bonus objectives such as "Don't lose any Fallschrimjager" or "Capture all bridges". Overall I think there is a lot that could be done with a scenario like this that I think it has a very high chance of combing true.

1D - Spitfire as a CP reward - I see this as a highly likely thing to happen. Seeing as how there isn't many French units that could be given as a gift/reward (I guess the 2C?) I think we're going to get some amount of British equipment as rewards and I think the Spitfire is a perfect one to get. Better than anything the Germans can field for a pretty long time it would be an excellent choice to include (also if we get something like a raid on British soil then I see this as even more likely).

5E - Italy in the Balkans 1940 - Seeing as AO 1939 took us into Norway in AO 1940 I honestly see it as possible we get a 1941 scenario at the end of the campaign related to the German invasion in the Balkans. Of course with that comes the Italian forces in the Balkans. I think if anything is related to the Balkans in AO 1940 than it is essentially guaranteed to see the Italians (although they will do way way worse than their role in SCW).

counted.

There is no French Char 2C in game. And no one submitted it as a board listing. In fact interestingly enough no new unit models made it on to the board. To me that says people care a lot about the battles themselves. Well we'll see about Axis minor nations. As Finland feedback went, there probably shouldn't be content that writes nations out of their own conflicts, even if they are optional, bonus, and fictional in nature.

I'm feeling the 4's, for some reason.

Put me down guessing 4A, 4B, 4C.

interesting, giving some ground to middle weight listings here.

[Vorskl]

Like "Kondi said" this was the largest 'Tank-Battle" up to this date or time-period... and I for one... was completely 'Unaware' that it ever took place?. Treat it as a large 'Tank-Battle!'... as a near-'Kursk' epic style conflict!.

Maybe I knew of it in some other sense?... but not as 'The Battle Of Hannut'.

Please don't repeat Soviet propaganda, Kursk was not the 'tank battle', it was tanks against well-positioned anti-tank arty.
The true tank battle (i.e. tanks vs tanks) was the Battle of Brody (or Dubno) in 1941, hopefully we'll see it in DLC 41 E

Kursk was artllery and infantry battle where often tanks appeared on the battlefield but it was a typical war of attrition, an example of a material battle that was more like WW1 trench fights (like Verdun battle or maybe better example is Ludendorf's spring offensive on the Western Front in 1918)
BUT... part of the Battle of Kursk (on a strategic scale) was the typical "armored" battle of Prokhorovka (on a tactical-operational scale)
Due to the fact that there were fewer armored vehicles at Prokhorovka than at Dubno in 1941, it is believed today that the greatest tank battle of World War II (and probably in the entire history of wars) was the battle in the Dubno-Lutsk-Brody triangle and the second is Prokhorovka

Prokhorvka myth about 'the greatest head-to-head tank battle in the history' was created and promoted by General Rotmistrov, whose 5th Guard Tank Army was decimated by SS"LSAH" and Nikita Kruschev who was the military council member of the Voronezh Front. As per Soviet sources, 800 Soviet tanks and 700 German tanks fought head-to-head. Modern estimate is that ~760 Soviet tanks and ~420 German tanks fought there, with Germans taking a defensive stance beforehands (deploying AT arty to meet Soviet tanks). Since the loss was epic, the legend was created that over 350 german tanks were destroyed in the head-to-head battle. What archive materials tell us now, is that Soviet lost ~340 tanks (Rotmistrov 70% of its tanks and Katukov ~30%); LSAH lost around 100 or 25%. Since Germans controlled the battlefield, they were able to evacuate half of their 100 damaged tanks and detonate most of Soviet damaged tanks. Overall, LSAH achieved a tactical victory but a strategic loss.

Brody is the largest tank battle with almost 4000 tanks from both sides; The Lepel-Senno counter-strike of RKKA in 1941 in Belarus involved ~2200 tanks. The Kursk Salient battle involved ~6000 tanks but not all were fighting and not at the same place/time. The 2nd El-Alamein involved ~1800 tanks; so Prokhorovka is not even in the top-3

[Kerensky]

I will happily play your battle if it makes it. But I do not believe your idea of a successful outcome for the allies deterring Hitler from attacking through the Ardennes and crossing the Meuse at Sedan could have happened. The best I can tell the two battles seemed to have been fought almost concurrently.
I am also not convinced from reading Guderian’s own words that the modified Schlieffen plan was a feint. He states there was considerable resistance from Army High Command to Manstein’s plan to attack through the Ardennes and that only the crash of a courier carrying invasion plans caused its consideration. He also claims only he, Manstein, and Hitler believed it was possible. He states in the meeting with Hitler that General Busch commanding Sixteenth Army cried out, “Well, I don’t believe you will cross the river in the first place!”
It will definitely be an interesting battle to play. If you had not lobbied so hard for it I never would have bothered learning about it.

Regards,

As with most things in life, I think this was just a confluence of things as opposed to having a sole factor responsible.

The WW1 German plan was to go through the Low Countries. It was a good idea then, it was a better idea now (1940), given the existence of the Maginot Line.
Manstein was disappointed that they couldn't come up with a plan that was different/better than a 30 year old plan, so he had his alternative.
The Mechelen incident stirred the pot considerably. It gave the allies a potential plan the Germans were up to, so they created their own answer in the Dyle Plan. Where as the Germans knew they had some inkling of the plan, so if they played into it, the Allies would comfortable believe they knew what was happening. There is a lot of 'I know what he knows, so im going to do what he knows, so I know how he will react and use that as a diversion' going on here.

But I don't see it as any one grand plan. Both sides had many plans, and many contingency plans. When the battle was joined, it was all about seeing what was happening, and enacting a certain contingency plan as a result. Even the German attack through the Ardennes didn't go to plan. Rommel advanced so far and so fast, the French lost track of him. As did the British. As did his own German command. Thus earning the nickname of Ghost Division. All of this before he would become the Desert Fox that everyone knows, even people not well learned in WW2 are aware of Rommel the Desert Fox for one reason or another.

Meanwhile, the French even had contingency plans for the Ardennes. They managed to blow up quite a few Meuse River crossings despite the surprise of the attack coming to Sedan. So clearly in some part of the planning, they expected the Germans to potentially arrive even in Sedan. But to what degree and with what forces, the French had no idea. Or they would have had plans for more than just blowing up crossings.

[Buffalohump]

I will happily play your battle if it makes it. But I do not believe your idea of a successful outcome for the allies deterring Hitler from attacking through the Ardennes and crossing the Meuse at Sedan could have happened. The best I can tell the two battles seemed to have been fought almost concurrently.
I am also not convinced from reading Guderian’s own words that the modified Schlieffen plan was a feint. He states there was considerable resistance from Army High Command to Manstein’s plan to attack through the Ardennes and that only the crash of a courier carrying invasion plans caused its consideration. He also claims only he, Manstein, and Hitler believed it was possible. He states in the meeting with Hitler that General Busch commanding Sixteenth Army cried out, “Well, I don’t believe you will cross the river in the first place!”
It will definitely be an interesting battle to play. If you had not lobbied so hard for it I never would have bothered learning about it.

Regards,

As with most things in life, I think this was just a confluence of things as opposed to having a sole factor responsible.

The WW1 German plan was to go through the Low Countries. It was a good idea then, it was a better idea now (1940), given the existence of the Maginot Line.
Manstein was disappointed that they couldn't come up with a plan that was different/better than a 30 year old plan, so he had his alternative.
The Mechelen incident stirred the pot considerably. It gave the allies a potential plan the Germans were up to, so they created their own answer in the Dyle Plan. Where as the Germans knew they had some inkling of the plan, so if they played into it, the Allies would comfortable believe they knew what was happening. There is a lot of 'I know what he knows, so im going to do what he knows, so I know how he will react and use that as a diversion' going on here.

But I don't see it as any one grand plan. Both sides had many plans, and many contingency plans. When the battle was joined, it was all about seeing what was happening, and enacting a certain contingency plan as a result. Even the German attack through the Ardennes didn't go to plan. Rommel advanced so far and so fast, the French lost track of him. As did the British. As did his own German command. Thus earning the nickname of Ghost Division. All of this before he would become the Desert Fox that everyone knows, even people not well learned in WW2 are aware of Rommel the Desert Fox for one reason or another.

Meanwhile, the French even had contingency plans for the Ardennes. They managed to blow up quite a few Meuse River crossings despite the surprise of the attack coming to Sedan. So clearly in some part of the planning, they expected the Germans to potentially arrive even in Sedan. But to what degree and with what forces, the French had no idea. Or they would have had plans for more than just blowing up crossings.

I don’t really disagree with your point. This whole discussion made me pick up my old copy of Panzer Leader. I realize there is a lot of self aggrandizement by Guderian. But he seams to be more confident in a rigid French response than the rest of the German command. He states that although the French had more armor, they were utilizing them wrong with the bulk assigned directly to infantry divisions in a support role with only a small operational group. He further states that although the French armor had bigger guns and were more heavily armored, they were inferior in command and control facilities and speed. I have not finished rereading the campaign in the west but as I read the man appears to me to be wildly insubordinate and I do wonder how he advanced as far as he did with out being sacked.

P.S. I also realize he wrote the book post fact with the benefit of hindsight.

Regards,

[Kerensky]

P.S. I also realize he wrote the book post fact with the benefit of hindsight.

Regards,

This is the one of the things I enjoy most about the new Axis Operation Grand Campaign. Having characters in the moment is the ultimate reminder that the real historical situation was very far removed from the cold, calculating, after-the-fact analysis that has been talked and talked and talked about WW2.

Having a perspective without a complete picture nor perfect knowledge really helps to put historical fact and analysis into context. It really helps to see how the dots all connect, and why they connect a certain way as opposed to a different way.
We've already seen some of that in the first two DLC campaigns, but I think we will see it a lot more in future campaigns. There is a particular chain of scenarios where... oh... nevermind, got carried away rambling there. That sort of thing will have to wait for a formal announcement first.

[kondi754]

Please don't repeat Soviet propaganda, Kursk was not the 'tank battle', it was tanks against well-positioned anti-tank arty.
The true tank battle (i.e. tanks vs tanks) was the Battle of Brody (or Dubno) in 1941, hopefully we'll see it in DLC 41 E

Kursk was artllery and infantry battle where often tanks appeared on the battlefield but it was a typical war of attrition, an example of a material battle that was more like WW1 trench fights (like Verdun battle or maybe better example is Ludendorf's spring offensive on the Western Front in 1918)
BUT... part of the Battle of Kursk (on a strategic scale) was the typical "armored" battle of Prokhorovka (on a tactical-operational scale)
Due to the fact that there were fewer armored vehicles at Prokhorovka than at Dubno in 1941, it is believed today that the greatest tank battle of World War II (and probably in the entire history of wars) was the battle in the Dubno-Lutsk-Brody triangle and the second is Prokhorovka

Prokhorvka myth about 'the greatest head-to-head tank battle in the history' was created and promoted by General Rotmistrov, whose 5th Guard Tank Army was decimated by SS"LSAH" and Nikita Kruschev who was the military council member of the Voronezh Front. As per Soviet sources, 800 Soviet tanks and 700 German tanks fought head-to-head. Modern estimate is that ~760 Soviet tanks and ~420 German tanks fought there, with Germans taking a defensive stance beforehands (deploying AT arty to meet Soviet tanks). Since the loss was epic, the legend was created that over 350 german tanks were destroyed in the head-to-head battle. What archive materials tell us now, is that Soviet lost ~340 tanks (Rotmistrov 70% of its tanks and Katukov ~30%); LSAH lost around 100 or 25%. Since Germans controlled the battlefield, they were able to evacuate half of their 100 damaged tanks and detonate most of Soviet damaged tanks. Overall, LSAH achieved a tactical victory but a strategic loss.

Brody is the largest tank battle with almost 4000 tanks from both sides; The Lepel-Senno counter-strike of RKKA in 1941 in Belarus involved ~2200 tanks. The Kursk Salient battle involved ~6000 tanks but not all were fighting and not at the same place/time. The 2nd El-Alamein involved ~1800 tanks; so Prokhorovka is not even in the top-3

Ok, if we count like this, you are right

[terminator]

Kursk was artllery and infantry battle where often tanks appeared on the battlefield but it was a typical war of attrition, an example of a material battle that was more like WW1 trench fights (like Verdun battle or maybe better example is Ludendorf's spring offensive on the Western Front in 1918)
BUT... part of the Battle of Kursk (on a strategic scale) was the typical "armored" battle of Prokhorovka (on a tactical-operational scale)
Due to the fact that there were fewer armored vehicles at Prokhorovka than at Dubno in 1941, it is believed today that the greatest tank battle of World War II (and probably in the entire history of wars) was the battle in the Dubno-Lutsk-Brody triangle and the second is Prokhorovka

Prokhorvka myth about 'the greatest head-to-head tank battle in the history' was created and promoted by General Rotmistrov, whose 5th Guard Tank Army was decimated by SS"LSAH" and Nikita Kruschev who was the military council member of the Voronezh Front. As per Soviet sources, 800 Soviet tanks and 700 German tanks fought head-to-head. Modern estimate is that ~760 Soviet tanks and ~420 German tanks fought there, with Germans taking a defensive stance beforehands (deploying AT arty to meet Soviet tanks). Since the loss was epic, the legend was created that over 350 german tanks were destroyed in the head-to-head battle. What archive materials tell us now, is that Soviet lost ~340 tanks (Rotmistrov 70% of its tanks and Katukov ~30%); LSAH lost around 100 or 25%. Since Germans controlled the battlefield, they were able to evacuate half of their 100 damaged tanks and detonate most of Soviet damaged tanks. Overall, LSAH achieved a tactical victory but a strategic loss.

Brody is the largest tank battle with almost 4000 tanks from both sides; The Lepel-Senno counter-strike of RKKA in 1941 in Belarus involved ~2200 tanks. The Kursk Salient battle involved ~6000 tanks but not all were fighting and not at the same place/time. The 2nd El-Alamein involved ~1800 tanks; so Prokhorovka is not even in the top-3

Ok, if we count like this, you are right

The concentration of tanks in the battlefield should also be taken into account, not just the number of tanks in the overall event.