Close Combat Series :: View topic

through

[^/[Print]\]
Goto page 1, 2 Next :| |:
Close Combat Series -> Close Combat 5: Invasion Normandy

#1: TANK SHOW ROOM Author: ricwine,

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 11:26 am
—
HI

I have being watching a programme on WW2 tanks restored around the globe. TANK OVERHAUL has had 2 series now I think.

Confused

It makes me think of which was the best WW2 tank available in CC5. And if not shown included in the game you can still comment.

I reckon maybe the Sherman Firefly - 17 pounder or maybe the Churchill AVRE. I believe a handful of King / Royal Tigers were also present in Normady.

The oddities include Russian AFV and old French tanks.

:zzz Not just the best on paper but the tanks which aquited themselves well in this campaign.

All your comments welcome at' RICH IS BEST TANK HALLS'

#2: Author: Dima,

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 12:54 pm
—
Sherman Smile

#3: Author: flick,

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 2:39 pm
—
T-34...imagine if they had half-decent drivers and tactics, early on...

#4: Author: Pzt_Mac, Location: Oregon

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 4:43 pm
—
In CC5 I've had the most success with the Tiger, kill wise, for the Germans in my GJSTRSM GC. For the Allies in Utah it would probably be the Sherman for sheer kill numbers.

#5: Author: ronson, Location: England

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 4:44 pm
—
The Fire-breathing Croc! :hurt8 .......Its hot stuff!

Cheers
Ronson

#6: Author: Dima,

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 5:43 pm
—

Quote:

T-34...imagine if they had half-decent drivers and tactics, early on...

why telling something u don't know about Smile

#7: Author: flick,

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 7:09 pm
—
In english please Smile

#8: Author: flick,

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 7:15 pm
—
Wait..are you saying that the USSR tank corps, were used with the same skill(in 1941) as the german panzers?

#9: Author: Dima,

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 7:59 pm
—

Quote:

Wait..are you saying that the USSR tank corps, were used with the same skill(in 1941) as the german panzers?

no, iam saying that early on, they had better drivers and tactics than later on Smile

#10: Author: flick,

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 12:29 am
—
Er..no,

The ealy Russian tank formations were too reliant on orders from above, and lacked initiative to exploit any openings. I've read many examples of Russian formations, just drivivng straight at the enemy, and being easily out-flanked (Kharkow 42' being a prime example)

From 1943 onwards, they got better communications and tactics, it's common knowlege.

If anyone else is reading this, what do you say?

#11: Author: Dima,

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 8:45 am
—

Quote:

The ealy Russian tank formations were too reliant on orders from above, and lacked initiative to exploit any openings.

and when has that changed?
i believe you should decide for yourself what you mean by "early" Smile

Quote:

I've read many examples of Russian formations, just drivivng straight at the enemy, and being easily out-flanked (Kharkow 42' being a prime example)

didn't i tell that they had worse drivers and tactics later one? Wink

Quote:

From 1943 onwards, they got better communications and tactics, it's common knowlege

better tactics and better communications became possible with major upgrades of T-34.

#12: Author: ricwine,

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 8:52 am
—
Hi DIMA

So the devils advocate is back. What really are your opinions and not just rehashing others !!.

Russian tank formations were still using flag signals in 1942. And lest not forget the Red Armys disregard for life. At the Battle of Berlin massed Ruski armour was decimated by desperate German defences on the Eastern approaches to the city. WHY ?. Well beacause the Russians in there haste to gain a glorious victory ignored the reality of the operation and there hard won tactical dominace. You can build a tank but dont crew it with monkeys.

#13: Author: Dima,

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 9:44 am
—
Hi Ricwine,

Quote:

What really are your opinions and not just rehashing others !!.

iam rehashing to push you in right directions and away from "common knowledges" Smile

Quote:

And lest not forget the Red Armys disregard for life.

ha, i thought that were the Germans who did that Wink

Quote:

At the Battle of Berlin massed Ruski armour was decimated by desperate German defences on the Eastern approaches to the city. WHY ?.

because.
they did that in your reality along with pushing the mongol hordes back to Moscow Very Happy

Quote:

Well beacause the Russians in there haste to gain a glorious victory ignored the reality of the operation and there hard won tactical dominace.

like crushing prepared german defence and taking Berlin in 5 days with minimal losses (although probably not the minimal possible)?

Quote:

You can build a tank but dont crew it with monkeys.

so u agree they had worse drivers later on? Wink

#14: Author: flick,

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 10:30 am
—
I'd say 1942 is still early. 1943 onwards is late. It's really down to perception though.

http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&category_id=21&flypage=shop.flypage_bfc&product_id=82&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=26&vmcchk=1&Itemid=26

By June 1941 there were Tank Divisions in the Red Army that were missing 50 of their required tank officers and sergeants, even though they had 90 or more of their enlisted men. This meant that not only were the tactical units poorly led and tactical manoeuvres poorly organized and supported, but the training of the troops themselves was almost impossible because the trainers were missing or trying to learn the basics of their own jobs at the same time.

As a direct result of the debacle that engulfed Soviet armor early in the war, Stalin's famous Order Number 325 of October 1942 (reproduced in this volume) reiterated some very basic tactical and operational concepts. It did so because even the most basic tactics, although spelled out and required by the regulations, were of no use to commanders who barely knew the technical attributes of their tanks and had little experience in leading troops at all. Order 325 became the basic stimulus for the new regulations issued in 1944 that updated the pre-war tactical regulations.

Second, the general level of training in the Soviet Army, and the armoured force, increased dramatically. Not only were commanders more experienced and better able to pass on that experience to their subordinates, but the Soviet military, unlike the German Wehrmacht, had the manpower reserves to send a large percentage of their troops and officers to schools for technical training. By the beginning of 1943, almost 1,000,000 men (and women) were in military schools, academies, and "military courses" in the USSR. When these graduates went to the front 3-, 6-, or 9 months later, they were far better able to handle the basic staff and command tasks than the unfortunates standing in the way of Operation Barbarossa in 1941.

#15: Author: Dima,

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 11:44 am
—

Quote:

I'd say 1942 is still early. 1943 onwards is late. It's really down to perception though.

good.
but then you should take into account that T-34 in 1941 and T-34 in 1943-onward is very different tank. T-34 circa 1943 allowed to use different tactical/strategical options and better communications.

Mr.Sharps somehow tends avoiding the fact (according to this quote) that RKKA tank crews were not conscripts in mass but regular service men of whom many (especially officers) were veterans of KH, "Liberation campaigns", WW. The flow of conscripts before june 1941 was mainly filling the empty spaces in Mot.Rifle, Supply, Arty regiments (never succeded actually).
Neither in 1942 nor in 1943 tanks crew (in mass) had better quality than in June 1941.

If you are familiar with "Stalin's famous Order Number 325 of October 1942", could you please tell what has changed(following that order) in combat use of armored units during Kursk for example ("late" according to your choice)? Wink

#16: Author: ricwine,

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 1:07 pm
—
Lets remember that elements of German Panzer Corps were all for reverse engineering the T34. They were so impressed the Panzer 4 was over weight by mid war and undergunned until the PAK 40 - 75mm was added. Panther was unreliable in early marks.

Tigers few in number ( not as many as you might think ). So lets stick to Normady an the tank ops there. What about the Stewart light tanks. My fave in the game as I use as a mobile pillbox. Easily moved when Nazi armour appears. But its 37mm gun was sillier than a girl smoking a pipe.

#17: Author: flick,

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 2:44 pm
—

Dima wrote:

Quote:

I'd say 1942 is still early. 1943 onwards is late. It's really down to perception though.

I think you're better off asking Mr Sharpe himself. I'm sure he'll be delighted to answer. And my answer won't do justice compared to his Smile

The T-34's of 1941 got out manouvered...the T-34's of 1944/45 didn't as much. Better tactics, better machines.

#18: Author: Sapa,

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 4:36 pm
—
i thought this thread was about the best tank in WW II? Rolling Eyes

its not the Sherman anyway! yes it was made in greatest numbers but imagine if the germans had the same number of Tigers!!

#19: Author: Roger5,

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 5:05 pm
—
The best tank was T-34 and then may be expected in production costs, etc.

#20: Author: Dima,

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 5:30 pm
—

Quote:

The T-34's of 1941 got out manouvered...the T-34's of 1944/45 didn't as much.

pretty much, but not because "they had half-decent drivers and tactics, early on..." - the germans were just much more skilled operationally-wise, since 1944 it has changed in favor to RKKA Smile

.

sapa,
check the first post - it is about Normandy tanx Not just the best on paper but the tanks which aquited themselves well in this campaign

Quote:

its not the Sherman anyway!

yes of cause, but Sherman was one of the best overall:).

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat 5: Invasion Normandy

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Goto page 1, 2 Next :| |: Page 1 of 2