Stupid question of the year

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Stupid question of the year

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Stupid question of the year

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Stupid question of the year - 12/27/2002 2:31:23 PM

ZeroAntipop

Posts: 138
Joined: 12/4/2001
Status: offline

Can anyone give an idea of the average number of tanks, and maybe a breakdown (how many tank btns/tanks per btn/support units etc...) in an average German Panzer Division. I was wondering if it was feasible to model a panzer division, but wasn't too sure of how much to place in. Sorry for asking such a stupid and probably obvious question.

Post #: 1

- 12/27/2002 3:28:46 PM

gus

Posts: 237
Joined: 3/16/2002
From: Corvallis, OR
Status: offline

Hey Z

Check out the following web site;

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/divis.htm

It may not give you all the info you want but it is a good place to start.

-g

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 2

Before the French Campaign... - 12/27/2002 9:55:20 PM

Orzel Bialy

Posts: 2664
Joined: 4/4/2002
From: Wisconsin USA
Status: offline

the average Panzer Division had 3 Tank Regiments as a norm, as well as all its supporting units...so somewhere between 300 to 325 Tanks.
When Hitler ordered the creation of several new Panzer Divisions for Operation Barbarossa, it was effectively done by re-arranging the existing Panzer Regiments...not so much by the creation of new ones.
As such by 1941 the average Panzer Division had 2 Regiments of tanks, along with an assault gun battalion (I believe) which was to counter the loss of a Regiment. So on paper it still had 250+ AFV's, but less of them were true tanks.
By 1942 the blood-letting on the Eastern Front had sapped the Panzers of most of their strength...and Panzer Divisions formations were actually fielding 2 Battalions instead of Regiments by the end of the year and going into 1943!!! That meant around 125-150 panzers or less.
When Guderian was made IG of the Panzer forces, he put all his efforts at re-building the panzer divisions back to their pre 1941 numbers. However, inter-Army rivals and politics made the task extremely hard...an example is the independant assault gun units that were not "assigned" to a Panzer Divisions were under the command of the Artillery Officers, not the Panzer Commander of the unit they were fighting along side. When Guderian tried to have all the "floating" units assigned to specific divisions, he was met with heavy resistance.
Anyway...prior to Kursk Guderian had the panzer forces in the process of overhaul and their tank numbers began to rise to 200-225+...but Kursk shattered them once more. So, by the end of the year they were back down to around 150-170 panzers...and they never had the chance to recover again after that.
By 1944 a panzer division was lucky to have 100-125 panzers available for duty....and by 1945 they were averaging about 75-100 tanks tops.
So, there you have it....in a SHORT ANSWER :D

_____________________________

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 3

- 12/28/2002 3:38:27 AM

Bing

Posts: 1366
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: Gaylord, MI, USA
Status: offline

Questions about TO&E are certainly not stupid - check the usual sources; for the Wehrmacht yoiu ought not to have a problem locating the information.

As has been pointed out, the TO&E is often not anything more than paper. When the Tigers were newly delivered, many broke down on their first sortie. There is a famous story in which a couple T-34/85's took out some new Tigers - Ferdinand Porsche's son was not killed during this action, but the myth persists to this day apparently - "The unit had disembarked earlier at Kielce with 45 King Tigers but by the time it had reached the vicinity of Ogledow ... it was down to only eight tanks. The rest had broken down during the 45 km road march, mainly due to reduction gear failures." (That is less than thirty miles - source as usual is Steven Zaloga, his book on the T-34/85 - New Vanguard Osprey.)

Soviet tank units were often sent into combat with a fraction of the necessary spares and replacement parts - Zaloga quotes one unit as having only three per cent of organizational quotas. Soviet tank losses due to actual combat were on the order of 30% of total during the heavy action in 1943, the remainder were hors de combat via simple breakdowns, lack of trained mechanics in the field and nothing with which to fix them. Supply and support were not a feature of the Red Army, nothing like the Wehrmacht, until later in the war.

If you can find unit level field reports, the actual force composition might be known. I have the feeling you would need a morning report for the day of the battle - or the equivalent for whichever nation you were fighting with - for the personnel plus a motor pool report to determine truly functional equipment.

Tricky subject, very much so - there are no easy answers. Best guess will do for our purposes, I feel. We do our best.

Bing

_____________________________

"For Those That Fought For It, Freedom Has a Taste And A Meaning The Protected Will Never Know. " -
From the 101st Airborne Division Association Website

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 4

- 12/28/2002 4:15:49 AM

Jack

Posts: 309
Joined: 5/25/2000
From: Canada
Status: offline

Orzel Bialey/ Bing
Excellent post. We all benifit.

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 5

- 12/28/2002 5:30:58 AM

Redleg

Posts: 1805
Joined: 5/23/2000
Status: offline

After 1941, many instances of panzer divisions with less than 100 operational tanks.... sometimes as few as 25 or so.

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 6

- 12/28/2002 11:45:02 AM

ZeroAntipop

Posts: 138
Joined: 12/4/2001
Status: offline

I also have another interesting question...

In reading books, I keep hearing about say 2 Corps converging on Berlin for example. Now, if I look at the average frontage space alloted to say a Company, which I think was about 1000-1500m (correct me if I'm wrong), that would make Berlin something like 500Km wide. Could someone perhaps explain the frontage of a Corps, and how many units would be at the front and such information. Thanks again.

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 7

Unit Frontage can be deceiving... - 12/28/2002 12:04:34 PM

Orzel Bialy

Posts: 2664
Joined: 4/4/2002
From: Wisconsin USA
Status: offline

as they are usually quoted for more "open" spaces.

When the Russians were converging on Berlin their Army Corps were advancing in formations that were more or less "condensed columns"...or great "battering rams".
They could afford to do this because of two factors:
1. Their Target area was fairly small (the city of Berlin) and therefore they didn't have to cover large sectors of ground.
2. They greatly outnumbered the Germans in man and firepower and therefore didn't have to take some of the normal precautions. They knew they had the initiative and that the German Army was a spent force...without major reserves in the area to counterattack with.

So instead of this type of front:

OOOO OOOO
-----x-----x-----x

They had it set up like this:
OO OO
OO OO
OO OO
OO OO
-----x-----x-----x

This allowed them to punch through the German defenses and fan out behind them once through the holes...then they could isolate the pockets and reduce them with overwhelming firepower.

Hope this helps. ;)

_____________________________

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 8

- 12/28/2002 12:40:27 PM

Goblin

Posts: 5547
Joined: 3/29/2002
From: Erie,Pa. USA
Status: offline

Very nice explanation, Bird Man!

Goblin

_____________________________

http://www.spwaw.com/phpBB2/index.php

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 9

- 12/28/2002 12:43:06 PM

ZeroAntipop

Posts: 138
Joined: 12/4/2001
Status: offline

Very good, thanks. Now, let's say I was on a 100x100 hex map, or say 160x200 hex map - what size force would be appropriate - batallion? brigade? certainly not division I believe.

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 10

If you are new to the game... - 12/28/2002 10:14:05 PM

Orzel Bialy

Posts: 2664
Joined: 4/4/2002
From: Wisconsin USA
Status: offline

you might want to stick to Battalion size formations...since Regimental and Brigade could prove to be a bit overwhelming.

_____________________________

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 11

- 12/28/2002 11:30:28 PM

Bing

Posts: 1366
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: Gaylord, MI, USA
Status: offline

I think that if you were to truly depict the devastation of the Soviet prep barrage, in game terms there might not be much left for the German to fight with.

BGR has done a series of scenarios on the final battles. One of them, I believe it is "Thunder on the Vistula" Brent asks the player to set Ammo Limited OFF and Fast Arty also OFF with no delay to simulate the opening barrage. IIRC it lasts about twenty minutes, a great show if you like artillery. (I do.) This will give you some idea of what the Soviet steamroller assault tactics were like.

Bing

_____________________________

"For Those That Fought For It, Freedom Has a Taste And A Meaning The Protected Will Never Know. " -
From the 101st Airborne Division Association Website

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 12

- 12/29/2002 1:31:48 AM

ZeroAntipop

Posts: 138
Joined: 12/4/2001
Status: offline

Yes, infamous Soviet artillery barrages, quite nasty affairs. Now, on a medium or large map, I feel that I can adequately handle a batallion - I was thinking on a 160x200 that two batallions or maybe a brigade would be appropriate. Also, I seem to have bumped up against a unit limit in the scenario editor, wherein it will not allow me to purchase anymore units, but I have something like 99000 points left - is there a way around this?

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 13

- 12/29/2002 1:41:58 AM

Redleg

Posts: 1805
Joined: 5/23/2000
Status: offline

Yes, 2000 guns lined up wheel-to-wheel is not good SPWAW material.

The very dense battles in cities are really very difficult to create in SPWAW. And, they are an absolute bear to test and debug.

Warrior makes some very excellent large battles - I have some slight idea of the amount of work is devoted to testing and tweaking goes into making them work predictably.

It might be worthwhile to look at some of Warrior's scenarios and try to benefit from his work.

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 14

- 12/29/2002 2:04:37 AM

ZeroAntipop

Posts: 138
Joined: 12/4/2001
Status: offline

Where might I be able to find a link to some of Warrior's scenarios?

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 15

- 12/29/2002 2:20:23 AM

Redleg

Posts: 1805
Joined: 5/23/2000
Status: offline

Warrior posted a couple for the H2H mod at [URL=http://www.redleg.homestead.com/]Dirty Dozen[/URL] last month (December).

I think there are some at the usual sites: Tankhead, Armor Site,
Raiders archives.

Lately, Warrior has been specializing in the H2H mod so look for older ones for SPWAW.

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 16

- 12/29/2002 7:10:15 AM

ZeroAntipop

Posts: 138
Joined: 12/4/2001
Status: offline

I usee the h2h mod - I like the new OOBs and the feel a bit more.

Thanks for all the help and questions answered.

(in reply to ZeroAntipop)

Post #: 17