Sighs & Portents: Soviets need Tank buster plane variant

[DM]

New traits as Zimmerit, Unreliable, Recon, Double Suppression etc etc.

Handy for fictional "German Civil War" scenarios since (I am led to believe) it was only the Germans who used magnetic AT mines in any numbers (the Soviets had them but not as prevalent as one might think)and its effect against "sticky" mines wasn't all that good

A classic case of designing against one's own weapons, but at least the fact was realised and its application ended in Autumn 1944.

 

[Alexb83]

'twould have been better to invest in some form of dog repellant...

 

[Agis]

New traits as Zimmerit, Unreliable, Recon, Double Suppression etc etc.

Handy for fictional "German Civil War" scenarios since (I am led to believe) it was only the Germans who used magnetic AT mines in any numbers (the Soviets had them but not as prevalent as one might think)and its effect against "sticky" mines wasn't all that good

A classic case of designing against one's own weapons, but at least the fact was realised and its application ended in Autumn 1944.

Whoah! That is a first even for DM; a snotty remark on a trait that is not even published... :wink: :wink: :wink:
(Sorry could not resist...)
But do not fear; all Zimmerit traits are optional... It is only included to give the more detail appreciating gamers some grit to play with. 8)

 

[DM]

Whoah! That is a first even for DM; a snotty remark on a trait that is not even published...
(Sorry could not resist...)

Snotty? SNOTTY? That doesn't even come CLOSE to snotty. If I ever do get snotty, you'll know

 

[Agis]

Whoah! That is a first even for DM; a snotty remark on a trait that is not even published...
(Sorry could not resist...)

Snotty? SNOTTY? That doesn't even come CLOSE to snotty. If I ever do get snotty, you'll know

Phew, enough for me already... :wink:

 

[Alexb83]

Whoah! That is a first even for DM; a snotty remark on a trait that is not even published...
(Sorry could not resist...)

Snotty? SNOTTY? That doesn't even come CLOSE to snotty. If I ever do get snotty, you'll know

Imagine the mess when he sneezes...

 

[Mr Evil]

going back to russian shermans, russians tried not to send shermans into combat due to the lend lease rules, so crews loved them as it often meant they where sent away from the front line.... and used as a spotter. Evaluaion after WW2 by the russians on lend lease tanks and captured tanks told them the JS tanks where far supperior and would be the test bed for future designs..


going back to subject, i think its a big shame about an other book comming out for WAW but in WW2 there was such a huge amount of different types of equipmen used i gues it was inevitable...

 

[Pietia]

going back to russian shermans, russians tried not to send shermans into combat due to the lend lease rules, so crews loved them as it often meant they where sent away from the front line.... and used as a spotter.

So... you mean that units like the 1st Guards Mechanized Corps, which has EXCHANGED all its T-34/85 tanks for Shermans were used as spotters. :lol: For the entire campaign in Hungary and Austria?

 

[Alexb83]

New traits as Zimmerit, Unreliable, Recon, Double Suppression etc etc.

Handy for fictional "German Civil War" scenarios since (I am led to believe) it was only the Germans who used magnetic AT mines in any numbers (the Soviets had them but not as prevalent as one might think)and its effect against "sticky" mines wasn't all that good

A classic case of designing against one's own weapons, but at least the fact was realised and its application ended in Autumn 1944.

Whoah! That is a first even for DM; a snotty remark on a trait that is not even published... :wink: :wink: :wink:
(Sorry could not resist...)
But do not fear; all Zimmerit traits are optional... It is only included to give the more detail appreciating gamers some grit to play with. 8)

That's fine, Agis, but what's the point in writing an optional trait when it really has no function at all? At least alternative ammunitions etc. would be of some use.

 

[Agis]

...But do not fear; all Zimmerit traits are optional... It is only included to give the more detail appreciating gamers some grit to play with. 8)

That's fine, Agis, but what's the point in writing an optional trait when it really has no function at all? At least alternative ammunitions etc. would be of some use.

It is in to gave the more detail oriented players options to play with (see above).
And I am pretty sure if it would not have been included you or DM would have asked for it, or? :wink:

Anyway - this is all way too early to talk about.
1st - let Matt come out with the Logo License, then let some of us publish something under it and we will see...

 

[Alexb83]

I don't think I would've asked for it - it really doesn't serve any purpose

Practical options for tanks and units (ones which serve a purpose) I can see as desirable - but an anti-magnetic coating when the opponents don't have or use magnetic mines is just a bit pointless...

Anti-dog mine flame throwers however - they would be useful.

 

[Mr Evil]

going back to russian shermans, russians tried not to send shermans into combat due to the lend lease rules, so crews loved them as it often meant they where sent away from the front line.... and used as a spotter.

So... you mean that units like the 1st Guards Mechanized Corps, which has EXCHANGED all its T-34/85 tanks for Shermans were used as spotters. :lol: For the entire campaign in Hungary and Austria?

they where exchanged at borders wasnt that due to fuel issues and it was decided to send the T34 to defend the mother land it wasnt a straight swap, it was eiser to train normal guys to use a T34 than a sherman, it was more to do with logistics than any thing else.

from friend who have driven the T34 and sherman an evan tiger, and the few rides i have had, id rather be a passenger and triper in a sherman, but if war broke out the T34 would be the choice hands down without a hesitation.. comfortable NO .... .... T34 is possably one of the most successful tanks in history.

 

[Alexb83]

If you look at the straight numbers, as I mentioned in my earlier thread - the T34 was probably less successful than the Sherman.

The important thing to remember is this: They were the two most produced tanks of the war. They both outlasted the war in various forms for the better part of 20 years, and even faced each other in anger in a number of theatres - the Sherman in those cases generally came out on top.

They were used by nations all over the world.

Both were incredibly succesful tanks, and yet for some reason one is widely derided (by game players) and the other is widely praised.

TBF, I would rather been in a Sherman any day - for a number of reasons. First, it would have been in a warmer climate with a distinct lack of beetroot soup. Second, I would have been better trained and personally equipped. Third, I probably would have had food to eat in my tank rather than worry about stewing down the nearest horse for Gelatine. Fourth, I would have been more comfortable. Fifth and probably most tellingly - statistically, I would've had a higher chance of survival, for the above mentioned reasons among others

 

[Pietia]

they where exchanged at borders wasnt that due to fuel issues and it was decided to send the T34 to defend the mother land it wasnt a straight swap

What defense of the motherland? In January 45 the Red Army did not defend the motherland anymore... They were knocking on the German door...

it was eiser to train normal guys to use a T34 than a sherman, it was more to do with logistics than any thing else.

It had nothing to do with ease of training. They issued the Sherman tanks to their best units because they were simply better:
-they were more reliable, which made them more useful in breakthrough exploitation (something the Guards units were expected to do)
-they had optical sights far superior to those on T-34s
-they had superior guns (US 75mm gun was FAR superior to the 76.2mm gun on T-34, also in terms of armor penetration, US 76mm gun was simply better than 85mm on T-34)* - so the US 76mm gun line goes above the 85mm one ;-)
-the three man turret allowed the tank commander to actually command the tank instead of acting as a gunner
-they had pretty much the same protection. You were hit by a German gun, your tank was destroyed. Period.
-oh, and did I mention radios. In every tank. WORKING ONES. RELIABLE. They allowed the Guard units to use something resembling tactics, not just an "Urrah!" charge across the field - a real coordination of their actions.

One additional thing you seem not to understand. Comfort is very important to tank crew (or any vehicle crew). Why? Because after a hour-long trip inside T-34 you are in no shape to fight. You'll be barely able to walk, won't be able to think clearly and will loose combat with enemy equipped with inferior, but comfortable tank. Those are the facts of life. Comfort is not a luxury - it is a necessity, as the most important component of any vehicle is its crew.

You don't give your best weapons to half-trained conscripts. You give them to folks who will be able to use them. The half-trained conscripts get the mass-produced crap. The fact that Soviets equipped their Guards units with Shermans whenever available says something about what they really thought about those tanks.

* - Take a look at this. The diagram shows penetration of various Soviet-used guns at various ranges. X axis is distance in meters, Y is the average penetration. The dashed horizontal lines represent protection of various German tanks. The yellow line is the performance of T-34's 76mm gun. The red line is the Sherman's 75mm gun. The pink line is the 85mm gun. The US 76mm gun is not on the diagram, but - to quote a sentence from the Soviet report on King Tiger:
"American 76 mm armor-piercing projectiles penetrated the "Tiger-B" tank's side plates at ranges 1.5 to 2 times greater the domestic 85 mm armor-piercing projectiles."

 

[Mr Evil]

all very good but part of the shermans problem with its armour peircing round was it would actualy penatrate the armour and wiz out the other side on some light tanks when what your aim was in WW2 was to cause mechanical breakdown in enemy tank not its destruction.

you can show me all the charts in the world, alot of what i understand is what has been passed to me via WW2 vets (sadly a dying breed)unfortunatly there not always the ones who write the history books or holly wood movies... WW2 allied tactics from chain of command was to imobalise enemy tanks and not to destroy them... wich is one reason why so few german tanks where not destroyed as the objective was to imobalise them. every body looks at the armour and gun or a tank, but in WW2 one important factor was its suspesion system, somthing alot of people over look. personaly id respect 1st hand exsperiance from a dozen or so men over a book any day.

not realy sure why this is being discused as it has little relevence to air power V tanks...

 

[Pietia]

all very good but part of the shermans problem with its armour peircing round was it would actualy penatrate the armour and wiz out the other side on some light tanks when what your aim was in WW2 was to cause mechanical breakdown in enemy tank not its destruction.

Wow, so we suddenly go from the problems with killing the huge German cats to the problems with killing the small Japanese tank look-alikes? BTW - your aim was to kill the enemy tank. HOW you achieved this was another thing BTW2 - there was easy solution to the "how to kill something with paper armor", one used in reality. You simply used HE shell instead of an AP one.

you can show me all the charts in the world, alot of what i understand is what has been passed to me via WW2 vets (sadly a dying breed)unfortunatly there not always the ones who write the history books or holly wood movies...

Thanks, I've talked to many WW2 vets - had quite a few of them in my family, some of them fought for the entire six years of this war. Some of them were fighting as crewmen of your beloved T-34s. Their opinion? It was better than walking - but barely.

but in WW2 one important factor was its suspesion system

Once again, the Sherman wins hands-down. Christie suspension on the T-34 was really bad. Both when it comes to mechanical reliability and the comfort of the crew.

 

[DM]

And I am pretty sure if it would not have been included you or DM would have asked for it, or?

er, no actually. I'd rate it as useful as the rule about aircraft crashing on the table

And yeah, don't stand downrange when I sneeze, if you ever intrduce a CBRN trait it'll apply to me!

 

[DM]

On the subject of Russian Shermans (or "Emchas", as the Russians called them), I've just tracked down the book I was thinking of - "Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks - The World War II Memoirs of Hero of the Soviet Union Dmitriy Loza", edited and translated by James F. Gebhardt, University of Nebraska Press. Lots of good source material for scenarios (and plenty of engagements with Tigers and Panthers!)

 

[Mr Evil]

Pietia you have a real attitude problem its a darn game..... keep it freindly please

chill, like i have said i have never stated it as a fact but as info given to me... me nor you or anbobody under the age of 70 has any realistic opinion on what it was like and how things performed, just personal accounts... and evan those like technical data are subject to opinion and battle feild conditions have never followed trial conditions, and evan in war its hard to make a decent account on how effective stuff is due to no level playing field that can be repeated consitently.

my grandad saw riffle take a panther out causing the crew to bail out on fire !!! that doesnt mean that all rifles had the ability to kill a panther !!!!! evan tear gas was a great option V tanks in WW2 but not somthing i feel we will ever see in rules... from those that i have worked with in the last 6 months on both the shermy and a the t34 id still sell my gran for the T34 any day and thats a personal thing maybe... not sure she would be to keen on being sold for a T34 though lol... one of my grandads average combat range was 300 feet upwards, on the other hand my other grandad who parachuted into malta talked about average combat range of several feet... that grandad had every bit of ammo they could throw at him while my grandad fighting in europe had a single mag to last him 3 weeks (he was a pasafist though) as you can see in a wargame your average stat for a tommy could never focus on every man in the unit... some where excelent soldiers and others where just gap fillers... and it was probably the same for tanks and aircraft.

as for airpower the point of this thread, looking through the book, airpower do need alot more bells and wissles so maybe an air power book needs doing, my fear is woulnt that start a problem of pacific war stuff entering the easern front in silly games ?

i think we also have the problem of reality, accounts V rules for example a flame thrower with a range of 30 meters on average with say 10, 3 second bursts could be over destructive in a wargame especialy at skirmish level... same goes for air power we have the issue of air power being extreemly destructive wich it was, but on the whole was limited more in say real world than in out table top games, no matter how limited you made them it would always seem over destructive... but then war is never fair ... but wargames for some reason always need to feel fair !!! its a tough nut to crack i feel....after all youd try and bomb enemy air bases to prevent thier air power going up, if you where out of range or it was not a priority then enemy would possably have air supperiority in that area,,

wonder if it would be an interesting idea for a spotter tank or unit to call in the airpower some how, and keep it secret what turn it was planned to turn up...that way you only get air power for that turn and the turn after... create a small chance for a dog fight...

 

[Mr Evil]

On the subject of Russian Shermans (or "Emchas", as the Russians called them), I've just tracked down the book I was thinking of - "Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks - The World War II Memoirs of Hero of the Soviet Union Dmitriy Loza", edited and translated by James F. Gebhardt, University of Nebraska Press. Lots of good source material for scenarios (and plenty of engagements with Tigers and Panthers!)

sounds like a good book, be interested to see what scenarios you source from it bud... by the way we still havnt managed to meet up fr a game yet lol... how many years has it been !!!!