Troop Quality in preferences

[Charles22]

Smersh said:

sorry if I wasn't clear enough, the 45mm remained the standard stationary anti-tank gun. it was redesigned in 43 with new more powerful round, and remained in service as the standard at gun. yes of course, 85mm, and even the 100mm were supplements, to the increasingly obselete 45mm gun. but the 45mm remained the most common and on paper the "standard" at gun.
your correct medium tanks and heavy AFVs used larger calibere rounds.

and in my opinion the german 20mm gun is overpowered already, it has (from memory) a penetration of around 6.

No, it's not 6, Smersh. I stated earlier that it's AP round is stronger than ANY German round in '39. I only mention '39 with certainty because that's where i have campaigned and saw it). The best round they have has an AP punch of 5, and I suspect, correctly, that the 20L55 is a 4 or less (probably a 3).

It's good to see you clarified your view on the 45L66, but I think you will find that probably from '42 onwards that the 76mm gun was produced in considerably higher numbers even for ATG's (just guessing though).

[Mobhack]

The 45mm gun was issued at infantry batallion level, 3 to a platoon AFAIR. No 76mm issued to rifle bns, or even 57mm I think during WW2.

It was rather mobile, and could deal with Marders, halftracks and so on easily, any P3/4 or Panthers from the flanks.

It was used also as an infantry gun in the DF role, and to deal with bunkers.

The grunts would wheel it around to where it was required and blaze away.

Cheers
Andy

[Charles22]

I can't see them dealing with bunkers with that peashooter, even if it is worthy of that 6 AP rating (salvo is another matter of course). So this would mean that they used salvo on fortresses? Did they do anything to increase velocity later? Is there a later high-velocity version?

[Mobhack]

Charles22 said:
I can't see them dealing with bunkers with that peashooter, even if it is worthy of that 6 AP rating (salvo is another matter of course). So this would mean that they used salvo on fortresses? Did they do anything to increase velocity later? Is there a later high-velocity version?

Max 6AP at the muzzle + some chance of some or all of the WH size of 3 being added = max at the muzzle (unlikely) of 9 cm.

Then at short range, if the hit % gets over about 90%, and depending on experience-relatred rolls, extra pen for a critical hit. (but I would only expect 1 or 2 for this gun if so).

Tiger side armour is 8, so zero deflection shots with all the ducks in a row at point blank range may well get through. But I would not bet the farm on it!

Panther side is 5, so I would expect a reasonable chance at maybe 150-200 metres.

Bunkers have 6 or 8 armour, and in any case are somewhat permeable - rifle/MG rounds (or shells) will sometimes "go through a slit" and cause casualties. Bunkers are NOT treated as AFV armour.

Cheers
Andy

[Charles22]

Mobhack said:

Max 6AP at the muzzle + some chance of some or all of the WH size of 3 being added = max at the muzzle (unlikely) of 9 cm.

Then at short range, if the hit % gets over about 90%, and depending on experience-relatred rolls, extra pen for a critical hit. (but I would only expect 1 or 2 for this gun if so).

Tiger side armour is 8, so zero deflection shots with all the ducks in a row at point blank range may well get through. But I would not bet the farm on it!

Panther side is 5, so I would expect a reasonable chance at maybe 150-200 metres.

Bunkers have 6 or 8 armour, and in any case are somewhat permeable - rifle/MG rounds (or shells) will sometimes "go through a slit" and cause casualties. Bunkers are NOT treated as AFV armour.

Cheers
Andy

Yes, I always thought the recent treatment of bunkers was a bit peculiar, as it seemed that the slit was too much accomodated for. It used to be the front had the heaviest armor, but now it's the worst. It look as though peopel went to an extreme to accomodate the slit and left most of them very vulnerable to AP shot instead. In that respect certainly NO gun scarecely has a problem with them. I'm curious if there isn't some way that the slits can be better balanced (just as a sidenote).

IOW, if it's possible, find some way to where the armor is bucked up, but the chance of hitting it is increased, or better yet the chance of the weak point sort of hit being fairly large. So, let's say you have a bunker with 10 armor all around, but the front is sort of cheated because of the slit, therefore a 2 rating. Couldn't that armor be bucked up to a ten, but the weakpoint hit chance increased as oppossed to the rate of weak points on tanks? What's more, the weak point hit damage could be much vaster than what we typically see in this game, like a +10 AP hit or something. That may not be doable but it seems to make more sense than a 2 armor rating. What do you think? Impossible?

[serg3d]

Charles22 said:
I can't see them dealing with bunkers with that peashooter, even if it is worthy of that 6 AP rating (salvo is another matter of course). So this would mean that they used salvo on fortresses? Did they do anything to increase velocity later? Is there a later high-velocity version?

IIRC 45mm guns were phased out in 1943 or 44. However some companies seems kept them around until Berlin. It could be a legend - where would they get the ammo ?

[cbo]

Charles22 said:
I can't see them dealing with bunkers with that peashooter, even if it is worthy of that 6 AP rating (salvo is another matter of course). So this would mean that they used salvo on fortresses? Did they do anything to increase velocity later? Is there a later high-velocity version?

Soviet 45mm L/46 ATG was more or less a copy of the German 37mm, scaled up to 45mm to fire a more usefull HE round. An improved version was made in 1942 with a longer barrel, increasing muzzle velocity and thus penetration. An APCR (aka HVAP, in game "sabot") round was also developed which increased penetration even further.

The 45mm gun remained in production until 1945, but production peaked in 1943. In all, 48.800 were made. Only 5400 57mm guns were made during the war, so it never replaced the 45mm as the main infantry anti-tank gun. 76mm field guns were produced in considerable quantity, but it was used primarily as field artillery. 68,800 were made during the war. In the divisions, the 76mm guns were only found in the divisional anti-tank battalion (if available) and in the field artillery regiment of the division. They were also found in anti-tank artillery regiments, army assets that could be used to strengthen anti-tanke defenses in critical areas.
The 76mm guns in the field artillery regiment was positioned to act as anti-tank defense in depth, so they could deal with deep penetrations of the division front.

Claus B

[Smersh]

exactly, claus. sergB your comments about the gun are totally unbacked where did u hear this legend idea?

and also the the 85mm aa gun was never used as a anti-tank defense (like the famous german 88.) until much later in the war when panthers and tigers started appearing. even then it was more of a stop-gap measure (the 85m at gun was not yet developed. it was a very rare thing for the 85aa to be used in any sort of tank defense role.

also the t-35 itself was a rare weapon. when u don't want to use the KV, t-35 wouldn't be the correct predessor. let me make a list of tank "linages"

t-28>KV
t-26>t-50(dicontinued)>t-60/70
BT-7>T-34

as u can see the t-35 is an oddball.

[cbo]

Smersh said:
and also the the 85mm aa gun was never used as a anti-tank defense (like the famous german 88.) until much later in the war when panthers and tigers started appearing. even then it was more of a stop-gap measure (the 85m at gun was not yet developed. it was a very rare thing for the 85aa to be used in any sort of tank defense role.

According to Zaloga, in the summer of 1941, a shortage of 76mm guns resulted in some Anti-tank regiments formally being issued 85mm AA guns instead. These units were apparently wiped out during the autumn battles, but a some new units raised were also issued the 85mm AA gun as an AT-weapon. Some were still available early in 1942.

After that, the 85mm AA gun wasn't used as an AT-gun until playing the 8,8cm FlaK in post-war warmovies

Claus B

[Smersh]

here is a direct quote from Zaloga which is where what I said in my post is based on: " It [the 85mm aa gun] was not generally issued to Army units, and unlike its german counterpart, it was seldom used in the anti-tank role except in expedient basis-such as the summer of 1943 when special anti-tank units were formed for a defensives battle at Kursk."

I don't know if Zaloga contradicts himself or claus u had a typo in your post.
but it logically doesn't make sense for a large caliber weapon like the 85mm to be used in 1941, when most germans tanks could be penetrated by the 45mm gun.