CMBB v CMAK

[Mad Russian]

I think you'll find that the T34 available in 1941 could be dealt with by a PIII with a 37mm gun on pretty even terms. A PIII with a 50mm is deadly to them, will kill them from most ranges. The T34 front armour doesn't stand up at only 45mm. It's the 60mm and 70mm turret front T34s that caused the trouble from 1942 onwards.

The 37mm Anti tank gun cannot deal with the T34, that's accepted. I don't know why, but the 37mm Pak does not have the power of the 37mm tank gun.

In CMBB thhe 37mm PAK is a 37L45 and the PzIII 37mm tank gun is listed as a 37L47. That would make the tank gun more effective. Even if firing exactly the same ammo. The Pz38(t) has a 37L48 making it even more effective.

You're also using production figures as if they bear some correlation to Russian tank strength which of course they didn't. So, on the eve of invasion iirc (and you will no doubt correct me), there were about fifteen to twenty thinly armoured T26/BT5/BT7 for every T23 or KV. And the PzII was quite capable of shredding them, leaving only the now somewhat rare PzI as completely useless.

I used both production numbers and availability numbers here. The production numbers were to show that the T-34 had already become the main Soviet tank before the invasion. From their standpoint. That it didn't take until 1943 for the Soviets to be using it as the workhorse and not T-60's and T-70's. I used Soviet TO&E's to show that fact as well. I can post the TO&E's for all the Soviet tank brigades and we can go over them one by one and discuss the changes.

Of course the TO&E's are not absolutes either. They never are. But when the other side of the discussion brings in production figures for two others Soviet tanks for a two year period that barely match the production figures for the T-34 in a single year to prove the point that the T-34 wasn't the mainstay of the Soviet tank brigades that doesn't hold up to me.

At present we don't have the ability to look at Soviet losses like we do the German ones. Maybe someday we will have.

I'm all for deflating myths of German superiority, but I think you're going a bit over the top. Also, you keep accusing Nikita of extolling German armour as flawless etc, when I didn't really see him doing any such thing???

Not actually. What he keeps saying is that the German tanks were better. When in fact they weren't. Not tank for tank better by a tremendously wide margin. I'll go back and pull some examples of his comments if you like.

German armor in MOST cases was inferior to it's Soviet counterpart. The invasion force was made up of 3561 tanks. Of that number 1033 were either PzI's or PzII's.

I think you would find that the Germans did fight T-34's with PZIII's armed with the 37mm gun. But again I gave an example of a T-34 being hit 24 times and then finally withdrawing because of a turret ring hit. Is that the tank you want to go to war in against T-34's? I don't.

The PzIII armed with the 50L42 doesn't have an even chance against a T-34 at range gun penetration wise. That is offset by the fact that at range the T-34 would have a harder time hitting the German tank due to much poorer optics. The PzIII with the 50L60 would fight the early war T-34's on an even basis with gun penetration and would usually emerge the victor because it had no issues with optics.

But again the Germans didn't fight T-34's on front armour after the first few engagements. They used their mobility and firepower. The other quote that I posted. That is where the German tanks were much superior. The ability to control the formation and get to a position where the Soviet vehicles did have weaknesses that the Germans could exploit.

Not all hits would be on the thinner armour of the turret. POS has an entire thread in the tactics section on just that issue.

There is an interesting scenario called Directive No.5 where early T34s (with, as it happens, virtually no AP ammo) and a large bunch of T26s/BT5, get their way for the first half of the scenario and are thereafter absolutely terrorised by a small force of German armour...PzIIs, Pz38t and a couple of PIIIs. It was a scenario I remembered for a long time because it felt right.

It's right if you have to use fire and maneuver to win. That's where the early war battles turn in favor of the Germans. It almost comes down to a single point. Crew experience levels. The Soviets have a hard time maneuvering their forces and then the Germans use the speed weapon on them. That doesn't always mean speed in offensive deep thrust actions but it can mean speed in a tactical sense too.

The Germans should start almost every scenario in the east as the numerical underdog. The exceptions are of course when they are on the attack and have a numerical advantage that they set up.

Using CMBB to equate directly the capabilities of WWII Eastern Front tanks and guns is not the most reliable source either. There are some very glaring issues with certain gun penetrations and armour factors.

Good Hunting.

MR