T-34/76: Question about its different models

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

T-34/76: Question about its different models

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 >> T-34/76: Question about its different models

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

T-34/76: Question about its different models - 3/30/2002 1:00:37 AM

Gallo Rojo

Posts: 731
Joined: 10/26/2000
From: Argentina
Status: offline

I have been giving a close look to the different T-34/76 models and how are they modeled in SPWaW.

As far as I know there were four mayor T-34/76 models. I give a short description of their most important characteristics:

* T-34m40
It was a pre war development and had a 76.2mm L-11 gun

* T-34 m41
Gun: 76.2mm F-34 (longer and better)
Cheaper cast turret instead the welded one.
This version had many technical faults (specially gear box and suspension).

* T-34 m42:

Basic:
Driver's hatch with two periscopes.
New shape of access hatch in the rear armor plate.
Modified engine's air intake.
All-steel road-wheels
Modified 550mm wide tracks
Additional armor on hull's machine gun

Details depending on production factory:
Stalingrad (STZ) and Leningrad (Factory No. 27) had often additional armor plates on the turret and front of the hull. STZ tanks had different shape of 76.2 mm gun mantlet too.

* T-34/76m43:
Thickening of the front armor to 70mm
Introduction of the new five speed gearbox.
New hexagonal cast turret: this was the more visible important difference between this model and previous versions. New hexagonal turret was bigger than previous models ones and allowed the addition of a third man in the turret (a loader).
Difference was so notable that Germans taught that it was a new soviet tank: T-43 (they were not very wrong since the turret had been taken from an abandoned universal tank project).
New turret came in four styles: "hardedge", "softedge", "laminate" and ChTZ produced in Chelyabinsk.

There are 5 types of T-34 in Soviet OOB in SPWaW on 1943:

T-34 m41
T-34 m41 imp
T-34 m41 E
T-34 m42 imp
T-34 m43

So my question are:

Firstly:
How does versions in SPWaW match with the real versions? For example: is T-34m41 imp the version produced in STZ factory?

Secondly:
Model m41 is the cheapest one, followed by m43. As units cost in SPWaW is related with its combat capacity (and not with its real cost of production) I can assume that designers consider m43 to be in general worst than all the other versions except the original m41.

Why is this?

I thought that m43 was an improved version better than the previous models.

Looking into different models characteristics it seems that m43 is the poorest armored of all -except the m41. That surprised me since all books I have about T-34 say that m43 had a thinker front armor (70mm as I said above). I guess that one possible explanation for this can be that the other models (m41 E, m42imp and m41 imp) were those from Stalingrad and Leningrad factories, which had added armor plates. Is this the explanation or there is other thing?

Other thing I notice is that m43 has the best fire control of all T-34/76 models. Is this to reflect the third crewman in the turret? Or m43 did have some other improvement in optics that I don't know and made it better than previous versions in its accuracy?

Related with the third crewman: I think that the addition of the loader in m43 model should improve thank capacity to fire faster. But this doesn't be the case: given the same crew experience m43 seems to have the same shots per turn than all the other two crew-men T-34 models. Am I right here? If yes, why is this? -
Additionally I think that the third crewman should improve unit's spot ability ... but I'm not sure if SPWaW goes that far in modeling units real behavior ...

Finally: The 76.2mm F-34 gun in m42 and m43 has a better performance using AP ammunition than the other models. Is this related to the gun itself (an improvement in F-34 gun) or to the AP ammunition in late 42?

Tanks in advance

_____________________________

The bayonet is a weapon with a worker on each end

Post #: 1

An old Grunts 2 cents worth. - 3/30/2002 7:08:06 AM

zaxilon

Posts: 41
Joined: 12/15/2001
From: PHX Arizona
Status: offline

OK I will take a crack at it. I think for the most part you answered your questions with respect to armor thickness and the superiority of one model over another. This is one aspect of this game which separates it far and above from most of the games out there. If you are well read on the equipment and troops you can simulate it here. This game offers poweful editing tools for customizing of units.

There is an editor floating around out there that lets you edit units at the most basic level. I dont know if this is included in the later versions. You can edit armor slope and thickness, as well as every other aspect of each unit in the game and create your own equipment. Things like rate of fire of each weapon, speed in various terrains, target size, etc... are just a few. I wonder if this editor will work on all versions of the game. I hope so. If anybody out there know the answer please respond.

When it comes to ordering one piece of equipment over another with respect to which is better there are several factors which set them apart. As for what the effect of different features of one model as compared to another model are I think you need to look a bit closer.

Speaking about spotting, the addition of crewmen doesnt necessarily mean better spotting unless there are viewports in the vehicle that were not being utilized because of the number or the crew. More basically put if there are 4 viewing stations in a particular tank and you increase the crew from 4 to 6 you dont enhance the spotting capability of the tank. However if you had increased the crew from 3 to 4 in that vehicle then perhaps you may have inhanced it spotting capability.

As for loading and rate of fire, yes it does make sense that if there was not a "Loader" in the crew and you add one then you should be able to load quicker and then fire quicker. This should increase your overall rate of fire. But perhaps the loader is not the limiting factor in the rate of fire. I think a closer look at the crew and how they perform their duties in one model as compared to another model may show another reason why rate of fire is not enhanced. Consider overcrowding in the vehicle with the added crewman. I dont know but I am just applying some logic. I think a lot depends on how the crew is organized and what the crew compartment layout is. Sometimes less people are quicker than more.

As for the ammunition, well I think a closer look at balistics and the particular rounds will show the critical difference.

One thing to keep in mind is that just because the piece is that way in this game does not necessarily mean it is accurate. I am not hacking any of the developers here. Just pointing out that when you create something like this you have to give and take and trade off on things to make it all work. But they were foresightful enough to give us some powerful editing tools so that we could simulate what we invision. So for example if you find data to support that one weapon should have a higher penetration at some particular range or that some armor slope should deflect better then you can edit it that way.

I think that the creators of SPWAW were wise enough to realize that they only had so much time that they could put into researcing all the possibilities and that they had to put a lid on it somewhere. They also knew that many of us maticulously research and catelogue the equipment, troops and battles and will want to simulate different aspects of different things. Wisely they provided us with editing capabilities to truely create.

Later,
Zaxilon :D

(in reply to Gallo Rojo)

Post #: 2

Somebody oughta do somethin' - 3/30/2002 10:42:29 AM

joegamer

Posts: 4
Joined: 3/30/2002
Status: offline

I think you have a point about the differences of the various T-34/76s as modelled in the game and as your research suggests. Can you suggest minor changes in the vehicles data backed by some referenced source for the rest of us to use (with the editor)?
It would appear as maybe the value of the front hull armor should be for a 42 variant (not 41) and incorporated in the base 43 model. In addition maybe the earlier ('40 and '41) T-34s should have their move reduced bya a point or 2 (for psychological effect).
I was concerned about the lack of penetration of the 76mm gun until a friend showed me a reference (I don't remember which) that documented a slight axial instability in the round that reduced its penetration over what it should have been as calculated (l/d, mass, velocity, etc).
Does anybody have anything else to add about the effectiveness of the '43 turret?

(in reply to Gallo Rojo)

Post #: 3

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> T-34/76: Question about its different models

Page: [1]