Concern-German vs. Soviet Armor

[SteveS]

I'm only learning the armor rules, so I don't know how a typical game goes (I've played an SK3 scenario with tanks-that's it). But I'm a bit worried about one implication of the armor rules.

It appears that Russian tanks are more effective in this game than German tanks. To Hit disadvantages (red numbers) don't really show up until the range is pretty large-so large, in fact, that it practically never happens in ASL. And below that range, Russian To Hit is virtually identical to German To Hit, and Russian To Kill as well as Russian Armor are often substantially better than German To Kill and German armor. The net effect seems to be that Russian tanks are more effective than German tanks. I'm especially wondering whether this reflects reality in the early war (1941) period.

I'm not arguing that Russian tanks shouldn't be better than German tanks in a mathematical sense. I know that T-34s were mathematically/scientifically better than German PzIIIs, and so on. But I question whether Russian tanks should be more effective on the battlefield than German ones. In other words, I wonder if there should be more 'crew quality' modifiers that reflect the differences in initiative, judgement, equipment familiarity, doctrine, etc, that aren't reflected in the game. The 'inexperienced crew' modifier is only +1, which doesn't really alter the relative value of tanks that much. It seems that if ASL accurately models armor use during WWII, the Russians should have won far more quickly than they did, because 1) their armor was better, and 2) that armor was more effective on the battlefield.

It is as if the infantry game was modelled by German and Russian infantry squads and nothing else. If ASL consisted only of 4-6-7 vs 4-4-7, you would wonder how and why the Russians were routed so much-their squads are the equal to the German squads at most ranges (and there were alot more of them!)! The reason this doesn't happen is that there is a lot more being modelled in the infantry game; differences in leadership, in ELR, in support weapons and support weapon breakdown, etc. Thus, an army of 4-6-7 can defeat a larger army of 4-4-7 because of all of the other factors.

It doesn't appear that this would happen with armor. A force of PzIII would not defeat a larger force of T-34, because there is less 'soft' stuff to model in ASL that would make the difference-thus, the mathematical, scientific comparison between the two models of tanks tends to decide battles, and thus that model is not as accurate.

Is this correct? How does the tank-on-tank battle in ASL tend to play out?

Sk

 

[Bob Holmstrom]

Steve,

Early war russian tanks have 2 main handicaps: no radio, and poor turret layout that prevents them from firing while CE.

These are huge disadvantages in ASL tank combat. Disadvantages that often allow the poorer armored and gunned German tanks to win out.

Tank combat in ASL does not normally involve tanks prep firing at each other. Usually one keeps his tanks out of LOS of enemy tanks and attacks enemy tanks during his Mph with Bounding Fire.

 

[Jazz]

I'm only learning the armor rules, so I don't know how a typical game goes (I've played an SK3 scenario with tanks-that's it). But I'm a bit worried about one implication of the armor rules.

It appears that Russian tanks are more effective in this game than German tanks. To Hit disadvantages (red numbers) don't really show up until the range is pretty large-so large, in fact, that it practically never happens in ASL. And below that range, Russian To Hit is virtually identical to German To Hit, and Russian To Kill as well as Russian Armor are often substantially better than German To Kill and German armor. The net effect seems to be that Russian tanks are more effective than German tanks. I'm especially wondering whether this reflects reality in the early war (1941) period.

I'm not arguing that Russian tanks shouldn't be better than German tanks in a mathematical sense. I know that T-34s were mathematically/scientifically better than German PzIIIs, and so on. But I question whether Russian tanks should be more effective on the battlefield than German ones. In other words, I wonder if there should be more 'crew quality' modifiers that reflect the differences in initiative, judgement, equipment familiarity, doctrine, etc, that aren't reflected in the game. The 'inexperienced crew' modifier is only +1, which doesn't really alter the relative value of tanks that much. It seems that if ASL accurately models armor use during WWII, the Russians should have won far more quickly than they did, because 1) their armor was better, and 2) that armor was more effective on the battlefield.

It is as if the infantry game was modelled by German and Russian infantry squads and nothing else. If ASL consisted only of 4-6-7 vs 4-4-7, you would wonder how and why the Russians were routed so much-their squads are the equal to the German squads at most ranges (and there were alot more of them!)! The reason this doesn't happen is that there is a lot more being modelled in the infantry game; differences in leadership, in ELR, in support weapons and support weapon breakdown, etc. Thus, an army of 4-6-7 can defeat a larger army of 4-4-7 because of all of the other factors.

It doesn't appear that this would happen with armor. A force of PzIII would not defeat a larger force of T-34, because there is less 'soft' stuff to model in ASL that would make the difference-thus, the mathematical, scientific comparison between the two models of tanks tends to decide battles, and thus that model is not as accurate.

Is this correct? How does the tank-on-tank battle in ASL tend to play out?

Sk

Eh, I've heard it said that ASL is a great infantry tactical game and a mediocre (at best) armor tactical game. I don't think I'd go quite that far, but the order is right.

I think the Russian/German balance is about right. It changes a lot based on just when the scenario is played.

Early Russia:

-Germans are hard-pressed vs T-34s, and a pretty easy time vs earlier models:

- T-34s until the T-34/85 (1944) have to shoot BU (restricted slow turret). Thats a +1 TH right off the top

-The german damn well better engage them at a range where the red TH number come into play if he wants to win. Thats another +1

- Are T-34/M41 radioless? Can't recall, but a lot of early russian tanks are radioless, which impacts tactical flexiblity and the ability to move quickly.

Mid-war Russia:

- The German had better be engaging at range...the Russian wants to close. The armor game is all about those conflicting objectives,

-The T-34/M43 still has to shoot BU.

- The various TH/TK mixes lead to a pretty even match-up between competent opponents I feel.

Late-war Russia:

- Even the T-34/85 has a hard time taking out a Panther from the front.

- The German *still* wants to enjage at range...the Russian still wants to close to get side shots in the black TH numbers.

I dunno...seems to capture the historical flavor and motivations of both sides for the various periods?

Of course, YMMV....

 

[Rindis]

It is as if the infantry game was modelled by German and Russian infantry squads and nothing else. If ASL consisted only of 4-6-7 vs 4-4-7, you would wonder how and why the Russians were routed so much-their squads are the equal to the German squads at most ranges (and there were alot more of them!)! The reason this doesn't happen is that there is a lot more being modelled in the infantry game; differences in leadership, in ELR, in support weapons and support weapon breakdown, etc. Thus, an army of 4-6-7 can defeat a larger army of 4-4-7 because of all of the other factors.

As you said, how do the Germans beat a large force of Russians? By factors not represented directly in the squads. Their strengths lie elsewhere.

As has already been pointed out, the same is true for armor. Something more to keep in mind is that in June 1941 Soviet armor was spread out in small detachments (especially the rare T-34s and KV-1s), while the Germans practiced keeping their armor together in a single unit. So in a scenario from that time, you should see a greater quantity of German armor, which can all maneuver independently, against a small herd of platoon-moving Soviet armor.

 

[Tuomo]

Good points by Jazz. Adding more:
* The Red To Hit # for the Vehicle Target Type is 1 worse than the Black at ranges > 6. This matters a lot, especially since various other TH DRM's will usually bring the final TH # down to the part of the bell curve where an extra +1 is significant.

* Mid-war Germans usually have some kind of special (APCR) ammo that comes into play with great effect - not just for the enhanced To Kill numbers, but for the chance of getting off a "free shot", should the special ammo TH DR be big enough to miss. This situation is reversed in the late war where Russians have the special ammo and the Germans have wasted all the tungsten building V-2 engines.

* German AFV MG's are typically 3/5, while Russians take a while to get to the 4/4 level. This extra bit helps against infantry.

* Early Russian tanks often have red MP's, increasing the chance of stall

* German tanks have much more smoke capability than Russian tanks. This is huge.

* German armor has friends in the form of PF-toting infantry; Russian armor is much more on its own.

* German armor rarely goes Berserk

All in all, there's a whole lot to the armor game than just the To Hit #s.

Tom

 

[James Taylor]

I'm pretty sure there are a some scenarios out there that will demonstrate things:

AP7 Directive #3
AP12 Cream of the Crop

are a couple that come to mind.

Results for the German will depend on how effective the German commander is. In early war Russian/German actions the German commander *generally* had the advantage on his Soviet counterpart. Later on, as the Russians got experience, they improved.

Try A51 Clash Along The Psel. Get your T34's into the wadis and wait until the Germans come in close, then swarm them.

Its brutal.

JT

 

[Corporal Kindel]

It appears that Russian tanks are more effective in this game than German tanks. To Hit disadvantages (red numbers) don't really show up until the range is pretty large-so large, in fact, that it practically never happens in ASL. And below that range, Russian To Hit is virtually identical to German To Hit, and Russian To Kill as well as Russian Armor are often substantially better than German To Kill and German armor. The net effect seems to be that Russian tanks are more effective than German tanks. I'm especially wondering whether this reflects reality in the early war (1941) period.

I've always felt the opposite, that the Germans are too overly strong. Adding to the four previous posts, I'd add that Red TH numbers are a serious disadvantage, especially when you add the RST restriction, that's +2 right off the bat at 7-12 hexes (probably the most common TH range) for the Russians. German tanks have seriously effective ROF. An ROF of 2 for a IIIJ&L is an unbelievable advantage, especially when the T34 has no ROF, except for the '43 model which is too late of an improvement (by then their up against tigers, which is no-contest battle)

T34s with no smoke is also an unbelievable disadvantage (I think the 85 has a one-shot sD though), especially since the IIIJ&L both have sD. Notice that the Russian 76L and German 50L use the same TK column, both at 13. The only thing that saves the T34 from massacre is the fact that it has an 11 front AF and the IIIs have a 6 front AF.

Of course, late war it's a totally different story.

 

[The Hermit (IX)]

1. In full ASL there are a large number of factors that interact in a variety of ways beyond gun caliber and armour thickness as mentioned above.

2. Note that Steve has only played with SK3 so we all may be talking about factors that don't appear in SK.

3. Don't forget that there are many factors well beyond the scope of ASL that caused armies to crumble in spite of equipment comparisons. E.g. it is fun thrashing Pz I/II/III with French B1s and S35/H39 etc. but the French army as a whole fell apart for operational/strategic reasons (where were the B1s when they needed them!?).

 

[Pitman]

Many Soviet tanks, as devices, compared favorably to German tanks, no matter which stage of the war you are talking about. Much of the advantages in 1941 came not from the abilities of the tanks themselves, but how the AFVs were used operationally. It matters not how great your tank is if it is part of a unit that is surrounded and out of gas, or greatly outnumbered, or bombed from the air, or sent into a hopeless counterattack.

 

[Nikon53]

I'm only learning the armor rules, so I don't know how a typical game goes (I've played an SK3 scenario with tanks-that's it). But I'm a bit worried about one implication of the armor rules.

You can be assured that NONE of us would have been able to accurately figure out how all this would work, before we had plenty of games behind us. As you play you will find that it works great. Hopefully, getting more games in is an option available to you. Happy gaming!

 

[Mr Incredible]

Who are you???

I've always felt the opposite, that the Germans are too overly strong. Adding to the four previous posts, I'd add that Red TH numbers are a serious disadvantage, especially when you add the RST restriction, that's +2 right off the bat at 7-12 hexes (probably the most common TH range) for the Russians. German tanks have seriously effective ROF. An ROF of 2 for a IIIJ&L is an unbelievable advantage, especially when the T34 has no ROF, except for the '43 model which is too late of an improvement (by then their up against tigers, which is no-contest battle)

T34s with no smoke is also an unbelievable disadvantage (I think the 85 has a one-shot sD though), especially since the IIIJ&L both have sD. Notice that the Russian 76L and German 50L use the same TK column, both at 13. The only thing that saves the T34 from massacre is the fact that it has an 11 front AF and the IIIs have a 6 front AF.

Of course, late war it's a totally different story.

Are you Oberst Balck's love child??? :devious:

Sorry, couldn't resist.

:ciao:

 

[Psycho]

Are you Oberst Balck's love child??? :devious:

Sorry, couldn't resist.

:ciao:

He should slap you in your sassy mouth!

 

[Corporal Kindel]

I think the only thing OB would want to send to me is something that comes out of a bazooka.

 

[Bryan Holtby]

It really depends on the tanks in use. Often, the German tanks are more flexible, better Smoke #, better special ammo Dep#. Early Russian tanks are more maneuverable speed wise, but platoon movement should severly cramp their tactical abilities.

A really good heavy metal scenario to try out is Valhalla Bound. Hordes of Russian T-34/85 and IS tanks up against a handful of SS troopers and 4 or 5 Panthers.

 

[ecz]

Good points by Jazz. Adding more:
* The Red To Hit # for the Vehicle Target Type is 1 worse than the Black at ranges > 6. This matters a lot, especially since various other TH DRM's will usually bring the final TH # down to the part of the bell curve where an extra +1 is significant.

* Mid-war Germans usually have some kind of special (APCR) ammo that comes into play with great effect - not just for the enhanced To Kill numbers, but for the chance of getting off a "free shot", should the special ammo TH DR be big enough to miss. This situation is reversed in the late war where Russians have the special ammo and the Germans have wasted all the tungsten building V-2 engines.

* German AFV MG's are typically 3/5, while Russians take a while to get to the 4/4 level. This extra bit helps against infantry.

* Early Russian tanks often have red MP's, increasing the chance of stall

* German tanks have much more smoke capability than Russian tanks. This is huge.

* German armor has friends in the form of PF-toting infantry; Russian armor is much more on its own.

* German armor rarely goes Berserk

All in all, there's a whole lot to the armor game than just the To Hit #s.

Tom

I would add to the list that Germans often (if not always) have better Armor Leaders than the Russians in their OB.
This is a huge advantage.

 

[wrongway149]

A really good heavy metal scenario to try out is Valhalla Bound. Hordes of Russian T-34/85 and IS tanks up against a handful of SS troopers and 4 or 5 Panthers.

Yeah this one really highlights the TH differential given the range of engagements. Haven't played it a while-it might be worth digging out sometime

 

[SamB]

Many Soviet tanks, as devices, compared favorably to German tanks, no matter which stage of the war you are talking about. Much of the advantages in 1941 came not from the abilities of the tanks themselves, but how the AFVs were used operationally. It matters not how great your tank is if it is part of a unit that is surrounded and out of gas, or greatly outnumbered, or bombed from the air, or sent into a hopeless counterattack.

This is exactly right. I've read accounts of a German ATG sitting in one spot and taking out 10 or 12 Russian tanks. Not great "rate of fire", but because - one after another - the Russian AFVs drove slowly across the line of fire. This happened because of the lack of radios, coordination, training, etc.

It would never happen in a game unless the rules didn't allow the Russian player to control his tanks. :nuts:

Another point. Such a scenario wouldn't be much fun to play. So the ASL scenarios tend to represent those engagements where the Russians were "smarter than average".

Except when I command the Russians. Then I move my infantry into the same fire lane three times in one turn - just because I forgot it was there. aperbag:

 

[trevpr1]

Another point. Such a scenario wouldn't be much fun to play. So the ASL scenarios tend to represent those engagements where the Russians were "smarter than average".

Smarter than the average 'bear?'

 

[Glennbo]

I would add to the list that Germans often (if not always) have better Armor Leaders than the Russians in their OB.
This is a huge advantage.

Beat me to it.

It really comes into play when the Germans use Bounding First Fire while Commander Exposed against those Closed-Topped Slow-Turreted Russians.

I recommend "Feast of Horror" from Dezign Pak 2, and "The Fast, The Slow, And The Doomed" from Dezign Pak 1 to explore this advantage.

 

[Psycho]

Does that describe Glenn or his ad

Beat me to it.

It really comes into play when the Germans use Bounding First Fire while Commander Exposed against those Closed-Topped Slow-Turreted Russians.

I recommend "Feast of Horror" from Dezign Pak 2, and "The Fast, The Slow, And The Doomed" from Dezign Pak 1 to explore this advantage.

A shameless plug