Slitherine

Yesterday i read an article about the Jagdtiger.

I didnt know that the main weapon had so much more range then a tiger. The tiger 1 destroyed all russian tanks at max. 1000m.. In tactical battlefield reality that meant the germans had 2,5 minutes to kill the russians, then it started to get painful for them, because at that time the russian tanks where close enough to penetrate the better german armor.

So the need for a gun, that could kill russian tanks at far higher range was present. The answer was the 12,8 gun that could kill every allied tank at 3000m. some at 4000m !!! That meant the time, where the germans couldnt be harmed increased to 7,5 minutes. A good veteran crew would have had enough time to kill a much higher number of attackers.

Unlike the ferdinand pak, the Jagdtiger had good anti infantry weaponry: a grenade launcher, an additional MG42 on top, that was fixed in way where the vehicle itself provided cover for the gunner, if not flanked. It even was painted (Zimmerit painting) in a way that made it impossible to fix magnetic bombs. (some claim that was a waste of ressources, bec. the allies didnt use mag. bombs...dont know if thats true)

The downside: This beast was very heavy - 75 tons - so the engine had a lot to do. Like the tiger, unexperienced drivers had lots of problems with the engine. (but carius (german tank ace) claimed that the tiger was reliable, if an experienced driver drove it (the real poblem of the tiger was that it was a nightmare to fix, it needed a lot of time for repairs, so carius rarely had all tigers battleready in his unit. Btw he was assigned to a Jagdtiger in 45, many think this was stupid, because a tank commander is used to a moveable tower...on the other hand wittmann had a stug 3 and got a tiger...i think good soldiers adopt fast)

The jagdtiger saw some limited action ag. the western allies. When the Jagdtiger suprised the enemy, it was a devestating weapon. But it had a super disadvantage, that should result in a very low initiative number in the game, if surprised: The main gun had to be fixed when the tankhunter was driven, so it had to be manually opened before they could attack. That alone made it very problematic if suprised by allied forces in closer range.

But as a defensive weapon, 1000 of this. in 44, would have been a serious problem for the red army. Of course this was never an option, because porsche and henschel delayed the production and the amount of extra fuel needed (860 l for one and that lasted for 100(street)/70 km only) would have been an unsolvable problem too. Another major problem: the industrial output was only 88 pieces...never nearly the needed numbers.

I write this to show, how important the factor range is and was for pak and tanks. Sadly this point isnt shown very well in pc2. And how important details are: When suprised the Jagdtiger couldnt use its main gun at all, because it was fixed and had to be unfixed manually. If infanty prevented the crew from climbing out, the Jagdtiger was nearly helpless prey, in that case. (ok there where anti inf. mgs too, that could be used from the inside, but its so easy to outmanouver this beast in close range battle)

o_t_d_x wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 7:41 am I write this to show, how important the factor range is and was for pak and tanks. Sadly this point isnt shown very well in pc2.

How would you put that in the game mechanics? It is just unit vs unit and any units got some specific stats. I remember in Panzergeneral II /3D in 1942 some tanks started to have a range of 2. So you could attack a T34 with a PZ IVF/G without risking losses, although the T34 had better stats.

Anyone playing world of tanks? Are these features integrated in the game or is it just tank vs tank and the better player wins?

DefiantXYX wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 8:14 am

o_t_d_x wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 7:41 am I write this to show, how important the factor range is and was for pak and tanks. Sadly this point isnt shown very well in pc2.

How would you put that in the game mechanics? It is just unit vs unit and any units got some specific stats. I remember in Panzergeneral II /3D in 1942 some tanks started to have a range of 2. So you could attack a T34 with a PZ IVF/G without risking losses, although the T34 had better stats.

Anyone playing world of tanks? Are these features integrated in the game or is it just tank vs tank and the better player wins?

Gun range is translated into Initiative value of a ground unit for direct fire weapons. The Jagdtiger indeed has the highest Initiative of all dedicated AT units, 14, while the Maus, mounting the same 12.8cm PaK 44, only has 12 Initiative, which means it deals damage first in any anti-tank battles provided that there isn't other factors (hero traits, status modifiers etc.) affecting that.

o_t_d_x wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 7:41 am The jagdtiger saw some limited action ag. the western allies. When the Jagdtiger suprised the enemy, it was a devestating weapon. But it had a super disadvantage, that should result in a very low initiative number in the game, if surprised: The main gun had to be fixed when the tankhunter was driven, so it had to be manually opened before they could attack. That alone made it very problematic if suprised by allied forces in closer range.

this is alrdy in the game. AT-guns loose half their initiative when moved before attacking.
sadly orientation does nothing in the game atm. that would be another opportunity to have some flanking malus. maybe selfpropelled at guns could suffer more from mass attack. maybe -2 init instead of just 1.

sers,
Thomas

I thought it was pretty clear from reading "Tigers in the Mud" that the Jagdtiger was a waste of resources. The inability to turn the gun without moving the entire vehicle was a far more serious problem on the Jagdtiger than it was on a smaller and lighter vehicle such as the Stug III. Carius talks about the necessity to get off the first accurate shot, even if you cannot get off the first shot. And a hulking behemoth like the Jagdtiger was at a disadvantage in that regard. When you can overstrain the transmission or drive train or tracks just trying to aim your gun, your vehicle is stupid.

Everything done in this war was a waste of ressources, because germany was too weak to win ag. the commonwealth, the sovietunion and the super strong us economy.
Starting a war, despite having a super problematic economic situation, says a lot. For winning a war you need a strong economy, not a bancrupt one, that lacks many war critical ressources in addition. Offcourse the Jagdtiger was, at this time of the war, a waste of ressources. Carius himself was very critical about the Jagdtiger, but the crews liked the strong armor and the firepower.

I know that the range aspect is implented in an abstract way. But like mentioned before, in pg tigers had the possibility to hit enemys without beeing hurt over 2 hexes. Maybe PC3 should have bigger maps, with more different firing ranges for many units. Maybe with UE 5.

BTW: Talking about weapon range.... I often think about how strong infantry must be nowadays, because the anti tank and anti air rockets they have. Does anybody know the range of modern top down anti tank rockets ? If these beasts have a range of 2 km or more, for what do we need pak nowadays ? (except maybe areas without cover)

Are the high russian tank losses the result of heavy use of anti tank infantry in the ukraine ? Or long range rocket artillery ? Are there good hps out there about modern warfare ? I really have to improve my knowledge about it.

o_t_d_x wrote: ↑Wed May 24, 2023 6:36 am
BTW: Talking about weapon range.... I often think about how strong infantry must be nowadays, because the anti tank and anti air rockets they have. Does anybody know the range of modern top down anti tank rockets ? If these beasts have a range of 2 km or more, for what do we need pak nowadays ? (except maybe areas without cover)

Are the high russian tank losses the result of heavy use of anti tank infantry in the ukraine ? Or long range rocket artillery ? Are there good hps out there about modern warfare ? I really have to improve my knowledge about it.

Yes, you don't have dedicated SPAT weapon systems any longer because of AT infantry weapons. More mobile, flexible, and much less expensive. Also with any MBT, AT ability is a major part of the weapon system to start with. Plus, weapon systems on aircraft and helicopters are more deadly than even in WW2.

With regards to the conflict in Ukraine (and elsewhere like that between Armenia and Azerbaijan) you are now seeing ever increasing weaponized drones filling that role, and not just the large ones like the United States has long deployed to take out terrorists attending a wedding, but also small kamikaze drones. You can find videos online of such attacks if you search.

So its cheap and effective to use infantry ag. tanks nowadays. Didnt the russians know that ? If the numbers i read are true, then they lost over 1000 tanks and armored vehicles.

I mean their little convoi to kiev last year, was it pure arrogance, or did they believe their own propaganda and expected no hostilities ? (we "free" the ukrain of "nazis"...)

Btw. a very idiotic way to make propaganda or create a reason to attack, because the leader is a JEW - or do we have nazi jews nowadays ? (goebbels would rotate in his coffin if he could see these amateures.... )

Isnt it, for helicopters, very dangerous too ? They cant fly high, because of long range anti air def. and fighters of course. But flying low means that infantry with anti air missles gets you. Are electronic counter m., flares etc. effective in such a low altitude scenario ? (i imagine a soldier with anti air missile, well camouflaged, the heli flys above him, low altitude, does the helicopter has a chance in that scenario ?)

Now we need some good power armor and tanks are obsolete in open terrain too . Or even better, small rockets with ultra mini nukes, that are ai controlled ... ok back to 40k.

o_t_d_x wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 4:43 pm So its cheap and effective to use infantry ag. tanks nowadays. Didnt the russians know that ? If the numbers i read are true, then they lost over 1000 tanks and armored vehicles.

this is a good source for causalties in wars in general, but also for the current ones.
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/

o_t_d_x wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 4:43 pm I mean their little convoi to kiev last year, was it pure arrogance, or did they believe their own propaganda and expected no hostilities ? (we "free" the ukrain of "nazis"...)

when ur own "spies" lie to u about what is going on and spent the black money u send their way on drugs and hookers instead of building networks that take over the invaded countries, what u saw is exactly what will happen. corruption mainly caused this.

o_t_d_x wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 4:43 pm Btw. a very idiotic way to make propaganda or create a reason to attack, because the leader is a JEW - or do we have nazi jews nowadays ? (goebbels would rotate in his coffin if he could see these amateures.... )

propaganda doesn´t have to be logical or true. it just needs to be broadcast on as many channels as possible as many times as possible and contain a tiny grain of truth.

o_t_d_x wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 4:43 pm Isnt it for helicopters very dangerous too ? They cant fly high, because of long range anti air def. and fighters of course. But flying low means that infantry with anti air missles gets you. Are electronic counter m., flares etc. effective in such a low altidude scenario ? (i imagine a soldier with anti air missile, well camouflaged, the heli flys above him, low altitude, does the helicopter has a chance in that scenario ?)
Now we need some good power armor and tanks are obsolete in open terrain too . Or even better, small rockets with ultra mini nukes, that are ai controlled ... ok back to 40k.

Russian helicopters invented a new way of "delivering" their rockets due to this dilemma. They pull up several kilometers before their target and then fire their missles in a balistic curve towards the target so they don´z have to fly above it and prevent getting shot at.

sers,
Thomas